The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Did Jesus die for our sins?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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: 3/4/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 608 times Debate No: 48331
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




I will be the against that Jesus died for our sins in the debate, i hope the debate is going to be Interesting.

Round 1- Acceptance
Round 2-Argument
Round 3- Rebuttals/Argument
Round 4-Closing sentence/Rebuttal


I accept.
Debate Round No. 1


Hi, I am now going to start my argument on the subject above you can see throught the OT Jesus pbuh is prophecied to be saved Psalm 91 supports this(See the verses 11+).

The following Biblical verses that further refute the crucifixion and resurrection:

Being lifted and saved:

Luke 4:10-12
10 For the Scriptures say, "He will order his angels to protect and guard you.
11 And they will hold you up with their hands so you won"t even hurt your foot on a stone.""
12 Jesus responded, "The Scriptures also say, "You must not test the Lord your God.""

Matthew 4:5-10
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of the Temple,
6 and said, "If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, "He will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won"t even hurt your foot on a stone."

Notice how satan referred to Psalm 91 regarding the protection of Jesus.
Notice how Jesus confirmed that Psalm 91 was indeed speaking about him by saying "the Scriptures also say..." (Luke 4:12 and Matthew 4:7).

GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).
"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.

Psalm 91

1 He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty. [a]
2 I will say [b] of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust."
3 Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare and from the deadly pestilence.
4 He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.
5 You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that flies by day,
6 nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the plague that destroys at midday.
7 A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you.
8 You will only observe with your eyes and see the punishment of the wicked.
9 If you make the Most High your dwelling" even the LORD, who is my refuge-
10 then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come near your tent.
11 For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways;
12 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.
(If Jesus died on the cross and got buried, then his feet would've struck the ground and the stones on it from bringing him down, throwing him on the floor and burying him).
13 You will tread upon the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion and the serpent.
14 "Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.
15 He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him.
16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation."

After the supposed Crucifiction, Jesus came to the disciples and told them(As the Christians claim that Jesus when he died on the Cross his body died but his spirit/Soul was alive) Luke 24:38 "He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?
Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have." so Jesus was not a spirit, which means he did not die on the cross.


Thanks to my opponent for opening the debate, I’m looking forward to it.

Con did not identify any definitions or assumptions, so I will lay out a few I hope they will agree with (Con, please correct me if you do not agree).

1) We are assuming there was a real, historical figure known as Jesus of Nazareth that walked the earth during the first century AD.

2) Based on Con’s opening argument, I assume we are using prophesies and accounts in the Protestant Bible as a legitimate source of evidence for this topic.

3) I assume we are primarily debating how to interpret the Protestant Bible’s account of Jesus’s life and death (although I will also provide some evidence from outside the Bible).

4) I assume we are defining death as a physical end of life (as opposed to "spiritual” or metaphoric death).

With these assumptions in mind, I will begin. A correct reading of the Bible and of history makes it impossible to deny that a man named Jesus was crucified by the Roman Empire in the first century AD. I will divide my arguments into two categories: Biblical and historical.

There are many prophesies in the Old Testament and many accounts in the New Testament that describe Jesus’ death. Scholars have identified numerous prophecies regarding the coming Messiah, whom Jesus claimed to be. Prophesies that specifically predict the Messiah’s death include Zechariah 12 (piercing by a spear), Psalm 22 (His hands and feet would be pierced, aka, crucifixion), and multiple times throughout the book of Isaiah, most notably Isaiah 53:5, 7-8:
“But he was pierced for our rebellion, crushed for our sins. He was beaten so we could be whole. He was whipped so we could be healed.… He was oppressed and treated harshly, yet he never said a word. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter. And as a sheep is silent before the shearers, he did not open his mouth. Unjustly condemned, he was led away. No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people.”
In order for Jesus to be considered the Messiah (which many people, including himself, believed he was), he would need to fulfill the old prophesies - including the many that said the Messiah would have to be killed.

Aside from Old Testament predictions, the New Testament gives many accounts that Jesus died. There are many eyewitnesses to the crucifixion. To name a few: The Roman governor Pontius Pilate, who presided over the trial and sentencing of Jesus. In Matthew 27 and John 19, he hands Jesus over to the crowd for sentencing and instructs his soldiers to prepare Jesus for crucifixion following the crowd’s verdict. This entire crowd of people were also eyewitnesses to, and participants in the sentencing. There is also Simon of Cyrene, who was forced to carry Jesus’ cross on the way to the crucifixion site (Mark 15:21). There are the soldiers who gambled for his clothes and pounded the nails (Mark 15:24). There are the soldiers who speared his side, watched blood come out, and noticed there was no need to break his legs because he was already dead (John 19:31-37). The Roman officer who confirmed to Pilate that Jesus was dead (Mark 15:45). The local people who watched him die and helped bury his body (Mark 15:46). The list goes on and on. Scores of people from all walks of life – soldiers, commoners, disciples, religious leaders, and criminals – witnessed the crucifixion of a man named Jesus. If the crucifixion never actually happened, surely it would take only one of these people to come forward and say “that’s not what happened” and the jig would be up. However, we have no Biblical or historical evidence that such a thing occurred.

There are also a few references to Jesus’ life and death outside the Bible. The first century Jewish historian Josephus mentioned Jesus on two separate occasions. In his book The Antiquities, Josephus wrote a passage about, “a man named James, the brother of Jesus, who was called the Christ. . .” This not only mentions relatives of Jesus (who would be able to confirm Jesus was killed) but also called Jesus “Christ,” which is a term used to indicate a Messiah, again pointing out that to be labeled as such he would need to fulfill the Old Testament prophesies, including the ones about being killed. Josephus mentions in a second passage called the Testimonium Flavianum, that “About this time there lived Jesus . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified.” Here we see, plainly written in secular history, a man named Jesus was condemned to be crucified. In another account, the second century Roman historian Tacitus wrote as he described early Christians: “[Christ] from whom the name [Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one on our procurators, Pontius Pilate. . .”

Finally, it is unlikely that a major world religion founded on the principle that its founder, Jesus, martyred himself, would have exploded across the world if he never actually died.
With all this considered, I propose it is impossible to deny Jesus died on the cross.
Debate Round No. 2


Sorry, I am not experienced with, I am new so excuse me.

And yes i agree with your points.

According to Psalms 91 Jesus never got crucified, now to your argument.

"Psalm 22 (His hands and feet would be pierced, aka, crucifixion),"
Psalm 22 seems to support Jesus crucifixion "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me? And to the dust of death thou appointest me, Piercing my hands and my feet."
However, this prayer of King David, peace be upon him, proves otherwise, since it was the Prayer of David, and David didn't die on any cross nor was he crucified! So these words, if they were to prove anything, they would prove that the Servant will not be crucified because David, who prayed those exact words for himself, never suffered through this experience, and never got killed from his enemies.
Also, the words in Psalm 22:1 are very common in these types of prayers. Any desperate person who is enduring a heavy burden of punishment or suffering would naturally say or be inclined to say such words.
As I mentioned above, if the words in the verse were to prove anything, they would prove that the Servant will not be crucified because David, who prayed those exact words for himself, never suffered through this experience and never got killed from his enemies.

Assuming that the text is referring to the coming Messiah, the text of the Psalm 22:16 verse doesn't explicitly say that the Messiah will actually die. It says that he will be laid on the soil of the ground with "dogs" piercing his hands and feet.

The text doesn't give any indication that Christ will actually die.
No where in the entire OT was the resurrection ever prophesied!
The text of the verse seems to clearly be talking about Christ being physically brought/wrestled down by the "dogs".
The original text seems to be speaking of poetical, metaphoric and symbolic style. Examples
1- Christ is a "worm" and "not a man" in Psalm 22:6.
2- The enemies are "dogs" in Psalm 22:16,20.
We can not use this text to support the lies of the crucifixion and the resurrection, especially when there are ample OT verses that clearly state that the crucifixion never happened!

Psalm 22 by itself appears, on the surface, to be an impressive prophecy about Christ's crucifixion, but when one reads it in the context of the other Old Testament verses, then one would clearly see that Psalm 22 is no more than a Prayer and not a Prophecy nor a confirmation about any crucifixion of Christ. Let's put it this way: It doesn't explicitly say that Christ will ever die! Let alone be buried and then resurrect again on the third day! The way I read it is that Christ, or the Servant, will be attacked by some human-dogs, and that he is absolutely helpless and weak. He is no more than a worthless "worm," and that without the help of GOD Almighty, he won't be able to prevail. This is how I read the text. I did not see any crucifixion or resurrection, especially that the man (David) who spoke them to GOD Almighty for himself and his own aid remained alive and was never crucified, and never did he get killed by his enemies. King David died a natural death. Not only that, but like I said, there are ample OT verses that say Christ will never get crucified.

As for Isaiah 53 there are clear reasons that it was not Jesus.
"1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "Jesus" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses).
2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the death of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not killed. But let us go with killed for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never killed.
3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this:
Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth.
Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object.
4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. According to
"in his death" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in death", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon:
"in his death
maveth (maw'-veth)
death (natural or violent) [notice not "his death". It only says "death"]; concretely, the dead, their place or state (hades); figuratively, pestilence, ruin -- (be) dead(-ly), death, die(-d)."


So in his death here is symbolically referring to his execution trial and not necessarily his physical and literal death. This is further proven in Young's Literal Translation of the verse:

He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death [Here is how the literal translation says: "And it appointeth with the wicked his grave, And with the rich [are] his high places"....This is verified at this link: (Young's Literal Translation)], though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth. "[1]

A Summary of Psalm 91:
GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).
Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion).
GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).
His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).
"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.
Psalm 116
1 I love the LORD, for he heard my voice; he heard my cry for mercy.
2 Because he turned his ear to me, I will call on him as long as I live.
3 The cords of death entangled me, the anguish of the grave came upon me; I was overcome by trouble and sorrow.
4 Then I called on the name of the LORD: "O LORD, save me!"
5 The LORD is gracious and righteous; our God is full of compassion.
6 The LORD protects the simplehearted; when I was in great need, he saved me.
Unreliable Josephus
Jesus never died.


Thank you Con for your response.

My opponent gives a lengthy rebuttal against only two of my points – Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53. Con then re-summarizes their argument about Psalm 91. Curiously, Con does not attempt to rebut the majority of my other arguments (Zechariah 12, New Testament accounts, and historical accounts). We are therefore left to assume that an unchallenged argument is an accepted argument.

I will begin by addressing my opponent’s argument using Psalm 91, and then move on to reinforcing my previous points.

Psalm 91:

It is illogical to propose that one Psalm overturns the vast amount of other Biblical passages and historical references to Jesus being killed. First, many of the most respected Biblical scholars do not even interpret Psalm 91 as describing Jesus [1]. Instead, Psalm 91 is interpreted as God promising to save and protect His people as a whole. Since it is doubtful this Psalm is even meant to refer to Jesus, Con’s argument is baseless.

Another key point is that according to the Biblical text and Con’s own evidence, Satan uses Psalm 91 in Luke 4 to tempt Jesus. Many scholars believe that, according to Satan’s nature, he is twisting and distorting Scripture to mean things it does not [2]. Satan – also known as “The Deceiver” – claiming Psalm 91 refers to Jesus does not make it true. He employs a classic tactic many people still use today to distort Scripture: taking it out of context. Satan only quotes two verses from Psalm 91 to Jesus: “He will order his angels to protect and guard you. And they will hold you up with their hands so you won’t even hurt your foot on a stone.” However, if you read the entire Psalm, it sounds a lot more like the Psalmist is describing God’s people at large, not Jesus. Consider verses 14-16: “The LORD says, ‘I will rescue those who love me. I will protect those who trust in my name. When they call on me, I will answer. I will be with them in trouble. I will rescue and honor them. I will reward them with a long life and give them salvation.” Notice the use of plurals, “those” “they” “them.” Clearly this Psalm was not meant to refer to one man.

Other arguments:

My opponent claims Psalm 22 is about King David. Contrary to Psalm 91, Biblical scholars overwhelmingly agree that Psalm 22 is a prophecy about Jesus and the crucifixion [3]. Con claims Isaiah 53 only admits to Christ being wounded, not killed. I again refer to Isaiah 53:8 “No one cared that he died without descendants, that his life was cut short in midstream. But he was struck down for the rebellion of my people.” Notice key words here – Died without descendants. Life cut short. Struck down. This is pretty clear language indicating death.

Moving on from the Old Testament prophecies (which are my opponent’s only source of evidence), I again point to the New Testament and historical accounts:

Almost every book in the New Testament refers to Jesus’ death. Five books, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts, give and acknowledge numerous eyewitness accounts to Jesus’ crucifixion. Pontius Pilate, the crowd, the soldiers, Jesus’ relatives, local people, and Jewish religious leaders all saw Jesus die. Paul writes in Acts 10:39, “We ourselves are witnesses of everything He did in both the Judean country and in Jerusalem. Yet they killed Him by hanging Him on a tree.” Furthermore, the contemporary historians Josephus and Tacitus mention Jesus’ execution in their writings. Con has not offered any rebuttals to these accounts.

I appeal to logic regarding these final examples. Christianity was founded on the belief that Jesus died on the cross for sins. Neither Jewish nor Roman leaders at the time wanted Christianity to spread. Therefore, the easiest way to stop Christianity would have been to prove Jesus was never crucified. However, the Jewish and Roman authorities never attempted to prove this because they couldn’t - he actually was crucified, and dozens, perhaps hundreds, of people across Judea were eyewitnesses to that fact. Once again I ask, why is there no historical evidence of even one person coming forward saying “this is not how it happened.”?

Ladies and gentlemen, we must submit to the evidence here. My opponent has not and cannot provide a satisfactory explanation for these accounts. I look forward to their reply.




Debate Round No. 3


I apologize for not refuting everything, but i will God willing do in this round.

Zerchariah 12
Below you will see from the original Hebrew sources that the current Trinitarian English translation of Zechariah 12:10 is not correct. I showed the proof below that Zechariah 12:10 should read as follows:

"they will look onto Me concerning whom they have pierced and they will mourn for him"

And not as:

"And they have looked unto Me whom they pierced, And they have mourned over it", as Trinitarian Christians like to suggest that GOD was the one to be pierced on the cross (i.e., Jesus).

Anyway, if Christians want Zechariah 12:10 to refer to Jesus, then it is a clear contradiction with Psalm 34:20

10. "I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication, and they will look onto Me whom (et asher) they have pierced and they will mourn for Him as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep for Him like the weeping over a first born. 11. In that day there will be a great mourning in Jerusalem like the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the plain of Megiddo. 12. and the land will mourn every family by itself; the family of the house of David by itself; and their wives by themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by itself; and their wives by themselves..."

The Christian reading of this passage is somewhat problematic. The words "Me" and "Him" makes it quite obvious that the text is speaking of two different subjects. The gospel of John acknowledged this and therefore rendered the passage as, "they shall look on Him whom they pierced." This New Testament mistranslation of Zechariah in and of itself demonstrates that the New Testament is fallacious.

To interpret this passage that at some future time the "Jewish people shall look unto Me (G-d/Jesus) whom they (the Jewish people) pierced" does not seem to be what John had in mind. It is important to note that according to John, Zechariah's prophesy was fulfilled at the time that the Roman soldiers pierced the side of Jesus. As it says in John 19:36, "For these things came to pass that the scripture might be fulfilled." John saw the two different subjects of Zechariah's passage as the Roman soldiers and Jesus.

"They (the Roman soldiers) shall look on Him (Jesus) whom they (the Roman soldiers) pierced.

There is an additional problem in this passage. The Hebrew words "et asher" are not found very often in scripture. When they do occur together the phrase is read as "concerning whom" or "concerning that" but never as "whom". You can see this by reading the Hebrew original of Ezekiel 36:27.

The correct translation of Zechariah 12:10 should be:

"they will look onto Me concerning whom they have pierced and they will mourn for him"

This is consistent with the two subjects. By reviewing the context we can also understand of whom this passage is speaking. Starting with the beginning of Zechariah chapter 12 the prophet speaks of a time when the nations of the world will be gathered against Jerusalem to destroy it (Zec 12:3). On that day, G-d Himself will defend Jerusalem and destroy all of its enemies (Zec 12:4-9). G-d will pour out a spirit of grace and supplication toward the Jews. Grace is requested from G-d and supplication are directed to G-d.

This new spirit will motivate the Jewish nation to look towards G-d concerning those Jews (collective Jewish Martyrs) (see Hosea 11:1 for the Jewish people described as him. See Ex.1 etc. verbs of oppression in singular. Cf. Deut 32, Hos 8:3 and Ex. 19:2) who have been killed in battle prior to G-d's divine intervention in fighting our adversaries.

All the inhabitants of Jerusalem will mourn. This has obviously not yet been fulfilled, now or when the Roman soldier looked at Jesus.

John 19:36-37

Also in John 19:36-37 " For these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled, “Not a bone of him shall be broken.” And again another scripture says, “They shall look on him whom they have pierced.”
Shows that the OT is contradicting and that Crucifixion never happaned.

New Testament
My adversary refers to the eye witnesses mentioned in the NT, I will begin to adress them now.
But first we have to see what the Bible says,
Psalm 37:28 "For the Lord loves the justand will not forsake his faithful ones. Wrongdoers will be completely destroyed
the offspring of the wicked will perish."

But in Matthew 27:46 "About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (which means My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).
Either Jesus was not faithful or Bible was lying in Psalm 37:28.

"Paul writes in Acts 10:39"
It is widely know that "Saint Luke" wrote the Gospel of Luke and Acts.

My adversary mentions many Witnesses to Crucifixion and the supposed death of Christ.
We cannot simply trust the testimony of people who made their books 68-100 years after Jesus Christ, Gospel order: Mark: c. 68–73[1]Matthew: c. 70–100[1] Luke: c. 80–100[1] John: c. 90–100[2]
They have never seen the witnesses, so most of the new testament accounts are far after Jesus Christ.

In Josephus book The Antiquities, It only mentions Christ and not the death/Crucifixion, and then you add the the passage “a man named James, the brother of Jesus, who was called the Christ. . .” means that Jesus got Crucified which is not mentioned nowhere in the passage above.

My adversary also mentions Testimonium Flavianum, TF is a forgery and has alot of Christian interpolation many scholars had questioned the authenticity of TF.
"The Testimonium has been the subject of a great deal of research and debate among scholars, being one of the most discussed passages among all antiquities.[3] Louis Feldman has stated that in the period from 1937 to 1980 at least 87 articles had appeared on the topic, the overwhelming majority of which questioned the total or partial authenticity of the Testimonium. [4]While early scholars considered the Testimonium to be a total forgery, the majority of modern scholars consider it partially authentic, despite some clear Christian interpolations in the text.[5][6]"

The Testimonium has interpolations espcially by Christians, you cannot rely on that.

Closing statement:
I thank my adversary for this great debate, It has been a pleasure of mine to debate this topic with you, and I wish you good luck in the future.

[1] Raymond E. Brown An Introduction to the New Testament.
[2]Harris Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985
[3]Feldman & Hata 1987 p. 55
[4]Josephus, the Bible, and History by Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata 1988 page 430
[5]Alice Whealey (2003). Josephus on Jesus: the testimonium Flavianum controversy from late antiquity to modern times. Peter Lang.
[6]Meier, 1990 (especially note 15)


I will offer a final rebuttal as my conclusion.

Before I begin, I concede one point to my opponent: I was incorrect in quoting Paul in Acts, I meant to attribute those words to Peter, who speaks them beginning in Acts 10:34. I apologize for the typo.

The majority of Con’s arguments depend on very narrow and (by their own admission) very uncommon translations of the ancient Hebrew text. I agree that the correct translations of some words and passages are still debated even today by scholars. This is why there are so many different versions, or translations, of the Protestant Bible. However, one cannot focus on single words in isolated passages and say, “See? This proves it did not happen!” This is akin to magnifying a blade of grass, finding a brown speck, and saying “everyone thinks grass is green, but this speck shows grass is actually brown!” You must take a step back and view all of Scripture in its entirety to truly understand it. Although I agree that individual translations of individual words are disputed (thus, the differences between KJV, NIV, NLT, HCSB, etc...), the overall message of the Bible never changes no matter what translation you use: God created the Earth, man sinned, God sent Jesus, Jesus was crucified and resurrected, man is saved by grace through belief in Jesus’ sacrifice. This is indisputably the message of the Bible, and suggesting the Bible itself claims Jesus was not crucified based on debatable translations of single words is simply incorrect.

Con applies a problematic rebuttal to the New Testament accounts. Con suggests, “We cannot simply trust the testimony of people who made their books 68-100 years after Jesus Christ.” And yet, they suggest we should instead trust the testimony of people who made their books over 1000 years before Jesus Christ? Psalm 91 is thought to be written by Moses (around 1300 BC) [1][2]. Even if it was written by David, that still makes it 1000 years old by the time of Jesus’ birth [3]. Why should we reject 68 year old testimony in favor of 1000 year old testimony? It doesn’t make sense.

Furthermore, my opponent claims the New Testament accounts were “far after” Jesus’ life, and their authors had “never seen the witnesses.” This is simply untrue. Jesus is thought to have died around 30 AD [4]. The Gospel of Mark was probably written (as Con admits) around 68-73 AD. This means Mark’s account was only 40-50 years removed from the crucifixion. Surely witnesses of the crucifixion were still around 40 years later when Mark was written. Such witnesses would only have been as old as our parents and grandparents are compared to us. Also, Peter addresses a group of these very witnesses in Acts 10, “We ourselves are witnesses of everything...” It is plainly incorrect to say the NT accounts are too old to accurately record eyewitnesses.

My opponent questions Josephus’ Testimonium Flavianum. It is true some scholars question the reliability this passage. However, According to Con’s own source (Josephus, the Bible, and History by Louis H. Feldman and Gohei Hata), the debate is over whether Josephus wrote “He was the Messiah.” No scholars question that Josephus wrote, “Pilate...condemned him to be crucified.” In fact, Con’s own source reports that a 10th century Arabic copy of the Testimonium, which likely escaped Christian tampering, still says, “Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die.”[5] Even if we exclude the writings of Josephus, there is still the passage by Tacitus, which Con did not attempt to refute.

I conclude by asking: if Jesus was not killed, what happened to him? How did the most controversial and explosive leader in history disappear without a trace? Why would the Jewish religious leaders allow a man they utterly feared to escape their custody without trying to hunt him down? The logical answer to these questions is right in front of us. The overwhelming majority of Biblical experts, the entire narrative of Scripture, eyewitness in the New Testament, and historical accounts provide indisputable evidence that Jesus was crucified.

Thanks Con for a great debate, I enjoyed the thought provoking discussion and thorough research.






Debate Round No. 4
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Valtin 2 years ago
Someone made to be Jesus was Crucified, and Reliable Josephus* not unreliable, sorry for that mistake.
No votes have been placed for this debate.