The Instigator
SterlingCamp
Pro (for)
The Contender
Longear
Con (against)

According to the Bible (Old and New Testament), Jesus is God

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Longear has forfeited round #4.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 546 times Debate No: 102288
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)

 

SterlingCamp

Pro

This debate is contending the issue of whether or not the Bible contains evidence that indicates Jesus Christ is God. Pro's position states that Jesus is God according to the Bible and Con's position states that the Bible does not claim Jesus as God.

Please read the rules cafefully before accepting this debate.

Rules:

(1) Evidence should primarily be from the Bible (Old and New Testament) as we are debating a theological issue. All theological issues should be grounded in the Bible. The Bible is defined as the traditional protestant canon established in the London Baptist Confession of Faith. You may use any translation you desire, and you may use multiple translations in your arguments with the simple rule that you cite the translation you are using.

(2) This debate is not discussing any other theological issues such as the doctrine of the trinity, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, the hypostatic union of Christ, etc. This debate also presupposes the authority of scripture, the exsistence of God, and the existence and humanity of Christ. The matter should be focused on the issue of Christ's deity.

(3) No personal attacks, or any games that will reduce this debate to anything less than what it is intended to be, which is a serious debate.

(4.1) There are four rounds.

(a) The first round is acceptance and recognition that the rules are understood and will be followed.
(b) The second round will be Pro's case and Con's first rebuttal.
(c) The third round will be Con's case and pro's rebuttal.
(d) The fourth round consists of summaries, and conclusions.

(4.2) If Con feels it necessary to use the third round as a means to further challenge Pro's case from round two they are allowed to do so at their own expense.

(5) All definitions will firstly be valid in accordance to orthodox biblical theological terms. If there is any reason to define a term it will firstly be in accordance with the theological definition. All secondary definitions will be based on definitions provided by dictonary.com.

Conclusion:

I only ask that the person who ends up partaking in this challenge will take it seriously. I hope to have fun in this endeavor. I will most likely re-issue this debate afterwards with the same argument for future challenges.

God bless you all and I look forward to the challenge.
Longear

Con

Hello, SterlingCamp! Yeah, this should be a fun debate. I understand the rules. I will take it seriously. I would like you to know that I am taking the devil's advocate position on this topic, meaning I believe in your proposition regarding Jesus, but I still hope to be a good opponent for you.

This going to be a blast!

P.S. Thank you for blessing me....

God bless you too.
:-)
Debate Round No. 1
SterlingCamp

Pro

I would like to formally thank Con for acceptance of the debate, and apologize within the debate for my error in regards to the round structure. I do not know how that occurred, but I hope to avoid it in the future. Observers of the debate should note the rule change found within the first comment in the comments section.

My position is that Jesus is God in accordance with the Bible (Old and New Testament). Without further delay, here is my case:


(1) The New Testament claims Jesus saved a people out of the land of Egypt.

“Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed those who did not believe” (Jude 1:5, ESV).



(2) The reference to rescuing Israel from Egypt is one found throughout all of the Bible beginning with the event itself known at the Exodus.

Not only is this event repeated throughout scripture and celebrated through the Passover, it is what brings about the initiation of the Mosaic covenant. The people of Israel are told over and over again to remember being brought out of Egypt. This narrative is nearly common knowledge among atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Jews and Christians alike as we know well the story of the parting sea as Israel escaped Egypt. Despite the observation that many know of this event, some examples, out of many, are provided to confirm this biblical narrative:

Exodus 13:3(a), “Then Moses said to the people, “Remember this day in which you came out from Egypt.”

Exodus 34:18, “You shall keep the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, as I commanded you, at the time appointed in the month Abib, for in the month Abib you came out from Egypt.”

Judges, “but when they came up from Egypt, Israel went through the wilderness to the Red Sea and came to Kadesh.”

2 Samuel 7:6, “I have not lived in a house since the day I brought up the people of Israel from Egypt to this day, but I have been moving about in a tent for my dwelling.”



(3) God, the LORD, is the one who brought the people out of Egypt.

In this narrative, we know that God sends plagues to Egypt in order to accomplish this task. It is repeated that God brought the people out of Egypt lest the people forget and abandon their covenant with God. For the sake of avoiding confusion, it should be acknowledged that the word “LORD” (in all capitals) always signifies God in the biblical text.

Here is the entire verse of Exodus 13:3, “Then Moses said to the people, “Remember this day in which you came out from Egypt, out of the house of slavery, for by a strong hand the LORD brought you out from this place. No leavened bread shall be eaten.”
There are roughly 95 verses in the Bible signifying that the “LORD” brought people out of Egypt. Here are some:

Deuteronomy 20:1, "When you go out to war against your enemies, and see horses and chariots and an army larger than your own, you shall not be afraid of them, for the LORD your God is with you, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt.”

Deuteronomy 24:9, “Remember what the LORD your God did to Miriam on the way as you came out of Egypt.”

Deuteronomy 26:8, “And the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great deeds of terror, with signs and wonders.”

Deuteronomy 29:25, “Then people will say, 'It is because they abandoned the covenant of the LORD, the God of their fathers, which he made with them when he brought them out of the land of Egypt,”

Joshua 24:17, “for it is the LORD our God who brought us and our fathers up from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery, and who did those great signs in our sight and preserved us in all the way that we went, and among all the peoples through whom we passed.”

Judges 2:12 (a), “And they abandoned the LORD, the God of their fathers, who had brought them out of the land of Egypt.”



(4) Jesus is God

(a) We are told that Jesus is the one who brought the people out of Egypt, “Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed those who did not believe” (Jude 1:5, ESV).

(b) And it is common knowledge at this point in the biblical narrative that God is the one who brought the people out of Egypt.

(c) Therefore, Jesus is God

Additionally: The readers of Jude would have understood this to be the case given that they were primarily Jews and knew well the story of the Exodus and celebrated it every year.



Conclusion:

I look forward to Con’s case and a fruitful, and edifying, debate.

S.C.
Longear

Con

John 5:19
"The Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees the Father doing, because whatever the Father does, the Son does also. "
If Jesus was God, how is it that he can not operate autonomously from the Father's will?

John 14:28
"The Father is greater than I."
If Jesus is God, and therefore equal with God because he would be one and the same with the Father, how is it that in this declaration Jesus is saying that the Father, the Heavenly Father, is greater in authority than he is?

Hebrews 4:15 (compared with James 1:13)
"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are yet without sin."
Jesus has been tempted in every way. Okay, but James 1:13 declares: "When tempted, no one should say, God is tempting me. For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt." How could Jesus have been tempted if he was God?
Debate Round No. 2
SterlingCamp

Pro

Thank you Longear for your contribution.
I will break down round three in the following way:

(1) Refutations
(2) Further Evidence for my Initial Claim


(1) Refutations

Con cites John 5:19 and asks, “If Jesus was God, how is it that he cannot operate autonomously from the Father's will?” The simplest answer to this question would be that it is impossible for Jesus to act outside of the will of the Father as the Son and Father are of one being but two separate persons. Since this debate does not allow for a response within the framework of a Trinitarian view point, though, this question is a Trinitarian question, this question can only be vaguely answered in that for Jesus to separate his will from the Father’s will would be to ignore his nature within his deity. Interestingly enough, John 5:18-23 further shows Jesus’ deity in that it expresses (1) they have the same purpose (v. 19), (2) the same power (v. 20-22), and (3) the same honor (v. 23).

Con proceeds to cite John 14:28, "The Father is greater than I”, which is a common objection, but answered by the apostle Paul in Philippians 2:5-8, “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant,being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.” Not only does this counter the objection raised by Con, it further proves that Christ is God. Breaking it down we see several things:

(1) “He was in the form of God”, which alludes to his two natures (a) humanity and (d) deity
(2) “He did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant”, which is the answer to Con’s question, that he humbled himself for the sake of his earthly ministry.
(3) “being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form”, God was ‘born in the likeness of men’ and ‘found in human form’.

There is much more that could be drawn from that text for this purpose, however, I digress.

Lastly, Con presents Hebrews 4:15 and James 1:13 and asks, “How could Jesus have been tempted if he was God?” I must admit I have not heard this argument before, but it is interesting to say the least. However, there is an answer within the person of Jesus Christ. Being fully human and fully God simultaneously allows for the temptation of his human nature. Hebrews 4:15 alludes to the high priest who is a man, and James 1:13 alludes to God.

The fact that Jesus did not sin actually shows his deity, and the fact that he could be tempted shows his humanity. However, as this gets into the function of his two natures (which would inevitably lead down the path of discussing debatable issues regarding the hypostatic union), we can actually reference back to Philippians 2:5-8, which again expresses this humanity. In regards to Hebrews 4:15, to be a high priest you would have to be a man as well.

One other means for addressing this is looking at James’ writing and noting that he is addressing God who has no needs unmet. However, the temptation of Jesus was that of physical and psychological needs (hunger, fatigue, and the desire for self-preservation). This again, stresses the two natures of Christ under federal headship replacing Adam in his humanity.


(2) Further Evidence for my Initial Claim

My claim was regarding the verse found in Jude verse 5, which I believe to be conclusive is a beautiful testimony of Christ being God. While there are many other evidences I could provide, I desire to hammer down on this verse due to objections that could arise in the realm of textual criticism.

Some may question the rendering of this verse in the ESV, however, manuscript evidence proves that it is long overdue. Nestle and Aland in their Greek Text, Novum Testament Graece (27, 28 editions) agree as we can see in their rendering of verse 5 in Jude,

"P25;πομνQ34;σαι δP50; P17;μQ18;ς βοa3;λομαι, εO84;δa2;τας P17;μQ18;ς O41;παξ π^0;ντα P05;τι *O92;ησοQ66;ς* (Jesus) λαP56;ν O52;κ γQ34;ς ΑO84;γa3;πτου σa4;σας τP56; δεa3;τερον τοP58;ς μP52; πιστεa3;σαντας O36;πa4;λεσεν"

IWe will see “Lord” (κa3;ριος) in this verse in other translations to which it is important to note that Kurios is a term, highly, and often attributed to Jesus.

What manuscripts contain the rendering Jesus? Well, most of the early witnesses including; A, B, 33, 81, 1241, 1739, 1881, 2344, pc, vg, co, Or1739mg, 88, 322, 323, 424c, 665, 915, 2298, eth, Cyr, Hier, Bede (all can me examined here: http://www.csntm.org...)

What about manuscripts more commonly known? P72, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Alexandrinus, the Bohairc Copic, and the Latin Vulgate all have a rendering indicating "Jesus" (while P72 says God Christ).

P72’s rendering is very intriguing within itself, as it would be known as God the Anointed, or God the Messiah. The Latin Vulgate was the people’s bible for many centuries after being translated by Jerome.

I now hand over the round to Con. Thank you.

NA28: http://www.nestle-aland.com...

P72: http://www.csntm.org...

Codex Vaticanus: http://digi.vatlib.it...

Latin Vulgate: http://www.latinvulgate.com...

Longear

Con

I have lot of stuff going on in my life right now, and I now understand that I took on a little more than I could chew when I accepted this challenge. Unfortunately, I will not be able to finish the debate. I apologize to Sterlingcamp and to the audience eagerly anticipating the conclusion of the debate.

Sterlingcamp presented an awesome case, so please vote pro.

My best wishes and prayers to Sterlingcamp.

Longear
Debate Round No. 3
SterlingCamp

Pro

I appreciate Longear's participation and hope that her situation improves.

Post Tenebras Lux.

God bless you all and thank you for being with us in this debate.

-S.C.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by SterlingCamp 1 year ago
SterlingCamp
I apologize for the errors in the Greek rendering of Verse 5 and Kurios. I didn't check it before submitting.
Posted by SterlingCamp 1 year ago
SterlingCamp
MissMedic, the Bible claims Jesus eternal. The orthodox theological position is the hypostatic union of Jesus, that Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man simultaneously. Thus his state of being eternal prior to his human incarnation isnaccounted for through his deity and his death is accounted for through his humanity. Those concepts will not be explored in this debate. The debate is whether or not the Bible claims Jesus is God. If humans could fully understand God, he would not be God.
Posted by missmedic 1 year ago
missmedic
Gods are supernatural and exist in a supernatural realm, Jesus existed in the natural world as a human.
Gods by definition are eternal, Jesus had a beginning and an ending.
Gods do not die, Jesus died, therefore Jesus is not god.
Posted by Longear 1 year ago
Longear
Heh, no problem. That is perfectly fine.
Posted by SterlingCamp 1 year ago
SterlingCamp
I just realized there's a flaw in the debate format, but wasn't able to correct it before the challenge was accepted. . Round three would have been Con's case, and pro's rebuttal, however that isn't possible because pro must go first. Therefore if Con allows it, the rules will be changed to:

Round:
(1) acceptance
(2) pro and con's case
(3) rebuttals
(4) conclusion

Before proceeding with the debate I'll await confirmation from Con. I apologize for my error.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.