Total Posts:23|Showing Posts:1-23
Jump to topic:

Does the Christian God exists debate

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/6/2016 10:53:58 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
http://www.debate.org...

I wanted to commend my opponent. He is diligently seeking to support his case, attempting to submit sound arguments, and he has not in the least been ugly towards me. I would like to think that has gone both ways. Feel free to comment on the debate so maybe we can get this on the front page. Perhaps, you will overlook the shameless self promotion! ;-)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 11:45:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
bump
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 12:14:52 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 11:45:44 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
bump

I will vote under one condition. You open up your coat. Come on. It'll be worth it.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 12:15:40 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 10:53:58 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

I wanted to commend my opponent. He is diligently seeking to support his case, attempting to submit sound arguments, and he has not in the least been ugly towards me. I would like to think that has gone both ways. Feel free to comment on the debate so maybe we can get this on the front page. Perhaps, you will overlook the shameless self promotion! ;-)

Or if you admit Jesus is the Christ on one of my threads.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:40:19 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 12:14:52 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 11:45:44 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
bump

I will vote under one condition. You open up your coat. Come on. It'll be worth it.

Lol, I'm not looking for votes. I just wanted to acknowledge my opponent's willingness to honestly represent his beliefs and not rely on insult or attack. He is a real class act from what I can see.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 5:20:53 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
I would argue that there is no such thing as "the Christian God" so therefore no it does not exist. However, as a man of faith and a student of comparative religions, I have to say that there is a disgusting sense of exclusivism that is generated when adding a prefix to God. There is no such thing as "the Muslim God' or "the Christian God" or "the Buddhist God" or "Orthodox Christian God" and such. It is just God. So the topic of conversation should be Does God exist? rather than Does the Christian God exist, because the answers are Yes and No, respectively. :) In conclusion, we can use attributory prefixes such as the All-Mighty God or the Ever-Forgiving God....But God does not require prefixes that restrict Him to a certain group of people. :)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 5:57:48 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 5:20:53 AM, persianimmortal wrote:
I would argue that there is no such thing as "the Christian God" so therefore no it does not exist. However, as a man of faith and a student of comparative religions, I have to say that there is a disgusting sense of exclusivism that is generated when adding a prefix to God. There is no such thing as "the Muslim God' or "the Christian God" or "the Buddhist God" or "Orthodox Christian God" and such. It is just God. So the topic of conversation should be Does God exist? rather than Does the Christian God exist, because the answers are Yes and No, respectively. :) In conclusion, we can use attributory prefixes such as the All-Mighty God or the Ever-Forgiving God....But God does not require prefixes that restrict Him to a certain group of people. :)

"The Christian" is added to the term "god" merely to point to god as defined in the Bible.

Also, perhaps you might click "reply" instead of "add post". That way I'll get a notification and you will get a discussion. ;-P
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 6:06:48 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
"The Christian" is added to the term "god" merely to point to god as defined in the Bible.

Also, perhaps you might click "reply" instead of "add post". That way I'll get a notification and you will get a discussion. ;-P

Thank you for that haha :) Now to address your reply:

Since there is no reference to the word "Christian God" in the Bible, the mere addition as you put it, of these words, makes the Christian community exclusive and less welcoming. Given that they've clearly set this man-made barrier on something that cannot be Scripturally supported, it would be worthwhile to note than such prefixes destroys the very purpose of the Bible's message of universal inclusivity.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 6:33:50 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 6:06:48 AM, persianimmortal wrote:
"The Christian" is added to the term "god" merely to point to god as defined in the Bible.

Also, perhaps you might click "reply" instead of "add post". That way I'll get a notification and you will get a discussion. ;-P


Thank you for that haha :) Now to address your reply:

Since there is no reference to the word "Christian God" in the Bible, the mere addition as you put it, of these words, makes the Christian community exclusive and less welcoming. Given that they've clearly set this man-made barrier on something that cannot be Scripturally supported, it would be worthwhile to note than such prefixes destroys the very purpose of the Bible's message of universal inclusivity.

The Christian god would be Jesus or Yahweh, and that would be distinct from gods of other religions. Also, I'm not a Christian, but I don't think referring to a specific god by the name claimed in the holy book (said to be inspired by him) would limit universal inclusivity of that book.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:45:31 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
The Christian god would be Jesus or Yahweh, and that would be distinct from gods of other religions. Also, I'm not a Christian, but I don't think referring to a specific god by the name claimed in the holy book (said to be inspired by him) would limit universal inclusivity of that book.

There is no evidence that Jesus is God because even He rejects it and I would be more than happy to provide you with such evidence from the Bible. There is no such thing as a Christian God other than it being a man-made title to please those who view themselves as different from the rest, aka exclusivism.

The supposed "distinction" of God, rests in the multitude of languages used to address God. Allah (arabic), Elohim (hebrew), Dios (spanish), Bog (Russian and other slavic lang.), Dieu (french), Khoda (persian), God (english), Dia (Gaelic), Theos (greek), Jumala (finnish)...and others. So there is no difference between God when the language all of a sudden changes, they all address God. I'll give you an example; The muslims refer to God as Allah while the Arab Christians also refer to God as Allah so there is no distinction of religion by what you use to call God. The religion may differ, but the language has no effect.

You don't have to be a Christian to know that the labeling God with a prefix that makes him your own, is a rather selfish act to do because God is for everyone and not for a specific community of individuals. So when a Christian says, "Yes, but the Christian God is different than the Jewish or Muslim God", is in fact an ignorant claim, given that they are the one and the same, hence the term monotheism. Placing a title that identifies with a specific group, is in fact promoting division and is contradictory to that of the Holy Texts and damages universal inclusivity, because God doesn't belong to just a group...God belongs to all.

Note: I speak on a scriptural level and I don't care for people's interpretations. I only gain knowledge from the source which is the Holy Texts themselves. Btw, if you like, I can provide to you in the Bible where Jesus rejects such claims of being God. :)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 4:05:30 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 7:45:31 AM, persianimmortal wrote:
The Christian god would be Jesus or Yahweh, and that would be distinct from gods of other religions. Also, I'm not a Christian, but I don't think referring to a specific god by the name claimed in the holy book (said to be inspired by him) would limit universal inclusivity of that book.

There is no evidence that Jesus is God because even He rejects it and I would be more than happy to provide you with such evidence from the Bible.

This is a position I have advocated as well, but the assumption that Jesus is god (a very popular assumption amongst Christians) can be allowed definitionally in order to address the weakness of the position.

There is no such thing as a Christian God other than it being a man-made title to please those who view themselves as different from the rest, aka exclusivism.

The supposed "distinction" of God, rests in the multitude of languages used to address God. Allah (arabic), Elohim (hebrew), Dios (spanish), Bog (Russian and other slavic lang.), Dieu (french), Khoda (persian), God (english), Dia (Gaelic), Theos (greek), Jumala (finnish)...and others. So there is no difference between God when the language all of a sudden changes, they all address God. I'll give you an example; The muslims refer to God as Allah while the Arab Christians also refer to God as Allah so there is no distinction of religion by what you use to call God. The religion may differ, but the language has no effect.

I get the sense that you believe all religions worship the same god. This is a separate debate to be had amongst believers.

You don't have to be a Christian to know that the labeling God with a prefix that makes him your own, is a rather selfish act to do because God is for everyone and not for a specific community of individuals. So when a Christian says, "Yes, but the Christian God is different than the Jewish or Muslim God", is in fact an ignorant claim, given that they are the one and the same, hence the term monotheism. Placing a title that identifies with a specific group, is in fact promoting division and is contradictory to that of the Holy Texts and damages universal inclusivity, because God doesn't belong to just a group...God belongs to all.

Note: I speak on a scriptural level and I don't care for people's interpretations. I only gain knowledge from the source which is the Holy Texts themselves. Btw, if you like, I can provide to you in the Bible where Jesus rejects such claims of being God. :)

I am familiar with the verses which are claimed to support Jesus as god, and those which are claimed to support Jesus was not. The reality is, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming divinity and sought to have him executed because of it. Jesus did not resist. Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be martyred.

I don't believe he was a god to begin with, so it doesn't really matter to me either way.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 5:52:11 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
This is a position I have advocated as well, but the assumption that Jesus is god (a very popular assumption amongst Christians) can be allowed definitionally in order to address the weakness of the position.

Great, so we're on the same page when we both say that Jesus is not God.

I get the sense that you believe all religions worship the same god. This is a separate debate to be had amongst believers.

Yes they do all pray to the same God (Monotheism). However, respectfully, you were the one that said there is a distinction between them and I clarified that the distinction rests in the language used to address God and no disrinction in God Himself.

I am familiar with the verses which are claimed to support Jesus as god, and those which are claimed to support Jesus was not. The reality is, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming divinity and sought to have him executed because of it. Jesus did not resist. Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be martyred.

I don't believe he was a god to begin with, so it doesn't really matter to me either way.

But how does that support your argument? I mentioned the damage of labeling God with an exclusive-associative-prefix, and your response was about Jesus being killed by the Jews because of His claims. There is no relation because the Christians' claims about Jesus being God is baseless and rejected by the Bible itself. But it should be weird to you that you and I (religious and non religious people) end up on the same page about Jesus not being God.

You had said, "Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be executed". Jesus did in fact mean the words He shared because they were revealed to Him and not His own. As far as the Bible and the religious community is concerned, Jesus did not hope to die because the Bible shows us how He prayed to God to save Him from death, but instead He would say after every plea that God's Will is more important than His own. This goes to show that Jesus was not God, if He had prayed to God. So again, it should be weird that we are agreeing haha.

I agree with you when you say that, "I don't believe he was God to begin with". Again we're 90% on the same page regarding this subject. The funny thing is that even though I'm a religious person and a believer in God and you are not, we still end up agreeing with eachother on a subject that a majority of Christians would argue oppositely. So technically, your way of thinking, is more Christian than those who claim association with Chrsitianity.

So in conclusion, the subject is the existence of a Christian God, which we both agreed is preposterous and baseless. Funny thing is that you and I have agreed on Jesus not being God, so basically a religious person and a non religious person have come to the conclusion that the Scriptures of the Bible, do not support the Trinity as being manifest in One individual. I love the collaboration here haha
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 6:51:04 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 5:52:11 PM, persianimmortal wrote:
This is a position I have advocated as well, but the assumption that Jesus is god (a very popular assumption amongst Christians) can be allowed definitionally in order to address the weakness of the position.

Great, so we're on the same page when we both say that Jesus is not God.

I get the sense that you believe all religions worship the same god. This is a separate debate to be had amongst believers.

Yes they do all pray to the same God (Monotheism). However, respectfully, you were the one that said there is a distinction between them and I clarified that the distinction rests in the language used to address God and no disrinction in God Himself.

I am familiar with the verses which are claimed to support Jesus as god, and those which are claimed to support Jesus was not. The reality is, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming divinity and sought to have him executed because of it. Jesus did not resist. Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be martyred.

I don't believe he was a god to begin with, so it doesn't really matter to me either way.

But how does that support your argument? I mentioned the damage of labeling God with an exclusive-associative-prefix, and your response was about Jesus being killed by the Jews because of His claims. There is no relation because the Christians' claims about Jesus being God is baseless and rejected by the Bible itself. But it should be weird to you that you and I (religious and non religious people) end up on the same page about Jesus not being God.

You had said, "Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be executed". Jesus did in fact mean the words He shared because they were revealed to Him and not His own. As far as the Bible and the religious community is concerned, Jesus did not hope to die because the Bible shows us how He prayed to God to save Him from death, but instead He would say after every plea that God's Will is more important than His own. This goes to show that Jesus was not God, if He had prayed to God. So again, it should be weird that we are agreeing haha.

I agree with you when you say that, "I don't believe he was God to begin with". Again we're 90% on the same page regarding this subject. The funny thing is that even though I'm a religious person and a believer in God and you are not, we still end up agreeing with eachother on a subject that a majority of Christians would argue oppositely. So technically, your way of thinking, is more Christian than those who claim association with Chrsitianity.

If the majority of Christians would argue that Jesus IS God, then your way of thinking (and Skepticalone) are not actually aligned with the Christian way of thinking or the verses that support Jesus as God in Christianity.

So in conclusion, the subject is the existence of a Christian God, which we both agreed is preposterous and baseless. Funny thing is that you and I have agreed on Jesus not being God, so basically a religious person and a non religious person have come to the conclusion that the Scriptures of the Bible, do not support the Trinity as being manifest in One individual. I love the collaboration here haha
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:02:36 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
If the majority of Christians would argue that Jesus IS God, then your way of thinking (and Skepticalone) are not actually aligned with the Christian way of thinking or the verses that support Jesus as God in Christianity.

False. Majority can say whatever they want but it all boils down to the Scriptures and what Jesus says. I am in fact perfectly aligned with the Bible when I re-explain Christ's rejection to being called God. Therefore, quantity does not determine truth under any circumstances. The fact that you even say the words "Christian way of thinking" is proof enough that some views regarding Christianity are generated within the minds of individuals themselves, which ultimately leads to division and sects being created simply because of man's interpretation and inability to understand the Biblical verses. So in conclusion, Skepticalone and I are absolutely right and 100% Scripturally accurate, to state that Jesus was NOT God under any circumstances. Try again :)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:08:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 5:52:11 PM, persianimmortal wrote:
This is a position I have advocated as well, but the assumption that Jesus is god (a very popular assumption amongst Christians) can be allowed definitionally in order to address the weakness of the position.

Great, so we're on the same page when we both say that Jesus is not God.

I get the sense that you believe all religions worship the same god. This is a separate debate to be had amongst believers.

Yes they do all pray to the same God (Monotheism). However, respectfully, you were the one that said there is a distinction between them and I clarified that the distinction rests in the language used to address God and no disrinction in God Himself.

It is not a distinction I demand - it is a distinction Christians make that I acknowledge for the sake of the argument.

I am familiar with the verses which are claimed to support Jesus as god, and those which are claimed to support Jesus was not. The reality is, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming divinity and sought to have him executed because of it. Jesus did not resist. Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be martyred.

I don't believe he was a god to begin with, so it doesn't really matter to me either way.

But how does that support your argument? I mentioned the damage of labeling God with an exclusive-associative-prefix, and your response was about Jesus being killed by the Jews because of His claims. There is no relation because the Christians' claims about Jesus being God is baseless and rejected by the Bible itself. But it should be weird to you that you and I (religious and non religious people) end up on the same page about Jesus not being God.

You had said, "Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be executed". Jesus did in fact mean the words He shared because they were revealed to Him and not His own. As far as the Bible and the religious community is concerned, Jesus did not hope to die because the Bible shows us how He prayed to God to save Him from death, but instead He would say after every plea that God's Will is more important than His own. This goes to show that Jesus was not God, if He had prayed to God. So again, it should be weird that we are agreeing haha.

I agree with you when you say that, "I don't believe he was God to begin with". Again we're 90% on the same page regarding this subject. The funny thing is that even though I'm a religious person and a believer in God and you are not, we still end up agreeing with eachother on a subject that a majority of Christians would argue oppositely. So technically, your way of thinking, is more Christian than those who claim association with Chrsitianity.

So in conclusion, the subject is the existence of a Christian God, which we both agreed is preposterous and baseless. Funny thing is that you and I have agreed on Jesus not being God, so basically a religious person and a non religious person have come to the conclusion that the Scriptures of the Bible, do not support the Trinity as being manifest in One individual. I love the collaboration here haha

We agree to an extent, but I'm not advocating for or against the Trinity...that is a different debate.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:48:20 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 7:02:36 PM, persianimmortal wrote:
If the majority of Christians would argue that Jesus IS God, then your way of thinking (and Skepticalone) are not actually aligned with the Christian way of thinking or the verses that support Jesus as God in Christianity.

False. Majority can say whatever they want

If the Majority say that Jesus IS God, then that IS the Christian way of thinking.

but it all boils down to the Scriptures and what Jesus says.

Jesus says:

John 8:51-58 - "Before Abraham was, I am"

John 14:9b, 10a ... Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father... Don"t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?

Mark 14:61-62: But he remained silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said, "I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."


As you can see, there are verses in the Bible that would most certainly have Christians, (the vast Majority) believe that Jesus is God.

I am in fact perfectly aligned with the Bible when I re-explain Christ's rejection to being called God.

If you have a link to that explanation, I'd be happy to read it.

Therefore, quantity does not determine truth under any circumstances. The fact that you even say the words "Christian way of thinking" is proof enough that some views regarding Christianity are generated within the minds of individuals themselves,

True, but if the views are generated from the Bible, which they are, then you have to show the views of Christians way of thinking is indeed simply notions from their minds.

which ultimately leads to division and sects being created simply because of man's interpretation and inability to understand the Biblical verses.

That is a slippery slope, you can't really claim to be an individual who possesses the correct interpretation and understanding of the Bible while at the same time wafting your hand in contempt of and over everyone else. That's as ludicrous as it is egotistic.

So in conclusion, Skepticalone and I are absolutely right and 100% Scripturally accurate, to state that Jesus was NOT God under any circumstances. Try again :)

Really? 100% Scripturally accurate? Funny, how you didn't actually show that.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 7:50:03 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Yes they do all pray to the same God (Monotheism). However, respectfully, you were the one that said there is a distinction between them and I clarified that the distinction rests in the language used to address God and no disrinction in God Himself.

It is not a distinction I demand - it is a distinction Christians make that I acknowledge for the sake of the argument.

Yet the distinction that they make to which you acknowledge, has no Biblical foundation. So to say that you don't demand a distinction but then agree with the Christian generated distinction, makes you a sympathetizer to their false claims. With the utmost respect, I would have to say that either you agree with them or disagree with them, because there is no Grey area in this situation.

I am familiar with the verses which are claimed to support Jesus as god, and those which are claimed to support Jesus was not. The reality is, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming divinity and sought to have him executed because of it. Jesus did not resist. Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be martyred.

I don't believe he was a god to begin with, so it doesn't really matter to me either way.

But how does that support your argument? I mentioned the damage of labeling God with an exclusive-associative-prefix, and your response was about Jesus being killed by the Jews because of His claims. There is no relation because the Christians' claims about Jesus being God is baseless and rejected by the Bible itself. But it should be weird to you that you and I (religious and non religious people) end up on the same page about Jesus not being God.

You had said, "Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be executed". Jesus did in fact mean the words He shared because they were revealed to Him and not His own. As far as the Bible and the religious community is concerned, Jesus did not hope to die because the Bible shows us how He prayed to God to save Him from death, but instead He would say after every plea that God's Will is more important than His own. This goes to show that Jesus was not God, if He had prayed to God. So again, it should be weird that we are agreeing haha.

I agree with you when you say that, "I don't believe he was God to begin with". Again we're 90% on the same page regarding this subject. The funny thing is that even though I'm a religious person and a believer in God and you are not, we still end up agreeing with eachother on a subject that a majority of Christians would argue oppositely. So technically, your way of thinking, is more Christian than those who claim association with Chrsitianity.

So in conclusion, the subject is the existence of a Christian God, which we both agreed is preposterous and baseless. Funny thing is that you and I have agreed on Jesus not being God, so basically a religious person and a non religious person have come to the conclusion that the Scriptures of the Bible, do not support the Trinity as being manifest in One individual. I love the collaboration here haha

We agree to an extent, but I'm not advocating for or against the Trinity...that is a different debate.

Again, yet you acknowledge their argument, which has no scriptural proof. Trinity is the title of their man-made doctrine based on biblical misunderstandings which, promotes the distinction of "The Christian God" from "all other Gods". So you can't acknowledge an arguement from one side then say that you're indifferent in regards to a certain doctrine; because essentially the doctrine of trinity is the tool that creates this ridiculous distinction. Therefore you are, according to your position on this subject, for what they're arguing.

Note: I share these words with the utmost respect to your belief and I don't wish to offend. I'm simply having a good conversation :)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 9:03:04 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 7:50:03 PM, persianimmortal wrote:
Yes they do all pray to the same God (Monotheism). However, respectfully, you were the one that said there is a distinction between them and I clarified that the distinction rests in the language used to address God and no disrinction in God Himself.

It is not a distinction I demand - it is a distinction Christians make that I acknowledge for the sake of the argument.

Yet the distinction that they make to which you acknowledge, has no Biblical foundation. So to say that you don't demand a distinction but then agree with the Christian generated distinction, makes you a sympathetizer to their false claims. With the utmost respect, I would have to say that either you agree with them or disagree with them, because there is no Grey area in this situation.

Do you understand accepting something for the sake of the argument? It does not mean that I agree with it, it simply means that I'm not going to argue about it. For instance, I could accept for the sake of the argument that all religions are referring to the same god in a debate on the existence of god. It doesn't mean that I sympathize with an Omnistic view.

I am familiar with the verses which are claimed to support Jesus as god, and those which are claimed to support Jesus was not. The reality is, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming divinity and sought to have him executed because of it. Jesus did not resist. Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be martyred.

I don't believe he was a god to begin with, so it doesn't really matter to me either way.

But how does that support your argument? I mentioned the damage of labeling God with an exclusive-associative-prefix, and your response was about Jesus being killed by the Jews because of His claims. There is no relation because the Christians' claims about Jesus being God is baseless and rejected by the Bible itself. But it should be weird to you that you and I (religious and non religious people) end up on the same page about Jesus not being God.

You had said, "Either he meant the words that way, or he hoped to be executed". Jesus did in fact mean the words He shared because they were revealed to Him and not His own. As far as the Bible and the religious community is concerned, Jesus did not hope to die because the Bible shows us how He prayed to God to save Him from death, but instead He would say after every plea that God's Will is more important than His own. This goes to show that Jesus was not God, if He had prayed to God. So again, it should be weird that we are agreeing haha.

I agree with you when you say that, "I don't believe he was God to begin with". Again we're 90% on the same page regarding this subject. The funny thing is that even though I'm a religious person and a believer in God and you are not, we still end up agreeing with eachother on a subject that a majority of Christians would argue oppositely. So technically, your way of thinking, is more Christian than those who claim association with Chrsitianity.

So in conclusion, the subject is the existence of a Christian God, which we both agreed is preposterous and baseless. Funny thing is that you and I have agreed on Jesus not being God, so basically a religious person and a non religious person have come to the conclusion that the Scriptures of the Bible, do not support the Trinity as being manifest in One individual. I love the collaboration here haha

We agree to an extent, but I'm not advocating for or against the Trinity...that is a different debate.

Again, yet you acknowledge their argument, which has no scriptural proof. Trinity is the title of their man-made doctrine based on biblical misunderstandings which, promotes the distinction of "The Christian God" from "all other Gods". So you can't acknowledge an arguement from one side then say that you're indifferent in regards to a certain doctrine; because essentially the doctrine of trinity is the tool that creates this ridiculous distinction. Therefore you are, according to your position on this subject, for what they're arguing.

Note: I share these words with the utmost respect to your belief and I don't wish to offend. I'm simply having a good conversation :)

see above.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 10:14:10 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 7:48:20 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/8/2016 7:02:36 PM, persianimmortal wrote:
If the majority of Christians would argue that Jesus IS God, then your way of thinking (and Skepticalone) are not actually aligned with the Christian way of thinking or the verses that support Jesus as God in Christianity.

False. Majority can say whatever they want

If the Majority say that Jesus IS God, then that IS the Christian way of thinking.

Yes they can say anything like, i don't know... Jesus had a cape or whatever. Scripturally, they're off target haha. Same goes for calling Jesus God.

but it all boils down to the Scriptures and what Jesus says.

Jesus says:

John 8:51-58 - "Before Abraham was, I am"

It's true that Jesus says this, but this verse does not mean that Jesus is saying He is God. The words "I am" is a reference to the OT where God tells Moses in Exodus 3:14, "I am that I am". So Jesus is saying in John 8:58 that before Abraham came into existence, there was God. Look at 4 verses back in 8:54 of the same chapter, Jesus makes a clear distinction between Himself and God. So again the argument that the Christians are making about Jesus being God is baseless and uninformed.

John 14:9b, 10a ... Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father... Don"t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?

This verse also doesn't mean that Jesus is saying He is God. You cut the verse off and I invite you to read the rest which says, "...The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work." So Jesus isn't saying I am God, Jesus is saying I am the link/mediator between God and man. For example, the spirit of my biological father is in me but am I my father? clearly no, yet I am from him. Same goes for Jesus when he constantly makes a distinction between Himself and God.

Mark 14:61-62: But he remained silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said, "I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven."

This verse again, does not prove Jesus is God because He answers a question from the High priest which contains the words "Son of the Blessed". This does not mean Jesus is God...come on haha

As you can see, there are verses in the Bible that would most certainly have Christians, (the vast Majority) believe that Jesus is God.

All falsely interpreted because the Bible gives us the proper explanation we need therefore we need not formulate a new one...we have no such authority.

I am in fact perfectly aligned with the Bible when I re-explain Christ's rejection to being called God.

If you have a link to that explanation, I'd be happy to read it.

There's no point to share a link that leads to someone else writing about Christ's rejection to being called God. All you have to do is read the Bible. I know it sounds cliche but it the only way to understanding the subject at question thoroughly. But let me offer my explanation and hopefully it will make sense:

So will you worship Jesus, or the one Jesus worshiped? One glaring problem the Christians have is that Jesus prayed, and had a God himself. This logically lets us conclude that Jesus cannot be God. The Scripturally accurate thing to do is to worship and pray to the one Jesus prayed to. If Jesus told you that He had a God, would you honestly take Jesus as God? The answer is simply no, but Christians throw all logic out of the window when it comes to the Bible. When Jesus prays to a God and said explicitly that He has a God therefore it is pretty ungodly of Him to indicate His complete devotion to the one true God if He was God in the first place. Here are some points to consider. While reading, notice how Jesus shows us the difference between Himself and God:

John 20:17
Numbers 23:19
Matt 26:39-44
John 8:42-43
Acts 2:22-23
Acts 17:30-31
1 Timothy 2:5
Numbers 23:19
Mark 13:32
John 13:3
Matt 16:27
John 17:1-26
John 7:16
John 12:49
**John 8:42-43**
John 12:49-50
John 8:25-27
John 14:23-26
Matt 15:24
Matt 16:13-17
Mark 2:10
Mark 5:26-27
I can provide more verses should you want it.


Therefore, quantity does not determine truth under any circumstances. The fact that you even say the words "Christian way of thinking" is proof enough that some views regarding Christianity are generated within the minds of individuals themselves,

True, but if the views are generated from the Bible, which they are, then you have to show the views of Christians way of thinking is indeed simply notions from their minds.

which ultimately leads to division and sects being created simply because of man's interpretation and inability to understand the Biblical verses.

That is a slippery slope, you can't really claim to be an individual who possesses the correct interpretation and understanding of the Bible while at the same time wafting your hand in contempt of and over everyone else. That's as ludicrous as it is egotistic.

I don't make such claims of knowing all. God forbid! I respectfully and humbly present to you the argument Christ makes, which makes the people's arguments baseless. I offer what Jesus offered...I could care less for what people believe. I completely apologize if I came across as egoistic, truly sorry. But I don't argue with the Bible. :)

So in conclusion, Skepticalone and I are absolutely right and 100% Scripturally accurate, to state that Jesus was NOT God under any circumstances. Try again :)

Really? 100% Scripturally accurate? Funny, how you didn't actually show that.

I did now and should you wish it, I will show more :)
persianimmortal
Posts: 115
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 10:19:09 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Do you understand accepting something for the sake of the argument? It does not mean that I agree with it, it simply means that I'm not going to argue about it. For instance, I could accept for the sake of the argument that all religions are referring to the same god in a debate on the existence of god. It doesn't mean that I sympathize with an Omnistic view.

Well this is embarrassing...I admit I didn't read your response clearly and I sincerely apologize for that. I don't want to argue my point or convince you of anything, I am simply pointing to the lack of foundation in claim such as "Jesus is God". Again, I apologize for not paying attention haha...my bad
Peepette
Posts: 1,240
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 12:18:40 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 5:20:53 AM, persianimmortal wrote:
I would argue that there is no such thing as "the Christian God" so therefore no it does not exist. However, as a man of faith and a student of comparative religions, I have to say that there is a disgusting sense of exclusivism that is generated when adding a prefix to God. There is no such thing as "the Muslim God' or "the Christian God" or "the Buddhist God" or "Orthodox Christian God" and such. It is just God. So the topic of conversation should be Does God exist? rather than Does the Christian God exist, because the answers are Yes and No, respectively. :) In conclusion, we can use attributory prefixes such as the All-Mighty God or the Ever-Forgiving God....But God does not require prefixes that restrict Him to a certain group of people. :)

+1
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 2:03:10 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/6/2016 10:53:58 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

I wanted to commend my opponent. He is diligently seeking to support his case, attempting to submit sound arguments, and he has not in the least been ugly towards me. I would like to think that has gone both ways. Feel free to comment on the debate so maybe we can get this on the front page. Perhaps, you will overlook the shameless self promotion! ;-)

Is it really this rare for people to be courteous in a debate without insulting each other?
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,131
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/9/2016 3:18:13 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 10:19:09 PM, persianimmortal wrote:
Do you understand accepting something for the sake of the argument? It does not mean that I agree with it, it simply means that I'm not going to argue about it. For instance, I could accept for the sake of the argument that all religions are referring to the same god in a debate on the existence of god. It doesn't mean that I sympathize with an Omnistic view.

Well this is embarrassing...I admit I didn't read your response clearly and I sincerely apologize for that. I don't want to argue my point or convince you of anything, I am simply pointing to the lack of foundation in claim such as "Jesus is God". Again, I apologize for not paying attention haha...my bad

No worries! ;-)
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten