The Instigator
snelld7
Pro (for)
Losing
43 Points
The Contender
DATCMOTO
Con (against)
Winning
50 Points

The trinity is a false teaching

Do you like this debate?NoYes+9
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 15 votes the winner is...
DATCMOTO
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,968 times Debate No: 8036
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (78)
Votes (15)

 

snelld7

Pro

Criteria for accepting this debate:
A) YOU MUST, EITHER, BELIEVE IN THE TRINITY (being God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit being as one.) OR BE ABLE TO ARGUE IT AS IF YOU DO
B) YOU MUST BE A SKILLED DEBATER WHO WILL NOT FORFEIT
C) YOU MUST BE CRAZY IF YOU THINK YOU CAN BEAT ME IN THIS (lol jk on this one)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onto my argument:

1) God says he is the one and only

-Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. When he speaks, it is as one undivided individual. The Bible could not be any clearer on this. As God states: "I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory."(Isaiah 42:8)

2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one

-Why would all the God-inspired Bible writers speak of God as one person if he were actually three persons? What purpose would that serve, except to mislead people? Surely, if God were composed of three persons, he would have had his Bible writers make it abundantly clear so that there could be no doubt about it. At least the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures who had personal contact with God's own Son would have done so. But they did not.

Instead, what the Bible writers did make abundantly clear is that God is one Person—a unique, unpartitioned Being who has no equal: "I am Jehovah, and there is no one else. With the exception of me there is no God." (Isaiah 45:5) "You, whose name is Jehovah, you alone are the Most High over all the earth."—Psalm 83:18.

3)No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY

-JESUS called God "the only true God." (John 17:3) Never did he refer to God as a deity of plural persons. That is why nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called Almighty. Otherwise, it voids the meaning of the word "almighty." Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for Jehovah alone is supreme.

4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself

-Jesus is spoken of as being "tempted by the Devil." After showing Jesus "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory," Satan said: "All these things I will give you if you fall down and do an act of worship to me." (Matthew 4:8, 9) Satan was trying to cause Jesus to be disloyal to God. But what test of loyalty would that be if Jesus were God? Could God rebel against himself? No, but angels and humans could rebel against God and did. The temptation of Jesus would make sense only if he was, not God, but a separate individual who had his own free will, one who could have been disloyal had he chosen to be, such as an angel or a human. On the other hand, it is unimaginable that God could sin and be disloyal to himself. "Perfect is his activity . . . A God of faithfulness, . . . righteous and upright is he." (Deuteronomy 32:4) So if Jesus had been God, he could not have been tempted.—James 1:13.

Not being God, Jesus could have been disloyal. But he remained faithful, saying: "Go away, Satan! For it is written, 'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'"—Matthew 4:10.

5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his cause
ONE of the main reasons why Jesus came to earth also has a direct bearing on the Trinity. The Bible states: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all."—1 Timothy 2:5, 6.

Jesus, no more and no less than a perfect human, became a ransom that compensated exactly for what Adam lost—the right to perfect human life on earth. So Jesus could rightly be called "the last Adam" by the apostle Paul, who said in the same context: "Just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45) The perfect human life of Jesus was the "corresponding ransom" required by divine justice—no more, no less. A basic principle even of human justice is that the price paid should fit the wrong committed.

If Jesus, however, were part of a Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's own Law required. (Exodus 21:23-25; Leviticus 24:19-21) It was only a perfect human, Adam, who sinned in Eden, not God. So the ransom, to be truly in line with God's justice, had to be strictly an equivalent—a perfect human, "the last Adam." Thus, when God sent Jesus to earth as the ransom, he made Jesus to be what would satisfy justice, not an incarnation, not a god-man, but a perfect man, "lower than angels." (Hebrews 2:9; compare Psalm 8:5, 6.) How could any part of an almighty Godhead—Father, Son, or holy spirit—ever be lower than angels?
DATCMOTO

Con

First may I take this opportunity to thank my esteemed opponent for issuing this debate challenge and for all the work he has so obviously put into his concise and thorough opening round.
*************************************************************************************
1) God says he is the one and only
*************************************************************************************8
Here my opponent has made the common error of stating that if a thing is described as 'one' then it naturally follows that it cannot ALSO be 'three'.
As I will now show, many occurrences within nature are trinitarian or three in one, Exactly as one would expect if the Creator were Himself Trinitarian.
Some Examples:
REALITY. Time, space and matter.
TIME. Past, present and future.
SPACE. Length, width and height.
MATTER. Solid, liquid and gas.
H2O. Water, ice and steam.
MAN. Soul, body and Spirit.
SOUL. Mind, emotions and will.
This negates the argument that anything described as 'one' cannot be 'three' at the SAME time.
*************************************************************************************
2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one
*************************************************************************************
My opening argument somewhat negates most of this point. However, I would at this point wish to introduce a scripture which I believe does explicitly show that God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are indeed (3 in) One.
ROMANS 8:9 States:
You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by The Spirit, If the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.
Here, in one verse and only two sentences, Paul makes a point of using first 'The Spirit' and then 'Spirit of God' and then 'Spirit of Christ' to explicitly convey that these terms are interchangeable.
*************************************************************************************
3)No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY
*************************************************************************************
Jesus' ministry on earth was essentially to teach us 'how to be men'.
Part of that would include how to think about God, how to address Him and how to pray etc.
As a major part of his teaching ministry was to teach humility it would not have been wise to refer to Himself as 'God Almighty'.
He is, however, explicit, in aligning Himself with God the Father.
JOHN 14:9 states
Jesus answered: "Don't you know Me Phillip? even after I have been among you such a long time? ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN ME HAS SEEN THE FATHER. (my caps) How can you say 'Show us the Father?' ."
*************************************************************************************
4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself
*************************************************************************************
Again I feel your inability to believe that 'anything that is separate can indeed still be one' blinds you to the fact that Christ is indeed BOTH separate AND One with God.
If He is separate and Has free will and became a man then the choice to rebel was open to Him. He resisted that temptation and, as with any resistance, He suffered.
The KEY to understanding this point is that although Christ is God, He became FULLY human.. But NOT a fallen sinful human.
*************************************************************************************
5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his cause
*************************************************************************************
Again I'm struggling to say anything new because my opening argument shows God can indeed be God AND mediator.
In the same way that a glass of water can be separated into both ice and steam.
Maybe a way to think of it would be 'who else is God gonna trust?'.
OR.. IF YOU WANT A JOB DONE PROPERLY..
*************************************************************************************
Jesus, no more and no less than a perfect human, became a ransom that compensated exactly for what Adam lost—the right to perfect human life on earth.
*************************************************************************************
Jesus certainly was a perfect man. This in no way negates Him being God incarnate.
Jesus, like Adam, was spiritually joined to God (Alive). Unlike you and I he did not have a human father and so escaped the sinful nature that is passed down from man to man.
The Whole 'Jesus for Adam' doctrine is just one way to understand a greater mystery. Another way is that Adam brought death through disobedience and Christ brought Life through obedience, even to a shameful death on a cross.

Jesus Christ Is consistently referred to as the Son of God or God's 'only begotten Son'.
Let's dwell on that word 'begotten' a moment. It refers to pro-creation. A sinful man begets a sinful human child. A badger begets a badger and so on and so forth.
God begets God.
If we accept the doctrine of the virgin birth then it is unavoidable that Jesus Christ IS God.
Debate Round No. 1
snelld7

Pro

1) God says he is the one and only

- I believe my opponent is missing the purpose of this contention. It is to show that GOD HIMSELF (according to believers of the bible) has stated that there is no other. Not that, 3 things can't be one.

But since you've done this.. I guess I can refute this point also.

God and Jesus or Jesus and the Holy Spirit are either present at the same time or are talking to one another in certain parts of the bible. You attack this, basically, by saying water can be gas, liquid, or a solid. True, but only 2 or 3 different elements of water can be Solid, Gas, or Liquid at the same time. And the bible preaches that there is only 1!! Meaning, if they are to be three into one, they can't both be present at the same time or talking to each other because that makes there be more than one....The best conclusion in this is that there is only ONE GOD (LIKE HE SAYS) and the others are merely created by him (meaning they're under him).
============================================================================

2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one

-Christ: any expected deliverer

The word christ originated before JESUS Christ was born. It simply means the messenger. God is the messenger of the word to his people, so he was referenced to accordingly. It doesn't say JESUS Christ, just Christ.
============================================================================

3) No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY

-The argument you made against this fits with the 5th contention, not this one. You have not made an argument against this contention, so i'll extend this out in hopes of getting your answer in a later round?

============================================================================

4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself

Jesus is spoken of as being "tempted by the Devil." After showing Jesus "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory," Satan said: "All these things I will give you if you fall down and do an act of worship to me." (Matthew 4:8, 9) Satan was trying to cause Jesus to be disloyal to God.

But what test of loyalty would that be if Jesus were God? Could God rebel against himself? No, but angels and humans could rebel against God and did. The temptation of Jesus would make sense only if he was, not God, but a separate individual who had his own free will, one who could have been disloyal had he chosen to be, such as an angel or a human. On the other hand, it is unimaginable that God could sin and be disloyal to himself. "Perfect is his activity . . . A God of faithfulness, . . . righteous and upright is he." (Deuteronomy 32:4) So if Jesus had been God, he could not have been tempted.—James 1:13.

Not being God, Jesus could have been disloyal. But he remained faithful, saying: "Go away, Satan! For it is written, 'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'"—Matthew 4:10.

Jesus was tempted to turn against God (meaning he was suppose to revolt against God and God's cause). Now, how can someone join a war against something that he is? IT'S IMPOSSIBLE! YOU CAN'T. If you join the other side, that's what you are... the other side. You can't in turn lead something against yourself [...] if you're not there anymore! That's what this is saying.
============================================================================

5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his cause

(the argument you made against this, changes it into a completely different creation, so i've turned it into contention 6)

But what I can do is refute the arguments you made against my 3rd contention, in this one (because this is where it fits)

<>"As a major part of his teaching ministry was to teach humility it would not have been wise to refer to Himself as 'God Almighty'.He is, however, explicit, in aligning Himself with God the Father."

Now, how is it not wise to refer to himself as God, but then to:
(A) Refer to God as his father and saying God is the ONLY true God
(B) Talk to God while he was on the cross and tell him to forgive the people who've betrayed him
(C) Ask God why God has "forsaken" him while he was on the cross (meaning he's talking to someone completely different and other than himself)
and (D) Ask God to not make him have to go through his suffering in the garden before his capture
???? Makes a lot of sense. That wouldn't be wise, but confusing you into believeing that there are three Gods,thus, resulting in damnation for believing in more than one God IS WISE?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

6) Jesus was created by God

-God who transferred the life-force of Jesus to the womb of Mary. (Matthew 1:18-25) But that is not how he began. He himself declared that he had "descended from heaven." (John 3:13) So it was only natural that he would later say to his followers: "What if you should see the Son of man [Jesus] ascend to where he was before?"—John 6:62, NJB.

Thus, Jesus had an existence in heaven before coming to the earth. But was it as one of the persons in an almighty, eternal triune Godhead? No, for the Bible plainly states that in his prehuman existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their creation.

Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was "the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15, NJB) He was "the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition). "Beginning" [Greek, ar�khe'] cannot rightly be interpreted to mean that Jesus was the 'beginner' of God's creation. In his Bible writings, John uses various forms of the Greek word ar�khe' more than 20 times, and these always have the common meaning of "beginning." Yes, Jesus was created by God as the beginning of God's invisible creations.
============================================================================
7) The disciples viewed Jesus as the "one mediator between God and men," not as God himself. (1 Timothy 2:5)

Since by definition a mediator is someone separate from those who need mediation, it would be a contradiction for Jesus to be one entity with either of the parties he is trying to reconcile. That would be a pretending to be something he is not.

The Bible is clear and consistent about the relationship of God to Jesus. Jehovah God alone is Almighty. He created the prehuman Jesus directly. Thus, Jesus had a beginning and could never be coequal with God in power or eternity.

Looking forward to a response...
DATCMOTO

Con

1) God says he is the one and only
*************************************************************************************
The fact that three separate things not only CAN be one but very often ARE one clearly negates your argument that 'God describing Himself as One means He cannot also be three.'
There is One God who is ALSO a trinity.
IF the Bible teaches that God is:
(1) The Creator or Father of all.
(It does. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Genesis1:1 )
(2) The person of Jesus Christ.
(It does. "Thomas answered Him and said 'My Lord and my God!'" John 20:28)
(3) The Holy Spirit.
(It does. "For the Spirit searches everything even the depths of God.")
THEN it stands to reason that God IS three. The fact that the Oneness of God is emphasised only reinforces that these three entities are indeed One God.
*************************************************************************************
But since you've done this.. I guess I can refute this point also.
*************************************************************************************
Is there ice in the world now? Sure there's some in my freezer right now.
Is there water in the world now? Sure there's some in a glass in front of me.
Is there steam in the world now? Sure there's some coming off of the kettle.
All the water in all of the universe is in one of these three states. It's still ONE body of water.
*************************************************************************************
2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one
-Christ: any expected deliverer
The word christ originated before JESUS Christ was born. It simply means the messenger. God is the messenger of the word to his people, so he was referenced to accordingly. It doesn't say JESUS Christ, just Christ.
*************************************************************************************
Christ means 'Anointed by God'.
It was not revealed to the writers of the Bible exactly how the Messiah (Greek for Christ or Annointed) would come or Who He would be. This is why the members of the Judaic religion are still waiting for the Messiah to this day.
Any 'argument of omission' is invalid simply by virtue of the fact that there is always an infinite amount of omissions in any account or history.
*************************************************************************************
3) No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY
*************************************************************************************
Again, IF three things are can be One and ALSO be separate then it follows that they would have both features that are similar (such as H2Os transparency in water, ice and steam) AND features which are distinctive.
That God the Father is known as the Almighty and Jesus Christ is not is of no consequence.
*************************************************************************************
4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself
*************************************************************************************
Your argument lends itself to my cause , not your own.
It's nonsensical to say 'IF He could have rebelled' IF He did NOT. The fact that He did not sin adds weight to the fact that He is Indeed God Himself. By your own logic He could not join the enemy If He is God.. He did not join the enemy. If He did Have what would have happened? who's knows.. He would no longer have been God. But He did NOT succumb, And He IS.
*************************************************************************************
5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his cause
*************************************************************************************
Ok, When we Christians state that Jesus Christ 'died for us' What we actually mean is that He died 'Spiritually' for us.
This is what He feared in the Garden.. not the naiils or the torture etc BUT Gods wrath which is Spiritual separation from God.. In other words DEATH. This Is why He cried out to God " Why have you forsaken me?" But even here He is quoting Himself or rather the Holy spirit in a Psalm.
The Son or Word of God became a Man. What kind of man would He be if He did not need to pray to God etc like the rest of us?
You imply confusion where none exists. We Christians are very certain of the Trinity. Nothing makes sense without it.
**********************************************************************************
6) Jesus was created by God
-God who transferred the life-force of Jesus to the womb of Mary. (Matthew 1:18-25) But that is not how he began. He himself declared that he had "descended from heaven." (John 3:13) So it was only natural that he would later say to his followers: "What if you should see the Son of man [Jesus] ascend to where he was before?"�€"John 6:62, NJB.
Thus, Jesus had an existence in heaven before coming to the earth. But was it as one of the persons in an almighty, eternal triune Godhead? No, for the Bible plainly states that in his prehuman existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their creation.
Jesus, in his prehuman existence, was "the first-born of all creation." (Colossians 1:15, NJB) He was "the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition). "Beginning" [Greek, ar��khe'] cannot rightly be interpreted to mean that Jesus was the 'beginner' of God's creation. In his Bible writings, John uses various forms of the Greek word ar��khe' more than 20 times, and these always have the common meaning of "beginning." Yes, Jesus was created by God as the beginning of God's invisible creations.
*************************************************************************************
The Bible certainly does NOT teach that Jesus is a created being. In fact many if not most cults believe this doctrinal heresy. Please state WHERE in the Bible it states that Jesus is a created Spirit. You CANNOT because it does NOT.
The Colossians quote (in future please state verse as well) references the resurrection of Christ NOT the 'creation' of Christ.
In my N.I.V Colossians 15 has three separate headings.. (1) The resurrection of Christ. (2) The resurrection of the dead. and (3) The resurrection of the body.
I think this gives a very clear picture as to the theme of Colossians 15. It is both highly dangerous and dishonest to take scripture out of context like this.
Let's look at some scriptures that shows Christ as the uncreated God incarnate.
John1:1 "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God"
John1:14 "The Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us."
Isaiah9:6 "For unto us a child is born, unto us a child is given and the goverment shall be upon His shoulder, and His name will be wonderful counsellor, THE MIGHTY GOD, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."
*************************************************************************************
7) The disciples viewed Jesus as the "one mediator between God and men," not as God himself. (1 Timothy 2:5)
*************************************************************************************
God and man are separated by sin. God became a man to mediate that chasm. God did what no man can do.
Your whole argument rests on omission: "The Bible does not say this or that."
You have only provided one extremely out of context scripture for your claim that Christ is a created being. You must back up your arguments with scripture.
You must refute each piece of scripture I have presented which clearly shows Jesus Christ is God.
Please address Romans 8:9
Please address John 14:9 Both from round 1.
And each of the scriptures presented in round 2.
Please provide scriptual evidence that Christ is Created.
Debate Round No. 2
snelld7

Pro

1) God says he is the one and only
_____________________________
+You attack this by saying, "The fact that three separate things not only CAN be one but very often ARE one clearly negates your argument that 'God describing Himself as One means He cannot also be three.'

- Now, the mistake with this argument is that your argument only works if I was saying "God says he is God." He's not just saying he's God[...] He's saying there are no other forms, he's the ONLY God.

Now, onto the "side note of the contention (if you will)"

+You sare saying"""Is there ice in the world now? Sure there's some in my freezer right now.
Is there water in the world now? Sure there's some in a glass in front of me.
Is there steam in the world now? Sure there's some coming off of the kettle.
All the water in all of the universe is in one of these three states. It's still ONE body of water."""

-This is a logical fallacy. This statement makes perfect since, and is true. However, it is irrelivant to what i'm stating. I'll put it this way.

Let's say God is H20. Now, if ONE solution of H2O changes from Ice into liquid, then from liquid into gas (THE VERY SAME SOLUTION OF H2O)... you can say YES GOD IS ALL THREE IN ONE. BUT, when you have one solution of H20 in its water state, and a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOLUTION of H20 in its ice state right next to each other in each others presence at the same time, it creates the 2 H20's oppose to just one (MEANING THERE ISN'T ONE GOD BUT THERE ARE PLURAL). And there is where the problem lies. If God is all three into one, they most certainly can't all be present at the same time; because if they are, then there is 3 God's and not one! This said, they would only be able to be around ONE AT A TIME. This is where the problem sets in inside of the bible. God reveals himself to Jesus and the others when Jesus is baptized by his cousin in the river. Jesus pleads to God while in the garden before he is captured by the romans to NOT UNDERGO HIS TREATMENT IF HE DOESN'T HAVE TO, and he pleads to God while on the cross. Surely if they are the same person, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THEY ARE BEGGING EACH OTHER TO NOT MAKE THE OTHER DO SOMETHING, CONVERSATING WITH EACH OTHER, OR REVEALING THEMSELVES TO EACH OTHER (unless there is more than 1 God)!! The simple fact that they would be able to communicate back and forth means that they aren't 2 or 3 in 1, but 2 or 3 in 2 or 3.
___________________________________
2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one
___________________________________
Your definition of Christ is flawed. By your definition, EVERY PROPHET, every disciple (if you believe jesus is God), and every person that talked to God and was told to do something by God, IS CHRIST.

Christ is defined as-messiah (which is): any expected deliverer
http://www.google.com...
or
1capitalized a: the expected king and deliverer of the Jews b: jesus 1
2: a professed or accepted leader of some hope or cause
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
even the name "Jesus" originated before Jesus The Christ. So in a sense, everyone of them was God.

This said, I'll post my argument again. God is the messenger of the word to his people, so he was referenced to accordingly. The scripture you provided doesn't say JESUS Christ, just Christ."

It is also widely accepted that there were MANY other blasphemers of "God's Son" at this time.... This next question isn't part of the debate, but, what singles this one man out?

I'll Concede that Jesus was a VERY effective prophet, even the most succesful leader of all time. However, I will not concede that he is God.
___________________________________________________
3) No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY
___________________________________________________
This first time you argued against this contention, the argument didn't fit this one, but it did the 5th Contention. I refuted the argument from you on your last post in the 1st contention. So since you've failed to go against THIS contention, i'll post the original text back up here:

JESUS called God "the only true God." (John 17:3) Never did he refer to God as a deity of plural persons. That is why nowhere in the Bible is anyone but Jehovah called Almighty. Otherwise, it voids the meaning of the word "almighty." Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for Jehovah alone is supreme.
________________________________________________
4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself
________________________________________________
+ You've stated """If He is separate and Has free will and became a man then the choice to rebel was open to Him. He resisted that temptation and, as with any resistance, He suffered."""

- Now, lets say he does indeed switch sides. Then what? Jesus is with the Devil while God and the Holy Spirit are still in Heaven? This, AGAIN, is evidence of either there being 3 seperate gods (that aren't one), or that Jesus isn't a "God" at all. You say the key to understanding this is knowing that Jesus became fully human without sinning. But, there is no such thing as "FULLY" human without sinning. First off, I don't even think Jesus The Prophet (what he should go by) was sinnless, and I don't understand how you think he was. HIS LIFE IS MISSING FROM AGE 12 TO AGE 33!! The ages where people go out and "have fun (sin)" are completely left out of the bible. How can you ignore the fact that, that may mean he wasn't "oh so holy" as we expected? If you were to read a book about me where it said "David Angelo Snell Jr has stated he is God. He healed people, fixed people, and cured people," then it left out all of my years from 12 to the year before i die and said He was SINLESS, WOULD YOU THEN BE COMPELLED TO BELIEVE IT? What if I got a group of 12 friends (Romi, Scott, Michael, Tonish, Johnny, Cody, Ramen, Austin, Shavey, Sean, Chris, and Tommy) to vouch for me, then I also added in a few family members and random people I've had a positive impact on to vouch also, would you believe it then?
_________________________________________________
5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his Cause
_________________________________________________
+ you've stated, "What kind of man would He be if He did not need to pray to God etc like the rest of us?"
By this what I'm guessing you mean is "What kind of 'image' of a man would he be if he didn't pray like the rest of us"

- He'd be the same kind of man who has superpowers and never sinned.
(according to you) He knows he is God, and if you say he's stated that he IS god, then he doesn't have to pray. All that would be doing is confusing his followers (like you). Come on now, think logically for a second (in your own view), someone is telling you he is GOOOOOD!!! THE CREATOR OF AAAALL, then turns around and prays to God when he is in his times of need? Does that add up to you? Would you believe me if I did it? Why not? Then why would you believe someone who did it? You also say "We Christians are very certain of the Trinity. Nothing makes sense without it." Howver not all christians believe in Jesus being God. All you have to do is believe that Jesus is the son of God (not exactly that he is him)
____________________________
6) Jesus was created by God
____________________________
Evidence where it says that jesus is created by God is present in my last post!! Look and read! Now are you disagreeing with your bible Mr. D?
____________________________
Extra arguments:
>>>You must refute each piece of scripture I have presented which clearly shows Jesus Christ is God.

I'M PRO! you have to refute all of MY arguments.. NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!! Why? Simply because without all of mine and just a few, it still stands. Without all of yours and just a few, its a weak argument
DATCMOTO

Con

1) God says he is the one and only
+You attack this by saying, "The fact that three separate things not only CAN be one but very often ARE one clearly negates your argument that 'God describing Himself as One means He cannot also be three.'
- Now, the mistake with this argument is that your argument only works if I was saying "God says he is God." He's not just saying he's God[...] He's saying there are no other forms, he's the ONLY God.
*************************************************************************************
ONLY:
–adverb without others or anything further; alone; solely; exclusively: This information is for your eyes only.
–adjective being the single one or the relatively few of the kind: This is the only pencil I can find.
Only means the same thing as one. One can and often is three things in one.
*************************************************************************************
Now, onto the "side note of the contention (if you will)"

Let's say God is H20. Now, if ONE solution of H2O changes from Ice into liquid, then from liquid into gas (THE VERY SAME SOLUTION OF H2O)... you can say YES GOD IS ALL THREE IN ONE. BUT, when you have one solution of H20 in its water state, and a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SOLUTION of H20.
*************************************************************************************
Wait! where did the 'completely different solution' of H20 come from? there's only ONE remember? One body of water that can be divided. Let us not forget that we are discussing God not H20.
IF three things can be one (I've shown they can) then God can describe Himself as One and still interact with Himself separately.
************************************************************************************
2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one
Your definition of Christ is flawed. By your definition, EVERY PROPHET, every disciple (if you believe jesus is God), and every person that talked to God and was told to do something by God, IS CHRIST.
I'll Concede that Jesus was a VERY effective prophet, even the most succesful leader of all time. However, I will not concede that he is God.
*************************************************************************************
You seem to constantly forget that we are arguing whether the Trinity is false from a BIBLICAL standpoint.. at least that is the way you initially framed it. Jesus Christ descibes HIMSELF as the Only begotten Son of God. As you will not address any scripture I use I am at a loss how to precede with this.
*************************************************************************************

3) No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY
Neither Jesus nor the holy spirit is ever called that, for Jehovah alone is supreme.
*************************************************************************************
Yes Jehovah IS ALONE and supreme. He is also Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit.
*************************************************************************************
4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself
- Now, lets say he does indeed switch sides. Then what? Jesus is with the Devil while God and the Holy Spirit are still in Heaven? This, AGAIN, is evidence of either there being 3 seperate gods (that aren't one), or that Jesus isn't a "God" at all.
*************************************************************************************
Again, you have not moved past the stage that three things can be one. Three separate but STILL ONE.
*************************************************************************************
5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his Cause
*************************************************************************************
Jesus, WHILE He was on earth had only the same powers as a man. That means He had to pray like the rest of us.
*************************************************************************************
6) Jesus was created by God.
*************************************************************************************
No you have provided no scripture to back this up apart from Col.15 which I've already refuted.

To be completely honest with you I regret taking on this debate at all.
You have consistently ignored my arguments, refused my simple requests for scripture etc.
I believe the cause of this to be that I demolished you're entire argument (that three cannot be one) in my opening paragraph.
I suggest we stick to this point alone from now on as the rest is ALL based on this.
Debate Round No. 3
snelld7

Pro

I thank my opponent for this interesting debate!

Now onto the arguments

1) God says he is the one and only

My whole point in this (sorry I couldn't get you to understand it), was to show that yes 3 things can be one, however if the 3 things are talking to each other [...] they aren't one. But, entirely different entities (if they were one, no conversation would be needed....what would they have to discuss aloud if they share a brain?).

In introducing the second solution was to show that if 2 or more are present at the same time, they are seperate and not the same.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one

There is no reason to negate this. Jesus does say he is God's son [...] but the argument is that esus never DIRECTLY said he was God's equal! He refers to him as a father (which clearly means he is under God. People on the same level as anyone else would not claim a position under).
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

3) No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY

No Jesus is not. (the only response for you saying he is, with nothing else there.)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________

4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself

Obviously, if these three things are in fact one, if one changes, then they are all for hell, right? God being the SUPREME BEING that the bible says he is, would then be in control of hell. However, the devil is in hell to get out from God's control, is he not? This said, he wouldn't tempt God to come and rule hell, he would only tempt a HUMAN MESSENGER. Not God becaus it would be counterproductive to his cause (to also be a ruler of something or to be more powerful than God).

So I repost this contention in hopes that you will ACTUALLY ADDRESS ALL PARTS::

Jesus is spoken of as being "tempted by the Devil." After showing Jesus "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory," Satan said: "All these things I will give you if you fall down and do an act of worship to me." (Matthew 4:8, 9) Satan was trying to cause Jesus to be disloyal to God.

But what test of loyalty would that be if Jesus were God? Could God rebel against himself? No, but angels and humans could rebel against God and did. The temptation of Jesus would make sense only if he was, not God, but a separate individual who had his own free will, one who could have been disloyal had he chosen to be, such as an angel or a human. On the other hand, it is unimaginable that God could sin and be disloyal to himself. "Perfect is his activity . . . A God of faithfulness, . . . righteous and upright is he." (Deuteronomy 32:4) So if Jesus had been God, he could not have been tempted.—James 1:13.

Not being God, Jesus could have been disloyal. But he remained faithful, saying: "Go away, Satan! For it is written, 'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'"—Matthew 4:10.

Jesus was tempted to turn against God (meaning he was suppose to revolt against God and God's cause). Now, how can someone join a war against something that he is? IT'S IMPOSSIBLE! YOU CAN'T. If you join the other side, that's what you are... the other side. You can't in turn lead something against yourself [...] if you're not there anymore! That's what this is saying.
============================================================================

5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his cause

(the argument you made against this, changes it into a completely different creation, so i've turned it into contention 6)

But what I can do is refute the arguments you made against my 3rd contention, in this one (because this is where it fits)

<>"As a major part of his teaching ministry was to teach humility it would not have been wise to refer to Himself as 'God Almighty'.He is, however, explicit, in aligning Himself with God the Father."

Now, how is it not wise to refer to himself as God, but then to:
(A) Refer to God as his father and saying God is the ONLY true God
(B) Talk to God while he was on the cross and tell him to forgive the people who've betrayed him
(C) Ask God why God has "forsaken" him while he was on the cross (meaning he's talking to someone completely different and other than himself)
and (D) Ask God to not make him have to go through his suffering in the garden before his capture
???? Makes a lot of sense. That wouldn't be wise, but confusing you into believeing that there are three Gods,thus, resulting in damnation for believing in more than one God IS WISE?

You say the key to understanding this is knowing that Jesus became fully human without sinning. But, there is no such thing as "FULLY" human without sinning. First off, I don't even think Jesus The Prophet (what he should go by) was sinnless, and I don't understand how you think he was. HIS LIFE IS MISSING FROM AGE 12 TO AGE 33!! The ages where people go out and "have fun (sin)" are completely left out of the bible. How can you ignore the fact that, that may mean he wasn't "oh so holy" as we expected? If you were to read a book about me where it said "David Angelo Snell Jr has stated he is God. He healed people, fixed people, and cured people," then it left out all of my years from 12 to the year before i die and said He was SINLESS, WOULD YOU THEN BE COMPELLED TO BELIEVE IT? What if I got a group of 12 friends (Romi, Scott, Michael, Tonish, Johnny, Cody, Ramen, Austin, Shavey, Sean, Chris, and Tommy) to vouch for me, then I also added in a few family members and random people I've had a positive impact on to vouch also, would you believe it then?
__________________________________
5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his Cause

"Jesus, WHILE He was on earth had only the same powers as a man. That means He had to pray like the rest of us"~You

Did he not perform miraculous miracles? Did he not make the blind, see; the paralyzed, walk; the dead, rise; GUESS NOT.

So because you haven't attacked this YET IN FOUR ROUNDS... Here ya go for one more shot:
Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his cause
ONE of the main reasons why Jesus came to earth also has a direct bearing on the Trinity. The Bible states: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all."—1 Timothy 2:5, 6.

Jesus, no more and no less than a perfect human, became a ransom that compensated exactly for what Adam lost—the right to perfect human life on earth. So Jesus could rightly be called "the last Adam" by the apostle Paul, who said in the same context: "Just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive." (1 Corinthians 15:22, 45) The perfect human life of Jesus was the "corresponding ransom" required by divine justice—no more, no less. A basic principle even of human justice is that the price paid should fit the wrong committed.

If Jesus, however, were part of a Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's own Law required. (Exodus 21:23-25; Leviticus 24:19-21) It was only a perfect human, Adam, who sinned in Eden, not God. So the ransom, to be truly in line with God's justice, had to be strictly an equivalent—a perfect human, "the last Adam." Thus, when God sent Jesus to earth as the ransom, he made Jesus to be what would satisfy justice, not an incarnation, not a god-man, but a perfect man, "lower than angels." (Hebrews 2:9; compare Psalm 8:5, 6.) How could any part of an almighty Godhead—Father, Son, or holy spirit—ever be lower than angels?

If you've demolished my complete arguments [...] Why do so many still stand? How can you ask me to provide scripture, then when I do, state that it's irrelevant?
DATCMOTO

Con

1) God says he is the one and only
My whole point in this was to show that yes 3 things can be one, however if the 3 things are talking to each other
*************************************************************************************
Now you are simply jumping from one foot to the other. IF one thing IS three separate and individual things then those things can interact with each other or else in WHAT sense would they be three? If I pour water onto ice it will melt.. this is interaction between ONE substance in TWO states.
*************************************************************************************
2) Bible writers would make it clear that they are all one
but the argument is that esus never DIRECTLY said he was God's equal!
************************************************************************************
John 14:9-11 (New International Version)
9Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? 10Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.
*************************************************************************************
4) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself
*************************************************************************************
I agree (in a sense) which means ONLY God (Jesus Christ) could be trusted to do the job. Only a 'spotless Lamb' could be worthy of sacrifice. You mean tempted as in 'realistically troubled'. Jesus had a human body with all the frailties and needs that we all have, so yes he was tempted in this sense. I mean in the sense that he could not be tempted BECAUSE He is God.
Your argument that God cannot rebel against God only stands up if he had of failed.. He did not rebel.. He is God.
*************************************************************************************
5) Jesus being God would be counterproductive to his Cause
Did he not perform miraculous miracles? Did he not make the blind, see; the paralyzed, walk; the dead, rise; GUESS NOT.
*************************************************************************************
"And others will come who will do even greater things" Jesus showed us what faith in a man can do. NOW your arguing that He must have been God!
Yes Jesus became a 'perfect human' to pay the price of ALL of our sins.. NOT just Adams. How could one man (however perfect) pay the price for all men?

Let us look at some more scripture that CLEARLY teaches that God is a trinity and that Jesus Christ IS God.

Genesis 1:26
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [b] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Do you see? Let US make man in OUR image in OUR likeness. RIGHT at the start He's letting us know.

Hebrews 11:25-26 (New International Version)
25He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time. 26He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward.

Here Paul is referring to Moses.. 'Disgrace for the sake of CHRIST' in the OLD Testament!

The Bible clearly teaches that God is a trinitarian God and that Jesus Christ is God.
My opponent has done little more than repeat the same confused doctrines that I have refuted in round one. I am slightly embarrassed that this debate has degraded into a 'yes it is' no it not' affair.
Debate Round No. 4
78 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Knologist_Prime 4 years ago
Knologist_Prime
Rebuttal 4.1) God couldn't be tempted to join a cause against himself - "Again I [FEEL] your inability to believe that ‘anything that is separate can indeed still be one' blinds you to the fact that Christ is indeed BOTH separate AND One with God. If He is separate and Has free will and became a man then the choice to rebel was open to Him. He resisted that temptation and, as with any resistance, He suffered. The KEY to understanding this point is that although Christ is God, He became FULLY human. But NOT a fallen sinful human." – DATCMOTO

Blah, blah, blah is essentially what you have stated. You may ‘FWEELS' strongly about something, BUT, you haven't proved your ‘FWEELWINGS' with any sound, reasoned out, and scriptural definitive somethings. Just saying something is so, because ‘I said so', doesn't make it to be, so. Therefore, where in the Scriptures is your ‘fweelwings' founded/established? Where is the ‘unrealities' of this ‘god-man' creature proved in Scripture? (1 Samuel 12:21) "And YOU must not turn aside to follow the unrealities that are of no benefit and that do not deliver, because they are unrealities." You still haven't proved your ‘concept' to be anything, you've only stated nothing. And that's supposed to be a winning strategy of debating? Blah, blah, blah is all I read. Where is your scriptural basis? (1 Peter 3:15) "…always ready to make a defense before everyone that demands of YOU a reason for the hope in YOU, but doing so together with a mild temper and deep respect." In a Court proceeding OR in a Scientific Peer Review, the following would have been pointed out to you and your ‘concept' rejected and sent back to you for lack of preparation and research: "Where is your facts to back up your statements/'fweelwings'?" Even a belief system MUST have something to back itself up as to it's believability.
Posted by Knologist_Prime 4 years ago
Knologist_Prime
#3.3 -- 3.3) "He is, however, explicit, in aligning Himself with God the Father. JOHN 14:9 states; Jesus answered: "Don't you know Me Phillip? even after I have been among you such a long time? ANYONE WHO HAS SEEN ME HAS SEEN THE FATHER. (my caps) How can you say 'Show us the Father?' "" – DATCMOTO.
Jesus, responding to a question by Thomas, said: "If you men had known me, you would have known my Father also; from this moment on you know him and have seen him," and, in answer to a question from Philip, Jesus added: "He that has seen me has seen the Father also." (Joh 14:5-9) Again, Jesus' following explanation shows that this was so because he faithfully represented his Father, spoke the Father's words, and did the Father's works. (Joh 14:10, 11; compare Joh 12:28, 44-49.) It was on this same occasion, the night of his death, that Jesus said to these very disciples: "The Father is greater than I am."—Joh 14:28. The disciples ‘seeing' the Father in Jesus can also be understood in the light of other Scriptural examples. Jacob, for instance, said to Esau: "I have seen your face as though seeing God's face in that you received me with pleasure." He said this because Esau's reaction had been in harmony with Jacob's prayer to God. (Ge 33:9-11; 32:9-12) After God's interrogation of Job out of a windstorm had clarified that man's understanding, Job said: "In hearsay I have heard about you, but now my own eye does see you." (Job 38:1; 42:5; see also Jg 13:21, 22.) The ‘eyes of his heart' had been enlightened. (Compare Eph 1:18.) That Jesus' statement about seeing the Father was meant to be understood figuratively and not literally is evident from his own statement at John 6:45 as well as from the fact that John, long after Jesus' death, wrote: "No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in the bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him."—Joh 1:18; 1Jo 4:12. it-2 p. 55 Jesus Christ
Posted by Knologist_Prime 4 years ago
Knologist_Prime
#3.2 "Almighty only used with Jehovah God, never Jesus his Son.

(Revelation 1:8) 8 "I am the Al&#8242;pha and the O-me&#8242;ga*," says Jehovah God, "the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty#."

*Or, "the A and the Z." Gr., &#964;&#8056; &#8142;&#913;&#955;&#966;&#945; &#954;&#945;&#8054; &#964;&#8056; &#8143;&#937; (to Al&#8242;pha kai to O[-me&#8242;ga]), the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet; SyhJ22, "the Aleph and the Taw."
Syh - Philoxenian-Harclean Syriac Version, sixth and seventh cent. C.E.; G.S.
J22 - Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by United Bible Societies, Jerusalem, 1979.

# "The Almighty." Gr., ho Pan-to-kra&#8242;tor; Lat., O-mni&#8242;po-tens; J18(Heb.), &#700;El Shad-dai&#8242;, "God Almighty"; J17,22(Heb.), &#700;Elo-heh&#8242; tseva-&#700;ohth&#8242;, "God of armies." See Ru 1:20 ftn, "Almighty."
J17 - Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by Franz Delitzsch, London, 1981 ed.
J18 - Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by Isaac Salkinson and C. D. Ginsburg, London.
J22 - Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by United Bible Societies, Jerusalem, 1979.

(Ruth 1:20,21) "And she would say to the women: "Do not call me Na&#8242;o-mi. Call me Ma&#8242;ra, for the Almighty* has made it very bitter for me. (21) "I was full when I went, and it is empty-handed that Jehovah has made me return. Why should YOU call me Na'o-mi, when it is Jehovah that has humiliated me and the Almighty that has caused me calamity?"
*"The Almighty." Hebrew: Shad-dai&#8242;. Syriac: &#700;El-Shad-dai, "God Almighty"; Latin: O-mni&#8242;po-tens. See Re 1:8 ftn, "Almighty."
To many notable scholars with honorable reputations and their jobs on the line to stand by fictitious concepts that are not supported by the hard evidence of scriptural artifacts, which happens to have the word, FACTS in it. You should be losing more points. But It's not about points, it's about truth. (Romans 1:25) "…even those who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and
Posted by Knologist_Prime 4 years ago
Knologist_Prime
#3.1 "No one else in the bible is called the ALMIGHTY." – snelld7. Statement is true. DATCMOTO, you did not produce 1 shred of scriptural evidence to counter snelld7's statement. But I will. "As a major part of his teaching ministry was to teach humility it would not have been wise to refer to Himself as 'God Almighty'." - DATCMOTO. Really? Where? LOL. Almighty never used with or connected to Jesus Christ, Son of God, the one whom was sent forth to do his Father's Will.

(Exodus 6:2, 3) "And God went on to speak to Moses and to say to him: "I am Jehovah. 3 And I used to appear to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty*, but as respects my name Jehovah# I did not make myself known to them."
*"As God Almighty." Hebrew: be'El' Shad-dai'. Greek: The-os' on au-ton&#8242;. Latin: in De'o o-mni-po-ten'te (omnipotent). # "But as respects my name Jehovah [&#1497;&#1492;&#1493;&#1492;, YHWH]." Hebrew: u-shemi' Yehwah'. Latin: et no&#8242;men me&#8242;um A-do-na&#8242;i.(LORD, Title in Latin) Or, "also as respects my name Jehovah did I not make myself known to them?" James Washington Watts (1977), "by my name Yahweh I had not made myself thoroughly understandable to them."

(Haggai 1:2) "This is what Jehovah of armies* has said, ‘As regards this people, they have said: "The time has not come, the time of the house of Jehovah, for [it] to be built."'"
*"Jehovah of armies." Hebrew: Yehwah' tseva-‘ohth&#8242;. Greek: Ky'ri-os pan-to-kra'tor. "Jehovah Almighty"; Luther (German, 1964 ed.), der HERR Ze'ba-oth. This expression occurs 14 times in Haggai's prophecy. (Ky' ri-os; Lord is title not a personal name, people can be called Lord. Personal name are identifiers.) I deal in truth, just like the God of truth, Jehovah God Almighty, Father of Jesus. (John 17:17) "Sanctify them by means of the truth; your word is truth." No unrealities here. (1 Samuel 12:21) "And YOU must not turn aside to follow the unrealities that are of no benefit and that do not deliver, because they are
Posted by Knologist_Prime 4 years ago
Knologist_Prime
I will rebuttal your #2

Actually, if you read the context of the previous chapter, you will see in Romans 7:14, "For we know that the Law is spiritual; but I am fleshly, sold under sin."

Paul was talking about the spirit of the law and later in Galatians 5:16-25 clearly identifies how an anointed Christian who are chosen to go to heaven are supposed to act, displaying the fruits of the spirit.

And is in harmony with the rest of Romans 8:1-17. So, as the scriptures say, God is a spirit being and operates on a spiritual plane, His Son Jesus, was a spiritual person always doing his Father's will, HE SAID SO and DID SO.

Jesus' example for all Christians is to be spiritual persons, but especially those chosen to go to heaven; even though at the time, they were still in human bodies.

It's real simple.

So in context, the verses before and after Romans 8:9, where is this so-called trinity? You should lose a point for this. One scripture set out of context is like taking one piece of a puzzle and saying, ‘this is the whole picture.' Read Romans chapter 7 and 8 and see the continuity flow away from your argument.

I'm still looking for the word 'trinity'.... looking ..... looking...... searching ...... aaaannnndddd , it's not in my 1879 Englishman's Bible either. Oh but Jehovah's name is in my 1879 Englishman's Bible! Wow. Go figure.
Posted by Knologist_Prime 4 years ago
Knologist_Prime
I will rebuttal your # 1

Some Examples:
REALITY. Time, space and matter. ALSO perception, altered,
TIME. Past, present and future. ALSO perspective, sense, fast, slow, old, prehistoric,
SPACE. Length, width and height. ALSO volume, breadth, circumference, small, large,
MATTER. Solid, liquid and gas. ALSO energy, electricity, inferred, light, atoms, electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks,
H2O. Water, ice and steam. ALSO mist which is not steam, drizzle, sprinkles, rain, fog, snow, gas
MAN. Soul, body and Spirit. ALSO Father, Uncle, cousin, Grandfather, Great grand Father. Female man which is Woman, Genesis account. A man cannot be a spirit at the same time. LOL you are funny, that's make Mongo laughs!
SOUL. Mind, emotions and will. ALSO desires, likes, hates, hunger, fish, birds, animals, burns, thinks, plans, Adam became a living soul. Genesis 2:7. That's what ALL Bibles record, can't change Hebrew or English Grammar.
This negates the argument that anything described as 'one' cannot be 'three' at the SAME time.

AND this negates your argument that there IS more than three at anytime.
Posted by eric95209 5 years ago
eric95209
Part IV

Fleeing mysticism

The issues I have mentioned above are just some of the problems regarding the Trinitarian doctrine that I as a former Trinitarian have tried to find answers for a very long time. Most Trinitarians do not care about these issues though. They have entrusted the priesthood, the keeper of the mysteries, to handle everything for them.

I sincerely believe however that there are still some of you who would like to love the Lord not just with all your heart and with all your soul but also with all your mind. May you find comfort in the fact that God is not the author of confusion and mysteries and that Jesus, a man who has told us the truth, actually came to "reveal the Father" (8) as the "only true God" (9) and as the one "who alone has immortality" (10).

http://www.reclaimingwalther.org...
This Rock (The Magazine of Catholic Apologetics and Evangelization) Volume 4, Number 2, February 1993
Deut. 32:40, I Tim. 1:17
Job 14:2, Psalms 146:4
Heb. 2:17, 18
I Cor. 15
John 15:13
Matthew 11:27
John 17:1,3
I Timothy 6:16
Posted by eric95209 5 years ago
eric95209
Part III

Inconsistency with the creeds

Another difficulty for Trinitarians with the claim that Jesus died only in his human nature is that it squarely contradicts Trinitarian creeds like the Chalcedonian Creed which confess of "one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably;" The belief that only the man Jesus died but not Jesus the God splits the human and divine natures such that Jesus can no longer be considered one person. It is a denial of the Trinitarian incarnation doctrine.
Atonement problem

It is asserted by most Trinitarians that Jesus had to be God in order for his sacrifice to be sufficient to secure our forgiveness. A finite being, like man, cannot atone for an infinite offense against an infinite God, they claim. However, with the belief that only the human nature of Jesus died on the cross and not his divine nature, it appears after all that the death of a finite human flesh was enough to atone for all the sins of humanity.
Posted by eric95209 5 years ago
eric95209
Part II

The Apostle Paul argued that Christ "rose again the third day" and that "if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen". For Paul, Christ would have remained asleep had he not risen on the third day, proving that Christ didn't continue to live as a disembodied soul or spirit before he was resurrected. He continued to argue that if the dead is not resurrected, "then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished". Again, for Paul, death is the end of man's existence and "if the dead rise not at all" then "let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die". Paul's arguments make no sense at all if man continues to live upon death. (6)
Undying on the cross

Even if we grant for the sake of argument that the soul of Jesus continued to live when his body died on the cross, Trinitarians will still be left with many difficulties. If only the physical body of Jesus died on the cross, it would follow that no person really died on the cross. To say that only the body of Jesus died but his soul remained alive is to say that the person Jesus didn't really die. He just lost his body but he was still alive. Something died but no one died on the Cross. Had no one died on the cross, no one would have died for our sins. There can be no hope of any life after death and our faith is in vain. Christianity is a fraud.

If Jesus had only lost his body but had remained alive in some way or another, it would appear that Christ's love isn't that great. Christ taught that the greatest love a man can give is to lay down his life for others (7). Yet, it would appear that he didn't really give up his life. He just gave up his body.
Inconsistency with the creeds.
Posted by eric95209 5 years ago
eric95209
Part I

For those who believe that Jesus is both God and man, the question who or what died on the cross is a very difficult one. This is demonstrated by the conflicting answers various Trinitarian groups give. Some Trinitarians claim that only the Second person of the Trinity died while others believe that all of God died (1). Some believe that the second person died completely while others believe that only the human nature of Jesus died. No wonder Karl Keating, a prominent Catholic apologist, included this question in his article "The World's Toughest Catholic Quiz".

The Catholic Belief
As Keating shows in his article, Catholics believe that "God died on the cross" (2). He explains that it is wrong to say that "Jesus' human nature died on the cross" because "when you die, it is not your human nature which dies, but you as a distinct person." The Catholic belief is not surprising at all if you consider their arguments for their belief that Mary is the mother of God which use the same line of reasoning.

The problem with the belief that God died on the cross is that it directly contradicts the scriptures. The bible teaches that God is immortal or cannot die. (3)

Other Trinitarian Explanation
To avoid directly contradicting the teaching of the Bible that God cannot die, others explain that Jesus only died in his human nature, that is, his physical body died but his soul or spirit remained alive.

The problem with this alternative answer is that it is still not biblical. Rather, it is based on ideas about immortal souls popularized by early Greek philosophers such as Plato. According to the bible, when a man dies, he "does not continue" and his "thoughts perish" (4). The bible doesn't describe the death of Jesus differently with the death of other men. Instead, it states that "in all things he had to be made like his brethren". (5)
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by daboss 7 years ago
daboss
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 7 years ago
Tatarize
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by Lazy 7 years ago
Lazy
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by snelld7 7 years ago
snelld7
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 
Vote Placed by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
sherlockmethod
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 
Vote Placed by Volkov 7 years ago
Volkov
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:32 
Vote Placed by fisher 7 years ago
fisher
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by bookwormbill111 7 years ago
bookwormbill111
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Colucci 7 years ago
Colucci
snelld7DATCMOTOTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07