Is Jesus God or not?
Debate Rounds (4)
A plethora of biblical texts agree that Jesus is God:
Jesus Christ is eternal (Micah 5:2, John 1:1-3,Colossians 1:17).He is omnipotent (Matthew 28:19, Ephesians 1:21,Philippians 2:9).He is very God ( Colossians 2:9).He is "God" in the strictest sense of the word ( John 1:1, 18, 20:28, Hebrews 1:8).He is "our great God" (Titus 2:13).He is specifically called the "one Lord" or "one Jehovah" (Deuteronomy 6:4;1 Corinthians 8:6).He is of same nature with the Father (Matthew 28:19,John 5:18, 10:30).He receives latriatic worship (Daniel 7:14 LXX;Revelation 5:13,14:4, 22:3) and receives prayers ( John 14:14;1 Corinthians 16:22).Any biblical text that speaks of Christ as "inferior" to the Father is in reference to his being "the only begotten Son" (John 3:16) as well as to his being "fully human" (Philippians 2:7-8).
Bottom line: The biblical teaching is that Jesus Christ is "truly, wholly and very God himself."
What we currently know about the bible is that it was authored between 1500 BCE and 300 CE, that it had multiple authors who ignored and sometimes directly contradicted one another, and crucially that all the gospels were written years after Jesus' death, and they too contradict each other, as well as current historical fact.
For example, we know that there wasn't a census around Jesus' birth. Even if there was, why would Caesar require his subjects to return to their birthplaces? Some gospels leave out the census completely.
With this in mind, there will be some who accept the bible as literal fact. For them, let us analyse Con's 'evidence'. He says that Jesus is "fully human". He also claims that Jesus is God. So, it's like this - if he is correct, then:
A: Jesus is God
B: Jesus is human
Therefore, C: God is human
I probably don't need to explain to you why Con might find this conclusion unsettling. Especially since the bible goes on and on about how God is greater than everything.
If Con wants to accept that God is a mere human, then it is possible that, for the thirty three years of his life, Jesus was God (if you ignore everything the bible says about God being omnipotent and the supreme lawgiver and the rest). Con also has to accept that like all humans, God was mortal, and is in fact dead. So right now, Jesus would not be God. He'd probably be soil, or possibly mud.
I eagerly await the next round,
radz forfeited this round.
Con apologises for forfeiting Round 2 due lack of internet connexion that occured because it had been raining cats and dogs here in Metro Manila, Luzon, Philippines wherein I reside.
Pro should not win this debate because he did not refute the original proposition of this debate challenge.Pro tried to deviate from the argument by focusing on the Bible pe rse than on the Biblical argument that he ought to refute.
If Pro wants to win this debate, he must comply with the debate challenge.So, Pro start addressing the original propositon.
All I have to do is to cast enough doubt on the claim that he is for people to be undecided, because it's Con's job to prove that Jesus is God (because he made the claim, the burden of proof is on him), and thus far he hasn't because the only evidence he has offered to support the claim is useless because the bible is an unreliable source, for the reasons I gave previously. Also, I focused on the bible because it is the crux of Con's argument. If he has other evidence, let him show it.
Just for fun, let's see what Con needs to prove to win this argument:
a) There is currently a God
b) The same God also existed approximately two thousand years ago
c) The same God incarnated itself as a human, then killed itself whilst speaking to itself begging itself to forgive the people who were killing it (if you believe the bible)
He must prove all of this to be not only possible, but definitely true, before we consider the claim that the two are in fact the same person. Observers, I implore you. Can you, by any stretch of reason infer from any of the argument that Con has presented that any of the above are even close to true? If not, you know how to vote.
The fact is that my debate challenge is in error: I should be the Pro and not the Con.
Therefore, this debate challenge is indeed of need of stopping.
I agree that my opponent should be Pro.
I also support ending the debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: First off, this is a case of mistaken identity, that Con should have been Pro and vice versa. Regardless, I can still analyze their arguments. Conduct to Pro because Con forfeited a round. S&G tied. The resolution is undefined, such that there is no definition of god or jesus, but this makes Con's burden slightly tougher. On argument points, Con uses bible quotes to demonstrate that Jesus is god. These would seem to affirm the resolution however, Pro points out contradicting authors of the bible, the accounts were written way after jesus, the bible seems to contrast historical fact, and there was no census around jesus's birth. Pro also logically points out that if jesus = god and jesus = human, then god is human, rejecting a god status. These all point to the lack of truth of the bible, which was the basis for Con's only argument. Being that Con only complained about Pro's arguments, requested the debate be scrapped, and didn't address Pro's refutations...arguments to Pro.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.