Debate about Christianity (Looking for someone to argue against it)

[Jimmy]

Well if this thread that I made is true it would be a good argument against Christianity.

Is “Christ” An Actual Man On Earth?

Do some Christians actually and secretly believe there’s a man living on earth right now who is the reason for all of existence being here? Do they believe all of existence will end when this man dies? Do they believe this man will be reborn and existence will begin again? Do they believe this...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[walt]

I think a good place to start is, what does the Bible say about any particular belief?
[ Belief: Jesus is the Son of God and God is his God and Father ]

Jesus gives us instructions and so does the Bible:
1. "I am God's son" "my Father who is in the heavens" "my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." "This is my Son, the beloved"
John 10:36, Matthew 7:21, John 20:17, Matt 3:17,
John 3:16-18, Matthew 11:27, John 3:35, Luke 10:22, John 6:46, Luke 3:32, John 3:13, John 6:38, 8:23, 42; John 17:5, Matt 16:13-17, John 14:1

"Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!" 1 Peter 1:3, Ephesians 1:3, 17; 2 Corinthians 1:3, 11:31; Romans 15:6, Rev 1:6, 1 Cor 15:24, Colossians 1:3, Ephesians 4:4-6, 1 Corinthians 8:6, 1st Timothy 2:5, John 17:1-3, John 20:31, John 1:34, Galatians 4:4, Acts 20:28, Luke 1:32-35, 1 John 4:9, John 1:34, Hebrews 4:14, John 1:49, Galatians 4:6, Matthew 27:40, Romans 8:3, 32; 1 John 4:9-10, Matthew 14:33, Acts 9:20, Hebrews 1:2, 1 John 4:15, 1 Corinthians 15:47, Deuteronomy 6:4, Mark 12:29, Mark 12:32, 1 Corinthians 3:23, 11:3, 15:27-28, Isaiah 46:9

Can you explain each detail of your belief, word for word from Bible Scriptures, ONLY ?

 

[ecpotts4]

I will keep responding, here, but I cannot guarantee a word count. Though, those who know me wouldn't doubt that I could reach it.

Haha, fair enough. And I just found out about the one-on-one debate threads. Let's move there if that's cool with you. If this ends up being the dialogue I use for my assignment, it will be helpful to just have us two messaging since I'll have to compile it all into a single Word document.

 

[PureX]

Haha, fair enough. And I just found out about the one-on-one debate threads. Let's move there if that's cool with you. If this ends up being the dialogue I use for my assignment, it will be helpful to just have us two messaging since I'll have to compile it all into a single Word document.

Post a link to it, if you can, please. I'm old. These new-fangled gizmos easily confuse me.

 

[Quintessence]

A worthy endeavor, even if it isn't my thing. I reject the notion of there being "false" and "true" ways of life (what most just call religions, I suppose) - it's more a question of where the currents of life happen to take your particular boat. Then, recognizing the strengths and weaknesses of your path in equal measure while making mindful decisions about where you might steer your boat as it travels. Decrying "this river and this boat is wrong!" is a bit silly to me; you are what you are.

 

[ecpotts4]

Post a link to it, if you can, please. I'm old. These new-fangled gizmos easily confuse me.

Haha, here ya go:

ecpotts4 vs PureX: "The validity of Christianity"

PureX, thank you for being willing to debate me concerning the truth of Christianity (or lack thereof). I hope we both learn from this debate, and I am looking forward to it. I am going to copy and paste your first message from the original thread that I made and then respond to it in a...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[walt]

Hey everyone, I am a current seminary student, and I am in a class on apologetics. Our "paper" is to have a 3500 word written exchange with someone outside of the Christian faith. I would like to complete our discussion about this by Tuesday or Wednesday next week. We can discuss via email or just message back and forth on here through the conversation feature. I would be arguing for Christianity, and you would be arguing that Christianity is false.
Please only inquire about this if you have the time to do this extensive written discussion throughout the next five days. Thank you!

I thought you were looking for a debate about Christianity?

 

[Trailblazer]

Hey everyone, I am a current seminary student, and I am in a class on apologetics. Our "paper" is to have a 3500 word written exchange with someone outside of the Christian faith. I would like to complete our discussion about this by Tuesday or Wednesday next week. We can discuss via email or just message back and forth on here through the conversation feature. I would be arguing for Christianity, and you would be arguing that Christianity is false.
Please only inquire about this if you have the time to do this extensive written discussion throughout the next five days. Thank you!

I am someone outside the Christian faith and I would love to discourse with you, but I am not sure I will have much time during the next five days.

I would not argue that Christianity is false but I would argue that many of the commonly accepted Christian doctrines are false.

The following list contains some beliefs that are central to Christianity which I believe are false.

1) Jesus is God
2) Jesus is the only way to God
3) Jesus rose from the dead
4) Jesus is going to return to earth

I think that Christianity would be a true religion from God without these beliefs.

I started a thread on this not long ago.

What if these Christian beliefs are not true?

The following list contains some beliefs that are central to Christianity. 1) Jesus is God 2) Jesus is the only way to God 3) Jesus rose from the dead 4) Jesus is going to return to earth But what if these beliefs are not true? Of course this is hypothetical since these are beliefs that...

www.religiousforums.com

 

[GoodAttention]

It is up to you. You can either reply here or in private message.

Good luck to the both of you.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Hey everyone, I am a current seminary student, and I am in a class on apologetics. Our "paper" is to have a 3500 word written exchange with someone outside of the Christian faith. I would like to complete our discussion about this by Tuesday or Wednesday next week. We can discuss via email or just message back and forth on here through the conversation feature. I would be arguing for Christianity, and you would be arguing that Christianity is false.
Please only inquire about this if you have the time to do this extensive written discussion throughout the next five days. Thank you!

Sure, I'm game. Let me introduce myself. I'm Jewish. My observance level is that of Conservative Judaism, but my theology is very liberal. What that means is I do things like keep the Shabbat and eat Kosher. But I also take a more scholarly approach to the sacred texts, like accepting Moses didn't write the Torah. I'm a very live and let live person when it comes to religion. This is in part simply an aspect of my Judaism, which doesn't proselytize. But also, just in general I don't find what people believe to be highly relevant. My only true concern is how people act, whether they love their neighbor as themselves. In short, I'm absolutely fine with you being a Christian, even though we disagree on a good many things.

Okay, let's begin. Here are the reasons that I would never accept the Christian Jesus or the central claims of Christianity.

1. God is ECHAD, one, not three in one. Christianity teaches Trinitarianism, which although it is monotheism, is a muddled monotheism. Judaism on the other hand teaches a pure and simple monotheism. Anything that comprises the oneness of God is unthinkable.
2. God is not a man. This is the nature of God, and the nature of God is unchanging. It is stated four times in the Tanakh: Numbers 23:19 God is not a man nor a son of man. 1 Samuel 15:29 He is not a man. Job 9:32 He is not a man. Hosea 11:9 I am God, and not a man. For something to be reiterated four times -- it must be of great importance. Christianity on the other hand, claims that Jesus is "fully God and fully man," at least in the orthodox version. The two are absolutely incompatible. Christians try to claim that "let us create man in our own image" is a reference to the triune nature of God, but in reality it is God talking to the heavenly court. Similarly, the claims of Elohim being a plural are moot -- it is more similar to the royal "we" used by the Queen.
3. The New Testament contradicts the teachings of the Tanakh/Torah. The Torah clearly teaches the following of the Law, in order to receive the blessings of prosperity and the land of Canaan. Psalm 19 states that the Law is "perfect....sweeter also than the honey and the honeycomb." Yet Paul teaches that the Law brings a curse. He teaches that circumcision is nothing and keeping the Sabbath or refraining from meat offered to idols is up to the individual, rather than being necessary for the Jew. These views, that of the Tanakh and those of Paul, are utterly incompatible. The Torah is agreed upon by both Christians and Jews to be the word of God, and is therefore the measuring reed to determine what else is orthodoxy -- and it therefore determines that the NT doesn't pass muster.
4. The New Testament quotes prophecy out of context (i.e. Hosea 11:1, which is about Israel, not the messiah), misquotes prophecy (i.e. Isaiah 7:14 which is rightly translated young maiden, not virgin), and even makes up prophecy out of whole cloth (such as Matthew 2:23, He shall be called a Nazarene aka someone from the city of Nazareth.)
5. Jesus cannot be the Messiah because he simply did not fulfill messianic prophecy. It makes no sense to say, "He will fulfill the rest when he comes back again." After all, anyone can claim to be the messiah and say they will fulfill the prophecies the next time around. The only way we have of determining the messiah is if they fulfill the messianic claims, all of them, and quite frankly Jesus did not; thus he failed in his attempt to be the messiah. The most obvious example is that the Messiah will usher in an era of worldwide peace between the nations. Jesus did not.

 

[YoursTrue]

Haha, here ya go:

ecpotts4 vs PureX: "The validity of Christianity"

PureX, thank you for being willing to debate me concerning the truth of Christianity (or lack thereof). I hope we both learn from this debate, and I am looking forward to it. I am going to copy and paste your first message from the original thread that I made and then respond to it in a...

www.religiousforums.com

Before I even think of getting involved, you say you are a seminary student. Would that be a Catholic seminary or a Protestant seminary? Thank you.

 

[F1fan]

This is a far question, but it is a little misleading. We aren't being taught to have our beliefs validated by non-Christians. Instead, we are being taught to give a defense of the faith because we are commanded to do so (1 Pet 3:15).

Wouldn't the defense of the faith be to live as an example following the teachings of Jesus? There is no plausible way to defend Christianity via an argument. Christianity isn't based on fact. All of these attempts fail, and they end up making the Christian look arrogant and foolish. Many Christians get drawn into debates and fail, and that's because there is no factual basis to argue. The winning and wise thing to do is not get involved in debate that has to defend a literalist interpretation.

If I was Christian in your position I wouldn't defend Christianity at all. It can't be done, there is always a rebuttal. I would write how following the ideas of Jesus is a highly moral path that doesn't require following a dogma, but that allows a person the flexibility to make moral judgments.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Hey Shadow Wolf, would you be able to have a lengthy discussion / debate over private messaging / email about this?

Yes.

 

[oldbadger]

Hey everyone, I am a current seminary student, and I am in a class on apologetics. Our "paper" is to have a 3500 word written exchange with someone outside of the Christian faith. I would like to complete our discussion about this by Tuesday or Wednesday next week. We can discuss via email or just message back and forth on here through the conversation feature. I would be arguing for Christianity, and you would be arguing that Christianity is false.
Please only inquire about this if you have the time to do this extensive written discussion throughout the next five days. Thank you!

I would offer my time but it could only be via posts on a thread like this. I think there is a one-on-one section here but you'd do much better to face a tough group in interchanges wouldn't you?
You get more strong arguments from a larger audience, and you'd get many more very good replies from Christians here.

The very first hurdle for Christianity to jump is the resurrection, and it just never did happen......I don't think Jesus died on that day, and can explain that easily. And don't forget that he did see all his friends up in the Galilee a short time afterwards.

All the best with your work on this.

 

[John D. Brey]

Here are the reasons that I would never accept the Christian Jesus or the central claims of Christianity.

Someone could interpret your statement as though you were giving the fundamental reasons you'd never accept the Christian Jesus, or the central claims of Christianity. In other words, someone could suspect, based on your statement, that the 5 reasons you list are the comprehensive "cause" for why you would never accept the Christian Jesus or the central claims of Christianity.

For my part, after a lifetime of engaging such things, I suspect that there's a real possibility that you would never accept the Christian Jesus, or the central claims of Christianity, under any circumstances, such that the reasons you list are more like rationalizations, reasonable, quasi-factual, justifications, for a position that's actually not based on any of those things (reason, facts, logic, etc.).

I hypothesize that even if I could reasonably, factually, logically, historically, scripturally, refute every one of the 5 reasons you give, you would then be not one iota, not one jot or tittle, closer to accepting the Christian Jesus or the central claims of Christianity. Which is to argue that it's actually our personal theological-epistemology, at the deepest level of our psyche, that determines if we're open to, or contrary to, Christianity, such that the reasons you list function not as the comprehensive "cause," or "reason," for your rejection of the Christian Christ, but as the closest thing to reasonable, factual, justification for your rejection of the Christian Christ. Idea being that the our belief comes first, and the rationalizations after the fact.

If I'm correct about this, then should I show sound and reasonable reason why your 5 reasons for rejecting Christ don't really hold up to objective scrutiny, you'd either have to simply deny the argumentation that shows your reasons don't hold up, or admit that it doesn't matter if they don't hold up to objective analysis since you know, and admit, that the Christian message isn't correct (in your beliefs) regardless of any argumentation. In effect, the latter position is that you consider yourself to have sound reasons, logic, and scriptural exegesis, for rejecting Christ, but absent those things, you're self-informed enough to know you'd still reject Christ.

​

The results of these experiments indicate that even when we think we control the choice to act—a behavior as simple as moving a finger—the brain is deciding for us when to make the move. After making the decision, without our being aware of the internal impetus, the brain then convinces us that we were in control of that decision.​

​

— Gray Matters: A Biography of Brain Surgery by Theodore H. Schwartz.​

John

 

[PureX]

I responded on the link, if anyone cares to follow it.

 

[John D. Brey]

I responded on the link, if anyone cares to follow it.

Where's the link?



John

 

[PureX]

Where's the link?



John

Link here (I think)

 

[Balthazzar]

Haha, fair enough. And I just found out about the one-on-one debate threads. Let's move there if that's cool with you. If this ends up being the dialogue I use for my assignment, it will be helpful to just have us two messaging since I'll have to compile it all into a single Word document.

I just acknowledged that you are engaging in more than one exchange and deciding which you turn in for the assignment later. When is it due? 3000 word total isn't all that lengthy between two people, so the exchanges could happen fairly quick. I like the project. I made a post in philosophy about something very similar. If it's about the mental effort and education, I may change my mind about participating. I would still very much like to be an onlooker.

A stage is needed.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This is a far question, but it is a little misleading. We aren't being taught to have our beliefs validated by non-Christians. Instead, we are being taught to give a defense of the faith because we are commanded to do so (1 Pet 3:15).

Maybe you do not need someone to argue about the falsity of Christianity, the greatest challenge Christianity faces is that of the end of ages Messiah.

It may be the greatest challenge comes from people that support 100% Jesus and the Bible, but have embraced and are teaching the Message of the promissed Messiah.

I give this post as a consideration, as this is ultimately a challenge about what it is to be a "Christian".

Regards Tony