CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
When Judas kissed him, he should have said, "Oh no you didn't!" ;)
And allowing himself to get nailed..., Hell..., even my wife puts up a fight every once in a while ;)
Or when he gave his disciples a pedicure..., like he was running a Vietnamese nail salon ;)
How about when he brought that guy back from the dead? That's like one more idiot on the road during rush hour traffic. ;)
There's also the time when this guy brought back this chair he had bought and the late JC gave him his money back. He should have given him store credit. ;)
No proven mistakes of Jesus shown here, just conjecture but conjecture is not proof. No logical arguments presented just opinions. Opinion statements are not facts. But hey, it got you 6 points‼️
No proven mistakes of Jesus shown here, just conjecture but conjecture is not proof. No logical arguments presented just opinions. Opinion statements are not facts. But hey, it got you 6 points‼️
Depends on who you ask, In the gospel of Thomas apparently he was a mischievous child that would use his powers to play pranks on his mates, such as turning them into animals.
In the gospel of Judas, he asked to be crucified, basically committing suicide (that's another topic for discussion, maybe in a different debate).
What's the point of him being born from a woman if he wasn't human, if he didn't share the same temptations and fallibilities of the rest of us? If he's not the same as us, then he can't very well be an example for us to follow.
I think Christians feel that he needs to be perfect or else his teachings don't carry any real authority, but I don't see the point of him being born, growing up, and basically living as a human unless he's meant to show us the path to salvation, and he can't show us that path unless he starts from the same place that we start. To be an example for us to follow, he has to make mistakes, but then admit them, feel bad about them, and then try to do better the next time. That's the only way his life, and death, makes any sense.
(For this argument, I have put on my "Christian, but still not willing to accept everything verbatim" has.)
He did get tempted, by the devil himself, three times. And each time, he resisted. When he did this he gave up all his power of being God. And was tempted just as you and me are. But he did not fall.
He was fully human, fully God.
In christianity, salvation is only earned through faith because of grace, no works. So we christians dont 'feel' he needs to be perfect, he was. He did show us a path to salvation, it was on the cross, the only way we could inherit a personal relationship with God, was through a PERFECT sacrifice.
1) Even though you’re right saying Jesus was born fully human and he was tempted like we are—how does that prove he made mistakes?
2) Why do you think a mistake maker would make a better leader than one who doesn’t make mistakes? What kind of a spiritual leader is that? We’ve already got a bunch of those. If we are to follow a mistake maker then when are we supposed to know to follow and when not?
3) If Jesus must be just exactly like us, as you say, then why does Jesus get to have a perfect Father who never makes mistakes or sins but all of us have sinful mistake riddled fathers? Sorry but your argument lacks rationale.
No He didn't make a mistake in his life. If Jesus sinned then He wouldn't be God, and we need a perfect being to show us the way and we need a perfect sacrifice because no one was worthy enough to die on the cross for our sins except for Jesus.
The biggest biblical proof that Jesus was sinless (perfect) is that sin couldn't condemn Jesus to the grave. It was not right for a person without sin to die. So the fullness of God raised Jesus from the dead. He raised up renewed flesh & bone. And from there to the right hand of God... If Jesus did mess up when satan tempted Him, if he did have sin in his life (like the first Adam) then Jesus would never have raised from the dead. He would have never had victory over the grave for us.
Those are the only 4 Gospels that is in the Bible their is no other Gospels and if your talking about the Gospel of Judas and Thomas those have nothing to do with the Bible. In fact the disciples rejected the Gospel of Judas because it was fiction.
Those are the only 4 Gospels that is in the Bible their is no other Gospels and if your talking about the Gospel of Judas and Thomas those have nothing to do with the Bible.
That is only because the Roman Emperor Constantine didn't want them there. There was no new testament before the Nicene council.
In fact the disciples rejected the Gospel of Judas because it was fiction.
"That is only because the Roman Emperor Constantine didn't want them there. There was no new testament before the Nicene council."
True, but getting hypothetical here; if there was really a God, then could he not have "inspired" Constantine to separate fact from fiction in order that the Bible might be written?
Seems a ridiculous way to go about it though. The retained texts all point to a hierarchical church that gives men the power, something an Emperor like Constantine would have desired for a religion to rule the empire, the gnostic texts then that seem more in keeping with Jesus' ethic of hippy peace and love religion were cast out on pain of death for reading them.
Maybe it was fiction maybe not the only people who know for sure are Jesus and Judas to me this shows that the Bible has been tampered with from the beginning and shows that it is not a valid source for historical truths. My view is the other Disciples would have probably had the hump with Judas because he was basically in the parlance of our times a snitch which would have been good reason for them not to trust him and also they might have excluded his gospel as a form of revenge, does not meen it was not true
This may seem to you as though I am intentionally saying stupid things, but I am really not. All I intend to mention is that God is Jesus' dad and therefore he may be slightly biased about who gets to go to heaven and who doesn't. So if someone makes enemies with God by beating him at chess, and God becomes moody, surely that means that God might possibly feel the need to sentence them to an eternity in hell. However some parents cannot see any fault with their children, and God may be one of those exact parents. If he sees no fault with Jesus' actions then of course he could say that his child was sinless. He would also attempt to prove it by taking notions that may be slightly biased.
If God is Jesus' dad then it isn't really proof that Jesus got to be risen into heaven based on sinless merit. I think if I was God I would shoot my son into the sky - that would be so cool.
"If he did have sin in his life (like the first Adam)"
I don't really think Adam was sinful in that situation.
It is true that he didn't do exactly as God had wished, but created man in his image, and because of his alleged all-knowing and all-powerful characteristics he would have been well aware of what Adam would eventually do. He could have prevented it, and therefore it was God who was in the wrong.
It is not possible to say that God just wanted to test Adam, because God is apparently all-knowing, meaning he would know the outcome of such tests before they were even conducted. Adam's curiosity is something that I would actually consider to be a good thing. Without curiosity and experiments we would still be lighting fires with stones and living in caves. If God thinks that Adam is sinful because of possessing traits that would help us leave such situations then God is someone who I would consider to be sinful, and therefore hypocritical. Therefore if God is sinful His decision on Jesus' status of sin is utterly irrelevant as it may well be biased.
This may seem to you as though I am intentionally saying stupid things, but I am really not. All I intend to mention is that God is Jesus' dad and therefore he may be slightly biased about who gets to go to heaven and who doesn't. So if someone makes enemies with God by beating him at chess, and God becomes moody, surely that means that God might possibly feel the need to sentence them to an eternity in hell. However some parents cannot see any fault with their children, and God may be one of those exact parents. If he sees no fault with Jesus' actions then of course he could say that his child was sinless. He would also attempt to prove it by taking notions that may be slightly biased.
If God is Jesus' dad then it isn't really proof that Jesus got to be risen into heaven based on sinless merit. I think if I was God I would shoot my son into the sky - that would be so cool.
God isn't Jesus's dad. God is three in one. Father, Son, and Spirit. Just like the government has 3 branches executive, judicial, and federal but they are still the government.
I don't really think Adam was sinful in that situation.
It is true that he didn't do exactly as God had wished, but created man in his image, and because of his alleged all-knowing and all-powerful characteristics he would have been well aware of what Adam would eventually do. He could have prevented it, and therefore it was God who was in the wrong.
It is not possible to say that God just wanted to test Adam, because God is apparently all-knowing, meaning he would know the outcome of such tests before they were even conducted. Adam's curiosity is something that I would actually consider to be a good thing. Without curiosity and experiments we would still be lighting fires with stones and living in caves. If God thinks that Adam is sinful because of possessing traits that would help us leave such situations then God is someone who I would consider to be sinful, and therefore hypocritical. Therefore if God is sinful His decision on Jesus' status of sin is utterly irrelevant as it may well be biased.
Adam was sinful because he disobeyed God's direct orders.
God knew Adam was going to sin but He gave them free will to decide to obey God or rebel against God and ate the fruit. And the reason why God didn't stop it was because if He stopped Adam, God would have sinned because He isn't supposed to do that. So He gave Adam and Eve specific instructions to follow so they sinned and now we face the consequences of sin, death, disease, pain, and suffering.
Well, that just makes my point all the more valid.
I previously pointed out that if God said that Jesus was sinless then it is highly likely that he said it from a perspective which was biased and unfair. Some other people may have lead good lives, too, but Jesus gets a special mention on the right hand of the father. Even if Jesus is the same person as God, it just means that God was being slightly selfish when he allowed himself into heaven whilst excluding everyone else.
Thus meaning that God is not perfect, and that Jesus is not perfect - oh, and I have loads of reasons for why God can't be perfect.
"God knew Adam was going to sin but gave them free will to decide"
These statements contradict one another.
If God knew what Adam was going to do then he wouldn't have had to make the test at all, as he would have known exactly what Adam was going to do. Now, if he knew what Adam was going to do in the future then God wouldn't be sinless for intentionally giving Adam the options (knowing what was going to happen).
These statements contradict each other, because if God knows what you will do in the future, then it can't really be free will, can it?
"The reason why God didn't stop it was because if He stopped Adam, God would have sinned because He isn't supposed to do that"
Based on what?
If I turned around in a science lesson and said to someone "hey, you there, may I suggest that you (says something intelligent)?" I would not be sinning as I would be positively affecting the results of the test for the greater good, however God appears not to intervene because that way he is sinless? How can anyone who knowledgeably brings "death, disease, pain, and suffering" into the world be excused because he decided not to interfere in something that he knew would end negatively?
