The Instigator
rubbersoul
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
HadenQuinlan
Con (against)
Winning
31 Points

The true nature of Jesus Christ being equal to God (For Jehovah Witnesses who think God made Jesus)

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/5/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,290 times Debate No: 3527
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (14)

 

rubbersoul

Pro

Biblically speaking, I would like to challenge any Jehovah's Witness to give me an argument saying that the Bible says Jesus is "a god".

I believe that Jesus IS equal to God the Father and I am prepared to show verses confirming that.

I await.
HadenQuinlan

Con

First and foremost, good luck Rubbersoul throughout the course of this debate, I hope we have an interesting one.

For the clarification of the judges, I'd like to redefine the resolution as it's interpretation currently is a little shaky:

Jesus Christ is equal to God.

Also, we must truly understand, to prevent an argument of semantics, what God is in question. As it most obviously implies, the God aforementioned in the resolution is most logically Yah-weh, the Christian God, as is spoken of in the Bible.

In negation of the resolution I offer the following points to disprove the claim "Jesus Christ is equal to God".

1) Jesus Christ is unequal physically.

2) Jesus Christ is of lesser moral character than God.

3) Jesus Christ commands less respect than God.

4) Jesus Christ does not have the same abilities attributed to God.

1) First, I'll address the point of Jesus Christ being physically unequal to God.

A) As the burden of proof lies on the Pro, it is necessary to prove that there is a God. While there is insurmountable evidence proving that a man, Jesus Christ, existed, there is no physical proof for a God. If there is no physical proof for God, then Jesus Christ cannot possibly be equal to him, because J.C. would obviously be superior in that he exists.

B) Let us assume for a moment that my opponent proves that God exists (highly unlikely). In this scenario we see that he has refuted my first subpoint, however I provide an alternative. Jesus cannot be physically equal to God, because Jesus no longer physically exists. If my opponent proves the physical existence to God, then we must accept the claims of the bible are true. That being said, we see that Jesus died (http://www.biblegateway.com...; "Jesus breathed his last"), therefore Jesus is inferior to God as Jesus exists metaphysically in spirit, whereas God exists physically.

As you can see, my opponent cannot refute both subpoints, because if he disagrees with one he must concede the other.

For the following contentions we must presume that God exists, however, please keep in mind that if my opponent does not prove the existence of God these points are fairly irrelevant as I have already won the debate through that single point.

2) Jesus is of lesser moral character than God.

So we have already accepted the notion of the Christian god, Yahweh, therefore we accept what platforms he claims to uphold. God (as he will be referred to as from now on) accepts that he is omniscient, omnipresent, immortal and perfect. By perfect, we assume morally perfect. Therefore, if Jesus shows one sign of moral imperfection then he must be unequal to God.

A) Look to the bible verse Corinthians 11(http://www.biblegateway.com...;):

"7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God"

this phrase literally translates to wearing headgear, however we see that it clearly implies something different. Let us take the context of the passage previous for clues:

"5 And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved"

By covered and uncovered, the bible is discussing hair and hair length, therefore the statement "A man ought not to cover his head" translates into:

"A man should not have long hair."

As the bible is the word of God, we see that God does not want man to have long hair. How does this apply to us? Well, I offer you a simple, yet effective answer:

Google Image Search Jesus, all depictions of the Christian Messiah feature him with lengthy hair. This does not empirically prove that he had long hair, for nothing can do that besides a time machine, however this offers substantial evidence in favor of it. Also, look the time period in which Jesus Christ existed. The style of hair was the roman style, which was often worn long. Jesus Christ, a roman citizen, clearly would, most logically, have adopted the hair style of the era, so as Jesus wore his hair long, we see that he has achieved moral IMperfection and is therefore morally inferior, and unequal to God.

B) The bible, as well as many protestant faiths which have branched off of early-Lutheranism are based around the idea of faith. Man is not saved through works, he is saved through faith. Therefore if Jesus is to be morally perfect, his faith in God must never waver. When we examine this point, we see a large contradiction, for Jesus Christ HAS questioned God! Look to the bible verse Mark 15:33-34:

"33 At the sixth hour darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour. 34And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"—which means, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?""

As you can clearly see, Jesus' faith in God wavers, therefore he cannot possibly be equal morally to god, because he is imperfect in the fact that his faith is imperfect.

3) Jesus Christ commands less respect than God.

According to the bible, Jesus Christ is the son of God. This does not deem him inferior, however the respect commanded by Jesus Christ is somewhat less than that of God. If Jesus is the son of God, we must accept that God created Jesus, therefore as God created Jesus GOD is ultimately responsible for Jesus' actions. Especially because God is omniscient, he was fully aware of Jesus' acts and designed him to fufill these acts. Saying that Jesus is equal to god is essentially saying that a puppet is equal to a puppeteer. This is false, because the respect that the puppet show gains goes to the puppeteer, not the puppet.

4) Jesus Christ does not have the same abilities attributed to God.

We see this statement proved in several areas:

A) First, Jesus lacks omniscience. Refer back to my 2nd contention, where I referenced Mark 15:33-34. Do you remember Jesus crying

"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?""

As you can see, Jesus Christ was resurrected 3 days after his death, showing that God had in fact not forsaken him. This disproves the idea of Jesus' omniscience, because he did not know that God had not forsaken him.

B) Jesus lacks immortality. I again ask you to refer to a previous point, look at my first contention where I referenced Mark 15:37

"Jesus breathed his last"

This shows that Jesus Christ died, which proves that Jesus Christ cannot be equal to God as he lacks the immortality that God has.

~~~RECAP~~~

Jesus Christ is unequal to God for the following four reasons:

1) Jesus Christ is unequal physically.
-Existed when God doesn't.
-Died when God has not

2) Jesus Christ is of lesser moral character than God.
-Long Hair when it is shunned in the bible
-Doubted God

3) Jesus Christ commands less respect than God.
-God Created him, and is omniscient and therefore responsible for Jesus' actions

4) Jesus Christ does not have the same abilities attributed to God.
-Omniscience is tested: Doubting God
-Immortality is tested: Died

Finally, I would like you to remember that the final 3 contentions and subpoint B of my 1st contention all DO NOT MATTER if my opponent cannot prove the existence of God, they simply are there only to further strengthen my case against my opponent.

I urge you, the judges, to apply your logic and reason to see that clearly the Con is the winner of this debate.
Debate Round No. 1
rubbersoul

Pro

First of all, while Jesus was on earth, he was "below angels", he made himself submissive to mankind. That is why he died for our sins.

We as Christians, believe Jesus is equal to God as stated in John 1:1.

So your argument that because Jesus was beaten and died was all foretold in the New Testament.
HadenQuinlan

Con

I would just like to extend the following points,

1) Jesus is unequal physically.
My opponent has not proven that God exists, therefore as Jesus physically exists, right now you can see that I have proven him unequal physically.

2) Jesus is unequal morally.
My opponent has not addressed both Jesus doubting God, as well as Jesus' hairstyle being against the scripture.

3)Jesus commands less respect than God.
Another point my opponent has not addressed, I'd like to elaborate upon it further. If God is omniscient, then he knew what was going to happen to Jesus and what Jesus would do when he created Jesus, therefore the glory of dying for humankind's sins falls to God, not Jesus.

4)Jesus does not have the same attributes as God.
My opponent has not addressed omniscience, however he has addressed death - which I'll address below.

My opponent contends that Jesus made himself vulnerable, and therefore is still immortal, however the fact that he died disproves immortality. Immortal means, according to http://dictionary.reference.com...:

"not mortal; not liable or subject to death;"

as Jesus Christ MADE himself liable to death, we see that he forfeited his immortality, which removes that characteristic, making him unequal to God.

As you can see, my opponent has addressed almost none of my case, and has only posted a lucrative side point which is easily batted away. At this point in the debate, you MUST vote Con.
Debate Round No. 2
rubbersoul

Pro

It takes faith to believe in God. It's like trying to prove there is such thing as wind. You cannot see it, but you can see the effects of it. Try to prove that a billion dollars exist. Have you personally seen it? I'll bet you have not.

I don't need to make a big fancy argument about whether God exists or not.

Did you read John 1:1?
In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the WORD was God.
HadenQuinlan

Con

I'd like to extend ALL of my arguments, as my opponent feels the only thing that is requisite of him winning is him proving the existence of God (which he has not done), and therefore ignored all but a single subpoint in my first contention.

To address my opponents last "speech":

"It takes faith to believe in God. It's like trying to prove there is such thing as wind. You cannot see it, but you can see the effects of it. Try to prove that a billion dollars exist. Have you personally seen it? I'll bet you have not."

-There's scientific evidence supporting the existence of wind, whereas the only scientific evidence supporting God is a 2,000~ year old book.

"I don't need to make a big fancy argument about whether God exists or not."

-Seeing as your entire case is contingent upon this, I'm pretty sure you do.

"Did you read John 1:1?
In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the WORD was God."

-This doesn't prove anything. The WORD? Jesus is now also the WORD? John 1:1 does not support your case, in fact you've provided nothing linking to how John 1:1 has any relevance to this debate! Let's look back to something you said earlier

"We as Christians, believe Jesus is equal to God as stated in John 1:1."

I don't see it being stated there, in fact the WORD sounds more probable to being the Holy Doctrine than anything else.

To recap, my opponent has not proven anything throughout the course of this debate. He's given one example to help support the idea of Jesus being equal to God, however he has not shown how this example holds any relevance, in fact he hasn't even explained it past simply stating it. He also has not addressed 75% of my contentions, and only when he has he has done it minutely and addressed the smallest detail of a much larger structure. As you can see, the Pro side has proven nothing, has shown nothing, and has given a single verse of scripture to help entirely prove his case. Any logical being must weigh the arguments presented, and you see that I have clearly disproved the resolution several times over. Because of this, you must vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by stevencho 6 years ago
stevencho
Rubbersoul. Let's put aside our beliefs and take an honest look at the debate.

Haden gave thorough, well thought out (multi-paragraph) arguments and rebutted each one of you statements. And you responded with a couple sentences which didn't address any of the arguments Haden made. Instead of using a scripture or even your own thoughts on why you thought his argument was wrong, you instead just decided to ignore it all together and just rephrase what you already said in your opening post.

When we vote, we are not saying which side we ultimately believe in. We are saying who made the better argument. And in this debate, Rubbersoul didn't even attempt to give a rebuttal. There are many scriptures he could have used and instead said barely anything.

This is why Haden should win. Not because he necessarily correct. But because he actually tried.
Posted by HadenQuinlan 9 years ago
HadenQuinlan
@aietius

I REALLY LIKE YOU MAN.

WANNA HOOK UP SOMETIME?
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
Um, thanks I guess. :)

25 characters.
Posted by Aietius 9 years ago
Aietius
@Logical-Master: I like you =D
Posted by Aietius 9 years ago
Aietius
@Logical-Master: I like you =D
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
"I think you having an ego is............lame"

Where have I heard this kind of comment before?

http://www.debate.org...

Gurenman:

"It seems like "logicalmaster" has a bit of an ego.

I must say i didnt know alot about Lee, but "logical" said a bunch of stuff that was all about ego"

Very suspicious indeed.
Posted by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
Happens all of the time, HadenQuinlan. I've lost debates on this site where my opponent ended up forfeiting his/her rounds or where my opponent merely posted blatantly irrelevant information from wikipedia. In fact, there are a pack of voters on this site who vote against simply because they don't like me.

Under the current rules and regulations, the only thing you can do is get used to it and enjoy the actual debating. A high win/loss ratio is nice, but chances are, a lot of the voters who voted for you probably didn't read your debates and voted out of bias, hence making it meaningless.
Posted by Aietius 9 years ago
Aietius
You guys are so mean to each other =(
Posted by HadenQuinlan 9 years ago
HadenQuinlan
I wish I could say the same for you.

Regardless, thanks for debating with me and choosing this topic. It was a fun topic to research for.
Posted by rubbersoul 9 years ago
rubbersoul
Your'e a big bab...I mean boy, one of these days, you will see the light.
14 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by stevencho 6 years ago
stevencho
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 draxxt 9 years ago
draxxt
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 
Vote Placed by Gao 9 years ago
Gao
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 CP 9 years ago
CP
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 
Vote Placed by SportsGuru 9 years ago
SportsGuru
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 9 years ago
Logical-Master
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 
Vote Placed by Aietius 9 years ago
Aietius
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 9 years ago
s0m31john
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 
Vote Placed by emiliocab 9 years ago
emiliocab
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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 brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
rubbersoulHadenQuinlanTied
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