Jump to content

Debate Proposal: Scott Vs. Scotter On Jesus As The Messiah


scotter
 Share

Recommended Posts

Scott will present theological points that Jesus is the Messiah based on his Christian belief, Scotter will give feedback to his points.

 

Free format (that why’s I consider the Colosseum more appropriate): no word counts, response time 2 weeks in-between posts. Either party should at least make a courtesy notice post within 2 weeks/asap if he is not able to make a debate response post like, “My area has a flood and I have things to take care of, I shall address your post 2 weeks later.”

 

Scott you have the options :-

 

Option 1 take out the 10 strongest arguments and we discuss on the points. After the discussion of the 10 points, if Scotter has no additional questions for Scott, the debate ends; or

 

Option 2 we can discuss all the points you have in mind and you need not state them all in your first post. Scott you can opt to present the points one after the other, and we discuss on it (and Scotter may also have questions for Scott to answer too), rendering it almost a never-ending debate, until one party explicitly states “opt out” or both parties agree to end this debate. (For option 2 the Modulator needs not Pin the thread though, it would be bumped up after each new post).

 

Same applies to individual debate points: when both parties agree to end the individual point and the debate can move on to next point. For individual point posts, I have a suggestion to code the post e.g. 1.1 1.2 for readers to follow and for future reference, I shall update with you and readers regarding the details.

 

Scott, I may surprise you by saying “this point you presented is convincing, I have no other arguments….on this point itself you score this round and we move on to your next point.” And I am asking that if you would do the same in observing this code of honor, instead of “I know that Jesus is the Messiah, Darn it. It is a fact. You are wrong!” We ask each other to address the debate points and posts.

 

If one of the Ex-C modulators would permit this debate to be realized and would like to be the debate’s modulator, it would be great.

 

Scott I visit Ex-C almost everyday, so when I see your first post after your are done with the Existence-of-God debate, it means the Jesus-as-the-Messiah debate formally commences.

 

Thank you all for your interests.

 

 

Topic pinned, awaiting answer.

 

kFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, I accept the challenge. I'll pick option two. It looks like you want me to make one point per post. If this is not the case, tell me, and I will make more than one point a post.

 

Jesus fulfilled many prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the Christ.

 

Point one - Jesus was the Son of God

 

"I will declare the decree: the LORD has said unto me, Thou art my Son: this day have I begotten thee." Psalm 2:7

 

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest...The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." Luke 1:32, 35

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1.1

 

Scott’s Point 1 in summary: “You are my Son, I have begotten you” is the prophecy, and an angel appeared to Mary declaring the greatness of Jesus in her womb, fulfilled the prophecy.

 

For the benefit of the readers, I propose that our debate be a theological debate – doctrinal / scriptural presentations are debatable in their contexts, supernatural events cannot be debated.

 

Jesus’ blissful transfiguration with Moses and Elijah by his side “proved” that he is the Son of God – it is a matter of faith the transfiguration happened as it is unverifiable, so is the event of the Annunciation by the angel.

 

Thus the Angel Gabriel appeared to Muhammad and transmitted the Quran to the Prophet proved that Islam is from God of Abraham, whom the Muslims call Him Allah; God the Father and Jesus the Son appeared to Joseph Smith, rendering the founding of Mormonism, proved that Mormonism is from the Christian God.

 

Putting aside the issue that Annunciation and supernatural event are not debatable, I shall present my case that the Tooth Fairy is indeed the Messiah, and no supernatural event involved.

 

The Tooth Fairy is the Messiah and prophesied in OT

 

The Tooth Fairy shall suffer as the atonement

 

Job 16:9

His anger tears [at me], and He harasses me.

He gnashes His teeth at me.

 

Job 19:20

My skin and my flesh cling to my bones;

I have escaped by the skin of my teeth.

 

Job 29:17

I shattered the fangs of the unjust

and snatched the prey from his teeth.

 

Job 41:14

Who can open his jaws,

surrounded by those terrifying teeth?

 

Ps 35:16

With godless mockery

they gnashed their teeth at me.

 

Ps 37:12

The wicked schemes against the righteous

and gnashes his teeth at him.

 

Ps 57:4

I am in the midst of lions;

I lie down with those who devour men.

Their teeth are spears and arrows;

their tongues are sharp swords.

 

Ps 58:6

God, knock the teeth out of their mouths;

Lord, tear out the young lions' fangs.

 

Ps 112:10

he will gnash his teeth in despair.

 

The Salvation by the Tooth Fairy

 

Ps 3:7

You strike all my enemies on the cheek;

You break the teeth of the wicked.

 

Ps 124:6

Praise the Lord,

who has not let us be ripped apart by their teeth.

 

Prov 10:26

Like vinegar to the teeth and smoke to the eyes,

so the slacker is to the one who sends him [on an errand].

 

Song of Songs 6:6

Your teeth are like a flock of ewes coming up from washing, each one having a twin, and not one missing.

 

Jer 31:29

The fathers have eaten sour grapes,

and the children's teeth are set on edge.

 

The Final Redemption by the Tooth Fairy

 

Zec 9: 7

I will remove the blood from their mouths

and the detestable things

 

 

On the OT verse itself, it would be helpful if you can show me additional NT scriptures/Gospels/Luke on the explicit wordings ‘this is to fulfill the scripture / prophecy “Thou are my son, today I have begotten thee.”’ regarding the Annunciation. This is not to say I shall agree with it, if you find it.

 

If there are no explicit wordings, do you honestly believe it is a prophecy if standing alone by itself?

 

Firstly, in the grammatical context, the verse suggests it is something already happened “I have begotten thee”, not “My Son, the Messiah, shall be begotten/born, [according to the timeline of Psalms]….”, this doesn’t require Biblical knowledge at all; secondly, review the flow of the Tooth Fairy as the Messiah, do you see the vagueness and randomness in taking a verse from OT, and it be declared as prophecy?

 

If not read as prophecy, the Psalms verse you quoted refers to God’s relationship with David.

In the historical section of the Bible we are made acquainted with David, the king of Israel, but it is the Psalms that the real David appears. It is that we see him on his knees pouring out his soul to God, in patience, in thanksgiving, in faith, assurance, for strength, deliverance, and instruction.

.

 

Your Point 1 OT part, would have presented itself better with the Psalms 132:11 verse:

 

The LORD swore to David a sure oath from which he will not turn back: One of the sons of your body I will set on your throne. (RSV)

The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. (KJV)

 

-----

 

For this post, despite I have stated supernatural events cannot be debated, nevertheless I have presented to you my additional feedback. And, for the upcoming points I request the debate points be based on theological grounds.

 

At the same time I do not wish to limit you nor confuse you, if for example

- you may be doing “the Virgin Birth” point, that the supernatural event was prophesied by Isaiah 7:14 scripturally, thus it is scripturally debatable (thus the focus is not on whether the Virgin Birth did happen historically, although you believe it did)….

- if you are saying the Virgin Birth supernatural event did happen historically and so it “confirmed” the prophecy Isaiah 7:14, then we cannot debate on it.

 

An additional general comment on filtered Christian lens in his belief and apologetics (I am not referring to you Scott), particularly in the supernatural events:

 

Once I read that there was a Christian apologetics who was puzzled when he was debating with the other on the topic on Matthew and Luke’s family tree of Jesus: if counting from Luke, Jesus is Son of David; if counting from Matthew, Jesus is the Divine Son of God because of the virgin birth, either way it showed Jesus’ authority. So why did the other stubbornly refuse to believe Jesus?

 

Ans. The miracle of Virgin Birth itself is not debatable (so it is not the other debater blindly ignored the “miracle” of Virgin Birth), but the “physical data” derived from the Virgin Birth is: it means that Joseph was not the biological father, that Jesus was adopted by Joseph, there are related Jewish legal issues, the same applies to the family tree by Luke.

 

I hope I have clarified what’s not debatable.

 

-----

 

I code this post as 1.1, Scott I can suggest you code your response post 1.2, so readers can read the posts with easier reference that the posts are referring to Point 1. And I code 1.3 if I have further response, and so on.

 

Your next prophecy point then we code 2.1 2.2, is this a good idea to you? If you opt not to code the posts, which is fine, I code my own sequentially for the convenience of the readers.

 

And would the Modulator please change the title “Debate Proposal: Scott Vs. Scotter On Jesus As The Messiah”? I think simply taking off the wording “Proposal” is good enough. The Modulator may rephrase the whole title if you so wish. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I may accept the challenge. However, the parameters must be clear.

 

Also, it must be stated clearly the basis upon which one could prove from Scripture or any other means that Christ was the Messiah. It would be futile to attempt to prove something which can't be proven given the parameters of the debate.

 

Also, there must be an agreed upon premise. Without which it will be impossible to proceed to a logical or valid conclusion.

 

For instance.

 

Will the Bible (the King James Version to be exact) be accepted at face value? ie, Will you claim that this part, or that part of the Bible isn't true or couldn't have happened?

 

Do you allow that figurative language is used when the context indicates that it is figurative? ie. When the Bible says that Jesus is a door, this is a figurative statement?

 

 

Please explain the premise to which you will submit so as to have an agreed upon starting point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... it must be stated clearly the basis upon which one could prove from Scripture or any other means that Christ was the Messiah. It would be futile to attempt to prove something which can't be proven given the parameters of the debate.

 

The debate is based on scriptures. For example, we can’t debate your personal spiritual experience with Jesus since becoming a Christian, proves that Jesus is the Messiah; 2nd example as mentioned, supernatural events such as Jesus’ transfiguration are not debatable, or the argument would become Jesus’ transfiguration proves that he is the Messiah; another example is Jesus’ baptism with a voice from Heaven that affirmed Jesus is the Messiah, “This is My Son…I am well pleased.” I cannot debate on those possible arguments with you.

 

Also, there must be an agreed upon premise. Without which it will be impossible to proceed to a logical or valid conclusion.

 

For instance.

 

Will the Bible (the King James Version to be exact) be accepted at face value? ie, Will you claim that this part, or that part of the Bible isn't true or couldn't have happened?

 

I would not simply claim that ‘this part of the Bible isn’t true’, ‘this event couldn’t have happened’, => thus Jesus is not the Messiah, because this is equivalent to a Christian holding out ‘I assert that this part of the Bible is true, this event had historically happened, so Jesus is the Messiah’.

If, if I do claim that, I shall give you my reasons and explanations.

 

Actually I mentioned to the previous debater Scott I might concede to the certain debate point(s) and ask to move to next point if I found them convincing (see opening post); since I am not doing ‘I know Jesus is NOT the Messiah and you are wrong!’, I am asking you to observe the same honor code, instead of ‘I know Jesus is the Messiah and you are wrong!’.

 

Yes, we can refer to King James Version.

 

Do you allow that figurative language is used when the context indicates that it is figurative? ie. When the Bible says that Jesus is a door, this is a figurative statement?

 

‘Jesus is a door’ is a figurative statement, but we may not totally agree on what’s figurative to you and what’s (not) figurative to me, we’ll see.

 

Please explain the premise to which you will submit so as to have an agreed upon starting point.

 

‘Hope the above helps. Any questions and clarifications please update with me and the readers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... it must be stated clearly the basis upon which one could prove from Scripture or any other means that Christ was the Messiah. It would be futile to attempt to prove something which can't be proven given the parameters of the debate.

 

The debate is based on scriptures. For example, we can’t debate your personal spiritual experience with Jesus since becoming a Christian, proves that Jesus is the Messiah; 2nd example as mentioned, supernatural events such as Jesus’ transfiguration are not debatable, or the argument would become Jesus’ transfiguration proves that he is the Messiah; another example is Jesus’ baptism with a voice from Heaven that affirmed Jesus is the Messiah, “This is My Son…I am well pleased.” I cannot debate on those possible arguments with you.

 

Also, there must be an agreed upon premise. Without which it will be impossible to proceed to a logical or valid conclusion.

 

For instance.

 

Will the Bible (the King James Version to be exact) be accepted at face value? ie, Will you claim that this part, or that part of the Bible isn't true or couldn't have happened?

 

I would not simply claim that ‘this part of the Bible isn’t true’, ‘this event couldn’t have happened’, => thus Jesus is not the Messiah, because this is equivalent to a Christian holding out ‘I assert that this part of the Bible is true, this event had historically happened, so Jesus is the Messiah’.

If, if I do claim that, I shall give you my reasons and explanations.

 

Actually I mentioned to the previous debater Scott I might concede to the certain debate point(s) and ask to move to next point if I found them convincing (see opening post); since I am not doing ‘I know Jesus is NOT the Messiah and you are wrong!’, I am asking you to observe the same honor code, instead of ‘I know Jesus is the Messiah and you are wrong!’.

 

Yes, we can refer to King James Version.

 

Do you allow that figurative language is used when the context indicates that it is figurative? ie. When the Bible says that Jesus is a door, this is a figurative statement?

 

‘Jesus is a door’ is a figurative statement, but we may not totally agree on what’s figurative to you and what’s (not) figurative to me, we’ll see.

 

Please explain the premise to which you will submit so as to have an agreed upon starting point.

 

‘Hope the above helps. Any questions and clarifications please update with me and the readers.

 

 

 

Thanks. I will be travelling some, but I should be able to post the first point shortly. And yes the clarification helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

This thread has been quiet, so let me put up some exchange questions for evangelical Christians.

 

OT prophecy about the Messiah and his accomplishment:

 

He will bring world Peace

Isaiah 2:4 He shall judge between the nations, and shall decide for many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

 

All Warfare Will Cease

Micah 4:3 He shall judge between many peoples, and shall decide for strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more

 

Established and agreed? We can move on to next.

 

Jesus came, died and resurrected and went back to Heaven, according to Christianity. But there was, and there is no peace in the world, more than that, wars and slaughters were committed in the name of Christianity.

 

Christians say when Jesus (physically) comes back the 2nd Time, he will accomplish it.

 

Skeptics’ response: “Nowhere does the Bible suggest the Messiah has to come twice to accomplish his mission.”

 

That is one. And I would like to present my additional understanding. Here is my flow:

 

If Jesus comes the 2nd time and still peace is not attained, then he is NOT the Messiah right?

 

If Jesus does not come back, is it equivalent to Jesus comes the 2nd time and peace not attained?

 

Because if Jesus does not come back ever -> there will be no peace -> that means he is not the Messiah?

 

Please just answer Yes or No to the above questions.

 

Your possible Christian argument: Well, humans are able to attain peace even if Jesus does not come back. Well, Good for you in your believing in human beings in atheists terms, however,

 

i) it contradicts with your first argument when Jesus comes back the 2nd time he will accomplish peace – you are saying humans don’t need to wait for Jesus to attain peace. Humans don’t need Jesus to attain peace, humans don’t need Jesus as Messiah.

 

ii) it basically contradicts with what you fundamentally believe that Jesus will come back the 2nd time.

 

My further comment:

 

Jesus has not come back the 2nd time. Agreed?

 

-> believing Jesus as Messiah is a matter of faith, not a matter of “proof”, simply because the 2nd coming hasn’t happened in the calendar timeframe, that is not academic dogmatics we are debating here. And no derogatory tone intended.

 

If it [Jesus’ 2nd coming] has happened, it is a proof, a fact that Jesus is the Messiah; if it will happen in the future, it will affirm and vindicate that Jesus is the Messiah.

 

For atheists and believers alike, there are only two outcomes concerning the future: Jesus comes back OR comes back not. Christians can say, “I have faith that Jesus will come back.”

 

How about a deeper question for reflection:

If Jesus does not come back during your lifetime, is Jesus still your Messiah till the last day you live?

 

Yes – the answer from you as a Christian. Therefore, he does not need to come back 2nd time to be your Messiah, right?

You are telling the skeptics, “When he comes back the 2nd time, it will prove that he is the Messiah.”

You don’t need that proof for yourself, so it goes back to: You Have Faith that Jesus is the Messiah.

 

Christians, refute the statement “Jesus as the Messiah is not founded on OT prophecy fulfillment, it is a matter of faith.” Of course you can agree with it.

 

 

There is another path you can go with, the figuratively interpretation of Jesus’ 2nd Coming: “Jesus did come, and he came and resided in people’s hearts.”

 

That’s beautiful, and there is another question while you are contemplating the beauty:

 

That Jesus had come back to people’s hearts for two thousand years, and where is peace?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Been away for a while.

 

I'll post some that you should agree to.

 

1. The messiah would be a descendant of Abraham.

 

These verses are generally accepted as promising that the messiah will be a descendant of Abraham. If you need more verses, let me know.

 

Gen 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

It was fulfilled.

 

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Mat 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

Mat 1:3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

Mat 1:4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

Mat 1:5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

Mat 1:6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

Mat 1:7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

Mat 1:8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

Mat 1:9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

Mat 1:10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

Mat 1:11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

Mat 1:12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

Mat 1:13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

Mat 1:14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

Mat 1:15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

 

These verses do not prove that Jesus was the Messiah, only that he was qualified to be the Messiah.

 

At this point.

 

Do you agree that the Messiah would be a descendant of Abraham?

Do you agree that Jesus was a descendant of Abraham?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been away for a while.

 

I'll post some that you should agree to.

 

1. The messiah would be a descendant of Abraham.

 

These verses are generally accepted as promising that the messiah will be a descendant of Abraham. If you need more verses, let me know.

 

Gen 12:2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

Gen 12:3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

It was fulfilled.

 

Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

Mat 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

Mat 1:3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;

Mat 1:4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;

Mat 1:5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;

Mat 1:6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;

Mat 1:7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;

Mat 1:8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;

Mat 1:9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;

Mat 1:10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

Mat 1:11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

Mat 1:12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;

Mat 1:13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;

Mat 1:14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;

Mat 1:15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;

Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

These verses do not prove that Jesus was the Messiah, only that he was qualified to be the Messiah.

 

At this point.

 

Do you agree that the Messiah would be a descendant of Abraham?

Do you agree that Jesus was a descendant of Abraham?

According to the Bible, The Messiah was to be a descendant of Abraham.

According to the Bible, Jesus was NOT a descendant of Abraham.

 

Those verses prove that Jesus COULD NOT be the Messiah... since Joseph was NOT his father.

 

 

 

Thanks for demonstrating your Biblical ignorance... again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been away for a while.

 

I'll post some that you should agree to.

 

1. The messiah would be a descendant of Abraham.

 

These verses are generally accepted as promising that the messiah will be a descendant of Abraham. If you need more verses, let me know.

 

Gen 12:2-3 Diatribe
It was fulfilled.

 

Mat 1:1-16 Diatribe
These verses do not prove that Jesus was the Messiah, only that he was qualified to be the Messiah.

 

At this point.

 

Do you agree that the Messiah would be a descendant of Abraham?

Do you agree that Jesus was a descendant of Abraham?

 

No and no.

 

You point only to something you read somewhere as proof. If this is the full extent of your proof, that you read about it somewhere, I am unconvinced. If all we offer each other is a book as proof, then I offer you the book, Peter Pan and Wendy as proof that Peter Pan exists.

 

Do you believe Peter Pan exists?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I dislike Judaism, since the supposed "prophecies" come from the Jewish holy books, I'd think the Jews should have some say in regards to Jebus and why they don't consider him the Messiah™.

 

And they do a bang-up job of it, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been away for a while.

 

I'll post some that you should agree to.

 

1. The messiah would be a descendant of Abraham.

 

These verses are generally accepted as promising that the messiah will be a descendant of Abraham. If you need more verses, let me know.

 

Gen 12:2-3 Diatribe
It was fulfilled.

 

Mat 1:1-16 Diatribe
These verses do not prove that Jesus was the Messiah, only that he was qualified to be the Messiah.

 

At this point.

 

Do you agree that the Messiah would be a descendant of Abraham?

Do you agree that Jesus was a descendant of Abraham?

 

No and no.

 

You point only to something you read somewhere as proof. If this is the full extent of your proof, that you read about it somewhere, I am unconvinced. If all we offer each other is a book as proof, then I offer you the book, Peter Pan and Wendy as proof that Peter Pan exists.

 

Do you believe Peter Pan exists?

 

Since the Bible was agreed upon by the one I was debating with, about something related to the Bible, it would be the source of the information.

 

Again, that's why debate is impossible. Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have prepared the answers meant for the debate and was about to post, and I haven’t noticed the thread took its course to the end. I thought this thread was between me and the other Christian debater.

 

What a pity. I apologize to the other posters who participated in this debate, if I had given them an impression of non-response hence they couldn’t wait to participate, although I have stated each party has two weeks to respond.

 

I apologize to InspectoGeneral also and thank him for his time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That one was just to see if debate was possible. Obviously it isn't. Glad I didn't waste a lot of time on it.

 

Debate is impossible, because it all hinges on you proving your god is real. Every Xian argument proceeds from that assumption. You can't offer proof, hence you aren't able to debate.

 

Now go away, or come back and make a fool of yourself on a public forum some more. Either way, you'll only help our cause. Thanks for playing :wave:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.

 

That one was just to see if debate was possible. Obviously it isn't. Glad I didn't waste a lot of time on it.

Translation: "I couldn't argue with what it says in the Bible and the way it proves Jesus couldn't be the Messiah so I'm going to claim debate is impossible... that way I don't get my ass whipped"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya'll do realize that this was a debate between myself and scotter, right?

 

He agreed on the parameters.

 

It is your forum, not mine. The debate was set between two posters and you guys but in.

 

Then you act like I 'couldn't handle the debate'.

 

If this forum isn't for more formal debate, so be it. If you guys are morons, and can't stay out of someone else's discussion, so be it.

 

Either way, it doesn't look like very many people want to engage you guys in debate. I wonder why that is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That one was just to see if debate was possible. Obviously it isn't. Glad I didn't waste a lot of time on it.

 

Debate is impossible, because it all hinges on you proving your god is real. Every Xian argument proceeds from that assumption. You can't offer proof, hence you aren't able to debate.

 

Now go away, or come back and make a fool of yourself on a public forum some more. Either way, you'll only help our cause. Thanks for playing :wave:

 

 

You don't realize that I was invited into this debate by another poster, do you? You're a moron. If you want to have a debate with someone, have at it. Why don't you go back and read the thread, and you'll realize what a moron you are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That one was just to see if debate was possible. Obviously it isn't. Glad I didn't waste a lot of time on it.

 

Debate is impossible, because it all hinges on you proving your god is real. Every Xian argument proceeds from that assumption. You can't offer proof, hence you aren't able to debate.

 

Now go away, or come back and make a fool of yourself on a public forum some more. Either way, you'll only help our cause. Thanks for playing :wave:

 

 

You don't realize that I was invited into this debate by another poster, do you? You're a moron. If you want to have a debate with someone, have at it. Why don't you go back and read the thread, and you'll realize what a moron you are.

Not as much of a moron as someone who wants a debate with one person, but uses an answer from someone else to declare debate is impossible...

 

Go back and read the thread... you'll see what I mean. :wave:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That one was just to see if debate was possible. Obviously it isn't. Glad I didn't waste a lot of time on it.

 

Debate is impossible, because it all hinges on you proving your god is real. Every Xian argument proceeds from that assumption. You can't offer proof, hence you aren't able to debate.

 

Now go away, or come back and make a fool of yourself on a public forum some more. Either way, you'll only help our cause. Thanks for playing :wave:

 

 

You don't realize that I was invited into this debate by another poster, do you? You're a moron. If you want to have a debate with someone, have at it. Why don't you go back and read the thread, and you'll realize what a moron you are.

Not as much of a moron as someone who wants a debate with one person, but uses an answer from someone else to declare debate is impossible...

 

Go back and read the thread... you'll see what I mean. :wave:

 

And you responded, because?

 

Seems like you're just rude. How unfortunate for scotter, who invited me to debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not as much of a moron as someone who wants a debate with one person, but uses an answer from someone else to declare debate is impossible...

 

Go back and read the thread... you'll see what I mean. :wave:

 

Or as much of a moron as someone whose method of "debating" includes purile insults and inabilty to provide facts to back up his argument.

 

Debate is impossible with douches :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you responded, because?

 

Seems like you're just rude. How unfortunate for scotter, who invited me to debate.

Because if you'd read Scotter's post from Dec 6th, you'd have noticed he'd basically opened it up to anyone...

This thread has been quiet, so let me put up some exchange questions for evangelical Christians.

See how it's become a "thread" not a "debate"

 

Oh, and it's really unfortunate for Scotter... he's been saved from having to deal with the ignorance and fractured logic you tried to pass off on us elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile though, maybe you could answer something for us... Who was Jesus's father? And, since it's all through the male line in the Bible/Jewish tradition, how could Jesus be a descendant of Abraham?

 

Trust me, that's one of the most vital points in any debate on whether Jesus was the Messiah... your refusal to accept even what it shows in the Bible shows just what a waste of time trying to debate you is for anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you responded, because?

 

Seems like you're just rude. How unfortunate for scotter, who invited me to debate.

Because if you'd read Scotter's post from Dec 6th, you'd have noticed he'd basically opened it up to anyone...

This thread has been quiet, so let me put up some exchange questions for evangelical Christians.
See how it's become a "thread" not a "debate"

 

Oh, and it's really unfortunate for Scotter... he's been saved from having to deal with the ignorance and fractured logic you tried to pass off on us elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile though, maybe you could answer something for us... Who was Jesus's father? And, since it's all through the male line in the Bible/Jewish tradition, how could Jesus be a descendant of Abraham?

 

Trust me, that's one of the most vital points in any debate on whether Jesus was the Messiah... your refusal to accept even what it shows in the Bible shows just what a waste of time trying to debate you is for anyone.

 

 

Yeah. I can see you have a lot of successful debates. I guess you guys can debate between yourselves. Enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.