The Instigator
Artur
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Hirakula
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

is christianity a monotheistic religion?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,242 times Debate No: 38279
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)

 

Artur

Con

hello.

first, I want you to know that I am not antichrist or against any religion. and I do not support any religion, furtherway, we will have many debaTES on several religions, not just christianity.

my opponent has to be a person who believes in christianity or anyway, a person who claims that christianity is monotheistic religion.

conditions:

i will use KJV bible for my arguements.
some people say: "I know hewbrew/greek and I have the bible in original, that version(any version, not exactly KJV) is not translated correctly" or "that version is written like that due to political plights" and e.t.c no arguemnts like this will be accepted. I use the widely used version.

this round is for acceptance. who will aceept?

p.s: I do not care grammatical rules.
Hirakula

Pro

Greetings. I’m happy to accept the challenge, and contend against your point that Christianity is not a monotheistic religion. I will argue that it is, in fact, a monotheistic religion.


It should be noted that I’m not a Christian, I’m an atheist, but I hope you will accept my argument regardless, as I was once a Christian, and am familiar with Christianity.


I see that my opponent has stated that he doesn't care for grammatical rules. While I can’t make him do anything, I would recommend, suggest, and hope that he present his conduct in an orderly and cosmetically-pleasing manner, as articulation failures can detract from an argument, possibly giving me an unfair advantage.

Debate Round No. 1
Artur

Con

hello Hirakula.

good luck.

now, there 2 or three verses among I have read in the new testament(which is a part of the bible) which contradicts monotheism. now I will start by using one of them, I think every christian or the one who is interested in the bible knows this verse, one of the most famous slogans in christianity of course if not the most famous. John 1:1:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...

now, let us analyse this verse, does it contradict to monotheism or not.

I will analyse it with giving an example, in my example I will act as GOD, the word will stay as Jesus. I say Jesus instead of word and Artur instead of god, in my example.

in the beginning was Jesus(the word), and Jesus(the word) was with Artur(GOD), and Jesus(word) was GOD.

now according to this verse, we have our FIRST GOD with whom was the word. I named GOD Artur, and the word was with Artur. Artur is god. here is our first god. here is one god.

and the word was with me(GOD), and word was god. this means: word was god in his own, and saying that god was with god makes 2 gods.

WORD is GOD itself(and the Word was God.) and it was WITH GOD(and the Word was with God).

saying that: GoD was WITH GOD makes two GODS.

it is like to: Artur was at home and he was talking with his friend.

here, it makes two humans. that verse is also like that: word was god and was with another god.
some may say me: read it with whole context, I have read it with whole context too, I have read old and new testament.

however, I think this is enough for now.
Hirakula

Pro

Hello Artur, and good luck to you too.

The greatest issue in this debate is how one can define monotheism. The very supernatural nature of deities makes it difficult for us to define them. I suppose what I'm trying to say is, there is no right answer, because this stuff, according to Christians, does not fit with our understanding of the world.

That is the essence of my argument. Deities (though I belief none exist) are awkward to understand. If one accepts that a God can create a man out of dust, then a woman from his rib, what is there that they cannot accept?

Most Christians are Trinitarians (and I won't deal with Anti-Trinitarians) - they believe that there are Three parts to God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit/Ghost (I will just say Spirit from now on). When most people say 'God', they are referring to the Father, even if they don't realize it. Jesus is the Son, created when the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary.

Now, here's where things get messy. Christians believe that these three beings are both individual and combined. The combination of all three makes "God". But "God" is perceived as a single entity, and is worshipped as one. Christians accept that this being is not homogeneous, rather heterogeneous, but look at it as one whole being. I like to think of it as such: Christians worship you (Artur), but your head, your torso, your legs and your arms were controlled by different minds (perhaps one of them can be said to be the Word). They acknowledge that you have different parts, but worship you as a whole - the deity is one being, made of multiple pieces, but the pieces are not deities.

In regard to your passage, I believe that the purpose of the saying "the Word is God" is simply to demonstrate that God's beliefs, thoughts, opinions, etc. ARE in fact the deity Himself - He is made of nothing but His own thoughts, etc.
Debate Round No. 2
Artur

Con

words written {{{with these symbols}}} mean I quote either you or any source.

{{{The greatest issue in this debate is how one can define monotheism.}}}
belief in the existence of one god or in the oneness of God.

I meant this, according to the new testament, it contradicts the oneness of GOD.

{{{The very supernatural nature of deities makes it difficult for us to define them. I suppose what I'm trying to say is, there is no right answer, because this stuff, according to Christians, does not fit with our understanding of the world.}}}
here, according to presumptions, you are right.
the believers(in any religion) consider the world out of facts.
but if your(not you, anybody) belief contradicts the fact then I think, it is time to realise the reality and change your mind or belief.

it is exactly known that 2+3=5 but can I say that: 2+3=37 because of my mind/belief. I believe that 2+3 makes thirty seven, because my religion says it, my religion may say a thing which contradicts the fact, if it occurs then time to change your belief, no point in wasting time with believing in it.

{{{That is the essence of my argument. Deities (though I belief none exist) are awkward to understand. If one accepts that a God can create a man out of dust, then a woman from his rib, what is there that they cannot accept?}}}
I also deny current religions or THE religions I know.

but I know religions are not fact hence they can not be analysed with scientific meausrement, due to this knowledge of mine, I am not analysing christianity according to scientific meausurements. if they were fact like 2+3 then it could have been analysed according to the scientific rules.

If you realised I have used biblical source, it is a religious source which contradicts monotheism, this are their source, this are presumptious source, this are not scientific analyses.

however, let us say deities may be out of our logic, our logic is insufficient to understand it, but according to this logic: every religion is right religion, because at the time/place a christian finds an error from islam: then it is deity and can be true because our brain is not enough to understand it.

if we use according to the logic which says: {{{That is the essence of my argument. Deities (though I belief none exist) are awkward to understand.}}} then every religion can be true? do you know somebody who accepts all the religions he/she knows?

there are some agnostics I know who accept every religion in case one of them becomes true after his/her death and hence he/she will not be penalised by god. he accepts islam, christianity, buddism and e.t.c he is from india and he says: after my death one of them will be true and I will be awarded with heaven.

{{{Now, here's where things get messy. Christians believe that these three beings are both individual and combined}}}
if we analyse it, it also makes more than one, it makes about 1.9. then it is something among monotheism and polytheism.

I know, this is belief and needs not to be analysed according to science, but the source of this belief, their own verse claims that there are two. If I used scientific measurement, then you may have said presumptions.

{{{The combination of all three makes "God". But "God" is perceived as a single entity, and is worshipped as one.}}}
good point but yet not right.

if it was like this, then it could have been monotheistic belief.
but, first of all, their holy book which they consider as the origin of the belief of theirs, says that there are two gods at least.

anyway, if the combination of them makes one god, then they can not be GOD when they are SEPERATED. the combination of this three makes one GOD, if they are still god even if they are seperated, then combination of them does not make one god, it makes a level higher than the god. combination makes one god means: god can exist when all these three(father, word(jesus) and spirit(holy ghost)) are together, aand at the time they are seperated there is no god.

at least, 33 years the world has survived without god, during the years Jesus lived among people.(because their combination makes god, and at the time they are seperated there is no god, because their combination makes god, at the time Jesus became man there was no combination, hence, at that time, the world was without god).

{{{Christians accept that this being is not homogeneous, rather heterogeneous, but look at it as one whole being. I like to think of it as such: Christians worship you (Artur), but your head, your torso, your legs and your arms were controlled by different minds (perhaps one of them can be said to be the Word). They acknowledge that you have different parts, but worship you as a whole - the deity is one being, made of multiple pieces, but the pieces are not deities.}}}

how come can you compare this combination to the combination of body.
I am composed of my leg, hand.... and my head, but my head is not Artur when seperated, my leg or legs is/are not Artur when they are seperated from the rest of body, but according to christianity: the word of ghost or father is god whether they are together or seperated.

if they are still god even if at the time they are seperated from each other, then it means: Jesus is god, Ghost is god, and Father is god, then again 3 gods.

if they are not god when seperated, then the word was not god and can not be said the word was god. it contradicts.

result: one of these two ways needs to be chosen:

a) christianity needs to make a big reform which claims polytheism
b)vice versa, again needs a big reform which demolishes the words {{{and the word was god}}} from the verse john 1:1 from the all bibles.
Hirakula

Pro

I will use "quotation marks" to quote my opponent, and {{{these}}} when requoting myself. I will start off with QUOTE then finish with END QUOTE in order to make the quotations clear.

QUOTE
{{{The greatest issue in this debate is how one can define monotheism.}}}

"belief in the existence of one god or in the oneness of God."

"the believers(in any religion) consider the world out of facts.
but if your(not you, anybody) belief contradicts the fact then I think, it is time to realise the reality and change your mind or belief.
it is exactly known that 2+3=5 but can I say that: 2+3=37 because of my mind/belief. I believe that 2+3 makes thirty seven, because my religion says it, my religion may say a thing which contradicts the fact, if it occurs then time to change your belief, no point in wasting time with believing in it."

{{{Now, here's where things get messy. Christians believe that these three beings are both individual and combined}}}
"if we analyse it, it also makes more than one, it makes about 1.9. then it is something among monotheism and polytheism.

I know, this is belief and needs not to be analysed according to science, but the source of this belief, their own verse claims that there are two. If I used scientific measurement, then you may have said presumptions."
END QUOTE

Key word: belief. If the word '37-ism' meant belief that every mathematical equation equals 37, then one who believes that 2+3=37 is a '37-ist', regardless of whether or not 2+3 does equal 37. If Christians believe in only one God, we cannot stop them with logic - we can convince them that there is more than one God, or that there is none, but then they will no longer be Christians, because Christianity says, despite breaking all rules of logic, that everything somehow adds up to one God.

QUOTE
"but, first of all, their holy book which they consider as the origin of the belief of theirs, says that there are two gods at least."
END QUOTE

Can you provide a citation of where the Bible states that "there are two gods at least"?

QUOTE
{{{The combination of all three makes "God". But "God" is perceived as a single entity, and is worshipped as one.}}}
"good point but yet not right.

if it was like this, then it could have been monotheistic belief.

anyway, if the combination of them makes one god, then they can not be GOD when they are SEPERATED. the combination of this three makes one GOD, if they are still god even if they are seperated, then combination of them does not make one god, it makes a level higher than the god. combination makes one god means: god can exist when all these three(father, word(jesus) and spirit(holy ghost)) are together, aand at the time they are seperated there is no god.

at least, 33 years the world has survived without god, during the years Jesus lived among people.(because their combination makes god, and at the time they are seperated there is no god, because their combination makes god, at the time Jesus became man there was no combination, hence, at that time, the world was without god)."
END QUOTE

My opponent has this idea of separation of the different parts of God. I fear this is from misunderstanding - they do not become God once united; they are always the parts of God. God doesn't become incomplete, die, or split up, by his very nature.

QUOTE
{{{Christians accept that this being is not homogeneous, rather heterogeneous, but look at it as one whole being. I like to think of it as such: Christians worship you (Artur), but your head, your torso, your legs and your arms were controlled by different minds (perhaps one of them can be said to be the Word). They acknowledge that you have different parts, but worship you as a whole - the deity is one being, made of multiple pieces, but the pieces are not deities.}}}

"how come can you compare this combination to the combination of body.
I am composed of my leg, hand.... and my head, but my head is not Artur when seperated, my leg or legs is/are not Artur when they are seperated from the rest of body, but according to christianity: the word of ghost or father is god whether they are together or seperated.

if they are still god even if at the time they are seperated from each other, then it means: Jesus is god, Ghost is god, and Father is god, then again 3 gods.

if they are not god when seperated, then the word was not god and can not be said the word was god. it contradicts."
END QUOTE

I fear you have contradicted yourself: "... my head is not Artur when seperated" yes, of course not. I'm not saying it does; you are. My opponent says "if they are still god even if at the time they are seperated from each other, then it means: Jesus is god, Ghost is god, and Father is god, then again 3 gods." No. No. They aren't God individually. They are parts of a whole - there is only one whole.
Christians believe in one deity that is comprised of three parts - the three parts are individual.

I will conclude with a different example. There are 50 states in the United States of America. The U.S.A. is one nation. Alaska is not a nation; it is a state. It cannot be separated from the U.S.A., or else then it's not a part of the U.S.A. But even if it could be, it would not be a nation.

One final remark: I strongly suggest that you keep quoting and re-quoting to a minimum in your response - this has been quite tiresome and complicated.

Debate Round No. 3
Artur

Con

as I said before, {{{I use these symbols to quote you or other source}}}

{{{Key word: belief. If the word '37-ism' meant belief that every mathematical equation equals 37, then one who believes that 2+3=37 is a '37-ist', regardless of whether or not 2+3 does equal 37. If Christians believe in only one God, we cannot stop them with logic - we can convince them that there is more than one God, or that there is none, but then they will no longer be Christians, because Christianity says, despite breaking all rules of logic, that everything somehow adds up to one God.}}}
as I said before: if the belief contradicts the fact, then htat belief is wrong.

I am not using scientific measurement, I am using their own verse, and their own verse shows that their belief includes two gods when we analyse it. but still they consider one god.

then, christianity is wrong(I apologise from christians for insulting your belief)

37 has been given as an example, I used 2+3=37 to make it like to word was god and it was with god and still they have one god. neither contradicts the fact.

{{{QUOTE
"but, first of all, their holy book which they consider as the origin of the belief of theirs, says that there are two gods at least."
END QUOTE

Can you provide a citation of where the Bible states that "there are two gods at least"?}}}}}}}}} END OF THE QUOTE OF HIRAKULA, NOW MY WORDS BEGIN.

it does not say directly: "there are two(or more gods)" when we analysed the verse from the old testament, there are two gods(at least) as I analysed above.(look at round 2) and there is(at least) one more verse which makes two gods.

{{{My opponent has this idea of separation of the different parts of God. I fear this is from misunderstanding - they do not become God once united; they are always the parts of God. God doesn't become incomplete, die, or split up, by his very nature.}}} END OF THE QUOTE AND MY WORDS BEGIN HERE

you say, {{{they are always the parts of God}}}
and if they are always parts of god, then they are not god when seperated, but the verse says: the word was god. christianity indicates Jesus by saying "word". the word was gpd means not part of god, it means it was god. result: Jesus is word when it is seperateed, according to the bible word was god, and word is Jesus, so when word is seperated, it was still god. not part of GOD.

even if, they were part of god, then they are not GOD when seperated(here it contradicts the verse john 1:1 you say they were part, according to you word(Jesus) was not god, was part of god but the bible says it was god(and the word was god)), now are we discussing your opinion or bible? we are discussing the verse from bible, hence you can not use your opinion which says they were part of god, use from the bible. my leg is not Artur when seperated. AND I AM NOT DISCUSSING YOUR OPINIONS, WE ARE DISCUSSING THE VERSE FROM THE BIBLE. and the bible says {{{WORD WAS GOD}} according to this, word was god itself too.

if the word was god, and was with god, it means the god was still god when he is seperated.

{{{No. No. They aren't God individually.}}}

the bible says that the word was god. we are not discussing your opinion, we are discussing bible, and the bible says the word was god. and it was with god. hence, it is god individually.

{{{Christians believe in one deity that is comprised of three parts - the three parts are individual.}}}

then their belief is wrong, because it contradicts the origin of their bible, christianity is based on the bible, if you are believeing out of the bible, then you are not christian, you are something like christian.

and: whatever they believe, still contradicts to bible. because according to john 1:1 there are (at least) two gods, but still they believe in one.

as you say: {{{hey aren't God individually. They are parts of a whole}}}

but the bible does not think so, nor says.

the bible says that the word was god, word(Jesus) is individual, and according to bible he was god individually.

{{{I will conclude with a different example. There are 50 states in the United States of America. The U.S.A. is one nation. Alaska is not a nation; it is a state. It cannot be separated from the U.S.A., or else then it's not a part of the U.S.A. But even if it could be, it would not be a nation.}}}
an example with less relation. usa is composed of 50 states but usa does not say:

we have 50 states and this makes 1 state, it makes one country. usa does not say: we have 50 countries which make one country when added. state in the usa is like a province, a part of country.

but according to the bible: word was god, and it was with god, and according to christian doctors/professors there are one god.

saying in christianity there is one god means: jesus(word which was god)+god(god with whom the word was with)=1god.

sounds like: 1+1=1 is this right?

anyway, I hope I did not forget to answer any part and this was the last round, I wish I set for 5 rounds, however seems it would also be not enough. thank you.
Hirakula

Pro

This has been an interesting but complicated debate, and I wish to end it off by trying to clarify two of the things that both I and my opponent have said and claimed.

First, I want to address my opponent's usage of John 1:1. At first, I saw it as relatively unimportant, but it has become apparent to me that my opponent views it as a defining piece of evidence for his case, which I had not considered it. However, this kind of view has come to me only from my familiarity with the Bible, and its depiction of the nature of God. I will attempt to describe what I feel God is depicted to be.
God appears to be undefined - amorphous. However, Christians have done their best to put some words to Him, to give us humans some sense of his nature and appearance. God is more of a collective form than a person. However, and I must stress this, there's only one guy, really. This guy might not be homogeneous, but there is one collective mind or soul, if you wish to state it as that.
Regarding, "the Word was God." I feel my opponent lacks a grasp on the complicated, convoluted nature of the Bible, something I find difficult to accurately portray to you. However, I can assure my opponent that "the Word was God" does not mean "the Word is a different God than God".

Secondly, I want to clarify my own examples, as well as conclude with another.
2+3=37
If 37-ism is the belief that everything equals 37, and Christianity taught that 2+3=37, then Christianity would be a 37-istic religion. Even if every Christian noticed that 2+3 does not equal 37, that would not change that Christianity is a 37-istic religion.
States of the U.S.A
The Word, as mentioned in my opponent Bible verse, John 1:1, can be considered the every document, policy, political thought of the U.S. government. Perhaps, if one stretched the rules of logic (which I proved can be done, in the previous example), one can claim that the Word is the U.S. government. I'm no longer sure if the states can accurately fit the analogy, but I feel the Word can be accurately compared to the government.
Allow me to finish with one more example/analogy: God is a salad made of salad. Within a salad, there should be many different pieces or parts, correct? Perhaps lettuce, tomato, etc. I can only say that the Bible makes little sense to me, to clarify the point. God's salad does have many pieces and parts - however, those pieces and parts retain the aspects and characteristics of God - but they are not God, because they are only the pieces.

To finally end, this is a very complicated issue, but, when it comes down to it, Christians believe, Christianity teaches, and the Bible says, whether they obey logic or not, that there is one God, and, if the every word of the Bible were to be taken literally, the only thing that can be understood is that God can't be understood. But there's still only one - apparently.
Debate Round No. 4
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
it does not say one god, it says two gods.

word is Jesus, father is father, not one god.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 3 years ago
Solomon_Grim
It uses the same name for both uses of the word God, implying the same God.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
I am not deniing that john 1:1 is talking about father and word(I also guess that john 1:1 is talking about father, it is clear that one is Jesus because john 1:1 says "word" and jesus is believed to be word, and the second was father I guess) all I said is: that verse says there are two gods.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 3 years ago
Solomon_Grim
However, in John 1, that can be talking about God the father and Jesus.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
I did not say that they can not exist, because it is belief, in belief impossible things may happen, beliefs are based on the fantasies and out of possibilities.

I dont say 3 gods or 2 gods can not exist, iti is belief and possible, I just said two gods at the same time can not be described: monotheism.

christians say: our religion is monotheistic pr christianity is placed among monotheistic religions in fact it is polyhtiestic I said.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 3 years ago
Solomon_Grim
I understand what you are saying now, but I find no reason why God the father, son, and Holy Ghost can not coexist as one God.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
and one of that two is Jesus I said.
Posted by Artur 3 years ago
Artur
@solomon, do not know you realised or not. I have not said Jesus is not god, according to many people Jesus is, I said: according to bible there are 2 gods.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 3 years ago
Solomon_Grim
In John 20:28, Jesus is called God by Thomas. Acts 20:28, it says "...be shepherds of the church of God, which he brought with his own blood."

Philippians 2:10-11 states that everyone will confess to Jesus being God.

"You were shown these things so that you might know that the LORD is God; besides him there is no other." " Deuteronomy 4:35. There is only one God, three parts of him.
Posted by Solomon_Grim 3 years ago
Solomon_Grim
I also pointed out how in John it states that the life was in him (God the father). In the Bible, it clearly states that Jesus is the life. It's saying that Jesus is in God the father. Also, trinities happen in normal life. You are a body, spirit, and soul. Your body is not you. Your spirit or your soul is not you. All three pieces together is you.
No votes have been placed for this debate.