The Instigator
Renascor
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
Rasheed
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Jesus must be God.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 7 votes the winner is...
Rasheed
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/20/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,458 times Debate No: 19393
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (7)

 

Renascor

Pro

Resolution

I recently witnessed a debate on this topic between you and another user. I feel that I can do a much better job than your original opposition.

Upon acceptance, I will be debating that Jesus must be God.

Notice the wording of the title: Jesus must be God. It is impossible to prove something which cannot be seen no matter how obvious the truth. I will, however, say that the Bible very clearly presents Jesus as being God.

I do firmly believe in the Trinity Doctrine, that is, a Triune God. And I will be arguing from this viewpoint as it is a fundamental to Christian faith.

Conditions

This debate will consist of five rounds with the first being acceptance. Each argument may contain a max of 8,000 characters.

Round one is acceptance only, followed by round two opening arguments.

The voting period for this debate will be a total of three days, and each vote must contain comments.

Each participant will have seventy-two hours to respond to the others debate.

I also accept the unwanted fact that the burden of proof will be on me.

Requests

I request that this debate maintain a respectful atmosphere and that all arguments are addressed in a mature fashion.

If outside sources are used, please cite them.

Assumptions

1. Jesus did in fact exist.

2. Jesus did in fact perform miracles.

3. Jesus was not a liar.

4. Any definitions or word interpretations must be based on the original Hebrew and Greek texts.

These assumptions may seem unfair, but because of the results of your last debate on this topic, they seem to be necessary for clarity.

Final Dispositions

If there are any conditions you would like to be incorporated into this debate, please include them in your acceptance or in the comments section of this debate and we can discuss the terms.

I will be using Hebrew and Greek dictionaries for my word interpretation when needed. My dictionaries will be directly from the "E-Sword" computer program unless otherwise stated.

If you find any of the first three assumptions to be unfair or unreasonable, feel free to challenge me to a debate on the topic and I will gladly extend why I feel this this way.

I thank you for your time and do hope we can share the honor of conducting this debate.
Rasheed

Con

I am humbled that you would honor me with a challenge, and I thankfully accept.

Assumptions.

I do accept that Jesus did exist and was not a liar, and for this debate I will concede that he did perfom miracles.

I await your first series of arguments, and I know that we will have a great and productive discussion.

Debate Round No. 1
Renascor

Pro

I thank you for your confident acceptance. I know that as long as we are respectful to one another, we will have a great and productive debate.

Initial Argument

(1) Jesus is God because He said that He was.

(2) Jesus never lied.

(3) Therefore, Jesus is God.

I am sure you would agree with me when I say that this syllogism is very inadequate for the depth of the topic we are debating, and for this I apologize. There are many approaches to this topic and I have chosen the one that is most appropriate for this type of online debate. Anything else would seem to be very abstract even for this website. However, It will suffice in presenting a basic format for us to argue by.

With this being said, let us review this syllogism.

The first premise is going to be what we dispute the most; I imagine that this will be the backbone for the entire debate. The second premise is a given, you and I both agreed to this fact. The conclusion however, is just a marrying of the two complimentary premises.

As you can see, this debate will be heavily influenced by the decision of the first premise.

I will now affirm our positions.

My Position

I must provide evidence that Jesus said He was/is God. Jesus claimed that He is/was the Word of God in human flesh so, due to the second premise, the Bible can be considered Jesus' word. Therefore, I must provide evidence that the Bible suggests that Jesus is God.

Your Position

You must provide evidence that Jesus said He was/is not God. Jesus claimed that He was/is the Word of God in human flesh so, due to the second premise, the Bible can be considered Jesus' word. Therefore, you must provide evidence that Jesus said He was/is not God.

Contention

I contend that Jesus did in fact state He was/is God in John 10:30. (I noticed this verse was used in your previous debate and so I will provide further input).

John 10:30 reads plainly as follows: "I and my Father are one."

Context:

(Joh_10:1-5)The parable of the good shepherd.
(Joh_10:6-9)Christ the Door.
(Joh_10:10-18)Christ the good Shepherd.
(Joh_10:19-21)The Jews' opinion concerning Jesus.
(Joh_10:22-30)His discourse at the feast of dedication.
(Joh_10:31-38)The Jews attempt to stone Jesus.
(Joh_10:39-42)He departs from Jerusalem.
These contextual references clearly align the context of the chapter. Notice that we are concerning the verse "John 10:30" which is in the fifth contextual grouping. Notice that in the following series of verses "group six starting with John 10:31" shows that the Jews attempt to kill Jesus after Jesus makes the statement that He and God are "one" (we will show proper concern to this word later). With this type of reaction, we can only know that the power of that verse (John 10:30) is real. If Jesus was meaning other than that He was God (such as only meaning that He was in agreement with God) surely there wouldn't have been such a terrible, emotional response.

Please keep this in mind while we walk through this verse word by word.

John 10:30 "I and my Father are one"

This verse is a clear example of the purpose and essence of Jesus Christ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-I-and-my-Father-are-one-

:

-I- ἐγώ; egō; eg-o'; A primary pronoun of the first person, “I” (only expressed when emphatic): - I, me. For the other cases and the plural see

-and- kai kahee Apparently a primary particle, having a copulative and sometimes also a cumulative force; and, also, even, so, then, too, etc.; often used in connection (or composition) with other particles or small words: - and, also, both, but, even, for, if, indeed, likewise, moreover, or, so, that, then, therefore, when, yea, yet.

-my-Father- patēr; pat-ayr'; Apparently a primary word; a “father” (literally or figuratively, near or more remote): - father, parent.

-are- esmen; es-men'; Frist person plural indicative of G1510; we are: - are, be, have our being, X have hope, + [the gospel] was [preached unto] us.

-one- heis; hice; (Including the neuter [etc.] ἕν hen); a primary numeral; one: - a (-n, -ny, certain), + abundantly, man, one (another), only, other, some.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With this in depth insight into the entire Greek interpretation of the verse, it is clearly evident that Jesus was saying that He is God.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taking our contextual overview into account along with our Biblical understanding, it is perfectly logical to assume that Jesus was/is not lying when He makes the statement that He is in fact God, in the singular sense.

To argue any other way against this verse would be to take it outside of it's well established context or to manipulate its clear Greek meaning.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Counter Argument

Many suggest that Jesus is not God due to the fact that He was seen, tempted, and prayed to God, whom Jesus called "Father".

Response:

(1) Jesus was tempted while God cannot be tempted.

(2) Jesus was seen while God cannot be seen.

(3) Jesus prayed to His "Father" (God).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) and (2) The original verses that express these truths are true. God cannot be tempted, but Jesus is God you say? That too is true. Jesus in His human nature, could be tempted while being God. He also could be seen. This is true because Jesus took came to earth as a human. So in Jesus' humanity, He could be both tempted and seen and could even experience pain.

As for (3), Jesus did pray to His "Father" (God). The Father is a separate part of the trinity, or triune God doctrine, that is, One God In Three Personalities.

This chart should illustrate my point


Let me know if you cannot view the image and I will provide a link for you to access it.

So as my image clearly shows, Jesus is God, but the Son is not the Father. Jesus is the same but different. The nature of this, or how exactly this is possible is never explained, but neither is the beginning of God explained. There are many questions regarding this topic that are not meant to be answered by man. This being one of them.

Here is a chart to help illustrate my point of Jesus being both God and Man:


Jesus as one person with two natures
GOD MAN

He is worshiped (Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; 28:9)
He is prayed to (Acts 7:59; 1 Cor. 1:1-2)
He was called God (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8)
He was called Son of God (Mark 1:1)
He is sinless (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15)
He knew all things (John 21:17)
He gives eternal life (John 10:28)
The fullness of deity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9)

He worshiped the Father (John 17)
He prayed to the Father (John 17:1)
He was called man (Mark 15:39; John 19:5).
He was called Son of Man (John 9:35-37)
He was tempted (Matt. 4:1)
He grew in wisdom (Luke 2:52)
He died (Rom. 5:8)
He has a body of flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)


I believe that this argument helps to excuse all other interpretation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Topical Notes

I hope that these seemingly scriptural discrepancies have been properly refuted in a matter most respectful and clear. Please note these last references:

John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

John 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."

and 1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

I am confident that these verses help to provide a foundation for my clause.


Good Luck.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sources:

E-Sword

http://carm.org...











Rasheed

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for challenging me, and I know that we will have an entertaining and informative debate.

My opponent says that I "..must provide evidence that Jesus said he was/is not God." I have proved examples of Jesus saying that He was not God in the statements below;

"As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, ‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ And Jesus said to him, Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone.’" Mark 10:17-18

In the above statement Jesus is clearing making a distinction between himself and God. Remember my opponent said that I must provide evidence that Jesus said he is not God, so this verse alone should be enough to settle the debate, but I will provide other examples;

"You heard that I said to you, ‘I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I,'" (John 14:28).

Jesus is clearly stating that he is in a lower position than God, and no amount of twisting of words can change the meaning of this simple sentence.

Matt. 24:35-37 Jesus said, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah."

If Jesus is God in flesh, then shouldn't He know what the day and hour of his return would be? After all, God knows all things. Therefore, if Jesus doesn't know all things, then He cannot be God.


I challenge my opponent to provide one sentence where Jesus is made to say that he is God


The Apostles of Jesus did not believe that he was God

“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.” (Acts 2:22).

“God has raised this Jesus... (Acts 2:32)

God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” (Acts 2:36)

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus.” (Acts 3:13).

We must obey God rather than men! The God of our fathers raised Jesus...” (Acts 5:29-30).

John 10:30 "I and my Father are one" rebuttal.

My opponent goes to great lengths to show that this verse means that Jesus and God are the same person, but he has several problems that he conveniently overlooks;

The most common quote from him that Christians give to support their claim is John 10:30, which says, “I and the Father are one.” But compare this to John 17:11, in which Jesus prays for his apostles, saying, “Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one.”

It is only logical that the Godhead would have to include all of the disciples if we are to follow my opponents argument, because the Greek word for one,heis, is used in this instance also.

My opponent says;

"So as my image clearly shows, Jesus is God, but the Son is not the Father."

I challenge this view as well for the following reasons;

There is no God but one.... yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him” (1 Corinthians 8.4, 6).

In this verse Paul clearly says that there is one (heis) God, and one (heis) Lord.

“Father,... This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17.3).

“I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God” (John 20.17).

Jesus is clearly saying here that there is a God that he serves, and so cannot be that same God.

Does a God need to pray?

Let us clarify what the definition of the word 'god', so that we can judge whether or not Jesus could be God.
Definition of GOD

1. capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: asa : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator and ruler of the universe b Christian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2 : a being or object believed to have more than natural attributes and powers and to require human worship;(http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

Anything perfect in power does not need help, and certainly would not feel powerless, but the verses below clearly show a scared human who was not in control of the events surrounding him;

"And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith to his disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall pray. And he taketh with him Peter and James and John, and began to be sore amazed, and to be very heavy; And saith unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful unto death: tarry ye here, and watch. And he went forward a little, and fell on the ground, and prayed that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from him. And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou? couldest not thou watch one hour? Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak" (Mark 14:32:39).


I await my opponents response.




Debate Round No. 2
Renascor

Pro

I thank my opponent for his attention in organizing an argument with proper concern to this debate.

I first should do well in pointing out to my opponent that he has done nothing but support my initial argument and my counter argument. I have stated in my initial argument that Jesus (1) Jesus said He was God, and (2) Jesus never lied. Second, you have supported my counter argument (That Jesus was both God and Man) by providing the scripture references. Because of such powerful and undeniable references, I must focus my attention only on the arguments you have provided that make the claim that Jesus said He was not God. Again, the reasoning behind this is because your arguments that demonstrate the humanity of Jesus only support my claim; remember that the resolution said simply that Jesus must be God, not that Jesus must only be God. Therefore, I will provide evidence that Jesus must be both Man (as you have proved) and God (as I have and will continue to prove).

Counter to Mark 10:17-18

I like this reference. It shows the humility of God. First we should notice that Jesus never says one way or the other. He simply is found asking a question; a question that suggests that if the disciples are calling Him "Good" then Jesus must be God. Jesus is asserting the fact that He is God by asking this question. So, in the stand of the resolution, this supports my case of Jesus being God. Therefore, this verse alone could not conclude the debate because Jesus is not saying He is not God.

Counter to John 14:28

I appreciate your noting of this beautiful passage of scripture. Again, the humility of God almighty is seen clearly. To respond to this verse, I should simply state that you are right, Jesus is lower then the Father because the Father is completely God, and Jesus is God and Human. Remember, the Father is not the Son, but God is God.

Counter to Matthew 24:35-37

This passage is very simple when you take into account that Jesus was limited by humanity, that is, human nature. As I have said before, Jesus was limited by becoming Man. Therefore, in this state, Jesus would not access His ability to know all in this sense.

I will provide more than one sentence, but it will be later on in my rebuttal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will not respond to the next verses (beginning with the "Apostles didn't believe Jesus was/is God) because I believe I have made it very clear that the Father and the Son are different, but that Jesus and God are the same.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am glad you took it upon yourself to note the effort I did indeed put into proving the power of the single verse of John 10:30. You countered this verse solely by using John 17:11; I should point out that Jesus is praying, asking that the disciples become one (Hice) as Jesus and God are one (Hice). If you return to my round one argument that provides the definition of "one" you will see that it also can be defined as "abundantly" or "abundant". So In this context, Jesus is praying that the disciples would be "abundant" even as Jesus and God are "abundant".

I will address 1 Corinthians 8:4,6 as well as the following verses in my end note as well as provide plural evidence that Jesus is God verses my singular argument of John 10:30.

The next argument you provide is based on a definition of God presented by Merriam Webster. I should make it clear that Merriam Webster is not a Biblical dictionary and that Merriam Webster is not contextually relevant to our topic, and so I will disregard this argument by that definition but will respond with this: Jesus is also Man. Therefore, He is limited as a Man while being God.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

End Notes and Presentation of Plural Evidence

I will now present additional evidence that will illustrate my point that Jesus is God and Man:


Matthew 1:23 - “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Isaiah 43:10,11 - “You are My witnesses,” says the Lord, “And My servant whom I have chosen, That you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, Nor shall there be after Me. I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no Savior.”
Revelation 1:17-18; Revelation 2:8 - (Jesus is the First and the Last)

Isaiah 44:6 - (God is the Redeemer)
2 Peter 1:1 (Jesus is the Redeemer) - “To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ”

Isaiah 44:24 - (God created the world by His self alone)
John 1:3; Colossians 1:16 - (Jesus made all things)

John 5:17,18 - “My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.” Therefore the Jews sought to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.

John 5:23 - that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.

John 8:24 - “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM He, you will die in your sins.”

John 8:58 - Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

John 10:30-33 - Jesus answered them, “I and My Father are one.” Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

John 14:6-7 - Jesus said to him, “I AM the way, the truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

John 14:9-11 - Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?”

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

Acts 4:12 - “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Acts 20:28 - (God purchased us with His own blood)
Revelation 1:5,6; Revelation 5:8-9 - (Jesus' blood purchased us)

Philippians 2:5-7 - Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bond-servant, and coming in the likeness of men.

Titus 2:13 - looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ

Hebrews 1:8,9 - But to the Son He (God) says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You with the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

2 John 1:7 - For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an Antichrist.

http://www.bugman123.com...
I encourage you to refute each of these verses.

One Final Verse

1 Timothy 3:16-
" And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. "
I will end by stating that I have fulfilled my resolution by providing evidence that Jesus said He was/is God and that you have not provided evidence where Jesus has plainly said one way or another.

I await your response.
Rasheed

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for a lively debate.

COUNTERING THE REBUTTAL ABOUT MARK 10:17-18

I provided a verse that clearly showed that Jesus is not God;

"As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, ‘Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ And Jesus said to him, Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone.’" Mark 10:17-18

The language here is very clear, and requires no commentary, but my opponent does just that when trying to explain away a verse that very clearly destroys his contention. Here is my opponents remarks below, I will leave you, the reader, to decide if this explanation (without one shred of evidence to support it) is enough to counter my argument;

"I like this reference. It shows the humility of God. First we should notice that Jesus never says one way or the other. He simply is found asking a question; a question that suggests that if the disciples are calling Him "Good" then Jesus must be God. Jesus is asserting the fact that He is God by asking this question. So, in the stand of the resolution, this supports my case of Jesus being God. Therefore, this verse alone could not conclude the debate because Jesus is not saying He is not God."

As you can see, my opponent takes the meaning of the verse and completely reverses its meaning, but he offers no source to support his idea, he simply states it. What my opponent has done is drawn a conclusion beforehand and is now trying to make everything fit that conclusion, but it is like trying to fit a square into a circle.

Answering John 17:21

How does my opponent answer the charge that If John 10:30, wherein Jesus is made to say "I and my Father are one", means that Jesus and God are one in the same, then he must read John 17:21 in the strict literal sense also, which would place the disciples in the Godhead also. This conclusion is inescapable. I provide the verse for the readers examination;

that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be one in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. .”

Countering proof with opinions

In many places my opponent has tried to counter my evidence with evangelizing, not with evidence. Here is one example;

"This passage is very simple when you take into account that Jesus was limited by humanity, that is, human nature. As I have said before, Jesus was limited by becoming Man. Therefore, in this state, Jesus would not access His ability to know all in this sense."

Where is the evidence?

What source is my opponent using?

Does my opponent wish that I should think that he is a credible source?

Credible sources are written by authors respected in their fields of study. Responsible, credible authors will cite their sources so that you can check the accuracy of and support for what they've written. Unless my opponent is a Biblical scholar I think that he should provide his evidence and leave the commentary alone, and let the reader decide how the verses should be interpreted.

For this reason I have chosen not to answer any of my opponents arguments that do not provide evidence to support them.

More Biblical evidence that Jesus is not God

James 1:13 King James Version (KJV)
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."

So God cannot be tempted

Matthew 4:1-11 King James Version (KJV) Matthew 4:1:"Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil."

But Jesus was tempted.

God does not have a God.....but Jesus did have a God.

God is the ultimate judge and refuge for all, and He does not call upon nor pray to any others. But Jesus acknowledged that there was one whom he worshipped and to whom he prayed when he said, "l ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God." St. John 20:17.

He is also reported to have cried out while on the cross, "My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?" Matt 27:46.

If Jesus were God, then couldn't this be read, "Myself, myself why hast thou forsaken me?" Is that logical? When Jesus prayed the Lord's prayer (Luke 11:2-4), was he praying to himself?

That Jesus, of his own admission and by his own actions, acknowledged, worshipped, and prayed to another being as God is clear proof that Jesus himself is not God.

Origin of the Trinity

"The word ‘trinity’ was not coined until Tertullian, more than 100 years after Christ’s death, and the key words (meaning substance) from the Nicene debate, homousis and ousis, are not biblical, but from Stoic thought. Nowhere in the Bible is the Trinity mentioned. According to Pelikan, ‘One of the most widely accepted conclusions of the 19th century history of dogma was the thesis that the dogma of the Trinity was not an explicit doctrine of the New Testament, still less of the Old Testament, but had evolved from New Testament times to the 4th century. (Historical Theology134)"'(http://www.heraldmag.org...)

"Long before the founding of Christianity the idea of a triune god or a god-in-three persons was a common belief in ancient religions. Although many of these religions had many minor deities, they distinctly acknowledged that there was one supreme God who consisted of three persons or essences. The Babylonians used an equilateral triangle to represent this three-in-one god, now the symbol of the modern three-in-one believers."

"The Hindu trinity was made up of the gods Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. The Greek triad was composed of Zeus, Athena and Apollo. These three were said by the pagans to 'agree in one.' One of the largest pagan temples built by the Romans was constructed at Ballbek (situated in present day Lebanon) to their trinity of Jupiter, Mercury and Venus. In Babylon the planet Venus was revered as special and was worshipped as a trinity consisting of Venus, the moon and the sun. This triad became the Babylonian holy trinity in the fourteenth century before Christ."

"Although other religions for thousands of years before Christ was born worshipped a triune god, the trinity was not a part of Christian dogma and formal documents of the first three centuries after Christ."

"That there was no formal, established doctrine of the trinity until the fourth century is a fully documented historical fact."

"Clearly, historians of church dogma and systematic theologians agree that the idea of a Christian trinity was not a part of the first century church. The twelve apostles never subscribed to it or received revelation about it. So how then did a trinitarian doctrine come about? It gradually evolved and gained momentum in late first, second and third centuries as pagans, who had converted to Christianity, brought to Christianity some of their pagan beliefs and practices." (http://www.christadelphia.org...).

Conclusion

I have proved both scriptural and historical evidence to show that Jesus was not and is not God. I have limited my commentary and in its place used evidence by scholars and verses from the Bible itself. I await my opponents rebuttal.




Debate Round No. 3
Renascor

Pro

I thank my opponent for his response to our lively debate.

I will start by mentioning that my opponents rebuttal was exactly as I expected. I thought about the options my opponent would have to consider when formulating his rebuttal, and I eventually came to the inevitable conclusion that my opponent would have no other choice then to attack my interpretation beings how the content of the verses I had provided were so powerful. Because of the soundness of the scriptural references I provided, my opponent would have no other choice then to attack my very own interpretation rather than my reference.

I should mention that some of my commentaries were not of my own, as I stated in my source "E-Sword", they are of Biblical scholars: Matthew Henry and Scoffield primarily.

Now I must bring for this contention:

My opponent has failed to provide his evidence. My opponent agreed to provide a single verse showing us where Jesus said that He is not God. However, my opponent has not done so. He has only provided a single statement where Jesus asked a question. Ergo, Jesus never said one way or another. I also must assert that my opponent has only provided arguments to support his interpretation of verses that he believes to suggest that Jesus was not God. So as you can clearly see, my opponent has provided no solid evidence. Next I will show you how my opponent has not responded to any of my plural scriptural references he requested of me in the last round.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, I extend all arguments to the next round.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I also should mention that my opponent never refuted my arguments, he only restated them and asked the audience to think for themselves. It is the audience's responsibility to respond to our arguments, not to read the verse themselves; This being said, I extend all original arguments to the next round.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only new argument my opponent has provided is the argument of temptation (James 1:13), which I have already addressed in my round one argument. Therefore, it is evident that my opponent has not been reading my arguments from beginning to end.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because my opponent has not introduced any new evidence or provided a rebuttal to my own arguments, there is nothing more for me to say, so I will instead use this time to provide additional references for my opponent to use to further his knowledge: http://www.answering-islam.org... http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org... http://carm.org...

Rasheed

Con

Thank you for an interesting debate.

Commentary

My opponent would have the reader believe that he cited Biblical scholars when voicing his opinion on what certain verses meant, especially when he totally changed the meaning of what a statement said. Here is an example;

"The next argument you provide is based on a definition of God presented by Merriam Webster. I should make it clear that Merriam Webster is not a Biblical dictionary and that Merriam Webster is not contextually relevant to our topic, and so I will disregard this argument by that definition but will respond with this: Jesus is also Man. Therefore, He is limited as a Man while being God."

The rejection of my source is not what I object to, but notice that he does not give a more credible source in its place, he merely gives his opinion why it should be cast aside, with no evidence to support his claim.

Here is another commentary by my opponent without evidence to support it;

"This passage is very simple when you take into account that Jesus was limited by humanity, that is, human nature. As I have said before, Jesus was limited by becoming Man. Therefore, in this state, Jesus would not access His ability to know all in this sense."

Again, my opponent is not debating, he is preaching, and there is a big difference; debates require that sources be used to support arguments, preaching only requires that a person be willing to believe what he is being told.

Disregarding the historical evidence about Trinity

My opponent did not answer the evidence that I put forth showing that Trinity was introduced to the Christian religion by pagan converts, so I must assume that he has conceded this point. Even if he had contested this fact it would still be fruitless because it is an historic fact of history.

Condescending remarks have no place in debates

I do not have a thin skin by any means but I call the readers attention to a thinly veiled insult;

"Because my opponent has not introduced any new evidence or provided a rebuttal to my own arguments, there is nothing more for me to say, so I will instead use this time to provide additional references for my opponent to use to further his knowledge:"

Does my opponent know the level of my knowledge, or how many languages I speak (I speak several, in fact)?

Is it not arrogance for my opponent to assume that because he disagrees with someone that he somehow knows more than they?

Are not Christians taught to be "harmless as doves and wise as serpeants"?

Is my opponent not familiar with the admonishment in his own Christian Bible that says; "Pride goeth before destruction and a hearty spirit before a fall"?

Nail in the coffin!

Below I provide a exhaustive list of evidence from the Christian Bible proving that there is only one God;


Deuteronomy 4:35,39 — Unto thee it was shown, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him. (39) Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.

Deuteronomy 6:4 — Hear, O Israel: The LORD thy God is one LORD. [Note in Mark 12:28-34 how Jesus and a Jewish scribe he encountered understood this text.]

Deuteronomy32:39 — See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.

2 Samuel 7:22 — Wherefore thou art great, O LORD God; for there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

1 Kings 8:60 — That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else.

2 KINGS 5:15
— And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel; now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.

2 Kings 19:15 — And Hezekiah prayed before the LORD, and said, O LORD God of Israel, which dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; thou hast made heaven and earth.

1 Chronicles 17:20 — O LORD, there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Nehemiah 9:6 — Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou has made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.

Psalm 18:31 — For who is God save the LORD? or who is a rock save our God?

Psalm 86:10 — For thou art great, and doest wondrous things: thou art God alone.

Isaiah 37:16,20 — O LORD of hosts, God of Israel, that dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth: thou has made heaven and earth. (20) Now therefore, O LORD our God, save us from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that thou art the LORD, even thou only.

Isaiah43:10,11 — Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no savior.

Isaiah44:6,8 — Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. Fear ye not, neither be afraid; have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Isaiah 45:21 — Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time: who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Savior; there is none beside me.

Isaiah 46:9 — For I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.

Hosea 13:4 — Yet I am the LORD thy God from the land of Egypt, and thou shalt know no god but me; for there is no savior beside me.

Joel 2:27 — And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.

Zechariah 14:9 — And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.



John 17:3 — And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Romans 3:30 — Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.



Galatians 3:20 — Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.

Ephesians 4:6One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

1 Timothy 1:17 — Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

James 2:19 — Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.


I have provided overwhelming historical and scriptural evidence that Jesus is not God. I have provided irrefutable sources. My opponent has responded with commentary without documentation.

"Certainly they disbelieve who say: "Surely Allah is the third (Person) of the three"; and there is no god but One God,…. The Messiah, son of Maryam is but an apostle; apostles before him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman, they both used to eat food. See how We make the signs clear to them, then behold how they are turned away." ( Glorious Qu'ran Surah 5:73 – 75)







Debate Round No. 4
Renascor

Pro

I thank my opponent for a good debate. As this debate draws to a close, I must say I am confident in my points and impressed to see my opponent make it as long as he has.

However, I will not lie when I say that I was a bit disappointed with the results of the closing rounds.

I did well to anticipate my opponents responses and I was satisfied with the emotion put into this debate. I was disappointed to see the last argument presented. It saddens me to see how my opponent became distraught and lost his calmness being forced to turn to ad hominem remarks, claiming that I was insulting him, and then trying to prove or establish himself at a certain level. I wish to take this time to tell my opponent that I respect him (and his ability to speak languages?) and that I have enjoyed this debate for the most part. I also would like to say that if my opponent felt it necessary to take a combatant approach to this debate then he did so in vain.

I will provide my counter argument (If you will call it that) by making the following statements:

(1) My opponent still has not provided a single verse in which Jesus said He was/is not God.

(2) My opponent has introduced arguments that either support my very own arguments, or that have already been accounted for in an earlier round.

(3) My opponents only attempt to refute my statements are based on the fallacy that I have presented opinion or commentary when in fact I have presented all of my arguments in two simple verses: John 1:1, and John 1:14. Commentary is necessary because of the confusion of this matter especially when one cannot understand such a simple principle.

With this being said, the verses my opponent has presented have not contradicted my statements and have not proved that Jesus was not God. As a matter of fact, many verses claim that the LORD is God, and we all know that Jesus is LORD.

The evidence for the historical trinity is irrelevant.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sadly, my arguments have yet to be addressed. My opponent has failed to present any arguments, or explanations for any of my evidence. My opponent has only attacked me on two different tracks:

(1) Commentary.

(2) Ad Hominem or Personal attacks.

Because my arguments have not been addressed, I extend them over to the final round.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In conclusion,

I have provided evidence that Jesus did say that He was/is God (John 10:30), thus fulfilling my resolution.

I have addressed all arguments that have been presented in this debate.

My opponent has not provided a verse in which Jesus said He was/is not God.

And my opponent has failed to address my arguments.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion of Evidence

I have said that Jesus is God and Man. My opponent has said that Jesus is not God. The resolution is "Jesus Must Be God". I have proved that Jesus said He is God. The only way my opponent has proposed Jesus is/was not God is by saying that Jesus was Man, which is true. So as you can see, my opponent has said that Jesus is not God because He is Man. And I have said that Jesus is God and Man, therefore my opponent has provided evidence to support my own claim. My opponent has also added irrelevant information into this debate as an attempt to distract the readers, so I say, don't be distracted. The answer is clear. Overall, I have enjoyed this debate and hope we can debate in the future.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.S.

-- I cannot begin to fathom why you felt it necessary to include a piece of the Qu'ran into our debate about Jesus being God, but I would be willing to debate you on the problems with Islam.
Rasheed

Con

My opponent has responded in a timely and articulate manner.

I would first like to tell my opponent that I do not approach these debates with any emotion, and you would be hard pressed to find any in my comments, I was simply addressing one of your statements. The problem with debating this way is that it is impossible to read the feelings behind statements, so If I misunderstood your remark I sincerely apologize.

While you may have been disappointed in this debate, I found it both thrilling and entertaining. You are a worthy adversery.

My arguments have been clear, and my sources cited to show that Jesus is not God, and the Trinity is a pagan belief that infiltrated Christianity in the 4th century. My opponent has done the following to counter my arguments;

1. Give his own understanding of the verses that I cited without offering one ounce of documentation to support his opinion.

2. My opponent has totally ignored the historical data, not once addressing the multitude of examples that I gave addressing the origin of a triune god, or how it is not unique in history. My opponent says; "The evidence for the historical trinity is irrelevenat", but does not give a reason for it being so, nor any supporting material for this claim. He simply says it, and we are to simply believe it.

3. My opponent has not given one verse that shows where Jesus (pbuh) said; "I am God." What he has done instead is to play a word game with the verses that I used as evidence to try an confuse the reader into thinking that the statements given have opposite meanings.

Quranic verse

I mistakenly thought that the last round was the final one, and so wanted to end the debate with a profound Quranic verse. Aside from the fact that the Glorious Quran informs my opinion on this issue, it has no other relevence in this debate, and I would gladly defend the Only True Religion from my opponents attacks.

Conclusion

Jesus is not God. The Bible does not support it. History shows that it is a pagan belief that found its way into Christianity. Logic tells us that it makes no sense. I ask that you vote con in this debate for all the reasons that I stated.

Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Mr.Infidel 2 years ago
Mr.Infidel
PS. I am changing conduct to PRO because of the ad hominems and source attacks from CON.
Posted by Mr.Infidel 2 years ago
Mr.Infidel
RFD

In this debate, PRO had the entire BOP, which he embraced and took the full BOP for.

PRO's argument boils down to:
1) Jesus never lied.
2) Jesus said he was G-d.
3) Therefore, Jesus is G-d.

CON's arguments boils down to:
1) Jesus prayed to G-d.
2) G-d does not pray.
3) Therefore, Jesus is not G-d.

Moreover, CON can be summarized in presenting passages that seem to show that Jesus is not G-d. This is all perfectly fine, however, from my understanding of the debate; it just takes one passage in order for PRO to win, which he provided.

CONDUCT goes to CON for the same reason ApostateAbe gave. Moreover, I also gave CON the conduct point because of the huge wall of text that pro gave.

ARGUMENTS: CON showed that heis does not always mean a triune G-d. +1 for CON.

In my opinion, PRO did not adequately refute the contention that there is only ONE Savior (Isaiah) and did not adaquetly refute all of CON's contentions.

In my view, CON wins.
Posted by wiploc 2 years ago
wiploc
Pro has the burden of proof, which he embraced.

Pro said Jesus said he is god, and Jesus didn't lie, so Jesus really is god. That argument would make hundreds or thousands of confused people into gods. But Con doesn't mention this, so we can ignore it.

Pro gives a quote in which Jesus plausibly claims to be god; Con provides an alternate interpretation. Con gives a quote in which Jesus plausibly claims not to be god; Pro provides an alternate interpretation.

Pro inexplicably provides a list of reasons why Jesus can't be god. God cannot be seen, but Jesus can be seen.

Obviously, this is an area where people of good will disagree. Sometimes the bible seems to say Jesus is god, and sometimes it seems to say it is not.

Therefore, Pro has not proven his case. He had the burden of proof, and he failed to carry it.
Posted by Renascor 2 years ago
Renascor
@ Wierdman,

It was my responsibility to provide the burden of proof (See round one) =__=
Posted by Rasheed 2 years ago
Rasheed
Wow ApostateAbe, that was a very fair and detailed review of the debate. I am blown away by your examination of the arguments and have learned a great deal. Thank you so much.
Posted by Renascor 2 years ago
Renascor
Thanks ApostateAbe,

I appreciate your findings and input as to how you (the reader) understood this debate. Great synopsis, your reviews are applauded!
Posted by ApostateAbe 2 years ago
ApostateAbe
Both presented sound initial arguments and equally-weak rebuttals. Arguments are tied.

I am giving conduct to Con, because Pro made two conclicting statements about where the burden of proof is placed.

(1) "I also accept the unwanted fact that the burden of proof will be on me."
(2) "You must provide evidence that Jesus said He was/is not God."

Such statements of "must" are statements concerning burden of proof. You should have said that the burden of proof is split equally, and each participant must provide evidence for his/her own respective position.

Also, it is bad conduct to post a large flood of passages (Round 3) and "encourage" your opponent to refute each of them.

Sources are of equal quality--I would have awarded the points to the opponent that left out irrelevant tertiary sources and instead focused on the Bible--but that didn't happen.

I didn't care about spelling or grammar.
Posted by ApostateAbe 2 years ago
ApostateAbe
I say in response to this counterargument from Mark 10:17-18: The passage is best interpreted as a reprimand of someone giving Mark's Jesus the title of "good." Mark's Jesus claims that he is NOT good, because only God is good. That would be the plainest and most probable interpretation, and it is no mere statement of humility, unless you think Mark's Jesus would mislead the hearer in an attempt to be humble.

Con says in response to this counterargument from Mark 10:17-18: "As you can see, my opponent takes the meaning of the verse and completely reverses its meaning, but he offers no source to support his idea, he simply states it. What my opponent has done is drawn a conclusion beforehand and is now trying to make everything fit that conclusion, but it is like trying to fit a square into a circle."

I think this gets the right general idea across, but Con did not rebut Pro's counterargument. Pro did not simply restate his conclusion. Pro made an argument, albeit a weak one, and Con needed to address it.
Posted by ApostateAbe 2 years ago
ApostateAbe
I have decided to base my decision on the arguments from the passages of John 10:30 and Mark 10:17-18.

Con argued against Pro's argument from John 10:30,

"It is only logical that the Godhead would have to include all of the disciples if we are to follow my opponents argument, because the Greek word for one,heis, is used in this instance also."

I say in response to this counterargument from John 10:30: The logic does not follow. John's Jesus is implying that the disciples may become one, and John's Jesus is implying that Jesus and God are one, but John's Jesus is NOT implying that the disciples may become one with God.

But Pro says in response to this counterargument from John 10:30: 'If you return to my round one argument that provides the definition of "one" you will see that it also can be defined as "abundantly" or "abundant". So In this context, Jesus is praying that the disciples would be "abundant" even as Jesus and God are "abundant".'

I think this is a weak counterargument, because it would require that John's Jesus uses two conflicting definitions for a single word in the same sentence, unless John's Jesus was saying that himself and God are "abundant." Or, maybe it was a pun?

Pro argued against Con's argument from Mark 10:17-18,

"I like this reference. It shows the humility of God. First we should notice that Jesus never says one way or the other. He simply is found asking a question; a question that suggests that if the disciples are calling Him "Good" then Jesus must be God. Jesus is asserting the fact that He is God by asking this question. So, in the stand of the resolution, this supports my case of Jesus being God. Therefore, this verse alone could not conclude the debate because Jesus is not saying He is not God."

continued...
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Mr.Infidel 2 years ago
Mr.Infidel
RenascorRasheedTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments
Vote Placed by lotus_flower 2 years ago
lotus_flower
RenascorRasheedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: pro really didn't deliver enough proof for the BOP, also, Pro said Jesus said he is god, and Jesus didn't lie, so Jesus is god. That is a really weak argument, and with the fact that con provided several references that proved that Jesus was not god is why I gave him my vote. But, all in all, it was a very good, (and close) debate!
Vote Placed by JustCallMeTarzan 2 years ago
JustCallMeTarzan
RenascorRasheedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: This would be closer had (oddly enough) Pro's own argument convinced me that at best, Jesus was only partially God. It is clear that Jesus' human nature is not equivalent to God. Also, if you consider "God" to be the singular term for the plural person of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then Jesus and God clearly cannot be the same, as Jesus would be a sort of subset of God.
Vote Placed by wiploc 2 years ago
wiploc
RenascorRasheedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by wierdman 2 years ago
wierdman
RenascorRasheedTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: In many ways, i still see Con as the winner of this debate. Both debaters did an excellent job in terms of arguing however, i believe Con gave me more than enough evidence that not only supported his case, but convinced me as an individual. I will give conduct to Pro for the same reason as abe.
Vote Placed by ApostateAbe 2 years ago
ApostateAbe
RenascorRasheedTied
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 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: See comments.
Vote Placed by Lickdafoot 2 years ago
Lickdafoot
RenascorRasheedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: this was an interesting debate to read. Unfortunately, i think both of you fell away from the debate a bit in the later rounds. Pro make a lot of good points and presented them in a cohesive matter. His arguments for "Jesus saying he was god/ he does not lie" and "jesus being both man and god" were not refuted or challenged by con. Conversely, cons main points that "only god is good" and his emphasis on there being only one god were negated and explained by pro.