You shouldnt question a God who gives kids cancer
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 1
- Time for argument
- Two weeks
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Rules:
Con must agree that such God knows best.
Title states something people would usually see as bad,
Kids with cancer,
Assumably given by God, because God created existence that includes cancer, or in some views of God, all of worlds little parts and peoples lives going according to Gods plan. Though many theists think our paths are more free than that, or even if unfree fighting against the wrong in the world is part of Gods plan.
Pro argues God knows best,
Meaning I assume that Gods actions are for the best.
Course a question that pops up, is it in Gods plan then that we question him sometimes?
Pro then argues threat,
Best not question the super powerful guy.
I suppose, though I might still have reasons to question.
Con argues
Con argues that even if God does know best, there can be value in questioning God by it being an act of engagement with God.
Though I might argue the questioning in the Bible, I 'think was sometimes shown to represent how undeserving and lacking in faith people could be.
Or was shown as a means to highlight how of course people will question and ask why, though God also praises Job at the end for his questioning I think. Or maybe he was praising Job for accepting God despite his situation. Faith can be important for people, even in facets of life unrelated to God.
Faith in the possibility of ends, can lead to their realizations.
Or the belief that one ought not be a fair weather friend.
Con builds on their engagement argument by arguing that questioning then holding to faith, builds one's faith.
Which does make sense, it's possible a person who has never questioned their faith, might be broken when they encounter a strong obstacle or resistance to it.
Though I'd I imagine there are people who question God in easy circumstances, whose faith still breaks.
Con argues all powerful and wise God may not mind our questioning.
Hm, Both assume God to exist, and to be good, except Pro says God knows best, but then that God might hurt us if we question him. Course one could argue God is still Good, and that the hurt was for our own good.
Pro it's for the best, also he might hurt you if you question him.
Con Engaging brings you closer to God, and can make your faith stronger.
Well, my vote goes to Con, as they offered possible reasons and examples to question God.
Being a 1 round debate and Con going last, they had an advantage of being able to pick at Pro and not have their own arguments questioned.
Thanks for voting. You clearly have a deep understanding of this topic.
Well, thanks for putting in the effort. I do tend to make short debates, because long debates tend to make me tired.
I had to.
Even if someone doesn't 'say something in many words,
What they are saying in implications can be many.
You put much more effort in your vote than I did in this debate.
That requirement does not make any sense. As con, you are opposed to the very idea. Meaning you are against the idea of not questioning such a God.
Oh! then I can't debate you, we share the same point of view haha!
You would be questioning the God.
I would be saying that we shouldnt question the God.
if I chose to debate you, would I be who question the god or the on who don't?
You should never question God. God knows best.
I beg your pardon. But your usual stance, and the way the rules in the description is written, is making me think you meant to make the topic title "You should question a God who gives kids cancer". Sorry if I am wrong.