Who do they worship?

[Mithrae]

They tell us that there is a devil out there, a powerful being, the "god of this world" (2 Cor. 4:4), supremely evil and working tirelessly to deceive humanity.

Then they tell us about the being who they choose to worship:

1. One who planned to keep humans ignorant of good and evil, the sole and greatest 'sin' (had they known what sin was) being to acquire that knowledge
2. One who established rules such that thenceforth every human would be born with an innate propensity for evil
3. One who is unwilling or unable to simply forgive or show mercy for those sins he thrust upon us, but instead requires a blood sacrifice in order to 'forgive'; and not just any blood sacrifice but a human sacrifice... and not just any human sacrifice, but a totally innocent sacrifice of his own son! Without that horrific act this being they worship was apparently incapable of forgiving the sinfulness which he himself created
4. One who endorsed, actively commanded and on several occasions personally engaged in the most heinous kind of deeds that humans have ever done such as institutional intergenerational chattel slavery and even wholesale genocide, and plans to ramp that slaughter up a hundred-fold at the end of the age
5. Even more amazingly, one who plans to do the most vicious thing that humans can even imagine - torturing and savouring the smoke from the fiery torment of billions upon billions of people for day after day, year after year, century after century for all eternity, a literally incomprehensible level of cruelty

Can we make any inferences about the being worshipped by Christians?

"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’"
~ Mark 9:43-48

"They, too, will drink the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever."
~ Revelation 14:10-11

[1213]

Then they tell us about the being who they choose to worship:

1. One who planned to keep humans ignorant of good and evil, the sole and greatest 'sin' (had they known what sin was) being to acquire that knowledge
2. One who established rules such that thenceforth every human would be born with an innate propensity for evil
3. One who is unwilling or unable to simply forgive or show mercy for those sins he thrust upon us, but instead requires a blood sacrifice in order to 'forgive'; and not just any blood sacrifice but a human sacrifice... and not just any human sacrifice, but a totally innocent sacrifice of his own son! Without that horrific act this being they worship was apparently incapable of forgiving the sinfulness which he himself created
4. One who endorsed, actively commanded and on several occasions personally engaged in the most heinous kind of deeds that humans have ever done such as institutional intergenerational chattel slavery and even wholesale genocide, and plans to ramp that slaughter up a hundred-fold at the end of the age
5. Even more amazingly, one who plans to do the most vicious thing that humans can even imagine - torturing and savouring the smoke from the fiery torment of billions upon billions of people for day after day, year after year, century after century for all eternity, a literally incomprehensible level of cruelty

That sounds like a straw-man argument.

1) Not eating a certain fruit is not the same as not allowed to know.
2) Why would anyone believe people have innate propensity for evil?
3) No Biblical reason to think God could not forgive without sacrifice. Scriptures show forgiveness was possible without death:

The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, "Who is this that speaks blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?" But Jesus, perceiving their thoughts, answered them, "Why are you reasoning so in your hearts? Which is easier to say, 'Your sins are forgiven you;' or to say, 'Arise and walk?' But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins" (he said to the paralyzed man), "I tell you, arise, and take up your cot, and go to your house." Immediately he rose up before them, and took up that which he was laying on, and departed to his house, glorifying God.
Luke 5:21-25
If you forgive anyone’s sins, they have been forgiven them. If you retain anyone’s sins, they have been retained.”
John 20:23

4) Slavery was possible only if the person accepted it, for example because kidnapping was not allowed and because people should love others as themselves. And about death, don't you think every human dies once? Why should God allow evil people to live forever?
5) In this case it would perhaps be good to understand that eternal life is promised only for righteous and the others are destroyed.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matt. 25:46
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23
Don't be afraid of those who kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. Rather, fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna [also translated hell].
Matt. 10:28

Do you think it would be good to allow unrighteous people to live forever and make life eternal suffering for all?

[POI]

Slavery was possible only if the person accepted it

This is false.

Exodus 21:7 If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.

Leviticus 25:44-46 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life

[Difflugia]

That sounds like a straw-man argument.

A straw man of whose argument? The list there pretty much fits orthodox Protestant Christianity. You seem to have come to different theological conclusions yourself, but that doesn't make Mithrae's claim a straw man. One might quibble that the debate question was directed to Christians at large rather than orthodox Christians. but that's an easy remedy.

[1213]

Slavery was possible only if the person accepted it

This is false.

Exodus 21:7 If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.

Leviticus 25:44-46 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life

None of those say it was possible keep them forcibly. And that it was forbidden to kidnap a person and if a slave escaped, the person was not to be returned indicates that it was possible only if the person accepted it.

Anyone who kidnaps someone and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Exod. 21:16
You shall not hand over to his master a slave that has escaped from his master to you.
Deut. 23:15

Also, as you know, forcing someone to be a slave, would go against the "love your neighbor as yourself".

[POI]

Slavery was possible only if the person accepted it

This is false.

Exodus 21:7 If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do.

Leviticus 25:44-46 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life

None of those say it was possible keep them forcibly.

None of them say these particular folks were allowed to leave either. Because they weren't.... Hence, the forcefulness is logically implied.

Since you are big on exact details, please provide the verse which states that any and all slavery is voluntary? I'll wait...

And that it was forbidden to kidnap a person and if a slave escaped, the person was not to be returned indicates that it was possible only if the person accepted it.

The verses I'm referring to have nothing to do with kidnapping. Your response here is irrelevant. We've been over this time and time again. Some females, foreigners, and slave offspring are not to go free.

Also, as you know, forcing someone to be a slave, would go against the "love your neighbor as yourself".

I've already spoken to this ad nauseam. The specifics outweigh the un-specifics. Also, the rules are not the same for all. You can read Exodus 21 alone to understand this.

************************

Please recall your claim --> "Slavery was possible only if the person accepted it"

Well, it depends now, doesn't it? If you are some females, or some males, or some offspring, the rules differ. Exodus 21 and Leviticus 25 explain.

[Goose]

Hi Mithrae, it's been a while.

They tell us that there is a devil out there, a powerful being, the "god of this world" (2 Cor. 4:4), supremely evil and working tirelessly to deceive humanity.

Then they tell us about the being who they choose to worship:

1. One who planned to keep humans ignorant of good and evil, the sole and greatest 'sin' (had they known what sin was) being to acquire that knowledge
2. One who established rules such that thenceforth every human would be born with an innate propensity for evil
3. One who is unwilling or unable to simply forgive or show mercy for those sins he thrust upon us, but instead requires a blood sacrifice in order to 'forgive'; and not just any blood sacrifice but a human sacrifice... and not just any human sacrifice, but a totally innocent sacrifice of his own son! Without that horrific act this being they worship was apparently incapable of forgiving the sinfulness which he himself created
4. One who endorsed, actively commanded and on several occasions personally engaged in the most heinous kind of deeds that humans have ever done such as institutional intergenerational chattel slavery and even wholesale genocide, and plans to ramp that slaughter up a hundred-fold at the end of the age
5. Even more amazingly, one who plans to do the most vicious thing that humans can even imagine - torturing and savouring the smoke from the fiery torment of billions upon billions of people for day after day, year after year, century after century for all eternity, a literally incomprehensible level of cruelty

That's not Christians telling about the God they worship. That's you offering a list of your theological interpretations.

Can we make any inferences about the being worshipped by Christians?

We can make lots of inferences. The question is whether the arguments that get us to those inferences are valid and whether the premises are true. At this point I see no reason to think your list forms either a valid argument or that any of the premises are true. So it seems to me any inferences from your list would be dubious at best.

"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’"
~ Mark 9:43-48

Do you believe Jesus was literally telling people to cut off their hands and feet and pluck out their eyes here?

"They, too, will drink the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever."
~ Revelation 14:10-11

How does the fact that Revelations is apocalyptic literature play into your argument?

[Mithrae]

That sounds like a straw-man argument.

1) Not eating a certain fruit is not the same as not allowed to know.

According to the story man and woman were threatened with death if they sought the knowledge of good and evil, and then in direct punishment for having done so they were cursed with pain in childbirth and toil in producing food (in fact the earth itself was cursed to produce scant food).

2) Why would anyone believe people have innate propensity for evil?

Among others:

• Romans 3:9 Well then, should we conclude that we Jews are better than others? No, not at all, for we have already shown that all people, whether Jews or Gentiles,[c] are under the power of sin. 10 As the Scriptures say,
  “No one is righteous—
  not even one.
  11 No one is truly wise;
  no one is seeking God.
  12 All have turned away;
  all have become useless.
  No one does good,
  not a single one.”

3) No Biblical reason to think God could not forgive without sacrifice. Scriptures show forgiveness was possible without death:

That would be even worse if so; if the sacrifice of Jesus was not a necessary means to a desirable end then it was an unnecessary, wanton sacrifice. However you seem to be highlighting a biblical contradiction, because elsewhere it is unequivocally clear:

• Hebrews 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. . . . 26 But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself.

4) Slavery was possible only if the person accepted it, for example because kidnapping was not allowed and because people should love others as themselves. And about death, don't you think every human dies once? Why should God allow evil people to live forever?

The more abstract theology of the first three points can be fun to debate, but this one is kind of stomach-turning. Christians' willingness and even eagerness to defend genocide and intergenerational chattel slavery - among the most evil if not the most evil practices in human history - is exactly my point. If the devil was real, this is pretty much what I'd expect of his worshippers.

5) In this case it would perhaps be good to understand that eternal life is promised only for righteous and the others are destroyed.

That's certainly a view supported by some bible passages, while others such as those I quoted indicate eternal torture quite unambiguously. It's a bit of a theological mish-mash of an anthology and I certainly wouldn't deny that there's some less evil and even some very good parts to it. But that infinitely unjust, infinitely sadistic view of god as an eternal torturer is not only one which some biblical authors held, but which many Christians choose to emphasize and relish in... and many, many more still choose to regard as god-breathed sacred scripture even if they downplay those parts in favour of the less vile passages you've highlighted.

It's rather like creating an anthology of manifestos by Abraham Lincoln, Adolf Hitler, Osama bin Laden and Pol Pot; emphasizing some of the nicer parts, defending some of the awful parts and perhaps downplaying the absolute worst parts... but insisting that the whole thing is wonderful and perfect and worthy of adoration.

[Mithrae]

Hi Mithrae, it's been a while.

Hi Goose, good to see you're still around

They tell us that there is a devil out there, a powerful being, the "god of this world" (2 Cor. 4:4), supremely evil and working tirelessly to deceive humanity.

Then they tell us about the being who they choose to worship:

1. One who planned to keep humans ignorant of good and evil, the sole and greatest 'sin' (had they known what sin was) being to acquire that knowledge
2. One who established rules such that thenceforth every human would be born with an innate propensity for evil
3. One who is unwilling or unable to simply forgive or show mercy for those sins he thrust upon us, but instead requires a blood sacrifice in order to 'forgive'; and not just any blood sacrifice but a human sacrifice... and not just any human sacrifice, but a totally innocent sacrifice of his own son! Without that horrific act this being they worship was apparently incapable of forgiving the sinfulness which he himself created
4. One who endorsed, actively commanded and on several occasions personally engaged in the most heinous kind of deeds that humans have ever done such as institutional intergenerational chattel slavery and even wholesale genocide, and plans to ramp that slaughter up a hundred-fold at the end of the age
5. Even more amazingly, one who plans to do the most vicious thing that humans can even imagine - torturing and savouring the smoke from the fiery torment of billions upon billions of people for day after day, year after year, century after century for all eternity, a literally incomprehensible level of cruelty

That's not Christians telling about the God they worship. That's you offering a list of your theological interpretations.

I'm sure they would quibble over the phrasing, but which if any of those points do you think is not easily-recognizable as a point of doctrine held by large fractions if not overwhelming majorities of Christian believers? I suspect that #1, #2, #4 and especially #3 are beliefs held by majorities of Christians even today, let alone a century ago, and even #5 is believed by hundreds of millions based on some unequivocal bible passages.

We can make lots of inferences. The question is whether the arguments that get us to those inferences are valid and whether the premises are true. At this point I see no reason to think your list forms either a valid argument or that any of the premises are true. So it seems to me any inferences from your list would be dubious at best.

Again, which of those points do you suppose is not easily-recognizable as a point of doctrine held by hundreds of millions if not overwhelming majorities of Christians? And moreover, based on straightforward readings of various (albeit sometimes elsewhere-contradicted) passages which overwhelming majorities consider god-breathed or inspired.

"If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’
And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire— where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’"
~ Mark 9:43-48

Do you believe Jesus was literally telling people to cut off their hands and feet and pluck out their eyes here?

I believe that he was propagating belief in a literal eternity of torture - pretty much the most sadistic and evil thing that we are capable of imagining. Same with the quote from Revelation, those obviously not being the only ones (though perhaps the most graphic in the Protestant canon, alongside the story of Lazarus).

• Daniel 12:2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
  
  Matthew 25:46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
  
  Luke 16:23 In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side. 24 He called out, “Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.” 25 But Abraham said, “Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony. 26 Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there to us.”

How can anyone with average intelligence and a properly-functioning conscience read a text that is not-so-indirectly saying that their God is a vicious, infinitely unjust and infinitely sadistic torturer and just nod along thinking to themselves "This is the word of the Lord... though I reckon I'll pick those other passages to believe instead"? It's long been my opinion (in considering some of Christianity's worst inquisitions, crusades, witch-hunts and so on) that one of the biggest problems with Biblicism is that it encourages believers to externalize their conscience and - even allowing that some Christians don't embrace #4 or #5 - there's still a prevalence of folk who on some level obviously know that genocide and slavery and eternal torture are utterly wicked but nevertheless keep reverencing the books which promote them.

[1213]

That sounds like a straw-man argument.

1) Not eating a certain fruit is not the same as not allowed to know.

According to the story man and woman were threatened with death if they sought the knowledge of good and evil,

No. By what God said, it was only about eating the fruit. If they would have wanted to really know something, they could have just asked directly from God about it.

2) Why would anyone believe people have innate propensity for evil?

Among others:

• Romans 3:9 Well then, should we conclude that we Jews are better than others? No, not at all, for we have already shown that all people, whether Jews or Gentiles,[c] are under the power of sin. 10 As the Scriptures say,
  “No one is righteous—
  not even one.
  11 No one is truly wise;
  no one is seeking God.
  12 All have turned away;
  all have become useless.
  No one does good,
  not a single one.”

Sorry, I have no reason to accept your interpretation, when there is no good support from the Bible for it. If at one point no one was righteous, it does not mean that all are necessary under the power of sin or that people have innate propensity for evil.

3) No Biblical reason to think God could not forgive without sacrifice. Scriptures show forgiveness was possible without death:

That would be even worse if so; if the sacrifice of Jesus was not a necessary means to a desirable end then it was an unnecessary, wanton sacrifice. However you seem to be highlighting a biblical contradiction, because elsewhere it is unequivocally clear:

• Hebrews 9:22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. . . . 26 But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Paul tells Jesus was like a sacrifice and that under the law there was no forgiveness without blood. It doesn't mean it was necessary for God to forgive.

But, it is true that Jesus died because of the forgiveness and that is why it can be seen as a sacrifice. I think the actual sacrifice was that he lived for us, instead of selfish life. I think it is expected that we also sacrifice our lives the same way, by walking in love.

Walk in love, even as Christ also loved you, and gave himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling fragrance.
Eph. 5:2

Bible gives also the actual reasons why Jesus was allowed to die and they are:

For to this end Christ died, rose, and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.
Romans 14:9
Most assuredly, I tell you, the hour comes, and now is, when the dead will hear the Son of God's voice; and those who hear will live.
John 5:25
Most assuredly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit.
John 12:24

So, in a way it can be said Jesus took the "Dimholt road", went to the place where dead are and took with him those who heard him.