The Instigator
kjw47
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
ReformedArsenal
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

Who is God??/

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/16/2011 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,160 times Debate No: 16441
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (4)

 

kjw47

Pro

Truth = The Israelites served a single being mono God all throughout their history. Moses,David,Daniel,Abraham,Lot, Job,etc all served YHWH = a single being mono God-- They served the true God-- Also When Jesus attended the synagogues his first 30 years as a mortal man he was taught a single being mono God named YHWH-- He never refuted that teaching.-- These are all undeniable facts of history.
Catholocism created a false trinity monster in their councils headed by a pagan king. The reason for the councils is because they didnt know truth. The greeks were refusing to revert to a religion with a single being mono God- so the trinity was created, and under the guise of being burned alive at the stake for heresy, the translators translated wrong meanings of greek words to english ( greek words had 4-5 different meanings ) to fit the false found council teachings.
But the truth about who God actually is is still present in Gods written word, alls one has to do is listen to Jesus and Paul over the guy with the white collar. 1 Corinthians 8:6- There is one God to all the Father. ( he didnt say- father,son,holy spirit ) And Jesus taught John 17: 1-6-- While praying to the Father, Jesus called the Father- The only true God-- Then again at rev 3:12- Jesus stressed 4 times in 1 paragraph, to all who will listen to him- that he has a God- because it is truth- which makes this truth-- psalm 83:18-- Catholocism altered Gods word centuries ago and its been handed down from generation to generation and accepted without even being checked by most.
ReformedArsenal

Con

My opponent has leveled a rather serious accusation against the Catholic (and by extention the Protestant and Eastern Orthodox) Church. This is an hefty burden of proof as he is challening doctrine that has been largely unchallenged for nearly 1700 years, in favor of an understanding that began in 1870.

Allow me to break this down into contentions.

C1) OT Figures served a monotheistic God.
C2) Jesus also serve a monothesitic God.
C3) Catholocism creatd a false trinity in the various councils initiated by the Emperors of Rome
C4) The Greeks refused to revert to a religion with a single God and therefore the Triity was created to appease their polytheistic leanings
C5) The translators used many wrong Greek words to English to fit their false council teachings
C6) The truth about God is present in the written words of Jesus and Paul in the Bible
C7) 1 Corinthians says "there is one God" and therefore there is one God
C8) In John Jesus calls the Father the "only true God", therefore jesus is not God
C9) In Revelation 3:13 Jesus stresses that the Father is "my God" and therefore Jesus is not God
C10) Catholocism has altered God's word to create this false teaching

Ultimately my opponent's resolution is not "Who is God" but is "The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine created by the Catholic Church by manipulation of the written word of God." As such, in order to secure victory he must prove the following points. As Con, all I must do is show that this burden of proof has not been fulfilled.

A) The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine
B) This false doctrine was created by the Catholic Church
C) The Catholic Church manipulated the written word of God to create this false Trinity

If he fails to prove any one of those points, he has failed fo fullfil his burden of proof and therefore loses this debate.

Refutation

RC1) Undisputed
RC2) Undisputed
RC3) This contention begs the question. He has not proven that the Trinity is false, and therefore cannot assert that Catholocism created a false trinity.
RC4) This contention is rediculous, since the primary source of Christians outside of the first century were Greek and Roman. Furthermore, there is no evidence backing this and therefore the point is moot until substantiated. Furthermore, this kind of Pagan Polytheism was on the decline in the 1st century and was likely essentially dead by the 300s. [A]
RC5) What credentials or evidence does my opponent have to make this claim. As he points out, most Greek words have several English equivalents, what grounds does my opponent have to determine which Greek word is "right" and which is wrong"
RC6) Undisputed
RC7) Undisputed
RC8) The Doctrine of the Trinity does not prohibit Jesus from calling the Father the "only true God." The Doctrine of the Trinity states that the Father is God, The Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God and that all three Persons exist coeternally and coequally as distinct beings sharing one divine nature. To call the Father the "one true God" is to identify that the Person of the Father exists in the Nature of the One True God. Stating that the Father is in Nature the "one true God" does not preclude the Son nor the Spirit also being in Nature the "one true God."
RC9) See RC9. This is what is called "Functional Subordination." It means that functionally or econmically, Jesus is subordinate to God but is not ontologically or existentially subordinate. The same would be true of the Holy Spirit. Consider this, am functionally my bosses subordniate. However, our Nature (Human) is identical. Am I somehow LESS human because I am functionlly subordinate to my boss? Absolutely not.
RC10) The manuscript evidence for the historical veracity and consistency of the Bible is massive. Although there has been minor modifications from time to time, no modification has been proven that shows any substantial change to doctrine or meaning. My opponent has made this claim with no evidence and therefore it can be dismissed.

As we can see my opponent has not satisifed any burden of proof what so ever.

A) The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine - Unproven
B) This false doctrine was created by the Catholic Church - Unproven
C) The Catholic Church manipulated the written word of God to create this false Trinity - Unproven

At this point in the debate, Pro has not secured victory due to his lack of satisfying burden of proof.

Footnotes
[A] See Craig L. Blomberg's "Jesus and the Gospels: An Introduction and Survey, 2nd Edition", (Nashville: B&H Publishing Group, 2009), 30 for more
Debate Round No. 1
kjw47

Pro

Truth = The Israelites served a single being mono God all throughout their history. Moses,David,Daniel,Abraham,Lot, Job,etc all served YHWH = a single being mono God-- They served the true God-- Also When Jesus attended the synagogues his first 30 years as a mortal man he was taught a single being mono God named YHWH-- He never refuted that teaching.-- These are all undeniable facts of history.
Catholocism created a false trinity monster in their councils headed by a pagan king. The reason for the councils is because they didnt know truth. The greeks were refusing to revert to a religion with a single being mono God- so the trinity was created, and under the guise of being burned alive at the stake for heresy, the translators translated wrong meanings of greek words to english ( greek words had 4-5 different meanings ) to fit the false found council teachings.
But the truth about who God actually is is still present in Gods written word, alls one has to do is listen to Jesus and Paul over the guy with the white collar. 1 Corinthians 8:6- There is one God to all the Father. ( he didnt say- father,son,holy spirit ) And Jesus taught John 17: 1-6-- While praying to the Father, Jesus called the Father- The only true God-- Then again at rev 3:12- Jesus stressed 4 times in 1 paragraph, to all who will listen to him- that he has a God- because it is truth- which makes this truth-- psalm 83:18-- Catholocism altered Gods word centuries ago and its been handed down from generation to generation and accepted without even being checked by most.

fact 1) over 4000 years of the israelites serving the true God-never served a trinity God-including Moses,David,Solomon,Abraham,Job,Lot,Daniel, etc. They served the true God-YHWH

fACT 2) Jesus was taught a single being mono God his 30 years attending the synagogues- He never refuted it but backed that God he was taught in his teachings--John 17:1-6-- The Father is the only true God. Also taught by the apostles as truth- i single being mono God-- 1 Corinthians 8:6-- There is one God to all the Father.-Same thing Jesus taught at John 17.

fact 3) The whole reason for the councils was because catholocism didnt know truth. And history proves there is no trinity God.

fact 4) The trinity scholars and teachers would have to tell all of their followers that- Moses,David,Solomon,Daniel,Job,Lot, and Abraham all served a false God because they did not serve the same God as them. And that they didnt know God. It is an undisputable fact that they served a single being mono God- any trinity scholar knows its fact.

Fact 5) The trinity teaching of when Jesus went back to heaven would have to be this---God sat at Gods right hand. And this When Jesus hands back the kingdom after his millenial reign, and becomes subject to his God and Father- the trinities would actually be teaching this-- God handed back the kingdom to God and God became subject to his God. thus the trinity teaching must be that-- God has a God.
ReformedArsenal

Con

RF1) Prove this supposition. What is to say that YHWH is not simply the Father in the Trinity and the Son and Spirit were not revealed later in history? Furthermore we have the Word of the LORD (d'var YHWH) and the Spirit of the LORD (ruach YHWH) present in the OT. Both are worshiped and identied as God, so we have a full Trinity present throughout the Old Testament.

RF2) Prove this supposition. As I said previously, calling the Father the one true God is speaking of is Nature.

RF3) Really, history proves this? Which history... the 1600 (I'll be generous and say the 300s were still up in the air) years of Christian, Trinitarian history or 140 years of Jehovah's Witness anti-Trinitarian history? It sure seems like I have the historical account on my side of the discussion.

RF4) Indeed they would not. Each one of these person worshiped YHWH, which as I established can be viewed as either the Father in the Trinity, or more probably as the Trinity itself. Abraham interacted with the Word of the LORD and called it YHWH without being corrected, he also interacted with the Spirit of the LORD and called it YHWH without being corrected. Others (especially the Prophets) identify the Word of the LORD and the Spirit of the LORD as YHWH without being corrected... it seems to me that the Word, the Spirit, and Elohim are all identified as YHWH... that's Word (Son... cf John 1:1), Spirit (Holy Spirit) and Elohim (Father) all being identified as YHWH... seems like we have 3 persons (Son, Spirit, Father) and one Nature (YHWH)... sounds like the Trinity to me.

RF5) Again... this is called functional subordination. One person with a divine nature handing the kingdom to another person with a divine nature does not change their nature any more than me obeying my boss makes me less human.

Again, my opponent is either unwilling or unable, I susupect unable, to prove his assertions. We are no closer to seeing him fulfill his burden of proof now than we were at the close of round 2.
Debate Round No. 2
kjw47

Pro

One just has to believe Jesus over men--- rev 3:12-- he stressed to all 4 times in one paragraph that he ( Jesus ) has a God--- There is no way Gods word teaches that-- God has a God. When he comes with the archangels voice is because it is his voice. He is the firstborn of all creation- All other things God created through him-God taught him everything-God gave him everything- he is the first and last directly created by God. He always subjects himself to God and does Gods will. If he were actually God- it would have all been his to start with-he would have known it all to start with. believe Jesus.
ReformedArsenal

Con

Yes, Jesus speaks as though he has a God. This is called Fuctional submission. This does not necessitate an ontological distinction. You have not shown that it does.

John 1:3 "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." This does NOT say "All things were made through him, after he was made..." it says "without him was not anything made that was made." If he is a "made" thing, then this passage is wrong... because something was made without him.

Phillipians 2:5-7 "Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus,who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men." Jesus Christ was in the form of God, he has the same form and substance as God. Then, he willingly made himself nothing (voluntarily self restrained his divine attributs), to take the form of a servant. In essence, he gave up his divine claim on the Kingdom, in order to earn it for humanity as a human, so he could draw humans into that kingdom.

Allow me to reiterate teh points that Pro was required to prove in order to fulfill burden of poof in this debate.

A) The doctrine of the Trinity is a false doctrine
B) This false doctrine was created by the Catholic Church
C) The Catholic Church manipulated the written word of God to create this false Trinity

My opponent has not proven ANY of the assertions required to fulfill burden of proof. Normally I am apt to take a neutral stance at the end of a debate and allow my voters to draw their own conclusion, however in this debate it is so clear that I will state it. Pro has put forward such a poor effort in fulfilling his burden of proof, that this debate is clearly mine. Please vote accordingly.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 6 years ago
ReformedArsenal
kjw47,

I read both Greek and Hebrew, so don't lecture me about "putting God's personal name back."

The fact is that there are multiple beings in the OT that are treated as divine and called YHWH... you need to account for that and your limited view has not done so.
Posted by kjw47 6 years ago
kjw47
Try reading the ot with Gods personal name put back in place- There is a passage that says this--- I am YHWH ( Jehovah), besides me ( singular ) there is no other God. And in Ezekial it says about 20 times-- They will have to know that i am YHWH (Jehovah ) He alone is the Father- he is the only true God.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 6 years ago
ReformedArsenal
You can't prove anything that happened in history... that's the nature of history and an epistemological limitation we have as temporal beings.

However, I can show that the Trinity is a doctrine that is mandated by both the Old and the New Testaments, because of the plurality of divine entities present in both. Either you have to go to a full Polytheism, or to a Trinitarian formula.

http://knol.google.com...#
Posted by kjw47 6 years ago
kjw47
Thats your opinion- i disagree- you cant prove that Moses and those israelites served a trinity God because written jewish history is on their side and positively prove they did not serve a trinity God, because God is not a trinity God. The only thing the trinity religion can say on the matter is that they didnt know God or that God didnt reveal himself to them, and that is not truth. The Jw,s have it right.
Posted by ReformedArsenal 6 years ago
ReformedArsenal
kjw47,

You haven't proven one word of yours to be true, which is why you lost the debate. Beyond the debate, you are teaching something that is a lie, and it is beyond arrogant for you and other Jehovah's Witnesses to teach that they alone know the truth after 1700 years of Christian history has shown otherwise. The Trinity is a doctrine that is derived from the Scriptures, was held and developed through the earliest development of the Church, and affirmed time and time again.
Posted by XimenBao 6 years ago
XimenBao
Praise Jesus!
Posted by kjw47 6 years ago
kjw47
you havent proved one word of mine to be false because you cant- its all truth
Posted by XimenBao 6 years ago
XimenBao
Perhaps it would be better not to plant seeds which can so easily be shown to be barren?
Posted by kjw47 6 years ago
kjw47
i agree as far as debates go in written form i should have lost. I am not a debater in that sense. I present truth thats all. I plant seeds its all i can do.
Posted by kjw47 6 years ago
kjw47
Whether the human race likes truth or not- the trinity teachers would have to teach that Moses,David,Solomon, all israelites served a false God, because it is undisputable fact that not 1 single day in the existence of the israelites did they serve a trinity God- they served a single being God. We know they served the true God. The same God Jesus was taught and served. If you need proof-talk to a Rabbi or jewish scholar or even a trinity scholar will tell you the same words. Because they are undisputable facts of history.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Dimmitri.C 5 years ago
Dimmitri.C
kjw47ReformedArsenalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Votes for arguments, grammar, sources and conduct.
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 6 years ago
KeytarHero
kjw47ReformedArsenalTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: KJW obviously has no evidence to back up his claims.
Vote Placed by XimenBao 6 years ago
XimenBao
kjw47ReformedArsenalTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: This was preaching, not argument.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
kjw47ReformedArsenalTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: 1 pt to Pro for a new member advocating and defending a worthy topic for debate. However aside from assertions the argument fell apart in the second round where all Pro did was recopy the OP. Clear argument to Con. Pro it would be nice to see your argument broken up into a list of primary claims which are then supported.