The Instigator
Gloryroad
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Peili
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Jesus Christ Was Justifiably Unclear That He Would Die

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 2 votes the winner is...
Peili
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/25/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 396 times Debate No: 79032
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Gloryroad

Pro

First Round: Acceptance, and initial argument to start us off.
Second Round: I initiate my argument, and return that of Con's. Con returns my argument.
Third Round: Extension.
Forth Round: Conclusions.
Peili

Con

Jesus was in no way unclear about the fact that he would die. The Gospels tell of at least three instances in which he said that he would die.

First Instance:
The plainest and most clear statement can be found in Mark 8:31-32. It says, "He [Jesus] then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again. He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him."

Notice that not only do we have a record of Jesus saying that he would die, but we are explicitly told that he "spoke plainly about this." There was no lack of clarity in what Jesus said.

Jesus called himself "the Son of man" which was the most common title he gave himself throughout the Gospels. Context consistently shows that Jesus is talking about himself when he uses the phrase "the Son of Man," but to remove any doubt Jesus expressly says that he is the Son of Man in John 9:35b-37. That says:

"He [Jesus] said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?"
"Who is he, sir?" the man asked. "Tell me so that I may believe in him."
"Jesus said, "You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you.""

This leaves no doubt that Jesus referred to himself when he said "the Son of Man" and that he said clearly that he would die.

Second Instance:
In the next chapter Jesus again says that he will die. Mark 9:31b-32 says, "He [Jesus] said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of me. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise." But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it."

Here we have a second example of Jesus saying that he will die. I grant that this is probably less clear because, unlike the first example, the disciples did not understand his meaning. None the less, it is a second statement from Jesus that he would die.

Third Instance:
Finally, Mark 10:33-34 says, ""We are going up to Jerusalem," he [Jesus] said, "And the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and teachers of the law. The will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise."

So now we have a third clear statement from Jesus that he will die. Also, each of these statement are found separately in the Gospel of Mark, so it is clear that they are not different points of view of the same event. Instead, we have three separate instances in which Jesus clearly states that he will die. In the first instance we are even told that he was not unclear but instead that he spoke plainly.

Jesus was in no way unclear about the fact that he would die.

All quotations come from the New International Version of the Holy Bible.
Debate Round No. 1
Gloryroad

Pro

Gloryroad forfeited this round.
Peili

Con

Pro forfeited.
Debate Round No. 2
Gloryroad

Pro

Because you're not even worth debating. You're worthless.
Peili

Con

Well that was uncalled for.
Debate Round No. 3
Gloryroad

Pro

Gloryroad forfeited this round.
Peili

Con

I get the feeling that Gloryroad realized that he had no case so he went straight for the ad hominem attack and nothing else. Either that, or he is just a troll. Either way vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Gloryroad 2 years ago
Gloryroad
Kill yourself Peili you coward rapist.
Posted by Gloryroad 2 years ago
Gloryroad
No, I don't. As I said, Con states his view. I then state mine, and I rebut. He then rebuts mine, and so on. It is completely even.
Posted by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
So you get an extra round of rebuttal.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by roguetech 2 years ago
roguetech
GloryroadPeiliTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided no arguments or sources, and needlessly used an ad hominem. Giving Con grammar due to one of two sentences by Pro starting with a conjunction.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
GloryroadPeiliTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff and used ad hominem attacks, so conduct to Con.