The Instigator
iTruthSeeker
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
persianimmortal
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Christianity vs Islam: Who is the real Jesus? Prophet or 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 487 times Debate No: 86410
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

iTruthSeeker

Pro

Hello! I am a Christian and have had plenty of conversations with Muslims they propose that Jesus never claimed Himself to be God.. But rather, He was a "prophet" or "teacher. I'm hoping that we can have an intelligent debate regarding this topic and I ask that any practicing Muslim willing to defend their beliefs in Islam would join me.

The rounds will be structured as such:

Round 1: Personal introduction/acceptance (No arguments)

Round 2: Introduction/opening statements (no rebuttals)

Round 3: 1st Rebuttal

Round 4: 2nd Rebuttal

Round 5: Last Rebuttal/Conclusion

I look forward to the upcoming debate and I will be arguing (Pro) Christianity, more specifically.. That Jesus is who He claimed He was.. God incarnate.

*Authoritive sources include.. the OT and NT of the Bible and the Quran.
persianimmortal

Con

Hello hello! My name is persianimmortal and I will be representing the Con side of this debate. For starters, I am NOT a Muslim, I am a Baha'i (message me if you would like to know more about what it is). The reason why I accepted this debate is because I am a student of Comparative Religions specializing in the Judeo-Christian-Islamic-Baha'i Religions. I have had these debates before and after 5 years of devoting myself to the above Scriptures, I will just say that His Holiness Jesus Christ is not who you claim Him to be. Please understand that I do not mean to offend any of your beliefs. My objective here is to simply some shed light on a perspective that you have probably not noticed. I am glad to take this debate and I look forward to a fruitful discussion ;)

Good luck to my friend, iTruthSeeker
Debate Round No. 1
iTruthSeeker

Pro

Thanks PersianImmortal for the warm regards! I appreciate his willingness to share his beliefs so openly... I commend him for that. Nevertheless, my goal in this debate is to show that both a biblical and historical outlook provides the notion that Jesus DID claim His own divinity.. I will begin with my initial arguments:

1). Jesus claimed Himself to be God

All throughout the earliest gospels (Mark, Matthew) we see Jesus claiming to be "The Son of Man".. What does that refer to? Well lets take a look at Daniel 7

13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

We see that Jesus is claiming to be this figure in Daniels vision.. That is, one who approaches the "Ancient of Days" (Yahweh) and receives all the glory and dominion among every nation. Furthermore the Greek word for "serve" is latreuó (λατρεa3;ω).. This word is only used when giving worship or honor to God.. Therefore, Jesus claimed to be this figure that would be "served" with the same worship that is only fit for God alone!

We see this parallel when Jesus is on trial before Pilate according to Mark 14:16:
“Then the High Priest stood up and asked Jesus, ‘Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?’ ‘I am,’ said Jesus, ‘And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the mighty one and coming on the clouds of heaven. The High Priest tore his clothes. ‘You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?’ They all condemned him as being worthy of death.”

Similarly, we see Jesus claiming to be the special "Son of God"..

In the Parable of the tenants:
“A man planted a vineyard and rented it to some farmers. At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from them some of the fruit of the vineyard but the seized him, beat him, and sent him away empty handed. Then he sent another servant to them. They struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully. He sent still another and that one they killed. He sent many others, some of them they beat, others they killed. Finally, he had one left to send, a son whom he loved. He sent him last of all saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But the tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir, let’s kill him and the inheritance will be ours!’ and so they took him and killed him.”

In Matthew 11:27:
“All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”

We see throughout the gospels that Jesus was not claiming to be a just "prophet". In the words of William Lane Craig:"Jesus’ self-understanding. It tells us that he thought of himself as God’s only beloved Son, distinct from all prophets, God’s final messenger and even the heir to Israel. He did not think of himself as merely another human prophet."

2). Jesus Trial and Crucifixion:

The gospels all testify that Jesus was charged for blasphemy (making Himself equal to God) by the Jewish Sanhedrin and was tried and executed by the Romans under Pontius Pilate. We also have accounts outside the bible that corroborate with the biblical accounts.. Here's a few

Tacitus (56-120AD)
Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”

In this account, Tacitus confirms several historical elements of the Biblical narrative: Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

Celsus (175AD)
This is the last hostile, non-Christian account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite antagonistic to the claims of the Gospels, but in his criticism he unknowingly affirmed and reinforced the Biblical authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century:

“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (I.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

Celsus admits Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea Jesus was the illegitimate son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm several important claims: Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.

For further inquiry: http://coldcasechristianity.com...

So it seems the historical sources that we have on the life of Jesus point us to the His claim of Divinity recorded in the gospels.. This lead me to my last point.

3). The Resurrection Phenomenon
*I'm running low on space so I will keep this short

After Jesus' crucifixion.. Scholars/historians agree that these things happened

1). Jesus tomb was found empty by a group of His women followers on the Sunday after His death

This corroborates the biblical account in Matthew 20:19 "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn Him to death, 19and will hand Him over to the Gentiles to mock and scourge and crucify Him, and on the third day He will be raised up.

Also keep in mind that according to Jewish culture in the time of Jesus, Women were not allowed to testify in court.. It seems highly unlikely that the original authors would make up a story under which, their credibility would have been tarnished due to the low view of women in that society. Unless it actually happened..

2). Different individuals and groups of people had experiences of the risen Jesus under various circumstances after His death.

We know that their was an eyewitness account of 500 people which was constituted of both believers and unbelievers (1 Cor. 15:16).. Paul an persecutor of the early Christian church radically became a follow of Christ after a vision of Him (Acts 9).

The sheer amount of eyewitness accounts along with conversion testimonies is overwhelming.. As Luke Johnson states,
“Some sort of powerful transformative experiences required to generate this sort of movement earliest Christianity was.”

3). The disciples sincerely believed that Jesus rose from the dead to the point of death, suffering and persecution

All but 1 disciple (John) was martyred for their faith in the Risen Christ.. Thomas was run through by a spear, James was beheaded (Acts 12:2), John was boiled alive with oil. Would these people give their lives up for a lie? I don't think so.

Lane Craig emphasis this point perfectly:
Think of the situation the disciples faced following Jesus’ crucifixion. Their leader was dead and Jews had no expectation of Messiah who instead of triumphing over Israel’s enemies would be shamefully executed as a criminal. According to Old Testament Law, Jesus’ execution exposed him as a heretic, a man literally accursed by God. Jewish beliefs about the afterlife precluded anyone’s rising from the dead to glory and immortality before the general resurrection at the end of the world. Nevertheless, the original disciples suddenly came to believe so strongly that God had raised Jesus from the dead that they were willing to die for the truth of that belief.

Overall, the sheer weight evidence both biblicaly and historically pointing to Jesus' divinity is insurmountable. My opponent has to somehow, reconcile this evidence to the "prophet" view of Jesus which in my opinion. Is impossible.

Nevertheless, I urge my audience and my opponent to look at the evidence objectively.. I've done my best to rely on historical measures and sources outside the bible to prove my point. Jesus said “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)

I cannot except religious relativism and neither does Jesus. Jesus is the ONLY way to God according to his own claims. Will you believe Him? That's for you to decide.

Back to Con

Sources:

1). http://www.reasonablefaith.org...

2). https://www.biblegateway.com...

3). https://carm.org...








persianimmortal

Con

1) "Daniel 7:13,14
In Dan 7:13, there is a clear distinction between the son of man and the Ancient of Days due to the wording of the verse. Grammatically, it would be incorrect to assume that 2 persons, as mentioned in the Bible, are 1, because that would contradict basic logic. If the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, how can He be the Ancient of Days when it explicitly says, that the Son of man CAME TO the Ancient of Days? Basically, what you are suggesting is that Jesus came to Himself. So, you see? It is impossible, illogical and a grammatical misunderstanding that can be forgiven :) So we should read it for what it truly says, which is, "...the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and CAME TO the Ancient of Days..."
Daniel 7:14 gives away the distinction in the fourth word of the verse (depending on the version you're reading). It says GIVEN. By whom? God. Why? Because He is the Appointed One (Messiah). So it's safe to conclude that without God given authority to Jesus (son of man), Jesus would have been just another lost in the sands of history. But clearly that has not happened, because God chose Jesus to carry his Message, bestowed Him with the title of Christ and gave Him full authority over the Sheep of Israel as their awaited Messiah. What I'm trying to say is that God and Jesus have a relationship but they're not the same, as the Bible clearly shows us.

2) "Mark 14:16"
Again, we should not overthink or misunderstand the verse; we should read it the way it's written. Jesus was asked if He was the Christ and the SON of the Blessed One. Jesus did not reply, "no, I'm in fact the Blessed One Himself". He replied, "Yes" to Pilate's question and continued, reinforcing His answer by saying, "the son of man will sit at the right hand of the mighty one", which again shows us a clear distinction between the mighty one and the son of man.

3) "Matt 11:27"
Again, the distinction between God and Jesus is clearly present in the first line of this verse. It says, "All things have been committed to me by my Father". I'll give you an example to clarify this better:
Let's say your dad comes to you and says, "son, listen, I wanted to give you this.", and gives you a key to a vault that has access to all his possessions. Pretty awesome, right? Well this is exactly what's happening in Matt 11:27. No matter what version of the Bible you read, you will see words such as, committed, entrusted, handed over, delivered, given up, turned everything over, and so on. So just like your dad committed, entrusted, handed over, delivered, gave up, or turned everything over to you by giving you that key, Jesus's Father had done the exact same by committing, entrusting, handing over, delivering, giving up, or turning everything over to Jesus. The next time your dad gives you something think about this example, put yourself in Jesus's position and your dad becomes God, then answer this question, "Is my dad giving me something, or am I giving myself something". The clear separation between God and Jesus should make more sense now :)

4) "blasphemy (making Himself equal to God)"
This is incorrect. His charges were, as you mentioned earlier, taking the title of Son of the Blessed One (God) and the Messiah, not claiming Himself to be God.

5) "Accounts outside the Bible 1: Tacitus"
I'm sure there is historical accuracy in such documents but it's mention has no relevancy to the title of this debate, which is, "Christianity vs Islam: Who is the real Jesus? Prophet or God?"

6) "Accounts outside the Bible 2: Celsus"
The last phrase of your argument states, "Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God." This is a description of Jesus's father, not Jesus Himself. So, this has a little more relevancy to this debate, but again, it does help your argument in proving that Jesus is God. These historical accounts challenge His Divinity but by no means address Him as God, because anyone who did, has to simply read the Bible and understand that there is a clear difference between God and Jesus.

7) "Your whole section on The Resurrection Phenomenon"
My friend, I respectfully have to say that we are not arguing the divinity of His Holiness Christ, nor am I objecting to His performed miracles as mentioned in the Bible. I fully believe in them and it is my religious duty to defend them from the anyone who misunderstands it, religious or otherwise. We are discussing whether Jesus is a Prophet or God Himself from a Christian and Muslim stand point. Regarding this whole section, I totally agree with you and I have no arguments against it, but please, with all due respect, stay on topic haha :)

8) "Overall, the sheer..........decide"
In this section, I will be talking about your whole conclusion, beginning with "Overall" and ending with "decide":

8a) In your first line, you stated that the evidence both Biblically and historically pointing to Jesus' divinity is insurmountable, to which I fully agree. I never accepted this debate to argue the Divinity of His Holiness Christ. I accepted this debate to show you that Christ Himself makes a clear distinction between Himself and God, so there should be no reason for you or anyone to think other wise :)

8b) I don't have to reconcile anything, because Christ has so graciously, done that for us. To my understanding and relating to my experience of studying Comparative Religions, I have a feeling that there is a misunderstanding on what Prophet means. It's important to know that Jesus referred to Himself as a Prophet in numerous places in the Bible, so to call Him a Prophet is not a bad thing, because Jesus does it. Let's look at a couple of the verses where He does that:

Mark 6:4 = "Jesus said to them, "A prophet is not without honor except in his own town, among his relatives and in his own home." So we can see that, Jesus alluded to Himself as a prophet.

In the streets, people called out to Jesus and referred to Him as a prophet (Matt 21:11), to which He had not objection. In John 4:19-26, Jesus has a full on discussion with a woman who tells Him that He is a prophet, and again Jesus has no objection. He continues the discussion until He answers the question of whether He is the Messiah or not, to which Jesus replies, Yes, I am the Messiah (John 4:26). So calling Jesus a prophet is not bad :)

8c) "look at evidence objectively"
Brother, I have. For 5 long years I have studied the Writings, compared them, defended them, read them, memorized them, re-read them, dissected them and I have to say that my objective study has again and again, solved numerous misunderstandings that is currently circulating in the Christian community today, and this is one of them. I understand that you have done your best to show me Biblical and historical sources, but the interpretation of man is nothing compared to what the Bible actually says. I am definitely NOT claiming that you have done the following but, I have had many online debates and face-to-face debates where people simply copy and paste other peoples arguments and share it with me. This is absolutely wrong and go to prove James 5:1. It says, "If any of you needs wisdom to know what you should do, you should ask God, and he will give it to you. God is generous to everyone and doesn't find fault with them." Instead of asking God, they have asked those people that God warns us about in Titus 3:9-11.

8d) "John 14:6"
There's a bit of history behind this verse that is answered in the verses prior to John 14:6, which I will gladly go over. If we backtrack a bit, we can see 2 main characters, including Jesus, who's actions eventually lead up to John 14:6. Peter asks the opening question in John 13:36, "Lord, where are you going", and Jesus says, "Where I am going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later." There is clearly some confusion by this answer when Peter asks again in John 13:37, "Lord, why can't I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you." But Jesus say no way buddy, you're gonna reject me 3 times (13:38). So then Thomas brings the discussion back on topic and asks again in 14:5, "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?". Jesus responds, to clarify for both Peter and Thomas that, He is the way and the Truth and the Life, nothing goes to the Father BUT through Him. He ends is answers in a bit of disappointment towards Phillip, who says show me the Father (14:9). Jesus frustrated at his lack of understanding goes on to explain that the Father is living in Himself (Jesus) and is doing His work. These works will be an example for everyone to follow if they want to go to the Father becauseeeee.......suspense....because, "I am the way and the truth and the life". So this was an answer to those who doubt at the time, the legitimacy of Christ.

My friend, in the Holy Bible nowhere does it say that Jesus claims to be God. Christian interpretation of verses are as the dust beneath the feet of Christ, for His Word is as clean and clear as the chime of a bell. So my question to you would be, "will you worship Jesus, or the one Jesus worshiped?" One glaring problem the Christians have is that Jesus prayed, & had a God Himself. This logically lets us conclude that Jesus cannot be God. Therefore, the right thing to do is worship & pray to the one Jesus prayed to. Second question, "If Jesus told you that he had a God, would you honestly take Jesus as God?" Answer is simply no. When Jesus prays to God & said explicitly that God is His Superior, it is pretty ungodly of him to indicate his complete devotion to the one true God if he was God in the first place. Here are some points to consider:

John 20:17
Num 23:19
Matt 26:39-44
John 8:42-43
Acts 2:22-23
Acts 17:30-31
1 Tim 2:5
Numbers 23:19
Mark 13:32
Jon 13:3
Matt 16:27
John 17:1-26
John 7:16
John 12:49
*John 8:42-43*
John 12:49-50
John 8:25-27
John 14:23-26
Matt 15:24
Matt 16:13-17
Mark 2:10
Mark 5:26-27
Debate Round No. 2
iTruthSeeker

Pro

Thanks to my opponent for his response.. Let me begin with my first contention:

1). Jesus claimed Himself to be God

My opponent begins by stating: "Grammatically, it would be incorrect to assume that 2 persons, as mentioned in the Bible, are 1"

Lets see what Jesus has to say on this issue,

"I and the Father are one." - John 10:30

How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? -
John 14:11

"The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one" - John 17:22

Jesus is PAINSTANKINGLY clear on this issue... I'm sorry but my opponents assertion is flat out wrong.

My opponent continues by saying: "If the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, how can He be the Ancient of Days when it explicitly says, that the Son of man CAME TO the Ancient of Days?"

This is a common misunderstanding of the Trinity.. Let me show you an illustration


Christians believe (according to the bible) that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are 1 being in 3 different persons.

This is reflected in Jesus' statement. "And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" Matt. 28:19

Therefore, my opponents assertion that the Ancient of Days and Son of Man cannot both be God because the Son of Man approached the Ancient of Days is not biblical whatsoever.. We see in the bible that both Jesus and God are both separate persons but both God.

John 1: 1-15
In the beginning was the (Christ)Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.2 He was in the beginning with God.3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. - 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.

This is also paralleled in Psalm 110:1 - "A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."

So wait? are there 2 Lords? No their is One Lord that is manifested in 2 persons according to the psalm

So when my opponent says.. "What I'm trying to say is that God and Jesus have a relationship but they're not the same, as the Bible clearly shows us." I need to ask.. What Bible are you reading? I say this with the utmost kindness but cmon.. This is clear as day!

I gave the Greek Word latreuó (λατρεa3;ω) which again, translates to "service rendered to God, perhaps simply: worship." Remember that the Greeks would only use this word when talking about worshiping God, They would never dare defile the word with a lesser being.. Although we see the translation "And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve (latreuó) him.

Why would the Son of man be worshipped with only a service rendered towards God? Not just Israel.. But EVERY NATION, TRIBE, and KINGDOM?

The answer is quite obvious.. Jesus gave himself that title for a reason.

My opponents objection to Daniel 19 holds no weight whatsoever..

In response to Mark 14:16 - my opponent replies: Jesus did not reply, "no, I'm in fact the Blessed One Himself". He replied, "Yes" to Pilate's question and continued, reinforcing His answer by saying, "the son of man will sit at the right hand of the mighty one", which again shows us a clear distinction between the mighty one and the son of man.

I have already shown how Son of man is a claim to Divinity... This renders my opponents counterargument null.

In response to Matt. 11:27 - my opponent replies: Again, the distinction between God and Jesus is clearly present in the first line of this verse. It says, "All things have been committed to me by my Father"

Again, we as Christians believe that Jesus and God the Father are distinct.. But 1 being. I've already explained this.. Look further at Jesus statement. "No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."

This is an intimate portrayal of John 1's account that I posted above.. Jesus is claiming to have a special relationship to God as his Son.. A further parallel is found at Matt. 28:19. My opponents response does nothing to further his case.

Listen to this... My opponent replies:
His charges were, as you mentioned earlier, taking the title of Son of the Blessed One (God) and the Messiah, not claiming Himself to be God.

...Oh no no. "31 The Jews picked up stones again to stone him.32 Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?”33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

Another false assertion by my opponent.. I don't think I really need to elaborate.

1). So we see that my opponent has not reliably disproved that Jesus actually claimed to be God.. I can confidently say that my first contention still stands unharmed.

2). Jesus Trial and Crucifixion:

my opponent states: 'm sure there is historical accuracy in such documents but it's mention has no relevancy to the title of this debate, which is, "Christianity vs Islam: Who is the real Jesus? Prophet or God?"

I can agree to that.. I was expecting to debate Muslims. They claim that Jesus was not crucified. I was giving a historical source outside the bible to prove that point.. Since your not a Muslim and believe these things. This specific source really has no purpose.

He then states: The last phrase of your argument states, "Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God." This is a description of Jesus father, not Jesus Himself.

Another completley false statement..
She gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

I don't see where Jesus father is mentioned anywhere in this passage..

He continues by saying: These historical accounts challenge His Divinity but by no means address Him as God

I ask my opponent to read the bold words on the quote I displayed above.. I think its very clear..

2). So we see that my opponent hasn't denied the historical reliability of these sources and agrees that they aid my argument. Therefore history stands on the side of Jesus claiming to be God.

3). The Resurrection Phenomenon
Again.. I figured my opponent would take the Muslim standpoint that Jesus did not rise from the dead. I will concede this contention in that respect.

I want to point out that my opponent has not disproven any of my above contentions and his responses are nothing more then common misconceptions... Again I don't say this to spark anger.. I say this because I sincerely believe this with my whole heart.

*I will respond shortly to the rest of my opponents responses due to a lack of space.

"I accepted this debate to show you that Christ Himself makes a clear distinction between Himself and God"

I fully agree.. So does the bible :)

"It's important to know that Jesus referred to Himself as a Prophet in numerous places in the Bible, so to call Him a Prophet is not a bad thing, because Jesus does it."

I agree that Jesus is a prophet.. He is the Messiah.. He is also God. I have shown how these things all collaborate in the bible.. I don't find your arguments otherwise.. convincing.

"One glaring problem the Christians have is that Jesus prayed, & had a God Himself. "

Not at all.. We understand the Trinity and the relationship that God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit have.. I've already shown how the Old Testament and New Testament reconcile these ideas together.. This is all foreshadowed in Genesis 1:26 "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness"..


Overall, I find my opponents rebuttal very unconvincing... My opponent forgets that Jesus claim to be God is very obvious according to the culture of that day.. His claim to be the Son of Man or claiming I AM were all taken as divine claims.. Take it from C.S Lewis,

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

P.S my opponent spewed a huge list of Biblical quotes that "allegedly" go against the notion of Jesus divinity.. They don't.. But nonetheless.. I don't have time to rebut them all.. Here's some for further inquiry

John 10:30
Matthew 28:19
John 1:1
1 John 5:7
John 15:26
John 1:14
John 14:26
Matthew 28:18
1 Cor. 8:6
1 Peter 1:2
Romans 8:26-27
Isaiah 48:16
Isaiah 42:8



persianimmortal

Con

I have to respectfully say that my opponent has not addressed any of the responses I have made, and has simply jumped forward to his next argument. I would like the voters to note that Pro's opening arguments, were solely based on proving the legitimacy of Jesus Christ, rather than addressing the debate title which states, "Christianity vs Islam: Who is the real Jesus? Prophet or God?". I would like the voters to also note that I FULLY accept the legitimacy of His Holiness Christ, which is what my opponent is trying to seemingly prove to me.

1) "John 10:30"
Earlier, I wrote that there is a grammatical error being made when assuming that 2 persons are 1. I will stay true to this because my opponent has confirmed this by citing John 10:30. I ask my opponent and anyone else if they wish, to read 1 verse before 10:30. Notice the distinction Christ makes by saying, "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand." This becomes very clear that His Father has given His sheep to Him and the authority to do works in His Name.
The thing is that, this leads back to the verse where it all begins, in 10:24. In that verse, the Jews ask Him to just get on with it and say that He's the Messiah. Jesus says in the next verse that He doesn't need to because His works speak for themselves and they don't believe because they are not His sheep. He goes on to explain that His sheep know Him and that He will give them eternal life. So all this comes back to the Father providing Jesus with the necessary means to command the Lost sheep of Israel. Without the Father, Jesus could not have done that, so this ultimately leads us to 10:30, when Jesus says I and my Father are one.
What's also interesting that completely shatters the foundation of my opponent's argument is that, in the verse after 10:30, in 10:31-39, Jesus is accused of and thrown stones at, because of the very thing my opponent's argument is based on. Lets have a look:

Once again the people picked up stones to kill him.
Jesus said, "At my Father"s direction I have done many good works. For which one are you going to stone me?"
They replied, "We"re stoning you not for any good work, but for blasphemy! You, a mere man, claim to be God."
Jesus replied, "It is written in your own Scriptures that God said to certain leaders of the people, "I say, you are gods!"
And you know that the Scriptures cannot be altered.
So if those people who received God"s message were called "gods," why do you call it blasphemy when I say, "I am the Son of God"?
After all, the Father set me apart and sent me into the world.
Don"t believe me unless I carry out my Father"s work.
But if I do his work, believe in the evidence of the miraculous works I have done, even if you don"t believe me.
Then you will know and understand that the Father is in me, and I am in the Father."

It's interesting how the Jews are accusing Christ of saying something that He Himself never said and Christ repeats this. The crowd accuse Him of saying that He was God, but Jesus says, no guys I said I am God's Son, not God Himself. So this tells us that my opponent's argument takes the place of the Jews who confronted Jesus at the time. Please read those verses properly before using a verse that you think serves you best.

2) "John 14:11"
Again, to my opponent I say, read the verse(s) before 14:11 in order to better understand the history of your argument and where it stands. Looking at 14:10, Jesus explicitly tells us that I do NOT do these works on my own authority but of that of MY Father. Jesus is saying, MY Father, and NOT my authority but HIS. How can you still say that Jesus is God when He Himself makes a clear distinction. I think I'll stick with Jesus's explanation rather than yours haha (no disrespect)

3) "John 14:22"
Again, if you read the verse before, Jesus Christ, the Messiah of the awaited by the Jews, is talking to the Father! This leads us back to the grammatical point I brought up. If Jesus is speaking to His Father, on what world is His Father, referring to Himself? The verse reads, "that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me."

4) "flat out wrong"
You can call me anything you feel like, but when Jesus makes a distinction between Himself and His Father, I have no argument with that and neither should you. :)

5) "Trinity"
My opponent says that I am making a common misunderstanding when I re-state the points Jesus Himself brings up. If we look at the Bible, we can conclude that the Bible is "Thus saith the Lord" while the Church councils say "Thus saith people." These 2 have a world of difference. The Bible does not proclaim the trinity; church councils do. But church councils do not carry the authority of God. So who is more important, the Bible or the Church councils? Clearly, anyone with the basic understanding of this question, would pick the Bible. To pick the Church council, would mean it has more value than the Bible. You could argue that the Church council, rely their authority on the Bible before making decisions, but that does not erase the fact that the Trinity is a Church council doctrine and not a Biblical one. So respectfully, to agree with the Trinity, would mean that you hold man-made formulations of concepts based on unqualified interpretations, more dear than the Bible which is the Message from 2 Messengers of God.
You could also argue that when it says in Matthew 28:19, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.", those 3 terms are the Trinity. But my response to you would be, that it is a reference to 3 names, and there"s no mention of "trinity" nor is there any God-given instruction that we should relate those names to each other in a philosophical mashup. If that were true and you were correct about the trinity, then any verse that mentioned the 2 terms the Father and the Son, or God and Jesus, would have a God-given instruction to create a philosophical mashup of "bi-nity." In addition to this, there are a LOT more verses that mention the two than mention the three " a LOT more. So at that point we would have an argument about whether to believe in the bi-nity or the trinity. Better to just take the Scriptures as they"re given to us and not add in man-made ideas like tri-nity and bi-nity. I challenge you my friend to find me the word Trinity or any instruction on combining them together in order to form a triune concept. Please remove your "trinity glasses" when referring to such verses.

6) "John 1:1"
Now that you know the Trinity is man-made and not instructed by God, I wld be very interested to know what you understand from this verse.

7) "My opponents response to my statement on Mark 14:16"
This was just a summary of the verses leading up to 14:16. So in conclusion read them and with your "trinity glasses" removed, tell me what it says :)

I am going to enter the conclusion stage of this response due my opponent's unfortunate integration of a sad, false, and man-made doctrine which is spoiling the very foundation of Christianity and the Message of Christ:

In conclusion, this whole debate is about whether Christ is God or not. I have clearly shown my opponent that the history behind the Trinity is not a Biblical one, but a man-made one (Look up Council of Nicaea). It seems that in my next argument I will have to go through the history of the Trinity and the reason of its creation. But in short, the Trinity has NO Biblical support and is a failed attempt at explaining a sequence of titles that refer to both God, Christ and their Bond between them. There is no Divine command or instruction in combining them into anything, so I could care less what Trinitarians say regarding this matter because, it all boils down to what Christ says, which is what most Christians unfortunately skim over. My opponent seems to also think that Jesus did NOT have God as His Superior, he responds by saying "Not at all". The Bible is sprinkled with verses that show us Jesus praying to God:

Luke 6:12 = "One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God.
Matthew 26:36-56 = This is the Garden of Gethsemane, where is Jesus Christ, the Messiah awaited by the Jews, the Lord and Savior of the Jews, is begging...no pleading with God to "let the cup pass" from Him. Jesus is keen on living but understands that God's will is more important that His own. Jesus is most definitely not having a divine monologue with Himself, so the only and most logical and most sensible understanding of such verses, is that Jesus prays to and has a God Himself. If He was God, He wouldn't beg Himself to take away the cup of martyrdom; He would simply take it away.

I would like to also respectfully make my opponent aware, to read very carefully before and after a certain verse that will be posted. Most of them were simply posted in hopes of achieving a goal that is not Biblically supported, because the before/after of the verse, collapsed the point my opponent was making.

The verses I allegedly "spewed" were all referring to the distinction between Jesus and God. The verse that I wanted you to see more than the others what John 8:42-43, where Jesus Himself is fed up with everyone calling Him God. He tells them, In what language or tongue should I tell you that God sent me? I don't know about anyone else, but it seems that Jesus is quite frustrated about individuals calling Him something He is not. So this goes for my opponent and anyone else reading this to know that calling Christ something He's not, results in His anger.

your turn :)
Debate Round No. 3
iTruthSeeker

Pro

I appreciate my opponents response but I must admit... I am a bit confused. My opponent says that I have not addressed his responses..? I have addressed EVERY SINGLE response! I need to ask my opponent to re-read my rebuttals and find a single statement that I did not respond to... He also states that I am trying to prove the "legitimacy" of Jesus.. Again, all of my responses are centered on Jesus claims of Godhood... I've used both historical and biblical sources that clearly show how the Muslim view of Jesus is not supported. I understand that both Muslims and Christians both believe that Jesus existed.

Even so.. My opponent has pinned himself in a corner, he claims that I take certain verses out of context, He lists:
John 10:30
John 14:11
John 14:22

He says: "Again, to my opponent I say, read the verse(s) before 14:11 in order to better understand the history of your argument and where it stands."

Ok lets do that.. I will go back to the very first verse in John and read all the way through in order to understand the context.. Lets see what it says:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the WORD WAS GOD2 He was in the beginning with God.3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. - 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.

Ok wait? So the FIRST VERSES in John say that Jesus is God.. Everything was made through Him.. And Him being the only God beside the Father has made Him known..

Guys, we then need to read the entire context through these lenses... My opponent does the exact opposite. He forgets this verse or twists it in order to fit his understanding.. And then finds verses in John that he thinks contradicts the Trinity.. This verse is VERY CLEAR.. It was meant to be.

Now that we understand the context. I urge my opponent to re-read the verse's he gave with his "trinity glasses" on... That's how the Gospel of John sets it up...

Now on to John 10:30..

Notice the distinction Christ makes by saying, "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand." This becomes very clear that His Father has given His sheep to Him and the authority to do works in His Name.

Again, I want to re-iterate that the Trinity understands God as 1 Being in 3 Persons..
A being is the "What"
A Person is the "Who"

So God in essence is 1 "Thing" with three "Who's"

Let me give this illustration.. Lets pretend PersianImmortal is my daddy.. I tell my friends that my "daddy" is greater than I. He plays a greater role in the family.. Does that however make my dad any more human than I? Not at all

So when Jesus says that God the Father is Greater than I or All.. That doesn't make Father any more "God" than Jesus.. just like me calling my "daddy" greater than I doesn't makes him more human.

Let me make this point clear.. Christians believe that God the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit ARE DISTINCT.. Look back to my previous illustration.. Here's a list from Carm in order to understand this concept:









            1. The Father sent the Son. The Son did not send the Father (John 6:44, 8:18, 10:36,1 John 4:14).





                        1. John 5:37, “And the Father who sent Me, He has borne witness of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form."














            1. Jesus came down from Heaven not to do his own will but to do the will of the Father.





                        1. John 6:38, "For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me."














            1. Jesus performed the redemptive work. The Father did not.





                        1. 2 Cor. 5:21, "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."









                        1. 1 Pet. 2:24, "and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.














            1. The Father gave the Son. The Son did not give the Father or the Holy Spirit.







1.John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.






Here's the link for further inquiry: https://carm.org...

Remember that we don't just believe this out of nowhere.. John 1:1 gives us the context.

My opponent then attacks the word "trinity" as being a "church invention" at the council of Nicea. While the word Trinity is not found in the bible.. We find the Trinity (Father,Son,Holy spirit) both throughout the OT and the NT.. I've already stated these verses but I will do it again:

"Then God said, 'Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness" (Gen 1:26)
"Then the Lord God said, 'Behold, the man has become like one of Us"
(Gen 3:22)
"Then the Lord [YHWH] rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord [YHWH] out of heaven." (Gen 19:24)
"Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of uprightness is the scepter of Your kingdom. 7 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of joy above Your fellows." (Psalm 45:6-7)
"Come near to Me [God], listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, from the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord God has sent Me, and His Spirit.” (Isaiah 48:16)

Besides the overwhelming evidence in the OT for the plurality of Gods statements.. Lets look at one of the earliest creeds in early Christian theology...

(Jesus) Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
We know that Philippians was written 30 years after Jesus death in 60 A.D, Paul is citing a Christian Hymn that dated back long before the written of his letter. We see that the earliest Christians were worshipping Jesus as God and having a fundamental understanding of the Trinity before the NT was written..

Again my opponents claim is not historically and biblicaly supported that the Trinity is only a church invention.

My opponent then states that certain verses only show the Bi-unity of Jesus and the Father.. We have other verses that show the Tri-Unity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit... I don't really see why my opponent has such a difficult time with this? So because some verses don't include the Holy Spirit means that God is not Triune? Not at all! If Jesus says: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

You better do what He says! You can reconcile why Jesus only talked about the Father to prove a point.. If you worship a bi-unity you would be disobeying Jesus.

*I want to note that my opponent has not responded to the Son of Man argument that I gave.. He did not refute as to why the Greeks used the word latreuó when talking about Jesus. This alone is enough to know that Jesus claimed to be God.. I urge my opponent to give a valid reason to the contrary rather then attacking my reliably supported Trinitarian view..."

In my opponents conclusion he states:

the Trinity has NO Biblical support and is a failed attempt at explaining a sequence of titles that refer to both God, Christ and their Bond between them

Check my above passages relating to the Trinity in the OT... I'm interested in hearing your response.

There is no Divine command or instruction in combining them into anything, so I could care less what Trinitarians say regarding this matter because, it all boils down to what Christ says.

False, What does Jesus say? Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

We see that Jesus wants his disciples to be baptized in the NAME of the FATHER, SON, HOLY SPIRIT. My friend, Jesus gave us this command after He rose. I pray that you will begin to understand.

"My opponent seems to also think that Jesus did NOT have God as His Superior"

Relational yes.. Fundamentally No.. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all in essence God.. But the Son is Obedient to the Father (Hebrews 10:7), The Father sends the Son in the power of the Spirit (1 John 4:14).. The Father is superior to Jesus in the relation role.. But that does not mean God the Father is "more God".

"I would like to also respectfully make my opponent aware, to read very carefully before and after a certain verse that will be posted. Most of them were simply posted in hopes of achieving a goal that is not Biblicaly supported, because the before/after of the verse"

I understand where you are coming from.. However you did not take into account the very first verses in John rendering all of your interpretations as faulty. You cannot take out the first verse.. Render your own interpretation.. And then say that my view is false based on a couple other verse's.

All in All.. My opponent has not succefully rebutted my initial claim that Jesus is God... I will gladly hold the BOP.. My opponent has barely scratched the surface of my arguments but rather threw out of context verses to attack the Trinity view..

I might sound a little brisk but this is very important! Jesus is not just a prophet.. He is much more, my friend, I ask that you will approach the real Jesus.. The one who says: if you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins." John 8:24

Back to Con

persianimmortal

Con

I will state that my arguments will remain the same and that the "spewed" list as Pro has stated, was not studied. I apologize for the lateness of my response but I had a Midterm to study for and write.

Please continue with your arguments and God willing in the next round, I will have more time to answer :)

I look forward to your argument
Debate Round No. 4
iTruthSeeker

Pro

In order to respect my opponents lack of time for a response in the previous round, I will keep my conclusion shorter than intended.

Although I had to concede some arguments due to my opponent being of different faith than Islam.. I have held to a singular contention.

1). Jesus claimed to be God

I gave a non biblical historical source that shows Jesus claim to Godhood.. That of Celsius:

a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

Let me reiterate that my opponent gave a faulty interpretation of this quoting and also says that it aids my argument: "this is a description of Jesus' father, not Jesus Himself. So, this has a little more relevancy to this debate, but again, it does help your argument in proving that Jesus is God."

It stands on the side of history then that the early Christians worship Jesus as God which is also shown from early Christian hymn in Philippians 2:6 where it states: 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped.. Which we know was created 5-10 years after Jesus death. .

We understand that this was written within 5-10 years of Jesus' death which discounts any hypothesis that the discples beleifs evolved from a prophet to divine Jesus.. I wonder.. Why did the early disciples worship Jesus as God if He so clearly emphasise that he was just a prophet? It doesent make sense. These Chrsitians were alive during Jesus teachings!

Therefore.. We see that history stands on the side of Jesus claiming divinity... We've seen no plausible rebuttal from my opponent...

Lets then turn to the biblical aspect of Jesus Godhood.. My opponent gives 2 essential rebuttals:

1). I'm taking verses out of context
2). We see that God and Jesus are distinct.. That is, there are not 1 being.

1).

In referring to the verses I used proclaiming the Trinity my opponents over-arching claim is: "So in conclusion read them and with your "trinity glasses" removed, tell me what it says :)"

I think this is great! my opponent forgets to read the beginning of John 1 (if you need further reference look to my previous argument) He forgets John wrote the gospel believing Jesus was God (John 8:58) and He also forgets the rest of the New Testament (I.e.. Paul's epistles, Hebrews) that all proclaim Jesus as God

"Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him." (1 Cor 8:6)

"2fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:2)

For my opponent to say that me.. As well as 2 billion other Christians are taking our verses out of context is not supported at all.. He thinks that taking quotes that show Jesus and the Father as distinct somehow disproves the Trinity. Lets move on to that..

2).

My opponents second claims revolved around this: One glaring problem the Christians have is that Jesus prayed, & had a God Himself. This logically lets us conclude that Jesus cannot be God.

I guess I'm not explaining the Trinity well enough.. Let me simplify it..

a being is the "what"
a person is the "who"

a being does not equal a person... I am a human but that is not "who I am" I am Truth seeker
a person does not equal a being.. I am a person but that is not "what I am" I am a human

The Trinity according to.. yes.. the New Testament, is 1 being (what) in 3 person (who's)

I do not believe Jesus and the Father are 1 person.. I believe they are 2 persons (who's) in 1 being (what)

A not so perfect example lies in Multiple Personality Disorder... Were 1 being.. comprises of multiple personalities (persons) . Again, this does not completely parallel the Triune nature of God but it helps us to grasp at it.

It is then not logically fallacious that Jesus prayed to the Father... This is also paralleled in multiple OT phrases that you have decided not to respond to:

"A Psalm of David. The LORD (Jehovah) says to my Lord (Adonai): "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." (Psalm 110:1)

This is paralleled in Isaiah 6:1: In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord (Adonai), high and exalted, seated on a throne; and the train of his robe filled the temple.

"Come near to Me [God], listen to this: From the first I have not spoken in secret, from the time it took place, I was there. And now the Lord God has sent Me, and His Spirit.” (Isaiah 48:16)

"Then the Lord God said, 'Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil (Genesis 3:22)

We see in the majority of these verse's that The Lord (Jehovah) is speaking to another Lord (Adonai).. or is referring to Himself in the plural. What does this sound like? 2 gods? No a triune relationship...

We also see that the Holy Spirit prays to the Father as well..

In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. (Romans 8:26)

Why do we call Jesus the Son you ask? Well what does a son do in a son/father relationship? He obeys.. In the same way the Son of God obeys the Father and prays to him.. understand? All the bible shouts this not so simple idea!

*Now that we understand the Jesus and the Father are distinct but still One.. I will like my opponent to re-read Daniel 7:13.. He still has not responded as to why the Son of Man in Daniels vision is worshipped alongside "the Ancient of Days" (Father) and why Jesus claims himself to be this very figure.


Guys.. The bible and history itself stands on Jesus simple claim that "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.".. The Islamic or Bahai faith rejects the Trinity and Jesus Godhood which is not biblical at all! We need to understand the bible from a Jewish context and the claims that Jesus made were claims to divinity. This is a fact.

I want to respectfully ask my opponent to look at this matter objectively.. I believe it has the utmost importance.. The Bible says:

But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. (Revelation

"But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. You happily put up with whatever anyone tells you, even if they preach a different Jesus than the one we preach, or a different kind of Spirit than the one you received, or a different kind of gospel than the one you believed." (2 Cor. 11)

Also,

"But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction." 1 Peter 2:1

Guys.. I need to get on my soap box but not all religions lead to God! They all contradict.. Muslims deny Jesus is God.. Christians believe He is the only way.. Bahai's believe that every revelation is acceptable.. It doesn't add up. God according to the Bible is very clear..

6 Jesus answered, I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (John 14:6)

How can you somehow say that every which way leads to God when Jesus makes this simple statement? I hope you see this as a way of me respectfully questioning your beliefs.. I do not wish to make you feel inferior or tread on your beliefs at all.

I had a great time with this debate and I thank my opponent for sharing his views alongside my own.. I want to end it with a quote from none other than my Lord

"The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let the one who hears say, "Come!" Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life." (Revelation 22:17)










Sources:
1). http://www.patheos.com...
2). http://coldcasechristianity.com...

persianimmortal

Con

My friend, you are a great debater and I have high respect for you. I thank you for this debate and I would like the voters to take into account the respect Pro has shown me in response to my lack of time. Allow me to share my conclusion:

To say that Jesus Christ is God and point to a verse that supposedly backs up the claim, means that you either reject the rest of the New Testament or you don't know the rest of it. Let me explain what I mean. My opponent has mentioned multiple verses which he claims, reinforces the stance of Jesus = God. I have asked him to read the back a few verses and understand the circumstances in which the Bible words the verses as such. Ultimately, this was not done. There are numerous if not almost everywhere in the Bible, where Jesus Christ refers to a Higher Power and prays to Him, asks Him questions, and at one point, He pleads with Him so save His own life (Garden of Gethsemane). It also comes to a point that Christ Himself becomes upset at the people and His disciples for referring to Him as God (John 8:41-43). This presents an obvious answer to the debate; If Christ becomes upset for calling Him God, then why are the Christians continuing to do so? Do they not care if Christ becomes upset? Do they not care to understand the distinction between God and Jesus that Jesus so generously makes? So if Jesus is pleading, and asking God for His Blessings, and takes actions in His Name, then we eventually have a definite distinction between God and His Messenger, Jesus Christ. Ultimately that's why He is called a Messenger; because He has a Message. So let's look at the verses where there is a separation between God and Jesus:

Matthew 3:17:
And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This [Jesus Christ] is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
*God talking about Jesus*

Matthew 12:32:
And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man [Jesus Christ], it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost [God], it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
*Speak against Jesus = forgiveness...Speak against God = well, that's not safe for your soul. This shows us the clear border between God and His Messenger, Jesus Christ*

Matthew 26:39,42:
And he [Jesus Christ] went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.
*Jesus pleading on his hands and knees and His face on the ground in submission to God in the Garden of Gethsemane*

Mark 13:32:
But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son [Jesus Christ], but the Father.
*So the Day of Judgment is not known to Jesus but only to God*

Mark 16:19:
So then after the Lord [Jesus Christ] had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
*Sitting on the right hand of God, does not imply that Jesus was sitting on His own right hand. Again, clear distinction.*

Luke 1:35:
And the angel answered and said unto her [Mary], The Holy Ghost [God] shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
*angel sharing a word of caution from God to mary about the future coming of Jesus*

John 1:18:
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
*None have seen God, but the only begotten Son, they have. So they're not the same.*

John 1:32-34:
And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him [Jesus Christ].
And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost [the gift of holy spirit].
And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.
*Jesus was not Annointed by Himself, He was Annointed by God*

John 3:16,17:
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
*God loved the world so He gave us Jesus. It says God sent Jesus...not Jesus sent Jesus haha*

John 5:30:
I [Jesus Christ] can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
*Jesus stating word for word that He can do nothing without the aid of the Father. Again, Jesus is just another man without God, but God chose Him to do His works on Earth so this puts Him above us mere humans but no where near God*

John 7:16:
Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.
*Not mine...but His that sent me...If you believe in Jesus, then dont make up things from church leaders who say things contrary to that of Christ. Who do you hold more dear? Jesus or some guy?

John 14:28:
Ye have heard how I [Jesus Christ] said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
*Father is greater than I...not I am greater than myself"

Romans 1:3,4
Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.
*Son of God...not Son of Himself...With all due respect, Jesus is not a sponge to partake in the biological process of budding...He's a human being that God chose to share His Message, hence Messenger from God.*

Romans 8:3:
For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.
God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh.....so either you're saying God is sinful by putting Jesus on par with God, or you haven't read the Bible*

I Corinthians 8:6:
But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
God - we are by Him and Jesus = we are by Him...If it was right to call Jesus God, then the printing shop wouldn't waste that much ink to separate Jesus and God. They would just write Jesus is God...period.*

I Corinthians 11:3:
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
*THe head of Christ is God,....enough said*

Galatians 4:4:
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.
*Jesus made of a woman....= human*

I Timothy 2:5:
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
Jesus is a mediator....not God Himself. If Jesus was God, then this verse and the rest of the Bible is useless*

Hebrews 4:14,15:
Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
*Jesus the SON of God...not Jesus, the God*

James 1:13:
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.
*no need to explain*

I John 5:5:
Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?
*Again, no need to explain*

II John 3:
Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.
*Son of the FATHER*

So in conclusion, either you haven't read the Bible or you reject what Jesus says entirely and His own argument and sepraration between Himself and His Father, His Master, His God.

Thanks! :)
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Yavneh 1 year ago
Yavneh
Persianimmortal, regarding the Judaism vs. Christianity debate, could you please check up on the comment stream and let us know if you are willing to accept the three teammates who want to join Con. Please reply on that comment stream, not this one, so I can get the e-mail. Thanks,
Yavneh
No votes have been placed for this debate.