Does the god of the Bible have poor character? -- Johnny Skeptic vs. Jason Gastrich

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

This thread has been set up for a formal debate between Johnny Skeptic and Jason Gastrich who will debate the following resolution:

"Resolved: the god of the Bible has poor character."

Johnny Skeptic will affirm and Jason Gastrich will oppose. The debate will have 7 rounds and Johnny Skeptic will go first, per the parameters ( http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showpost.php?p=3670343&postcount=51).

A Peanut Gallery (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=175895) is set up in the General Religious Discussions forum for the rest of us to comment on the debate.

Enjoy the debate!

- NS, FD Moderator

[Johnny Skeptic]

Hello, everyone. I would like to thank the Secular Web and Jason Gastrich for making this debate possible. Following is my presentation:

Romans 9:21 says “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” Yes, any being who has sufficient power is able to enforce rules of his own choosing, but that does not necessarily mean that he has good character.

The Bible does not mention that God will ever offer skeptics a parole in the next life. I would never endorse eternal punishment without parole. If God does, I am not able to compel myself to accept him. If he doesn’t, then I hope to make good use of my second chance(s).

In my opinion, mercy is forgoing punishment even when justice (in this case God's justice) requires it.

A God who has good character would do everything that he could in order to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell. Since God has not done this, he does not have good character.

I have actually had Christians tell me that it would be counterproductive for God to do more than he already has done to help people become saved, and that if Jesus returned to earth and performed miracles all over the world that not even one single person would become a Christian who was not previously convinced. I would certainly like some proof that this is so.

Consider the following Scriptures:

Matthew 14:14 And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.

Matthew 15:32 Then Jesus called his disciples unto him, and said, I have compassion on the multitude, because they continue with me now three days, and have nothing to eat: and I will not send them away fasting, lest they faint in the way.

Matthew 4:24 And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

Matthew 20:34 So Jesus had compassion on them, and touched their eyes: and immediately their eyes received sight, and they followed him.

John 2:23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

John 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

John 10:37-38 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Acts 14:3 So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders. (NIV)

Please note that Acts 14:3 refers to events that took place AFTER the Holy Spirit had come to the church, so Christians can’t get away with claiming that miracles were no longer needed to confirm “the message of his grace” after the Holy Spirit came to the church. Do we need tangible confirmations any less today? Of course not.

Now then, will any Christian claim that ANY of the preceding evidence was counterproductive, not to mention the many other miracles that the texts say that Jesus performed that were not recorded? Of course not, and yet some Christians will claim that one single bit of additional evidence would be counterproductive, and that more of said evidence would not result in one single person becoming a Christian who was not previously convinced. In order to avoid this embarrassing dilemma, more sophisticated Christians claim that God is not obligated to do anything more than what he has already done. However, all that that means is that God’s conscience compels him to do certain things. Since my conscience compels me to do certain things too, God and I are in the same boat. Both of us are not able to act any differently than we are acting. The difference is that if I had a message that would greatly benefit the world, if I was able to immediately tell everyone about it, I would do so. Similarly, if I developed a cure for cancer, if I was able to immediately make it available to everyone who had cancer, I would do so. From a Christian perspective, is the spread of the Gospel message not more important than curing cancer? If so, why isn’t God more involved in spreading it? He has allowed hundreds of millions of people to die without hearing the Gospel message, and yet he asks Christians to spread the very same message that he frequently deliberately withholds from the world.

Jason has said that God performs tangible miracles today. I request that he provide us with evidence that this is true. If God is performing tangible miracles today, he is doing so in a strange way indeed. While tangible good things are frequently DISTRIBUTED to those who ARE NOT in greatest need, they are frequently WITHHELD from those who ARE in greatest need. This gives many people the impression that the God of the Bible does not exist, or that if he does exist, his interest in our tangible needs is sporadic and inconsistent, or that he is bi-polar, or that he is mentally incompetent.

If it one day turned out that the one true God is not the God of the Bible, and he offers all sinners parole in the next life after a certain period of time of his own choosing, Christians who currently endorse eternal punishment without parole would most certainly approve, especially if THEY were among those who were paroled.

If I believed that any given being had the power to send me to heaven or hell, I would certainly want to accept him because I would want to go to heaven and not to hell, but unless he was available to discuss various issues with me in person in tangible form, I would not be able to will myself to accept him.

I am not aware that God would have anything to lose by discussing various issues with me, but if he were willing to discuss various issues with me and I deemed his answers to my questions to be acceptable, I would have much to gain because I would become a Christian. Obviously, God chooses to deprive me of this opportunity.

Exodus 4:11 says "And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?" Is that not cruel and unusual punishment? If not, then what is? Are we not due an explanation for such detestable behavior? I believe that we are.

Is murder wrong only because God says that it is wrong, or does God assert that murder is wrong because he is aware that morality transcends even him? Many people, including me, believe that morality transcends God. Would Christians accept just any supposed God? I doubt it.

Even if it is very unlikely that the God of the Bible does not exist, and that some other God exists, since Christians are not infallible, they must deal with the following hypothetical scenarios:

In the next life, Christians become aware of a powerful being, let’s call him Being A, who claims that he is the one true God, and that the God of the Bible is an imposter. He demonstrates that he has great powers, including the ability to convert energy into matter. The God of the Bible does not show up to contest the being. Being A states what his requirements are for entry into heaven. Some of the requirements are endorsing murder, and eternal punishment WITHOUT PAROLE, and loving him because he endorses those practices. Would Christians accept being A, or would they reject him based upon their assessment of moral standards that they believe transcend any being?

Ok, here is another hypothetical scenario:

In the next life, Christians become aware of a powerful being, let’s call him Being B, who claims that he is the one true God, and that the God of the Bible is an imposter. He demonstrates that he has great powers, including the ability to convert energy into matter. The God of the Bible does not show up to contest the being. Being B states what his requirements are for entry into heaven. Some of his requirements are endorsing love, mercy, forgiveness, and punishment WITH parole. Would Christians accept Being B based upon their assessment of moral standards that they believe transcend any being?

Any Christian who would pick God A or B has a problem. Such Christians are forced to claim that it is acceptable for them to judge the morality of any supposed God by their own moral standards, while at the same time hypocritically claiming that it is not acceptable for skeptics living today to do the same thing.

Some Christians will counter by claiming that no matter who created the universe, he must by necessity have good character. They cite the existence of good as evidence, but that will not do because if God is evil and deceptive, he could easily duplicate anything that is attributed to the God of the Bible. Some Christians have argued that an evil God would not have created a world like the world that we live in, but what could possibly be more appealing to a God whose character compelled him to be evil and deceptive than to create other beings to deceive?

Regarding Christians who would reject Beings A and B, and hope that the God of the Bible would eventually show up, my question to them is “Why wait for the God of the Bible to show up when you have evidence of two other supposed Gods, and not just ANY old kind of evidence, but FIRST HAND evidence?”

Isn’t the real prize for most Christians eternal comfort, both physical and emotional, not who provides it? If you had cancer, would you care who provided you with a cure as long as a cure was available? Of course you wouldn’t.

If some Christians criticize my use of hypothetical arguments, I will tell them that Christians frequently use them when they feel that it suits their purposes to do so. A good example is C.S. Lewis’ ‘Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?’

[Jason Gastrich]

Dear Will, IIDB, and everyone else,

I hope you’re well, today.

For those of you who don’t know me, my name is Dr. Jason Gastrich. I’m the director of Jesus Christ Saves Ministries. JCSM is leading unbelievers to Christ and believers into a deeper relationship with Him. I’m also the author of The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained, which is a full and complete rebuttal to The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible.

During this debate, Will and I will be discussing God’s character. I’ll be analyzing it and will exegete the scriptures. I believe we all make numerous judgments every day and in order to make a correct judgment on God’s character, we need to fully understand it.

The Righteous Judge

I want you to imagine a judge in a courtroom. Let’s call him Judge Stone. He has the right to make judgments and rulings. He can even sentence people to death.

Judge Stone is confronted with all kinds of situations where he must decide what is right and best. For instance, one time, he had to convict a murderer to death. He wasn’t necessarily excited about this, but he is an honest judge, so Judge Stone what He had to do.

God works in a similar way. God is the righteous judge of all people. When people do wrong, they don’t just do wrong to others, but they also sin against God. God, as the Creator, has the right to also be the Judge.

If God were to ignore sin, then He wouldn’t be a good judge. If He were to avoid holding people accountable for their actions, then He wouldn’t be an honest or righteous judge. However, since God is a good judge, He must rule and he must rule fairly.

Some may say that God has poor character, simply because He has judged others. However, those who say this are usually the ones who do not want to be accountable to Him. The same is true for lawbreakers in Judge Stone’s court. They don’t like him and they think he does a bad job. However, they only say this because they are guilty and their spirit is convicted.

The Same Standard

The measure of a good judge’s character lies with his consistency. Is his standard the same for everyone? Or does he sometimes choose to avoid being fair?

We find that the biblical God is consistent. The Bible dictates God’s commands to all people. The things that often make earthly people partial do not make Him partial. The color of one’s skin does not influence Him. One’s social status is of no concern to Him. How many good deeds one does is impertinent to His righteous judgments (more on this to come). God’s law extends to everyone and everyone must submit to it, as everyone is held accountable to Him.

The scriptures tell us that the gift of salvation is freely offered to everyone. Everyone must do the exact same thing in order to be saved. This equation, of course, involves trusting in Jesus Christ and repenting from one’s sins. When people die and face the judgment, this will be the only criteria that truly matters and this criteria will be applied to every human being. Those who have trusted Christ and repented will go to Heaven and those who have not will go to Hell.

The First Sin Immediately Brought God’s Plan of Redemption

A person without character would not care for others as much as God cares for us. In the Bible, after the first sin, God put His plan of redemption into motion. He did not forsake us or forget about us. On the contrary, He gave the first two sinners a way that they could continue their fellowship with Him and be redeemed.

The scriptures tell us that Adam and Eve received animal skins to cover their naked bodies. This happened directly after they sinned. This represented God’s implementation of the animal sacrifices that were necessary in the Old Testament for the temporary forgiveness of sins.

We see more evidence of this with Cain and Abel. One offered God the right sacrifice (e.g. an animal sacrifice) and the other offered Him an inappropriate sacrifice (e.g. vegetables). In fact, Cain wanted to force his will so badly that he even killed his brother. Cain did not please God because God had already told them what to do and he defied God’s commands. Abel pleased God because He did what He was told.

All Have Sinned

Some may say that God has no right to judge good people. However, we need to consider what “good” really means. What is a good person? Who defines good?

A good person may be defined as someone who gives a little money to the poor, someone who tries to treat others fairly, and someone who provides for their family. These are all good characteristics. However, is this all God requires? Is this how good is defined?

The Bible tells us what it means to be good. However, before it does this, it tells us something very important. The scriptures tell us that nobody is good. This word for good may also be translated perfect. Nobody is perfect. Since nobody is perfect or sinless, nobody has the right to tell God how to judge. We must trust God and His judgments, for He has been a righteous judge.

Sometimes, people see a good person die and get angry at God. Was this person really good, though? If so, was this person perfect? If the person in question wasn’t perfect, then the person had at least some sin. If the person had at least some sin (which is transgression against God), then the person deserved to be judged by God.

If we extrapolate this equation, we can quickly see how every adolescent and every adult has sinned against God and deserves to be judged by Him. Unfortunately, some people deny the concept of sin. Others downplay the wretchedness of it. However, we need to be mindful of what sin really is: willful or ignorant disobedience and rejection of the Creator’s commands, resulting in a rift in one’s relationship with Him, pain to the sinner, and almost always, pain to at least one other individual. When we begin to see sin as it really is, we can begin to see God as He really is.

Direct Responses to Johnny

At this point, I’m going to reply directly to Johnny Skeptic. He has made some statements that I will copy and respond to below.

The Bible does not mention that God will ever offer skeptics a parole in the next life. I would never endorse eternal punishment without parole. If God does, I am not able to compel myself to accept him. If he doesn’t, then I hope to make good use of my second chance(s).

It has been established that God is a righteous judge. It has also been established that sin is reprehensible and deserves punishment. Therefore, the possibility of parole should not be an issue.

Parole is not always given to those who break earthly laws. Why should parole be automatically extended to those who offend the Creator?

A God who has good character would do everything that he could in order to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell. Since God has not done this, he does not have good character.

It has already been established that as soon as the first sin occurred, God implemented His plan of redemption for humankind. Therefore, He has done everything possible to send people to Heaven; not to mention He sent His Son Jesus Christ, so that people can trust Him and repent, in order to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.
From a Christian perspective, is the spread of the Gospel message not more important than curing cancer? If so, why isn’t God more involved in spreading it? He has allowed hundreds of millions of people to die without hearing the Gospel message, and yet he asks Christians to spread the very same message that he frequently deliberately withholds from the world.

God’s plan of redemption was implemented a very long time ago. Some people have chosen to reject it and reject the Creator. What do you suppose God should do for or to those who willfully reject Him?

By the way, do you have any evidence that “God frequently, deliberately withholds the gospel message from the world”?

Jason has said that God performs tangible miracles today. I request that he provide us with evidence that this is true.

So far, there is no reason to address miracles. If there becomes a good reason for me to use them in my argument, then I will.

Exodus 4:11 says "And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?" Is that not cruel and unusual punishment? If not, then what is? Are we not due an explanation for such detestable behavior? I believe that we are.

This issue was already covered above. All have sinned against the Creator. Everyone deserves to be judged by the Creator. Therefore, if the Creator decides that a person be dumb, deaf, or blind, then He is right in doing so. This isn’t to take away the severity of these issues, but this is to put them in proper perspective.

We must also consider the temporary nature of human life on Earth and the eternal nature of life in Heaven. If a person suffers from one of these maladies for an extremely brief time on Earth, they have nothing to worry about, as they will spend eternity in Heaven without these problems.

I deleted your hypothetical scenarios because I don’t believe they have anything to do with determining the character of the biblical God.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[Johnny Skeptic]

All Scriptures are from the KJV of the Bible unless otherwise noted.

Argument #1

A God who has good character would do everything that he could in order to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell. Since God has not done this, he does not have good character.

It has already been established that as soon as the first sin occurred, God implemented His plan of redemption for humankind. Therefore, He has done everything possible to send people to Heaven; not to mention He sent His Son Jesus Christ, so that people can trust Him and repent, in order to go to Heaven and avoid Hell.

Do you mean that if Jesus returned to earth and performed miracles all over the world that not even one single person would become a Christian who was not previously convinced? If so, I do not believe that that is a credible argument. Human nature being what it is, any being who has sufficient power could easily attract a lot of attention, and if his message was deemed to be appealing, he would attract a lot of followers, or worshippers. This would especially be true if he healed sick people and fed hungry people. If a skeptic had the power to heal all diseases, and healed thousands of people around the world, how difficult do you believe that it would be for him to get some people to worship him?

Argument #2

God is the righteous judge of all people. When people do wrong, they don’t just do wrong to others, but they also sin against God. God, as the Creator, has the right to also be the Judge.

Romans 9:21 says “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” The verse essentially says that any being who has sufficient power is able to enforce rules of his own choosing, but there is not a necessary correlation between power and good character. If there were, any being, whether good or evil, would qualify as the Judge if he was able to enforce rules of his own choosing. Would Christians be able to love any supposed God who was able to enforce rules of his own choosing regardless of what his character was? Of course not. They would only be able to love a supposed God who appealed to their OWN moral standards.

I request that Jason provide a list of reasons why he believes that the God of the Bible has the right to rule the universe. It is my position that it cannot reasonably be proven that God has good character unless it can reasonably be proven why he has a right to rule the universe.

I mean really, folks, any would be ruler of the universe can show up and declare that he is perfect, reference Matthew 5:48, that he loves the world, reference John 3:16, that he in not willing that any should perish, reference 2Peter 3:9, that he is worthy of glory, reference Hebrews 3:3, and Revelation 4:11, but where is any credible evidence that those claims are true? The claims are merely self-declarations, otherwise stated self-validations.

Argument #3

Is God compassionate? Consider the following Scriptures:

Matthew 9:36-38 But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few; Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest.

Johnny: I much prefer “Since human effort could never meet anywhere near all humans needs, pray ye that the Lord will depend less upon humans and do more on his own to meet human needs.” Or, “Pray ye that the Lord will not create (or allow) hurricanes to injure and kill people.”

Matthew 14:14 And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.

Johnny: There are plenty of sick people around today that need to be healed, but where is Jesus? People commonly recover from colds, but for some strange and unexplained reasons there is not one single reliable recorded case in modern times of an immediate, complete recovery from a serious case of multiple sclerosis or cerebral palsy. In addition, there is not one single reliable recorded case in modern times of a person who has lost an arm or leg receiving a new arm or leg. Obviously, either God has gone out of his way to try to make it appear that he does not exist, or that his compassion is sporadic and inconsistent, or that he isn’t really that interested in helping mankind.

Matthew 15:32-38 Then Jesus called his disciples unto him, and said, I have compassion on the multitude, because they continue with me now three days, and have nothing to eat: and I will not send them away fasting, lest they faint in the way. And his disciples say unto him, Whence should we have so much bread in the wilderness, as to fill so great a multitude? And Jesus saith unto them, How many loaves have ye? And they said, Seven, and a few little fishes.
And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the ground. And he took the seven loaves and the fishes, and gave thanks, and brake them, and gave to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the broken meat that was left seven baskets full. And they that did eat were four thousand men, beside women and children.

Johnny: I find that to be quite strange. When I was young, I once read that 10,000 in the world died of starvation every day, and that half of the people in the world went to bed hungry every night.

God created the bacteria (Bubonic Plague) that killed one fourth of the people in Europe, the majority of whom were Christians. If Jason had the ability, would he like to go back in time and prevent the Bubonic Plague from occurring? If Jason had the ability, would he like to discover a cure for all diseases?

God essentially says “I will create (or allow) hurricanes that will destroy houses.” Christians essentially say “not if I and my hurricane shutters can prevent it”.

I invite Jason to provide evidence that a loving being would have any justifiable purpose in creating (or allowing) hurricanes and injuring or killing people with them.

What about slavery, colonization, and the subjugation of women? Regarding slavery, a few extra words in the New Testament about slavery would have gone a long way towards preventing needless harmful consequences from slavery, but God would have none of that because he is not nearly as compassionate as the Bible indicates he is. Jefferson Davis was the President of the Southern Confederacy during the U.S. Civil War. He was a Christian. He believed that the Bible endorsed slavery. There is most certainly a reasonably good case that it does, but regardless, God could easily have revealed to Davis, by means of additional Scriptures or direct revelation, that slavery was sinful, but God would have none of that. It is interesting to note that some of the first opponents of slavery in the U.S. were skeptics.

Regarding colonization, a few extra words in the New Testament would have gone a long way towards preventing the conquest of the largest colonial empire in history by far under a single religion, an empire that was taken by means of persecution, murder, and theft of property, but God would have none of that.

Regarding the subjugation of women, a few extra words in the New Testament would have gone a long way towards granting women the equality that they deserved, but God would have none of that.

God essentially says “I will create (or allow) hurricanes and destroy houses with them”. Christians essentially say “Not if I and my hurricane shutters can prevent it”.

Argument #4

If God is evil, omnipotent, and omniscient, he could easily deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive. Even if an evil God were not omnipotent and omniscient, there are not any good reasons to exclude a reasonable possibility that he would still be able to deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive. The Bible attributes great powers, including the power to deceive lots of people, to evil beings who are far from being Gods.

What could possibly be more appealing to an evil, deceptive God than to create other beings to deceive? 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 say “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” Similarly, “If God is evil, then it would not be surprising at all if he transformed himself into an angel of light.” The trick for Christians is how to tell the difference between a good God and an evil God. Good Gods have a habit of revealing their true intentions, but evil Gods do not.

I invite Jason to provide evidence that it is a good deal more likely that the God of the Bible is a good God than that he is an evil God who is masquerading as an angel of light. I said “a good deal more likely” because Luke 10:25-28 say “And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.” A required commitment like that would not be possible for a rational person without having excellent evidence that the God whom the Bible depicts is not an imposter.

Unlike Jason, I do not need to produce excellent evidence that God is evil, only evidence that there is not any credible evidence that it is a good deal more likely that God is good than that he is evil.

Hypothetical arguments are appropriate in debates and elsewhere. I have frequently found them to be quite useful. Christians frequently use hypothetical arguments when they feel that it suits their purposes to do so. C. S. Lewis’ ‘Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?’ is a good example. Hypothetical arguments are excellent means of revealing inconsistencies in bad arguments. I have found them to be useful on many occasions when debating Christians. Evidence that cannot be consistently applied is not evidence at all.

No God who has good character would allow any skeptic to undermine Christianity to the extent that I have with the arguments that I have presented in this post.

[Jason Gastrich]

Dear readers,

Thank you for reading our debate. I hope you have enjoyed our arguments. In this post, I will offer some point by point rebuttals and replies to Johnny.

Johnny = Do you mean that if Jesus returned to earth and performed miracles all over the world that not even one single person would become a Christian who was not previously convinced? If so, I do not believe that that is a credible argument. Human nature being what it is, any being who has sufficient power could easily attract a lot of attention, and if his message was deemed to be appealing, he would attract a lot of followers, or worshippers. This would especially be true if he healed sick people and fed hungry people. If a skeptic had the power to heal all diseases, and healed thousands of people around the world, how difficult do you believe that it would be for him to get some people to worship him?

There is a doctrine called universal salvation. In this doctrine, it is assumed that God will grant salvation to everyone. However, this doctrine has many flaws. Since your argument resembles universal salvation, I will affirm the problems in it and in your argument.

The Problems with Universal Salvation and Johnny’s Argument

Johnny essentially wants all people to be saved. He thinks God should do more to let people know about Him and salvation through Jesus Christ. In fact, Johnny goes so far as to say Jesus Christ should return to Earth and do more miracles. This argument has the same problems that universal salvation has.

Universal salvation removes free will. If people are automatically saved, then they don’t have a choice. They do not need to love God or choose God. They do not need to repent from their sins. They do not need to have faith.

Johnny’s scenario involves these exact same problems. Johnny wants God to be more forceful with the revelation of His presence. However, this would not only cause the problems I just mentioned, but it would also cause lots of other problems. For instance, about 2000 years ago, people who saw the Christ rejected Him. They wanted special signs for their own egos. The same thing would happen, today. In fact, this request by Johnny is exactly that; a special sign for his ego. Enough evidence of God’s existence has already been given to us.

The Diverse and Changing Criteria for Belief from Unbelievers

In my experiences with unbelievers, many of them want God to give them certain signs. They want Him to speak to them in a burning bush, or write their name in the clouds, or do other things, just so they will believe. Is this really fair, though? Should the Creator of the Universe be required to cater to each human’s requirements for belief?

It makes good sense that if there is a Creator, then He has a plan for humankind. His plan is not negotiable or changeable. It is one of His design and one to His liking. It would make good sense to trust the Creator and His plan, since He obviously knows more than we know.

Not only has God made His presence known through the creation, but He has also spoken to humankind through Jesus Christ. He came to Earth, performed miracles, lived a sinless life, died an atoning, sacrificial death, and rose from the grave. Afterwards, He walked the Earth for 40 days, then ascended to Heaven.

What more could He do? What more did He need to do?

Jason = God is the righteous judge of all people. When people do wrong, they don’t just do wrong to others, but they also sin against God. God, as the Creator, has the right to also be the Judge.

Johnny writes some things below, but none of them deal with the fact I just mentioned. Like most unbelievers, he doesn’t consider the depravity of sin and how it not only effects other humans, but also wrongs the Creator. Johnny (and all unbelievers) need to deal with this issue of offending the Creator and God being the rightful Judge of that sin.

Johnny = Romans 9:21 says “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” The verse essentially says that any being who has sufficient power is able to enforce rules of his own choosing, but there is not a necessary correlation between power and good character.

I’m not sure about your exegesis of that verse. I’m happy to address your argument, though.

Johnny = If there were, any being, whether good or evil, would qualify as the Judge if he was able to enforce rules of his own choosing. Would Christians be able to love any supposed God who was able to enforce rules of his own choosing regardless of what his character was? Of course not. They would only be able to love a supposed God who appealed to their OWN moral standards.

It would make good sense that the Creator would be able to design every law. This includes natural laws, the laws of science, moral laws, etc. It would also make sense that these laws could not be violated or changed. What reveals God’s character to be excellent is the fact that His moral laws have never changed and are applied equally to every individual.

I request that Jason provide a list of reasons why he believes that the God of the Bible has the right to rule the universe. It is my position that it cannot reasonably be proven that God has good character unless it can reasonably be proven why he has a right to rule the universe.

God created the universe. The Creator has the right to rule.

I mean really, folks, any would be ruler of the universe can show up and declare that he is perfect, reference Matthew 5:48, that he loves the world, reference John 3:16, that he in not willing that any should perish, reference 2Peter 3:9, that he is worthy of glory, reference Hebrews 3:3, and Revelation 4:11, but where is any credible evidence that those claims are true? The claims are merely self-declarations, otherwise stated self-validations.

Sure, anyone could say these things. However, God reveals His character as excellent by:

1. Implementing His plan of redemption immediately after human sin and communion with Him was broken.
2. Revealing Himself to humankind through nature.
3. Revealing Himself to humankind through Jesus Christ.
4. Giving moral laws that have never changed.
5. Giving moral laws that are applied equally to all people.
6. Judging all people by the same standard.

Johnny’s Avoidance

Before I continue addressing Johnny’s Round 2 arguments, I need to interject something. Johnny has avoided all of my Round 1 arguments. He has given no response to the following, bolded topics and developed arguments from my previous post (which have been expanded into six statements above):

1. The Righteous Judge
2. The Same Standard
3. The First Sin Immediately Brought God’s Plan of Redemption
4. All Have Sinned

Unless he has a convincing argument against them, we can conclude that Johnny has conceded these points.

God’s Compassion

Johnny = There are plenty of sick people around today that need to be healed, but where is Jesus? People commonly recover from colds, but for some strange and unexplained reasons there is not one single reliable recorded case in modern times of an immediate, complete recovery from a serious case of multiple sclerosis or cerebral palsy. In addition, there is not one single reliable recorded case in modern times of a person who has lost an arm or leg receiving a new arm or leg. Obviously, either God has gone out of his way to try to make it appear that he does not exist, or that his compassion is sporadic and inconsistent, or that he isn’t really that interested in helping mankind.

First, please tell us why sick people deserve to be healed. In my Round 1 post, I established that we are all sinners and our sin warrants God’s judgment. Where in the equation do humans have the right to an earthly life without problems, sickness, or even disabilities?

In your opinion, what constitutes a “single reliable recorded case” of a complete recovery from MS or palsy? There are, of course, a number of recorded cases of spontaneous recoveries from all sorts of ailments. In your opinion, can God use medicine (something He created) to heal people of ailments or are you discounting all of those types of recoveries?

Many have spontaneously recovered from cancer. These cases can be found with a search for spontaneous remission. Link: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=spontaneous+remission

It is wrong to assume that God is either uncaring or inconsistent. It has been established that God is the rightful and righteous judge of His creation. How do you figure that He is wrongfully judging people? It has been established that all people are sinners. We have all wronged the Creator. Therefore, we deserve the death penalty for our sins and infinite judgment for sinning against an infinite God. However, God’s mercy, grace, and love gives us life and prevents us from receiving a much worse existence or fate than you have mentioned.

Starvation, Bubonic plague, and Hurricanes

First, it has been established that people are all sinners and our sin has offended God. He is the perfect and righteous judge and Creator. He has the right to judge His creation. Therefore, in light of these things, we can put tragedies like starvation, bubonic plague, and hurricanes into proper perspective.

We must also consider the temporary nature of life on Earth and the eternal nature of life in Heaven. Suffering briefly on Earth is nothing compared to living happily forever in Heaven. Yes, the things you mentioned are tragic and can cause temporary pain to many. However, in light of earthly death and eternal life in Heaven, without pain or trial, there is no comparison.

Slavery

In the Bible, it is generally unclear whether people had slaves or servants. The Greek and Hebrew words used could have meant either. However, one thing is very clear. The Bible has not recorded God ever condoning slavery. In fact, the New Testament is a strong indicator that slavery is wrong.

Johnny used the example of a Christian man who was pro-slavery. However, there are and were plenty of Christian men and women who are and were against slavery. There are many who even use the scriptures to reveal that God is against it.

There are countless passages of scripture that reveal how people should treat others. The New Testament tells us to love one another. It tells us to be kind to others. Jesus says that we should treat others as we want to be treated. There is obviously no room in the Bible for slavery and it doesn’t take a lot of studying to see that slavery is contrary to the Bible’s commands. The same verses obviously apply to colonization and the treatment of women.

God is Not Evil

Johnny = I invite Jason to provide evidence that it is a good deal more likely that the God of the Bible is a good God than that he is an evil God who is masquerading as an angel of light.

I’ve already done this. For the most part, you have ignored my arguments. The arguments that go to prove how God is not evil are identical to the arguments that go to prove God has good character. The Bible reveals God as good because He:

1. Implemented His plan of redemption immediately after human sin and communion with Him was broken.
2. Revealed Himself to humankind through nature.
3. Revealed Himself to humankind through Jesus Christ.
4. Gave moral laws that have never changed.
5. Gave moral laws that are applied equally to all people.
6. Judges all people by the same standard.

No God who has good character would allow any skeptic to undermine Christianity to the extent that I have with the arguments that I have presented in this post.

This is an assumption from someone who clearly doesn’t understand the character or nature of God. Furthermore, it’s unnecessary and unwarranted boasting. Johnny hasn’t undermined Christianity at all. And what is he supposing God should do to him right now? He’s obviously implying that a God with good character would immediately judge him. Is this how a God with good character should act?

Sincerely,

Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[Johnny Skeptic]

Hello everyone,

I invite Jason to provide evidence that it is a good deal more likely that the God of the Bible is a good God than that he is an evil God who is masquerading as an angel of light.

I’ve already done this.

No you haven’t. In my previous post, I said:

If God is evil, omnipotent, and omniscient, he could easily deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive. Even if an evil God were not omnipotent and omniscient, there are not any good reasons to exclude a reasonable possibility that he would still be able to deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive.

What could possibly be more appealing to an evil, deceptive God than to create other beings to deceive?

A good God would quite naturally reveal what his true intentions are, but a deceptive, evil God would quite naturally not reveal what his true intentions are.

An evil God would easily have been able to inspire the Bible writers to write exactly what they wrote. It is just that simple. It is a ridiculous notion that mere, fallible human beings, who are members of a species that has not even found a cure for the common cold, would be able to outwit a deceptive, evil, infallible God.

Now really, Jason, if a deceptive, evil God created the universe, do you believe that he would provide you with the means to determine whether or not he is deceptive and evil?

The claim that God has good character is a hypothetical argument. This is because actions can be observed, but motives cannot be observed. Evil humans frequently get away with appearing to be good, and they are not nearly as good at concealing their motives as an evil God would be.

Some Christians claim that a deceptive, evil God would not act like the God who is depicted in the Bible, but wouldn’t that be exactly what a deceptive, evil God would want them to think? If God is deceptive and evil, anyone who believed otherwise for any reason would obviously be wrong.

Johnny Skeptic

[Jason Gastrich]

Dear Readers,

I hope you’re well.

First, I encourage Johnny to reply to my Round 1 and Round 2 posts. For some reason, Johnny posted under 300 words in his Round 3 post. I don’t see any circumstance where this might be appropriate, especially since he has already avoided most of my arguments.

In this debate, we agreed on allowing 3,000 words per round. It’s hard to understand how and why Johnny would use less than 10% of that allotment, while avoiding most of my arguments.

If God is evil, omnipotent, and omniscient, he could easily deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive. Even if an evil God were not omnipotent and omniscient, there are not any good reasons to exclude a reasonable possibility that he would still be able to deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive.

These “what if” questions are not pertinent to the resolution of the debate. We are debating whether or not God’s character, as revealed in the Bible, is good or evil. We are not debating whether or not an omniscient God could or would be able to deceive its creation. Perhaps this discussion could ensue after this debate or perhaps it could be the topic of another debate.

An evil God would easily have been able to inspire the Bible writers to write exactly what they wrote. It is just that simple. It is a ridiculous notion that mere, fallible human beings, who are members of a species that has not even found a cure for the common cold, would be able to outwit a deceptive, evil, infallible God.

Again, this isn’t the topic of the debate. We are debating the biblical God’s character. Here is the resolution we agreed upon: "Resolved: the god of the Bible has poor character."

Johnny, you’re welcome to make more 275 word posts, but here is what I’d like you to do. First, reply to my arguments from Rounds 1 and 2. Next, come up with your own arguments regarding the biblical God and why you think He has poor character. This is what we agreed on debating.

Scriptures

Here are some scriptures that are pertinent to this debate. Johnny has made some statements, saying that God should do more to save unbelievers. Even though plenty has been done and there is no excuse to deny God, here are some passages that address this issue of signs and additional persuasion.

1 Corinthians 1:

20Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

Also in Matthew 16:

1The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired him that he would shew them a sign from heaven.

2He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.

3And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?

4A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

May God richly bless every reader.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[Johnny Skeptic]

These “what if” questions are not pertinent to the resolution of the debate. We are debating whether or not God’s character, as revealed in the Bible, is good or evil. We are not debating whether or not an omniscient God could or would be able to deceive its creation. Perhaps this discussion could ensue after this debate or perhaps it could be the topic of another debate.

Johnny, you’re welcome to make more 275 word posts, but here is what I’d like you to do. First, reply to my arguments from Rounds 1 and 2. Next, come up with your own arguments regarding the biblical God and why you think He has poor character. This is what we agreed on debating.

It doesn’t matter what the Biblical God does unless we know what his true intentions are. The claim that God has good character is a “what if”. It is entirely hypothetical. In order to determine whether or not someone has good character, you first have to know whether or not they have revealed their true intentions. No God who has good character would refuse to provide sufficient evidence that he has revealed his true intentions. Since the God of the Bible has not provided sufficient evidence that he has revealed his true intentions, he does not have good character.

If God is evil, omnipotent, and omniscient, he could easily deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive. Even if an evil God were not omnipotent and omniscient, there are not any good reasons to exclude a reasonable possibility that he would still be able to deceive anyone who he wanted to deceive.

What could possibly be more appealing to an evil, deceptive God than to create other beings to deceive?

A good God would quite naturally reveal what his true intentions are, but a deceptive, evil God would quite naturally not reveal what his true intentions are.

If God is who the Bible says he is, we would have the very information that we have in the Bible. If God is deceptive and evil, we would have the very information that we have in the Bible. Therefore, the Bible is useless as evidence. Emotional, illogical self-interest would conclude that the former is true. Logic and reason would conclude that there is insufficient evidence to conclude whether or not a possible creator of the universe has revealed his true intentions.

Actions can be observed, but motives cannot be observed. Evil humans frequently get away with appearing to be good, and they are not nearly as good at concealing their motives as an evil God would be.

It is a ridiculous notion that mere, fallible human beings, who are members of a species that has not even found a cure for the common cold, would be able to outwit a deceptive, evil, infallible God.

If a deceptive, evil God created the universe, do Christians actually believe that he would provide them with the means of determining whether or not he is deceptive and evil?

Some Christians claim that a deceptive, evil God would not act like the God who is depicted in the Bible, but wouldn’t that be exactly what a deceptive, evil God would want them to think? If God is deceptive and evil, anyone who believed otherwise for any reason would obviously by wrong.

[Jason Gastrich]

Dear Johnny,

You have avoided every one of my arguments. I'll repost a summary of them for you.

The Bible reveals God as one who has excellent character because He:

1. Implemented His plan of redemption immediately after human sin and communion with Him was broken.
2. Revealed Himself to humankind through nature.
3. Revealed Himself to humankind through Jesus Christ.
4. Gave moral laws that have never changed.
5. Gave moral laws that are applied equally to all people.
6. Judges all people by the same standard.

Do you have any response to any of these arguments? If you don't, then please admit that you cannot reply (or else people will just know for themselves that you concede those critical points).

That is the core of my argument for the excellent character of God. To this point, it remains unchallenged. Even if you want to try and take the debate in a different direction, you still need to respond to my arguments or else you have lost those points and essentially lost the debate.

God Has Integrity, So His Intentions Are Good

How does one know when another person has revealed his intentions? What kind of criteria should be used to determine whether or not God has been forthright? You claim that there is not enough evidence to conclude that God has been forthright with His intentions, however you don’t tell us the criteria you’re using. So, Johnny, I call your bluff. How have you determined that God has not revealed His true intentions? How would a forthright God behave? If you cannot or will not answer these questions, then you have no business making a judgment against God’s character.

The greatest indicator of a person’s good intentions is integrity. Dictionary.com defines integrity as honesty, soundness of moral character, and adherence to moral and ethical principles. First, I will list ten promises that God has kept to humankind. Some of these promises have been kept for thousands of years. Next, I will summarize how God has sound moral character. I’ll conclude with several of God’s judgments and blessings. All of these arguments will contribute to my argument that God has integrity, so we conclude He has good intentions.

God Has Kept His Promises, So He Has Integrity. Since God Has Integrity, We Conclude He Has Good Intentions

The greatest indicator of a person’s good intentions is integrity. If a person has made a promise and kept that promise for a long period of time, for instance, we can conclude that he has integrity. This is exactly what God has done. He has kept His promises, shown His integrity, and proven His good intentions.

Promise #1 - Genesis 9:11 - “Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.”

Length kept: 4000+ years

The result: There has not been another worldwide flood.

Promise #2 - 1 Kings 8:56 - “Blessed be the LORD, who has given rest to His people Israel, according to all that He promised. There has not failed one word of all His good promise, which He promised through His servant Moses.”

Length kept: 500+ years

The result: God gave the Israelites rest and was revered as One who kept all of his promises.

Promise #3 - Psalm 105:41, 42 - “For He remembered His holy promise, And Abraham His servant. He brought out His people with joy, His chosen ones with gladness.”

Length kept: 600+ years

The result: God prospered the Israelites and kept his promise.

Promise #4 - 1 John 1:9 - “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Length kept: 1900+ years

The result: God forgives the sins of those who confess them to Him.

Promise #5 - Joshua 6:5 - “. . . the wall of the city (Jericho) will fall down flat.”

Length kept: This promise was a prophecy that was quickly fulfilled.

The result: Jericho’s walls fell.

Promise #6 - Matthew 24:2 - “And Jesus said to them, ‘Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.’”

Length kept: This promise was a prophecy that was fulfilled approximately 40 years later, during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

The result: Jerusalem was torn down and the temple was dismantled, stone by stone.

Promise #7 - Matthew 12:40 - “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”

Length kept: This prophetic promise was fulfilled approximately 1-2 years later, as Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead.

The result: Jesus proved that He has integrity and that He is able to resurrect those who repent and trust in Him for salvation.

Promise #8 - Matthew 18:20 - “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”

Length kept: 1900+ years

The result: Jesus’ spirit is present wherever two or three are gathered in His name. He blesses those people and edifies them.

Promise #9 - Genesis 3:16 - “. . . in pain you shall bring forth children . . .”

Length kept: 6,000+ years

The result: Due to Eve’s sin, which was the initial sin on Earth that broke the perfect fellowship between God and humankind, God promised women that they would experience pain in childbirth.

Promise #10 - Genesis 3:17 - “ . . . cursed is the ground . . . in toil you shall eat of it . . .”

Length kept: 6,000+ years

The result: Due to Adam’s sin, which accompanied Eve’s sin as the initial sin on Earth that broke the perfect fellowship between God and humankind, God promised men that they would have to work hard to bring forth food from the ground.

God’s Laws for Christians Haven’t Changed, So God Has Sound Moral Character. Since God Has Sound Moral Character, We Conclude He Has Good Intentions

The scriptures tell us that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). They also tell us that God cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18). These are the earmarks of integrity and as I just established, if one has integrity, we conclude he has good intentions (and trustworthiness, forthrightness, and legitimacy).

The scriptures were completed in the first century. They are contained in a book commonly called the Bible. It has instructed people on all sorts of things, such as loving others, forgiving people, eternal life, having meekness, self-control, patience, gentleness, faithfulness, and kindness. These commands have not changed, but they have been given and extended to every single person on the planet.

God Has Rightfully Judged Sinners and Blessed the Obedient, So God Has Adhered to Ethical and Moral Principles. Since God Has Adhered to Ethical and Moral Principles, We Conclude He Has Good Intentions

We have established that God has been revealed by the Bible as the Creator of all things. His creation is to submit to Him. When it doesn’t, He has the right to judge them for their sin. When it does, God blesses them. This is the pattern we see all throughout the Bible.

Here are some instances where God judged people for their poor behavior and disobedience to Him. These judgments reveal God as a consistent, ethical, and moral being. Consequently, since His judgments reveal His integrity, we conclude that He has good intentions.

Judgment #1 - In Genesis 4, Cain is judged for killing his brother.

Judgment #2 - In Genesis 19, Lot’s wife is judged for disobeying God’s commands.

Judgment #3 - In 1 Samuel 31, Saul is judged for consulting a witch in 1 Samuel 28.

Judgment #4 - In Numbers 14, God judges the doubters and complainers.

Judgment #5 - In Jonah 1, God judged Jonah for ignoring His call.

Here are some instances where God blessed people for their obedience. These blessings reveal God as a consistent, ethical, and moral being. Consequently, since His blessings reveal His integrity, we conclude that He has good intentions.

Blessing #1 - In Genesis 5, God takes Enoch to Heaven before his death because Enoch was a godly man.

Blessing #2 - In Joshua 10, God made the sun stand still, so His people could finish and win their battle.

Blessing #3 - In Judges 16, God blessed Samson for his obedience and allowed him to enact judgment on the Philistines.

Blessing #4 - In Numbers 14, the faithful spies who gave a good report were later rewarded by entering the promised land.

Blessing #5 - In Matthew 9, Jesus heals the woman with the blood disease because of her faith.

Conclusion

God has been revealed as one with excellent character because He implemented His plan of redemption immediately after human sin and communion with Him was broken, He had revealed Himself to humankind through nature, He has revealed Himself to humankind through Jesus Christ, He has given moral laws that have never changed, He has given moral laws that are applied equally to all people, and He judges all people by the same standard.

God has been revealed as one with integrity, so we conclude He has good intentions. We have seen that God has integrity because God is honest, has the soundness of moral character, and adheres to moral and ethical principles.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[Johnny Skeptic]

You have avoided every one of my arguments.

It is you who are being evasive. None of your arguments are valid because you have not produced any evidence at all that the God of the Bible is not an evil imposter. In the NIV, 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 say “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.” If it is not surprising that Satan masquerades as an angel of light, meaning that he pretends to be good, why would it be surprising if God pretends to be good too? If God is pretending to be good, how would you know about it? By definition, a God, whether good or evil, would be able to accomplish anything that he wanted to accomplish.

Since the God of the Bible has not provided sufficient evidence that he is not masquerading as an angel of light, he does not have good character.

You can continue to refuse to reply to my arguments if you wish, but I assume that most undecided readers will assume that I won this debate because you have not produced any evidence at all that God is not pretending to be good.

[Jason Gastrich]

God Has Integrity, So He is Not an Evil Imposter

Most of the 1500 words I posted last round, that showed how God has integrity, refutes the unsupported claim that He is an evil imposter. If you disagree, then you need to try and rebut my arguments and answer this question. What is God's motive?

Ignoring everything I've written and dismissing it out of hand is a very poor tactic. The folks in the Peanut Gallery seem to agree.

Good luck as you try and reply to my arguments and good luck supporting yours!

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[Johnny Skeptic]

Most of the 1500 words I posted last round, that showed how God has integrity, refutes the unsupported claim that He is an evil imposter. If you disagree, then you need to try and rebut my arguments and answer this question. What is God's motive?

Ignoring everything I've written and dismissing it out of hand is a very poor tactic. The folks in the Peanut Gallery seem to agree.

Good luck as you try and reply to my arguments and good luck supporting yours!

I did not claim that God IS an evil imposter, only that we could not reliably determine what his true intentions are if he is evil and wished to conceal them, but you claim that he IS NOT an evil imposter. If a God created the universe, by definition, whether he is good OR evil, he would easily be able to reveal OR conceal his true intentions according to his wishes. How could it possibly be any other way?

You are just a mere human, a member of a species of life that has not even found a cure for the common cold, and yet you presume to know that the most powerful good supernatural being is more powerful than the most powerful evil supernatural being. This is utterly absurd. You have not provided any evidence at all that you have such an ability.

I have not reasonably proven that God has poor character, but you have not reasonably proven that he has good character. A Mexican standoff is always best for skeptics.

[Jason Gastrich]

Dear Johnny,

I hope you’re well.

Although this isn’t my summary post, I’m going to summarize some important aspects of this debate. It’s only fair for the readers to see, in one concise location, what has happened so far. This post won’t be a summary of my arguments (as my next round post will be), but it will be a summary of your evasions.

Questions You Never Answered

During the course of this debate, you avoided twenty five of the questions I asked you. These questions gave you the chance to clarify your statements, develop some arguments, and even convince some that you may be right. Here is a list of the questions that you avoided.

Your Round 1 Evasions

1. The measure of a good judge’s character lies with his consistency. Is his standard the same for everyone? Or does he sometimes choose to avoid being fair?

2. What is a good person? Who defines good?

3. Sometimes, people see a good person die and get angry at God. Was this person really good, though? If so, was this person perfect?

4. Parole is not always given to those who break earthly laws. Why should parole be automatically extended to those who offend the Creator?

5. God’s plan of redemption was implemented a very long time ago. Some people have chosen to reject it and reject the Creator. What do you suppose God should do for or to those who willfully reject Him?

6. By the way, do you have any evidence that “God frequently, deliberately withholds the gospel message from the world”?

Your Round 2 Evasions

1. In my experiences with unbelievers, many of them want God to give them certain signs. They want Him to speak to them in a burning bush, or write their name in the clouds, or do other things, just so they will believe. Is this really fair, though? Should the Creator of the Universe be required to cater to each human’s requirements for belief?

2. Not only has God made His presence known through the creation, but He has also spoken to humankind through Jesus Christ. He came to Earth, performed miracles, lived a sinless life, died an atoning, sacrificial death, and rose from the grave. Afterwards, He walked the Earth for 40 days, then ascended to Heaven.

What more could He do? What more did He need to do?

3. First, please tell us why sick people deserve to be healed. In my Round 1 post, I established that we are all sinners and our sin warrants God’s judgment. Where in the equation do humans have the right to an earthly life without problems, sickness, or even disabilities?

4. In your opinion, what constitutes a “single reliable recorded case” of a complete recovery from MS or palsy? There are, of course, a number of recorded cases of spontaneous recoveries from all sorts of ailments. In your opinion, can God use medicine (something He created) to heal people of ailments or are you discounting all of those types of recoveries?

5. It is wrong to assume that God is either uncaring or inconsistent. It has been established that God is the rightful and righteous judge of His creation. How do you figure that He is wrongfully judging people?

6. What (are you) supposing God should do to (you) right now? (You’re) obviously implying that a God with good character would immediately judge (you). Is this how a God with good character should act?

Your Round 4 Evasions

1. How does one know when another person has revealed his intentions? What kind of criteria should be used to determine whether or not God has been forthright?

2. How have you determined that God has not revealed His true intentions? How would a forthright God behave?

The Atoning Death of God’s Son Proves His Good Intentions

As if enough evidence hasn’t been given for God’s excellent character and good intentions (which will be briefly summarized below and articulated and summarized next round), the atoning death of God’s Son proves His good intentions. No Father would want their son to die. No Father would want their son to die a gruesome death. However, only a father of excellent character and good intentions would ordain their Son to die, in order to save humankind and grant them eternal life.

God could have no other motive besides love. It would be impossible for God to have bad intentions, as no father would ever want their son to die, unless they were dying a sacrificial and atoning death for the entire human race, as Jesus Christ died. Since it would be impossible for God to ordain His Son to die for the sins of humankind and have bad intentions for humankind, we conclude that God has excellent character and good intentions.

Here are some scriptures that support this argument.

Claim: God ordained His Son to die an atoning and sacrificial death for the entire human race.

Scriptural support: Acts 4:27 and 28 reads, “For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done.

Claim: Jesus Christ died on the cross for the sins of the human race, so they could be saved and have eternal life.

Scriptural support: 1 Corinthians 15:3 reads, “. . . Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures . . .”

Conclusion

Since you haven’t developed any arguments, defended your position, or put a dent in my arguments (which will be summarized in more depth in my next and final post), you haven’t proven that God has poor character. In fact, you have failed to argue against my points that God has excellent character. Furthermore, we conclude that God has good intentions because He meets every bit of the definition of the word integrity. He has honesty, soundness of moral character, and He adheres to moral and ethical principles. He also ordained His only Son to die a sacrificial death on the cross, for the sins of the human race, to redeem everyone who believes and repents. There is no way God could have bad intentions.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Johnny Skeptic has requested that his deadline be extended to Sept. 16. I have agreed to grant his request.

- NS, FD Moderator

[Johnny Skeptic]

Hi everyone,

I have become aware from reading posts at the Peanut Gallery that I have not adhered to standard formal debate procedures, so in Argument #1, I will adhere to standard formal debate procedures. After further consideration, I realize that this debate is far from a draw. I will show that I have won hands down. In Argument #2, I will show that there is not any credible evidence at all that the God of the Bible has revealed his true intentions. Such being the case, no one should become a Christian.

All Scriptures will be from the KJV unless otherwise noted.

Argument #1

The greatest indicator of a person’s good intentions is integrity. If a person has made a promise and kept that promise for a long period of time, for instance, we can conclude that he has integrity. This is exactly what God has done. He has kept His promises, shown His integrity, and proven His good intentions.

Promise #1 - Genesis 9:11 - “Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.”

Length kept: 4000+ years

The result: There has not been another worldwide flood.

How utterly absurd. Today, whether directly or indirectly, God still kills millions of people in the world every year with disease and natural disasters. The only thing that has changed regarding his killing ways is his methods of killing people.

Due to Eve’s sin, which was the initial sin on Earth that broke the perfect fellowship between God and humankind, God promised women that they would experience pain in childbirth.

Since when is promising to hurt people and fulfilling your promise a sign of good character? If God promised that people would experience pain every time that they ate food (some actually do), and that happened, that would be a sign of poor character, so I wonder what Jason’s point is regarding women having pain during childbirth.

The measure of a good judge’s character lies with his consistency. Is his standard the same for everyone? Or does he sometimes choose to avoid being fair?

God is frequently not consistent, and he is frequently not fair. While good things are frequently distributed to those who ARE NOT in greatest need, they are frequently withheld from those who ARE in greatest need. Unexpected “blessings” are most certainly not limited to Christians. Some evil people who never become Christians enjoy much better health and finances than some of the most devout and faithful Christians do. Matthew 5:44-45 say "But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." It seems that God does not take a man’s character into account when he blesses him. Hurricane Katrina certainly didn’t.

By the way, do you have any evidence that “God frequently, deliberately withholds the gospel message from the world”?

Sure, after Jesus died, the Gospel message was spread by the grossly inefficient means of foot, horse, boat etc., ensuring that hundreds of millions of people would die without hearing the Gospel message. This was the result of God’s apathy. Hebrews 8:6 says “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” Of what benefit is a better covenant to people who do not know about it? Since God does not deem it to be necessary that EVERYONE hear the Gospel message, why does he deem it to be necessary that ANYONE hear the Gospel message?

What are you supposing God should do to you right now?

For one thing, God should tell everyone in the world why might makes right. Romans 9:21 says “Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” I don’t see how power necessarily makes anyone good.

Exodus 20:13 says “Thou shalt not kill,” and yet God frequently kills people, including some of his most devout followers. Even in the New Testament, God killed Ananias and Saphira. If God will not consistently keep his own rules, why should anyone else? Hypocrisy does not become a God, or a human.

When I was young, I read that 10,000 people died of hunger every day. Why doesn’t God care about our tangible needs on a consistent basis? Matthew 14:14 says “And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.” I do not believe that that happened. If it did, there is no evidence that Jesus consistently healed people. We know for a fact that God does not consistently heal people today who have serious cases of cerebral palsy, multiple scleroris, and Alzheimer’s disease. He much prefers to consistently heal people who have common colds.

Today, millions of Christians disagree as to what constitutes a miracle healing. Why should anyone believe that it was any different back then? Of one thing we can be certain: During the last twelve months, there has not been one single reliable recorded case of a person getting a new arm or leg. Obviously, God has gone out of his way to ensure that in the opinions of many people, he has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that he heals people. Why would he do that? Does he care less about people who have lost arms and legs than he cares about other people? Obviously so.

At http://www.goatstar.org/atrocities-committed-or-commanded-by-god/, readers will find an article that is titled ‘Bible atrocities’. The article provides numerous examples of the detestable character of the God of the Bible. Following are some excerpts:

God threatens people with having to eat their children’s flesh

Sons of Levi are blessed for randomly slaughtering cow worshippers

God kills all the Egyptian babies for Pharaoh’s stubbornness

God kills the meat eaters

God allows people to sacrifice their babies to him to teach them a lesson

God kills a man for not impregnating his sister-in-law

God allows babies to be dashed and pregnant women to be ripped open

God threatens to have wild animals carry away the Israelite’s children

God tells people to kill their loved ones if they worship other gods

Bible says beat your child with a rod

Bible says beating and wounding people is good for them

God rewards Jacob for deceiving his dying father

Johnny: That is just for openers. The article has a lot more evidence of the God of the Bible’s detestable character. Of course, Jason will claim that whatever God does is good no matter what he does, even though God frequently hypocritically breaks his own rules.

Consider the following from an article at http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-bibleatrocities.html

The second defense is that levitical law is obsolete and no longer valid today. But that argument is off-point: the presence of ‘any’ atrocity or unfairness in the Bible, ‘at any time in history’, invalidates it as a source of eternal truth and morality.

The third defense is that humans do not have a right to kill or commit atrocities, but God does. However, this is not a defense, but a capitulation. The atrocities and immoralities listed here should be even ‘less’ expected of a fair and perfect God.

Johnny: Exodus 4:11 says “And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord?” Obviously, when Christians ask God for protection, they should ask him for protection from himself.

Sometimes, people see a good person die and get angry at God. Was this person really good, though? If so, was this person perfect? If the person in question wasn’t perfect, then the person had at least some sin. If the person had at least some sin (which is transgression against God), then the person deserved to be judged by God.

Does a newborn baby deserve to be born with serious birth defects, suffer for a few days, and die? How can anyone be perfect when God has ensured that NO ONE can be perfect in this life? God has forced everyone to sin at least some of the time by causing a sinful nature to be transmitted to every newborn baby. Exodus 20:5 says “You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.” Now is that fair? Well of course it isn’t. Jason surely believes that humans can be guilty of cruel and unusual punishment, but in God’s case, he has made a convenient exception. One wonders to what extent Jason would endorse barbaric behavior from God.

The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines the word “perfect” as “being entirely without fault or defect.” Assuming that the God of the Bible has said that he is perfect, I request that Jason provide evidence that God is perfect merely because he has said that he is perfect.

What is a good person?

Mark 10:18 says “And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.” What evidence is there that God is good? Any being can declare that he is good, but what are the proper criteria for judging whether or not the God of the Bible is good? I suggest that 2 Peter 3:9 provides the proper criteria for judging whether or not God is good. The verse says “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” The verse, and many other Scriptures as well, suggests that God’s top priority is helping to ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell. If that is not God’s top priority, it most certainly ought to be.

Consider the following Scriptures:

Matthew 4:24 And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

Matthew 14:14 And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.

John 2:23 Now when he was in Jerusalem at the passover, in the feast day, many believed in his name, when they saw the miracles which he did.

John 3:2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

John 6:2 And a great multitude followed him, because they saw his miracles which he did on them that were diseased.

John 10:37-38 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

1 Corinthians 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

Acts 14:3 So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to do miraculous signs and wonders. (NIV)

It is interesting to note that Acts 14:3 refers to events that took place AFTER the Holy Spirit came to the church. Now readers, why does Jason suppose that after all of the preceding evidence, INCLUDING the presence of the Holy Sprit, that God felt the need to provide even more tangible confirmations, only to leave us with precious few tangible confirmations today, including no surviving eyewitnesses?

ANY being who healed all of the sick people in the word would immediately attract a lot of followers, especially if his message was deemed to be acceptable, such as 1) promising salvation by merit, 2) not requiring faith, 3) providing tangible evidence of his existence, power, and goodness for everyone to see, thereby eliminating most doubt, and most religious wars, and 4) being available to have frequent discussions with everyone, tangibly and in person. Jason would be quite pleased if God healed all of the sick people in the world, but yet, he is quite content that God refuses to heal all of the sick people in the world. Does Jason really have any opinions of his own?

God HAS NOT done everything that he can do in order to help ensure that as many people as possible go to heaven, and as few people as possible go to hell, and he IS willing that some people will perish or he would have done much more than he has done to prevent it.

Jason has not provided any evidence at all that it is necessary for God to deliberately injure and kill people, and destroy their property, in order to convince them that they should accept him. It is said that you can catch more flies with honey than you can with vinegar, but obviously, Jason believes that you can catch more flies with vinegar than you can with honey, well, at least as far as people who become Christians are concerned.

In Jason’s conclusion in round #6, he said:

Since you haven’t developed any arguments, defended your position, or put a dent in my arguments (which will be summarized in more depth in my next and final post), you haven’t proven that God has poor character. In fact, you have failed to argue against my points that God has excellent character. Furthermore, we conclude that God has good intentions because He meets every bit of the definition of the word integrity. He has honesty, soundness of moral character, and He adheres to moral and ethical principles. He also ordained His only Son to die a sacrificial death on the cross, for the sins of the human race, to redeem everyone who believes and repents. There is no way God could have bad intentions.

Any rational person who reads this post will surely conclude that I have defended my position, put much more than a dent in Jason’s arguments, and that I have reasonably proven that God has poor character.

Argument #2

How have you determined that God has not revealed His true intentions?

I haven’t. My position is this: By definition, a God, whether he is good or evil, would easily be able to reveal OR conceal his true intentions according to his wishes. If a God exists, we do not know whether or not he has revealed his true intentions.

How would a forthright God behave?

The very same way that a deceptive, evil God would behave in order to convince people that he was good. An evil God would easily be able to duplicate anything that is attributed the God of the Bible. Such a being would easily be able to heal sick people and inspire people to write whatever he wanted them to write.

If Jason claims that the creator of the universe has to be good, I will tell him that that might be true, but he might not be the God of the Bible. Whoever the creator of the universe might be, he might reveal his specific existence and will to humans in the NEXT life. The creator of the universe is not obligated to reveal is specific existence and will to humans in this life. In the NIV, Isaiah 55:8 says "'For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways', declares the Lord." Christians typically refer to this verse when they cannot explain some of the strange things that God does that many people find to be questionable. I am now using the verse to support my position that the creator of the universe might not be the God of the Bible, and that his ways might be strange, including not revealing his specific existence and will to humans in this life.

Hypothetical arguments are acceptable. Christians frequently use hypothetical arguments when they feel that it suits their purposes to do so. C.S. Lewis’ Lord, Liar, or Lunatic is a good example.

The Atoning Death of God’s Son Proves His Good Intentions.

I am glad that Jason mentioned that. 1 Corinthians 15:14-15 say “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.” I agree with that assessment. Paul basically says that REGARDLESS OF ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT JASON OR ANYONE ELSE MIGHT MENTION, IF JESUS DID NOT RISE FROM THE DEAD, CHRISTIANITY IS BANKRUPT. The problem for Christians is that a deceptive, evil supernatural being with sufficient power could easily raise people from the dead. Behavior does not necessarily reveal intentions, but obviously, Jason is not aware of this simple truth.

A rational man would not assume that he is able to determine which supernatural beings tell the truth, and which tell lies. An emotional, irrational man would speculate and guess that he is able to determine which supernatural beings tell the truth, and which tell lies.

Jason has lost this debate hands down.

Johnny Skeptic

[Jason Gastrich]

Dear Readers and Johnny,

I hope you are well.

Although IIDB’s rules allow a “no good reason” extension, Johnny’s extension shouldn’t have been necessary. On the IIDB, he posted at least 7 messages on the day before his extension request and at least 7 more messages on the day of his extension; not to mention many messages after his extension. Taking the full 5 day extension after prioritizing other conversations was in poor taste and the content of his debate posts have reflected his lack of attention (and it should be noted that I’m being generous and charitable here).

I hope Johnny takes future debates more seriously and devotes more time and attention to his posts. In this debate, while avoiding twenty five of the questions I asked him and all of my core arguments, at least two of his posts were brief and meaningless. They contained nothing substantial at all, while offering a mere few hundred words of meandering thoughts (see his Round 5 and Round 6 posts).

In Johnny’s 7th round post, we see him bragging that he has won. He begins his post by bragging and ends it with bragging. It would have been wise to let the readers decide the victor, as they certainly will, anyway. I also find it peculiar that Johnny was suddenly inspired by the Peanut Gallery to write a lengthy and somewhat more spirited post. Someone who approaches another because he wants to debate should at least be willing to do research, spend the required time, follow the debate parameters, and write and rewrite their posts without needing others to convince him to do so.

Incidentally, by my count, Johnny’s 7th round post was over the 3,000 word limit. After he got his sudden burst of inspiration, it would have been nice for him to stay within the agreed-upon word limit. This could have been accomplished by spending equal amounts of time, effort, and energy on each post, instead of waiting until the last post, but I digress. It’ll be my pleasure to overlook Johnny’s little trespass because he didn’t go that far over the limit.

Before I respond to Johnny and summarize my arguments, I must mention how this debate has inspired two of my recent, weekly devotional messages. These messages include scriptures and insight and they were called God Keeps His Promises and God Has Excellent Character. If anyone is interested in reading and hearing more scriptural support and a continued defense for these topics, please visit http://devos.jcsm.org and http://ada.jcsm.org .

Responses to Johnny’s Round 7 Post

In response to Promise #1, Johnny said:

How utterly absurd. Today, whether directly or indirectly, God still kills millions of people in the world every year with disease and natural disasters. The only thing that has changed regarding his killing ways is his methods of killing people.

This obviously isn’t a response to the content of Promise #1 or the fact that God has kept that promise for over 4,000 years.

In responses to a randomly selected promise (which was Johnny’s only other response to the ten promises and fulfillments that I articulated), Johnny said:

Since when is promising to hurt people and fulfilling your promise a sign of good character? If God promised that people would experience pain every time that they ate food (some actually do), and that happened, that would be a sign of poor character, so I wonder what Jason’s point is regarding women having pain during childbirth.

Johnny may have a valid point here, if he were to show why we should be free of pain. He seems to feel entitled to a pain-free life, but he doesn’t say why. He was asked this question earlier in the debate, but didn’t reply.

Here is one statement that I made earlier in the debate on the subject of pain. It, too, went unanswered and unchallenged by Johnny.

Suffering briefly on Earth is nothing compared to living happily forever in Heaven. Yes, the things you mentioned are tragic and can cause temporary pain to many. However, in light of earthly death and eternal life in Heaven, without pain or trial, there is no comparison.

In response to God being fair and consistent, Johnny said:

God is frequently not consistent, and he is frequently not fair. While good things are frequently distributed to those who ARE NOT in greatest need, they are frequently withheld from those who ARE in greatest need. Unexpected “blessings” are most certainly not limited to Christians. Some evil people who never become Christians enjoy much better health and finances than some of the most devout and faithful Christians do. Matthew 5:44-45 say "But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous." It seems that God does not take a man’s character into account when he blesses him. Hurricane Katrina certainly didn’t.

By what standard are you judging God? Johnny condemns God by a standard of his choosing, but doesn’t tell us how he makes such a judgment.

I’ll repeat an argument that I made earlier in this debate. Until this round, it went unanswered and unchallenged.

Sometimes, people see a good person die and get angry at God. Was this person really good, though? If so, was this person perfect? If the person in question wasn’t perfect, then the person had at least some sin. If the person had at least some sin (which is transgression against God), then the person deserved to be judged by God.

In response to my request for evidence that God has “frequently and deliberately” withheld the gospel message from the world, Johnny said:

Sure, after Jesus died, the Gospel message was spread by the grossly inefficient means of foot, horse, boat etc., ensuring that hundreds of millions of people would die without hearing the Gospel message. This was the result of God’s apathy. Hebrews 8:6 says “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” Of what benefit is a better covenant to people who do not know about it? Since God does not deem it to be necessary that EVERYONE hear the Gospel message, why does he deem it to be necessary that ANYONE hear the Gospel message?

It would make sense for someone (e.g. an atheist or agnostic, for instance) who does not know or understand God to mistrust God. However, those who know God, do trust Him. They trust Him because they understand His ways and they know that the things that are beyond our comprehension can rest in God’s hands.

To answer Johnny plainly, first, the population estimates in Jesus’ time range from 170 to 300 million. Therefore, there is no certainty that there were even hundreds of millions of people in existence at that time; not to mention no certainty at all that the gospel message didn’t reach them.

Johnny’s entire argument is based on conjecture. He supposed that there were hundreds of millions of people and supposes that they didn’t hear the gospel. This is an interesting theory, but it certainly needs some evidence and development.

While we are opining, I should interject that it’s entirely possible that the first century disciples carried the gospel message to virtually every tribe and nation. However, even if they didn’t, God’s character is excellent, so we can trust Him to judge unbelievers as He sees fit.

Johnny goes on to argue that God probably doesn’t exist or doesn’t have good character because He hasn’t restored a missing arm or leg in the past year. He said:

During the last twelve months, there has not been one single reliable recorded case of a person getting a new arm or leg. Obviously, God has gone out of his way to ensure that in the opinions of many people, he has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that he heals people. Why would he do that? Does he care less about people who have lost arms and legs than he cares about other people?

None of these sentences are congruent. Johnny assumes that God doesn’t heal people because he cannot find a reliable recorded case from the past year. Why does Johnny cite the last year? Does he have access to a reliable recorded case from the following year? Regardless, the implication that God doesn’t care about these people is absurd. Likewise, the implication that God doesn’t care whether or not these people believe is absurd.

Jesus met people just like Johnny and he had a fine answer for them. The Son of God walked the Earth, healed people, and caused some to even rise from the dead, but the Pharisees wanted their “ego sign”. They knew what Jesus was doing because they had heard about it, even from those who were healed (like the blind man). However, this still wasn’t good enough for them. They wanted their own personal sign for their ego. What was Jesus’ response to them? He told them that the resurrection was the only sign that they needed and they weren’t going to get their personal ego sign.

Response to Uncited, Alleged Atrocities of God

Johnny gave us a list of some uncited, alleged atrocities of God. They look like something that has come from The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible. In response, I’d like to remind the readers that I’ve written a full and complete rebuttal to The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible and it has been named The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained. In it, I take Steve Wells’ assertions, in a point by point format, and rebut every single one of them. I’d link my rebuttal here, but it is a commercial product that is sold by my organization, so the link would likely be removed by IIDB. Here is a Google link though, where you can find it and all sorts of information and opinions about it: [solicitation removed - NS]

Each situation and circumstance is unique. Therefore, there is a different response for each, alleged atrocity of God. However, in short and in general, every person on the Earth has sinned. We have all done wrong. This sin has offended God, our Creator, who has the right to judge us as He sees fit. I’ve already went over this fact in previous rounds and my arguments have went unchallenged.

Johnny said:

Exodus 20:5 says “You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.” Now is that fair?

We find in verse 4 that verse 5 refers to bowing down to idols. Johnny doesn’t address this action. Is this acceptable to Johnny?

The exact “punishment” isn’t mentioned. If the punishment for a person bowing down to idols was their submission to idols instead of God and this punishment spread to the third and fourth generations, would this be acceptable? Idol worship is punishment in itself, as anything that draws one’s attention away from worshiping the Creator is punishment in itself. I believe a punishment like this would be acceptable, so Johnny’s accusations fall flat, again.

We must also remember that all people have sinned against God, so they deserve to be judged by God for their sins. In no circumstance can we find a perfect person, even if we discount imputed sin, so humans do not have the right to tell God they are above His judgment.

Johnny said:

It is interesting to note that Acts 14:3 refers to events that took place AFTER the Holy Spirit came to the church. Now readers, why does Jason suppose that after all of the preceding evidence, INCLUDING the presence of the Holy Sprit, that God felt the need to provide even more tangible confirmations, only to leave us with precious few tangible confirmations today, including no surviving eyewitnesses?

Where is your evidence that God has provided “precious few tangible confirmations today”? Is there some sort of statistic or is this just more naysaying? On the contrary, God has provided all kinds of meaningful and verifiable confirmations of His handiwork. If this were not so, then approximately 92% of the world wouldn’t believe in some sort of God and the supernatural. Citation/Link: http://adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

In relation to Johnny’s position on God’s intentions, I asked:

How have you determined that God has not revealed His true intentions?

Johnny replied:

I haven’t. My position is this: By definition, a God, whether he is good or evil, would easily be able to reveal OR conceal his true intentions according to his wishes. If a God exists, we do not know whether or not he has revealed his true intentions.

He goes on to say:

An evil God would easily be able to duplicate anything that is attributed the God of the Bible.

I’ve already refuted these claims. You can see the summary of my arguments below. Specifically, see the section called, “The Atoning Death of God’s Son Proves His Good Intentions.”

Summary and Conclusion


God reveals His character as excellent by:

1. Implementing His plan of redemption immediately after human sin and communion with Him was broken.
2. Revealing Himself to humankind through nature.
3. Revealing Himself to humankind through Jesus Christ.
4. Giving moral laws that have never changed.
5. Giving moral laws that are applied equally to all people.
6. Judging all people by the same standard.


God Has Integrity, So His Intentions Are Good

How does one know when another person has revealed his intentions? What kind of criteria should be used to determine whether or not God has been forthright? You claim that there is not enough evidence to conclude that God has been forthright with His intentions, however you don’t tell us the criteria you’re using. So, Johnny, I call your bluff. How have you determined that God has not revealed His true intentions? How would a forthright God behave? If you cannot or will not answer these questions, then you have no business making a judgment against God’s character.

The greatest indicator of a person’s good intentions is integrity. Dictionary.com defines integrity as honesty, soundness of moral character, and adherence to moral and ethical principles. First, I will list ten promises that God has kept to humankind. Some of these promises have been kept for thousands of years. Next, I will summarize how God has sound moral character. I’ll conclude with several of God’s judgments and blessings. All of these arguments will contribute to my argument that God has integrity, so we conclude He has good intentions.

God Has Kept His Promises, So He Has Integrity. Since God Has Integrity, We Conclude He Has Good Intentions

The greatest indicator of a person’s good intentions is integrity. If a person has made a promise and kept that promise for a long period of time, for instance, we can conclude that he has integrity. This is exactly what God has done. He has kept His promises, shown His integrity, and proven His good intentions.

God’s Laws for Christians Haven’t Changed, So God Has Sound Moral Character. Since God Has Sound Moral Character, We Conclude He Has Good Intentions

The scriptures tell us that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8). They also tell us that God cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18). These are the earmarks of integrity and as I just established, if one has integrity, we conclude he has good intentions (and trustworthiness, forthrightness, and legitimacy).

The scriptures were completed in the first century. They are contained in a book commonly called the Bible. It has instructed people on all sorts of things, such as loving others, forgiving people, eternal life, having meekness, self-control, patience, gentleness, faithfulness, and kindness. These commands have not changed, but they have been given and extended to every single person on the planet.

God Has Rightfully Judged Sinners and Blessed the Obedient, So God Has Adhered to Ethical and Moral Principles. Since God Has Adhered to Ethical and Moral Principles, We Conclude He Has Good Intentions

We have established that God has been revealed by the Bible as the Creator of all things. His creation is to submit to Him. When it doesn’t, He has the right to judge them for their sin. When it does, God blesses them. This is the pattern we see all throughout the Bible.

The Atoning Death of God’s Son Proves His Good Intentions

As if enough evidence hasn’t been given for God’s excellent character and good intentions (which will be briefly summarized below and articulated and summarized next round), the atoning death of God’s Son proves His good intentions. No Father would want their son to die. No Father would want their son to die a gruesome death. However, only a father of excellent character and good intentions would ordain their Son to die, in order to save humankind and grant them eternal life.

God could have no other motive besides love. It would be impossible for God to have bad intentions, as no father would ever want their son to die, unless they were dying a sacrificial and atoning death for the entire human race, as Jesus Christ died. Since it would be impossible for God to ordain His Son to die for the sins of humankind and have bad intentions for humankind, we conclude that God has excellent character and good intentions.

I hope you have enjoyed this debate and I hope you enjoy my future debates. Please visit and bookmark http://debates.jcsm.org if you’d like to find when and where my next debate will be.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

Jason, for future reference, please note that complaints about your opponent's extensions and word counts are not appropriate for formal debate statements. Please take them to Questions, Problems, & Complaints (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/forumdisplay.php?f=16) instead. As for Johnny's word count, I'd like to point out that his concluding statement does not violate the length parameter because text created by VBB code is not counted (this is mentioned in the Rules & Procedures (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=85870)).

Anyways, the formal debate is now complete. We would like to thank Johnny Skeptic and Jason Gastrich for their participation. Discussion can be continued in the Peanut Gallery.

- NS, FD Moderator