Debating a Christian: Part 2

Hey everyone,

This is part 2 of the "Debating a Christian" series of post and today I will be talking mostly about the "God is not human" tactic as I explained in part 1. (To read part 1 click here. )

How many times have you been in a discussion with a believer of God, and come to the point where you have stomped every last statement of denial out of them? It happens quite often, in fact almost as often as a believer will resort to circular reasoning and avoidance of a question. It is very annoying to deal with, because of the fact that you must divert time and energy into explaining how self negating this statement is, in order to move on and have at least some of the audience on your side.

This will be the main point of this topic and I will simply show you exactly what to say to put an end to this non sense.

Now I, myself, have been to the point in many discussions where the opposition has stated that God is not human, therefor some how backing up their argument that no human can ever understand why He does what He does or why He does it. Here is all you have to ask..

If it's beyond what anyone can comprehend then how did they comprehend it? How did they comprehend the fact that its beyond anybodies ability to comprehend? Isn't this a self negating statement? Yes it is people, and those questions right there will confuse and lose anyone willing to back up such a horrid Deity.

After you ask these simple questions the audience will understand how stupid the statement that "God is not a human" is. It will throw off your opponent and more importantly give you the support of the audience.

Please everyone comment, and also subscribe to my blog via email to catch the 3rd part of this series, you won't want to miss it. I will be talking about how to put together a successful debate against a believer, that way you walk away with your head a little higher. See you soon

Debating a Christian: Part 1

Hey there,

I'm going to stray away from Bible verses [specifically] right now and discuss something that is currently on going. It involves me and a close friend, and of course the Bible. :) (You didn't think I'd go way off topic did you?). This will be a 3,4, maybe 5 part series depending on how much response it generates. Hopefully I will lend insight on how to successfully debate Christians, which will closely relate to debating creationist, but that is a whole different animal.

So, anyways what I wanted to talk about, in this first part, is a situation I am currently in, in an actual debate, and the usual tactics you can expect to face while debating a Christian. I will use the exact verse that the debate; or opinionated discussion if you will, is centered around; Deuteronomy 23:1, which states:

"No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord."

A little bit of background on the verse:

This section of "The Fifth Book of Moses; Deuteronomy" is classified as the 3rd sermon, which contains the Deuteronomic Code. The sermon is given by Moses and he specifies a series of mitzvot (in Hebrew; the plural for mitzvah, meaning: commands) given by the Lord, to the Israelites.

Now it is not necessarily the specific verse that has meaning to what I want to talk about, rather the use of "context error" that [most] followers of the bible [whilst involved in a debate] use to avoid being seen as wrong. While it is a clever tactic, which is intended to make the listeners believe the user and throw you off as the opposition, I myself have learned to spot it, immediately, and expose it at it's worst.

I will explain to you how to spot this while debating and what you can do to turn the tables quickly and use this elementary technique to your advantage.

Now it isn't hard to spot when somebody uses this against you because most of the times they will say something like: "you're not looking at the context" or "you have to pay attention to the context of the verse". Either way, most of the time they will use the word context; and in the rare case your are speaking with a well educated Bible scholar, you might hear the phrase "frame of reference" HA! give me a break.

Moving onto turning the tables on your opponent; it is very simple might I add. I will use an example of the debate I am currently in. Let us refer to myself as person A and my friend, person B. The discussion is about a very obvious contradiction in the bible. God says that he is a loving caring God who cannot sin, yet He is willing to kill His own creations? and deny them access to His Kingdom for ridiculous reasons. (Read my post "Deuteronomy 23:1" for a more detailed description on this specific verse.)

A- Deuteronomy 23:1 states: "No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord." How is God a loving deity if He is willing to kill His own children for such ridiculous reasons?

B- You are not understanding the context of the verse. Moses is speaking to the Israelites not everybody else.

Okay, lets break this down. I stated the verse and asked a simple question. Now regardless of what the answer really is (God is not a loving deity!) he avoided the question and through the "context" word out there. Now a listener will naturally follow person B because he avoided the question and put the pressure on person A. Everyone in the audience has most likely forgot about person A's original question and is now expecting person A to rethink his position.

A- I completely understand the context; Moses was given commands by God to tell the Israelites the laws that structure the promised land. Moses spoke to the Israelites, and explained the laws word for word as God had instructed him. Therefor Deut 23:1 is the Word of God. Now I will ask this question again that you failed to answer. How is God a loving deity if He is willing to kill His own children for such ridiculous reasons?

B- He was talking to the Israelites! No human will know why God does what He does because he is God.

Once again person B avoided the question, but since person A completely described the context of the verse and pointed out that person B dodged the question the audience is now on person A's side and should expect and answer from person B. As you can see person B was not expecting such a detailed, witty response and has fumbled his opportunity to gain the edge which in turn has given person A the advantage.

So in a few easy steps:

1- Make sure you ask powerful questions. Things like why has God done"___" when earlier in the Bible he says "___". Bible scholars hate this question and almost immediately use the next most famous tactic; the "God is not a human" tactic, which will be discussed in part 2.

2- As soon as they use the context tactic exploit it by explaining in detail to the audience what the context of the subject matter is. This will bring the audience to your side of the debate.

3- Lastly if your opponent dodges your questions (which is almost a guarantee) call them out on it. Tell the audience they have not answered your question yet, your opponent will feel stupid and it will put him/her on the spot.

That, is really all you have to do to turn the tables on someone who has used the "context" tactic. As you can see person B followed up with the "God is not human" tactic which will be discussed in part 2 of this series. As always, make sure you study up, and know your stuff before getting into a debate with somebody. Your best weapon is your brain so make sure you use it.

Subscribe to my blog and follow along for part 2 of this series "Debating a Christian".

Exodus 35:2

Exodus 35:2 Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy sabbath of solemn rest to the Lord; whoever does any work on it shall be put to death;

In this verse, Moses, is speaking to to a congregation of Israelites. He tells them that this is what the Lord has commanded them to do. Like my first quote from the Bible I will break the verse into smaller pieces. [I should probably just do this with every verse].

"Six days shall work be done,..."
This part is pretty self explanatory; the six days God was speaking to Moses about were Monday through Saturday. It has a direct correlation to the six days that God used to create heaven and Earth in the first chapter of Genesis.

"...but on the seventh day you shall have a holy sabbath of solemn rest to the Lord;..."

The seventh day God is talking about here is Sunday; once again, a direct correlation to the seventh day that God rested, after creating heaven and Earth. A holy sabbath would be a (in this case) weekly day of rest and worship to God.

"...whoever does any work on it shall be put to death;"

This is the violent part of this verse, the part you would never hear in any Bible study class or in any preachers sermon. The word of God stating that a man must be put to death if he works on a Sunday is absurd; this one verse alone should show people that the Judeo-Christian God that you grew up learning about is a horrible deity.

Know one in their right mind would put a man to death for such an act. This goes to show how selfish and evil God is, how is he all loving if he is willing to murder a man for working. A man that could be working to help support his family, I myself have worked many Sundays, and I'll be damned if someone feels the need to kill me for it because their "God" said so.

In closing, let me ask you a question. If you are a believer, and you claim to follow and worship this Lord; would you be able to murder a man for working on a Sunday?

This is only one of the many, many examples of how evil, cruel, and corrupt God is.