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

Jesus did not fulfill Genesis 3:15

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/22/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 249 times Debate No: 85382
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




My opponent will have to prove that Jesus fulfil Genesis 3:15

Round 1 - Acceptance, Opening Statements, and Questions Only
Round 2 - Opening Arguments Only (No rebuttals)
Round 3 - Rebuttals Only
Round 4 - Counter-Rebuttals
Round 5 - Closing Arguments and Closing Statements

- Only use arguments from the bible.

Onle chrisitans should accept this debate.


Please, I beg of you, please explain how Jesus didn't fulfill Genesis 3:15. Please.

Here's the thing; before I get into my actual argument, I'd like to lay down some theology. Assuming you're a Christian, you should understand this. If not, oh well. According to scripture, if Jesus didn't fulfill ALL Old Testament scriptures that were based on the Messiah, then he's not the savior of the world. He is the savior of the world, therefore he had to have fulfilled all of the scriptures that showed/described the Messiah and who he was.

Now, the argument. First of all, this scripture describes part of the curse on man after The Fall. In this verse, God the Father, also known as Elohim or Yahweh, is talking to the Serpent. The Serpent is Satan, the fallen Angel of Light. Satan, aka Lucifer, has successfully brought sin into this world by tempting Eve to disobey God's rule and eat of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. She took the temptation, ate of the fruit, and sin was born into the realm of Earth. The verse is God laying down the punishment on Satan, telling him first that all of Eve's offspring (everyone on the planet ever) will hate the Serpent. The second part of the verse describes the eventual defeat of Satan, saying that "he will crush your head and you will strike his heel". Let me explain this; Jesus was a human. Therefore, he is an offspring of Eve. Being the savior of the world, he was the most important of Eve's descendants. Now, the verse describes two strikes; the serpent striking the heel, and "He" (Jesus) striking the serpent's head.

The heel is not a fatal blow. If somebody hits you on the heel, it might hurt for a little while, but then you'll get up and continue fighting.
The head is a fatal area to strike. If a person crushes your head, you have no chance of survival; you've lost. End of story.

The crucifixion of Christ was Satan's strike at Christ's heel. It struck a painful blow at the Christian faith, but it really was a great, awesome, amazing thing. The heel had been struck, but it turned out to be a minor blow. Three days later, Christ rose up, signifying that he had taken the sins of the Human Race and atoning for them. This was the fulfillment of the first part of the verse. The Bible then tells of the Second Coming. This is when Christ will crush Satan's head; Satan will be permanently defeated and thrown into the lake of fire after the battle of Armageddon.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like first to tank my opponent for accepting this debate.

Please note that the previous round was only for question. The argument should have been posted on the round two.

Let me first clarify, I am not a Christian, but let me first put my argument, and I will answer Con's argument on the second round.

There is first a lot of preconceived idea about this verse.

The first preconceived idea is that only man can have "Zara" seed. First all women have seeds, which in this context should be translated as descendant. You can see that Genesis 16:10. "And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude". So if all women can have seed, it does not refer to a miraculous birth as portrayed in Matthew 1:23 and it can be any descendant of any women. If you tell me that Genesis 3:15 was fulfilled because Jesus was born of a woman, then this is actually the case for everybody and it does not help to determine who fulfil that prophecy.

Second, even if I am not a Christian, the New Testament itself mentioned that Satan is not Crushed yet. Romans 16:20 says "the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen." If Satan was crushed at the cross, then he would not need to be crush again.

Furthermore Revelation 20:2 portray Satan as free. He will be bound for 1000 years and then he will be set free again. As long as Satan, who is the Serpent as per Christian theology is still free to go round the earth as he pleased, there is no reason to believe that he was actually crushed at the cross.

A prophecy that cannot be verified or that will happen at his second coming cannot be use to prove that Jesus is the messiah. So, because the Serpent (Satan) has not been bruise by G-d/Jesus yet, there is no reason to believe that Jesus actually fulfil that prophecy.


Thompson98 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


"This is when Christ will crush Satan's head"
I am glad that you agree that this prophecy was not fulfilled yet if we follow Christian Theology.
"if Jesus didn't fulfill ALL Old Testament scriptures that were based on the Messiah, then he's not the savior of the world."
Sometimes, we think that prophecies were fulfilled, but were they really? Just like Genesis 3:15 was not fulfilled, I do believe that Jesus fulfilled no prophecies, or they are part of his second coming prophecies, or they are fulfilled in heaven (which we cannot verify) or they are misquoted.
I would like to answer some of your arguments anyway and see if it really makes sense according to the Hebrew Bible.
"The Serpent is Satan"
As per the Hebrew Bible, the serpent is not Satan. In fact he acted as an adversary, but as Genesis said, G-d created the animals and they were good. The serpent was created on the sixth day as the other animals.
"the fallen Angel of Light"
You must refer to Isaiah 13-14. Where Isaiah 14:12 is translated as Lucifer. The whole prophecy is about Babylon, not about Satan. In fact, "Lucifer" should be translated as "morning star". That did not look good for Jesus, who was also called "morning star", so they changed it for Lucifer. But again, this is only an allegory about the Kingdom of Babylon who will be destroy.
And in any way, if Satan really possessed the serpent, then the Satan should have been cursed, not the serpent.
A more literal way to see that curse (not prophecy) is that the women will have hatred for the serpent and the serpent will try to bite the heel and the women"s descents will crush the serpent head. It talks about a mutual hatred for each other. The head is a fatal area to strike for the serpent and usually serpents bite the heel.
There is no reference to Jesus as per the Hebrew Bible. And as per the New Testament, this is part of the prophecy that we cannot use to prove Jesus, because it has not been fulfilled.


Thompson98 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by CapAhab 9 months ago
Hi AngryBlogger, the burden of the proof is on me.

For the second part, I do not understand your comment. God is not a descendant of Eve and could not actually fulfil that prophecy. A prophecy is something that will actually happen in the future, so it does not matter if Jesus was born yet or not.
Posted by dsjpk5 9 months ago
And you give your opponent two whole rounds to do so!
Posted by AngryBlogger 9 months ago
You're making the assertion in the title that Jesus did not fulfill Genesis, therefore the burden of proof is more so on you and not the con.

Also, it's worth knowing that it was "god" and not Jesus because Jesus never existed at that point of time if that is where you are getting at.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 8 months ago
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, so conduct to Pro. Pro also wins the arguments due to his dropped argument regarding the fact that Satan was supposed to be crushed at the cross, however if he was, then he wouldn't have to be crushed again during the 2nd coming of Christ. This single contradiction gives Pro the win, because Pro shows that Jesus did not fulfill this prophecy.