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

Jesus Christ is God

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: 12/24/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 773 times Debate No: 28587
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




There is no evidence that, if the historicity of Jesus is proven, he was anything more than a human being. Biblical references to Jesus and his apparent supernatural abilities and apparent divine lineage can't prove anything more than any legend that happens to feature an historical figure.


Thank you for allowing me to accepting this debate. Before I post my argument, could you please clarify what we are debating? For roman Catholics (like me), we believe that Jesus Christ is God's only son, and that he is part of the trinity, Jewish people believe that Jesus was just a really good prophet, and I don't know much about other religions.

Merry Christmas! (if you celebrate)
Debate Round No. 1


Firstly I'd like to apologize for the lack of clarity in my initial argument, but this debate was initially set up for me to argue with someone who challenged me on Facebook and who had already set out their beliefs. However they never showed so the debate was left open and you obviously took up the challenge.

I am arguing against the notion of Christs divinity. I am accepting, for the sake of the argument, that Jesus was an historical figure, but am proposing that he was not an incarnate deity, the son of a deity, or even in communication with a deity, but rather was a mortal human being.

However, even the historicity of Jesus is in question, as no remains have ever been found and very few (if any) contemporary sources outside of the Bible mention his existence. Of course, Christ's historicity is irrelevant to his divinity (although proven historicity would be a step towards proven divinity). After all, the fact that we have proof that Tutankhamun existed doesn't prove that he (or any other Pharaoh) was an incarnate deity.

In order to justify accepting the historicity of Jesus but not his divinity or any kind of divine attributes associated with him I would refer to the theory put forth by the 13th Century Icelandic historian/politician Snorri Sturluson, who suggested that mythological gods started off as historical figures who developed a cult following after death that evolved into deification. Obviously, in this case, as belief in God occurred before Jesus existed, that theory would have to be extended to include the possibility that Jesus, after his death, because his teachings were so closely related to belief in God, became synonymous with God. This would be further suggested by the fact that the radical changes to the religion that would eventually become Christianity in it's various forms occurred because of Christ and these changes in many ways setting him up as the deity of a new religion (after all, Christians use Christ's name more often than Yahweh's).

Merry Christmas to you too by the way.


1. Even though there is no solid evidence that Jesus Christ exists, why do so many people believe in Him, if this whole thing is a lie?

I don't really understand the rest of your argument.
Debate Round No. 2


DeusMortisEst forfeited this round.


Which religion are you talking about? I still don't understand.

Nobody vote on this debate, please. I think it was a misunderstanding.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Dale.G 3 years ago
Jesus Christ is God and i have proven Jesus Christ is God to Paddy :)
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
"There is no way that we can prove with certainty that a man who lived some thousands years ago was actually God."

Pro doesn't need to prove it with certainty. If he can show that it's more likely than not, then he will win this debate.
Posted by stubs 3 years ago
Yeah, @Clash all those objections are relatively easy to overcome, but it would all go to semantics of the trinity. Which is why I prefer to debate the historical probability of the resurrection of Jesus.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 3 years ago

Come at me.
Posted by Clash 3 years ago
This is an easy win for Con. There is no way that we can prove with certainty that a man who lived some thousands years ago was actually God. Even if we grant that Jesus himself claimed to be God, this would in no way prove that Jesus really was God. Several people have claimed divinity throughout the time, but it doesn't follow that someone is God simply just because that someone claims to be God. Moreover, it can even be proved from the Bible itself that Jesus cannot be God. I debated about the divinity of Jesus some 7 months ago, and in this debate I gave clear examples from the Bible itself which clearly showed that Jesus cannot God. The link to this debate is:
No votes have been placed for this debate.