The Instigator
radz
Pro (for)
Tied
1 Points
The Contender
Vajrasattva-LeRoy
Con (against)
Tied
1 Points

Jesus is one with God in nature

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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/21/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 486 times Debate No: 60740
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

radz

Pro

This debate challenge is only for Unitarians.

Rules

1. The Bible should be the primary source.
2. Always use the texts with context.

Round 1 is for acceptance of Con only.
Round 2 Pro will give Biblical evidence that Jesus is one with God in nature.
Round 3 Con will refute the argument of Pro
Round 4 Pro will give final rebuttals.
Round 5 Con will give final rebuttals.
Vajrasattva-LeRoy

Con

Rots of ruck trying to use the Bible as your primary source of proof !

It's sure good to be back & awake again !

My name wasn't Jesus- I had a Hebrew name, pronounced Yeshua.
The 3rd nail proves that I couldn't have been on that cross.
The self- proclaimed "God" of the Bible apparently claimed that his personal name was pronounced"Yahweh" .
According to the Bible, both "Yeshua" & "Yahweh" were walking around on earth thousands of years ago.
"Yahweh" couldn't have been a Real God- for one thing he was doing things back then
that a Real God never would have done. (See, for example, Numbers 16. )
I see no reason to claim that what you call Jesus & what you call God are one in nature.
Are you claiming that the spirit body of "Jesus" & the spirit body of "God" are the same, or part of a larger spirit?
Prove it.

Debate Round No. 1
radz

Pro

Con did violate the first rule in my debate challenge. I will not respond to his question because it negated the subject matter at hand.
Vajrasattva-LeRoy

Con

Vajrasattva-LeRoy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
radz

Pro

radz forfeited this round.
Vajrasattva-LeRoy

Con

Your rule # 1 states that the Bible SHOULD BE one's primary source, not that it HAS to be.
I didn't violate your rule.
My question is requesting that you explain your position-
it doesn't negate the subject we're debating, at all.
Debate Round No. 3
radz

Pro

radz forfeited this round.
Vajrasattva-LeRoy

Con

Since you have neither proved your debate statement, nor proved that my counterarguments, etc. , are wrong,
I hereby claim that I've won.

Please vote for me.

Thank you !
Debate Round No. 4
radz

Pro

radz forfeited this round.
Vajrasattva-LeRoy

Con

See the last round.
Please vote for me.

Thank you!
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Vajrasattva-LeRoy 2 years ago
Vajrasattva-LeRoy
For GoOrDin:

I find it interesting that you claim to know the nature of God.
You are aware that nobody else does, don't you?

Before you go any farther in your discussions, computations, debates, etc. , I'd strongly suggest that you ask yourself how you could possibly know the nature of god ...

L. Ron Hubbard pointed out a long time ago that Absolutes have to be
considered logically unobtainable.
There can't be any such thing as perfection.
Posted by GoOrDin 2 years ago
GoOrDin
I am in favor of Pro.

God is factual one with God in the nature of his perfection.

I would love to have this discussion with you Radz, and read or contribute to any of your other spiritual debates.
Posted by radz 2 years ago
radz
To answer you both... it is because my debate challenge are only for UNITARIANS as I already did indicate.

The existence of God ( whoever he/she was or whichever it was) is an entirely different topic.
Posted by TheQuestion 2 years ago
TheQuestion
What warrant do you have to deny the use of the primary and most reliable sources for this debate? Also, this is clearly an in-house debate, the issue of God's existence is another debate entirely as is the historicity of Jesus. Just because you are ignorant or otherwise uniformed of these other issues it does not warrant you to request such topics in a debate where they're irrelevant.
Posted by DanK 2 years ago
DanK
I'm not really sure where to start on this. One since the first thing I'd want to see is evidence outside of the bible, not just for gods existence but for Jesus as well as there's, to my knowledge, no solid evidence to back either claim.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by LDPOFODebATeR0328 2 years ago
LDPOFODebATeR0328
radzVajrasattva-LeRoyTied
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: This should be a tie... Both debaters did horrible.
Vote Placed by TrasguTravieso 2 years ago
TrasguTravieso
radzVajrasattva-LeRoyTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was a troll who disregarded all the rules set in the debate I grant conduct to Pro and will disregard the rest of the debate. Too bad, I was looking forward to reading it.