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

Jesus was a real man with a real family who had a bloodline record that still continues to this day!

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/23/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 626 times Debate No: 49750
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)




The bible is simple and easy to understand. The bible is about one man = Jesus his family the Jews and the other sons of Abraham, and their impact on the earth.
Psa_40:7, Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me,
Heb_10:7, Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.

Rom_1:16, For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Rom_2:9, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Rom_2:10, But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:


I accept PRO"s challenge, and thank him for the opportunity to have this debate. I just want to clear up a few things before the debate really gets underway. PRO is claiming at least three things, all of which he bears the burden of proof. In the actual topic of this debate, PRO claims that (1) Jesus existed, (2) he had a family, and (3) his bloodline continues to this day. Now I"ll just explore these three items a little, just to make sure we are both on the same page.

(1) PRO has claimed that Jesus existed. then in his first round arguments, he quotes from the Christian bible. I therefore presume that the Jesus we are talking about is the Jesus from the Christian mythos, including at least virgin birth, miracles, and resurrection.

(2) PRO has claimed that Jesus had a family. In his first round comments, PRO expands this concept of family to mean, "the Jews and the other sons of Abraham." While I think this is using a little too much license with the definition of the word "family," I have no problem admitting that if Jesus existed, he was Jewish.

(3) PRO has claimed that Jesus" bloodline continues today. Now, a person"s bloodline refers to their ancestors and descendants [1], which means that Jesus not only had children, but that that lineage still exists.

I thank PRO for this opportunity, and look forward to his arguments and evidence.

Debate Round No. 1


I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.
However I must refute his claim that the bible is a Christian document.
For one; Christians do not follow Christ, God or the Bible=God's Word.
The actual word "Christian" is only used in a negative. Example they were called Christian then beaten, jailed then killed in the worst way men could devise/imagine.

Next I will attempt to educate my opponent. On the fact that the actual God/Christ of the bible was is Jewish of Hebrew roots. So if anyone associates the Christ of the bible with the Christian Religion of today, they error and never read the bible themselves with understanding.

So if one wants proof that Jews exist. One needs to look around. Or Google Jew, Hebrew or Wailing Wall.

One can assert that Christ never walked the earth, or just look around and know the simple truth that Jesus did exist.

If you want proof of Adam's bloodline being tracked til this day one just needs to ask the Queen

Adam to Queen Elizabeth II
[ Home ] [ Up ]


1. Adam m. Eve
2. Seth
3. Enosh
4. Canaan
5. Mahalaleel
6. Jared
7. Enoch
8. Methusaleh
9. Lamech
10. Noah m. Naamah
11. Shem
12. Arphaxad
13. Salah
14. Heber
15. Peleg
16. Reu
17. Serug
18. Nahor
19. Terah m. Amtheta
20. Abraham m. Sarah
21. Isaac m. Rebekah
22. Jacob m. Leah
23. Judah m. Tamar
24. Hezron
25. Aram
26. Aminadab
27. Naasson
28. Salmon
29. Boaz m. Ruth
30. Obed
31. Jcsse


32. K. David m. Bathsheba


I would like to thank PRO for his comments this round, and also for his attempt to educate me. I would now like to address PRO’s points.

The Origin of the Bible

I am well aware of the origins of the bible. My reference to is as “the Christian bible” was simple to make sure we are both talking about the same text.

The Existence of Jews

I never questioned the existence of Jews, so I’m not sure what PRO is aiming at.

The Existence of Christ

I never asserted that Christ didn’t exist; as PRO has made a claim, it is up to PRO to offer evidence as to the existence of Jesus. One point I did make, was to attempt to clarify what we mean when we say the name Jesus. My point is that the Jesus of the bible is a particular character that carries with it claims of a virgin birth, miracles, resurrections, and other miraculous events. If one is going to offer evidence for that biblical Jesus, they must also offer compelling evidence for these seemingly miraculous events.

It is not sufficient to simply offer evidence for the existence of a man named Jesus, and not for his miracles, any more than the existence of a man named Arthur is evidence that he was a king who had knights who sat at a round table. One PRO’s own sources notes that, “there is no evidence over the accuracy of any of the descriptions of his[Jesus’] life, as described in the Bible or as understood by his believers [1].

Adam’s Bloodline

Here is another point I don’t know why PRO included. We aren’t talking about Adam’s bloodline, so all of PRO’s evidence and arguments are irrelevant. PRO’s initial claim spoke of Jesus’ “bloodline record,” for which evidence of the existence has not yet been offered.

Final Thoughts

I would just like to make it clear that PRO has yet to offer any evidence that the Jesus as described in the bible ever existed. He has also not offered evidence that Jesus, or even a man that character is based upon, has a lineage at all, let alone one still around today. Finally, I would like to thank PRO for this debate, I am enjoying it.

Debate Round No. 2


I would like to thank my opponent for his response. My opponent said he was confused, I must agree!
I ask: if Jesus Christ was is a Sabbath keeping Jew, who never ate Easter ham, on Sunday or crack wafers in a Jewish Temple. What association does God's Word/The Bible have to do with Christianity? Please explain what part of the 1000's of different brands of Christanity who carry bibles but never actually read them. Have to do with Jesus Christ of the bible. I clearly asserted that Christians only use the name of God, but never actually obey Him.
My point is crystal clear for those with eyes to see. Adam was in Eden the Garden of God, Adam walked with God. Adam is also the Alpha of the bible. Adam's family record leads to Noah, to Abraham to David to Mary to Jesus to The Red Ruddy Queen who sits on a throne. The same family claims to share Christ's bloodline. Try viewing the prior post again for better understanding. They have the actual throne of David in their house. Where did America (One Nation Under God) come from? Try England, The Queen's family who title includes "Keeper of the Christian Faith!)

I must ask my opponent to explain his assertion that Jews and Christians are the same or how their rituals line up with the bible text that you refer to. Let us try common sense? Adam was the only man in the Garden of God named Eden. Adam was the first man in David's birth record. Jesus claimed to be the Alpha of bible, The Root of David.

Luke 3:38

King James Version (KJV)

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Revelation 5:5

King James Version (KJV)

5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.

Revelation 22:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

I am happy to inform my opponent that the Queen of England's family still exists today and facts are they just added a new baby king.



I would like to thank PRO for his comments. Now, onto the discussion:

Christians vs. Jews

First of all, let me make this clear; I am making no claim that Jews and Christians are the same. If my wording was ambiguous, re-read this sentence; I am making no such claim. What I did was refer to the book as the “Christian bible” for purposes of clarification. I’m not sure why PRO is so hung up on this point.


I didn’t address PRO’s whole point about the bloodline running to the modern day queen because it is irrelevant. As I noted (and cited) in the very first round of this debate, a bloodline refers to ancestors and decedents [1]. This means that the bloodline that allegedly runs from Adam, through David, to Jesus, stops at Jesus, unless Jesus had a child to carry it on. I reiterated this point in the second round, but PRO has yet to address it.

The Biblical Jesus

Another point I have addressed in both preceding rounds is that PRO needs to provide evidence for the existence of the biblical character of Jesus. If sufficient evidence to show the existence of this person is not provided, everything else in this debate is moot.

Returning to the Point

I would like to refocus this debate on the original three claims made by PRO at the beginning of the debate.

(1) The Jesus of the bible existed
(2) Jesus had a family
(3) Jesus’ bloodline continues today

In the first round, PRO defined (2) in such a way that I will not dispute it, but he has yet to provide evidence for (1) and (3). I await this evidence in subsequent rounds.



Debate Round No. 3


Yes my opponent missed the point.
Jesus was a real man of the Royal Line of David, David's bloodline still exists. Through England. Point proven, not my fault you did not think it through. There were many attempts to destroy the line of David. David share the same bloodline is a simple concept to understand. Try reading the topic. I never said Jesus had kids..
Facts are Jesus and Adam are the same guy. 99.9% of all religions deny that the Alpha was is Adam who had kids, that bloodline still exist today. Fact! Try thinking Alpha and Omega. The Root of David.
John 1:1-5

King James Version (KJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word,(ADAM WAS WITH GOD, NOT ALL MANKIND, ADAM WHO HAD CHILDREN!) and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.,(ADAM WAS WITH GOD, NOT ALL MANKIND, ADAM WHO HAD CHILDREN!2 The same was in the beginning with God.,(ADAM WAS WITH GOD, NOT ALL MANKIND, ADAM WHO HAD CHILDREN! 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. ,(ADAM WAS WITH GOD, NOT ALL MANKIND, ADAM WHO HAD CHILDREN!

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.



I would like to thank PRO for his comments this round, and for clearing up some confusion on my end. I feel that if PRO had made it clear he was claiming that Adam and Jesus were the same person, this debate would have looked very different.

Jesus’ Kids

PRO claimed in this round that he had not made the claim that Jesus had children, however, a simple reading of the title of this debate shows that very claim. The title is, “Jesus was a real man with a real family who had a bloodline record that still continues to this day!” In this line of text, several claims are made, including, ‘Jesus was a real man,’ ‘Jesus had a real family,’ ‘Jesus had a bloodline,’ and ‘Jesus’ bloodline continues to this day.’ As I have pointed out twice so far in this debate, the term bloodline refers to one’s ancestors and descendants [1], so for Jesus to have a shriving bloodline today, he would have to have had children.

Jesus is Adam

However, in this past round, PRO has finally clarified all of his statements by making it clear that he believes Jesus and Adam to be the same person. Why this wasn’t stated clearly at the outset is beyond me. Even though, as PRO notes, most will dispute this claim, I will, for the purpose of this debate, accept it. For the purposes of this debate, the biblical character of Adam is the same person as the biblical character of Jesus.

Where does this leave us?

After this revelation in the real line of reasoning during this debate, I feel I need to lay out what claims we are actually talking about. I have accepted that Jesus and Adam are the same person, and I will accept that IF Adam existed, we are all his descendants, making his bloodline still alive. So, the real question is:

Did Adam exist?

Modern science suggests that the story of the biblical creation [2][3] and the Garden of Eden story are not historically accurate [4][5].

Where are we now?

Now, we are at the end of the fourth round of this debate. PRO is left with a single point to discuss: Did Adam exist? I look forward to PRO’s comments.



Debate Round No. 4


My opponent asked "Did Adam Exist"!
1. Yes He is the first man listed in the pure Jewish Davidic Bloodline.
2. Does my opponent say King David who's son Solomon built the wailing wall that still exist today. Did not exist either?
3. David's bloodline has been preserved as a written record, and is more creditable, than my opponent's personal opinion. Notice my opponent need to 'ask' in order to build doubt.
4. A true response would state a fact and not wonder about a subject, my opponent knows nothing about.
5. Not my fault my opponent did not know that Christ is the Alpha of the bible. The only man who was in the Garden of God called Eden.
6. The bible says Christ was is the Root of David. Common Sense say that is the first man in David's Bloodline. Simple.
7. The 'word' Adam has three meanings.
A. Red Ruddy, to show blood in face. Strongs #H119
B. mankind low common man
C. Adam H121 the first Man of Palestine! Who is that! Jesus Christ the Alpha of the bible.

Ok let us answer my opponent question!
1.Do red ruddy white men rule the world?
2.Where did they come from?
3.So it is in the beginning so is will be in the end! Facts are in your face!
4.God said His people are sottish=stupid!
5.What is the race of the head of the Fedral Reserve, IMF, or The World Bank? Not Red Ruddy peoeple who rule the world?


PRO has made some interesting comments this round, before I address them; I want to touch one other matter.

I have made no claims in this debate. As I mentioned in the first round (and PRO did not object), my opponent bears the burden of proof for his claims. I am not required to disprove them, it is he that must provide evidence as to the veracity of his claims [1]. Now, to cover PRO’s points.

1) As I mentioned in the previous round, we were left with the question as to whether or not the Adam of the book of Genesis actually exists. PRO asserts that Adam existed, and that he is the “first man listed in the pure Jewish Davidic Bloodline,” but he offers no evidence. It is known that the first humans lived in Africa, not the Middle East [2]. This alone shatters any chance the Genesis story has of being accurate. It is also known that Home sapiens evolved gradually from our ancestors Homo erectus [3], so it cannot be said that there was a “first human,” let alone the man described in the first book of the bible.

2) No, I did not make the claim that King David didn’t exist; I would appreciate it if PRO wouldn’t put words in my mouth.

3) The only thing I want to mention here is that I wasn’t asking a question in order to “build doubt,” but rather to focus the discussion. PRO was all over the map, and I felt that asking questions was a useful format to focus the conversation, although I admit that it was only partially successful.

4) I did not state facts because I was not making claims. I was challenged to this debate by PRO, and it is PRO who has been making claims.

5) PRO states that it is not his fault that I didn’t know that Adam and Jesus were the same person. He is dead wrong; it is his fault. This is not a common opinion in my experience, and I had no way of knowing PRO’s feelings on the matter since he didn’t choose to bring them up until late in the debate.

6) This is one way to interpret vague scripture. It is also not evidence of anything since the bible itself is not historical evidence.

7) I’m not touching this irrelevant point, or the similarly irrelevant questions at the end. It’s getting late and I’m tired.

Where are we now?

We are now left in nearly the same spot that we were at the end of the previous round. PRO is asserting that Adam existed, while offering no evidence. I have offered evidence that suggests that the Adam character of Genesis could not have existed. PRO has not met his burden of proof.

Wrapping Up

I would like to thank PRO for challenging me to this debate. Why he chose me, I do now know, but it was fun. I had taken a hiatus from DDO, and it was good to be back, if only for a single debate.





Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by telisw37 2 years ago
I guess you can not read. How did Christ come in the flesh. See Rev.22:16 then babble back.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 2 years ago
this is like Monty Python searching for the Holy Grail
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 2 years ago
this is goofy. Adam was not the Word of John Chapter 1. Jesus Christ Himself is the Word of God.

I see no biblical need to beleive that David's bloodline was preserved, and if it is preserved it would be in Jewish people, not Caucasians (Galatians) like the queen of England. The Pope wants to be Jesus and you want to make the Queen of England heir to the throne of King David......goofy stuff. England will be included with all the other nations of the world when they all come to battle over Israel, and the King or Queen of England, if there remains a king or queen of england at that time, will be will be fighting against Israel and against God. This whole idea is knights of the round table and robbin hood jibberish.
Posted by LifeMeansGodIsGood 2 years ago
Jesus's blood was sinless blood from God His Father. Mary, the mother of Jesus was a descendant of David if I recall correctly, or Joseph, or both of them were decendants of David. But Jesus was the Son of God and His blood was not from man, it was from God. He shed His blood on the cross. He presented all of His blood to God as the payment for our sins. The blood of Jesus Christ and the blood of David came from different lines. David's bloodline may have continued to this day, it may not have. If I am wrong and God specifically promised descendants of David other than Jesus Christ would continue through his bloodline forever, please show chapter and verse. Jesus Christ will sit on the throne of King David on earth one day, fullfilling all of God's promises to David and the world.
Posted by MrJosh 2 years ago
I'm confused. What exactly is the topic or claim being debated here? You are playing fast and loose with some definitions, so I just want it to be clear before I accept this challenge. Are you basically just claiming that Jesus existed, that he was Jewish, and that there are still Jews around today?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
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 failed to meet BoP and said "99.9% of all religions deny that the Alpha was is Adam who had kids" So? The majority believes this, but that doesn't make it correct.
Vote Placed by Dakota-Hiltzman 2 years ago
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 debate was messy for me. Pro's resolution gives him three or four different burdens to maintain depending on how you interpret it, and I'm not sure he fulfills any of them. I personally believe in Jesus, but even there Pro fails to provide a compelling argument. I vote con as he upheld presumption.