• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

How Jesus Became God

ludin said:
First off Christ wasn't part of a death cult so i am not sure where this person gets this information from. In fact Christs overall message is the opposite of death and is mostly about life. So here is the first claim that has major issues.



No where in the bible does Christ ever proclaim to be God, but consistently adheres to the claim of being the Son or God and the Son of Man.
so here is the second claim that has no backing at all.



3rd point Christ was not a preacher. He was not even a priest. He was not part of the Sanhedrin. he is commonly refered to in those days as teacher.




Why do you believe the stuff you do? because someone presented enough evidence to convince you that it was true. The same goes for people that believe in Christ. They have seen heard or have enough information to believe that he is the Son of God.
Click to expand...

The author contends that the living Jesus was not the same man as the god we created him to be after he was martyred.
 
Crovax said:
We are talking about how you think Jesus go elevated to God. Only the Abrahamic religions count as far as that is concerned. If Jesus didn't preform some sort of miracles then Judaism would be the predominate Abrahamic religion, yet they make up just .4% of Abrahamic religion followers
Click to expand...

It could be that over the past 2000 it was rather unhealthy to be a Jew. Spanish inquisitions, Nazi extermination a, pogroms...that sort of thing. Maybe it was too dangerous to remain a new or non believer after the fall of Rome.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
There really ought to be some corollary to Godwin's Law, that treats gratuitous comparisons to Islamist terrorists the same as gratuitous comparisons to Hitler and the Nazis.
Click to expand...

The Spanish killed more people in the name of Christ than Hitler did for his Aryan Brotherhood. That's if you believe the Indians of North and South America, Haiti and the rest of the Caribbean were people. :roll:
 
Paleocon said:
Agnostics are child molesters.

As fun as it is to make comments that are completely ridiculous, extremely outrageous, and personally offensive, I prefer to stick with facts.

Speaking of facts, how many people did the Roman Christians kill?
Click to expand...

My point was Christians of Rome were martyrs. How many they killed in their effort is a good question though. This needs to be investigated. But we know they weren't pacifists and that they played a large role in the Roman army begining in the years AD.
http://riversfromeden.wordpress.com...roman-army-countering-the-pacifist-narrative/
 
Last edited:
calamity said:
The author contends that the living Jesus was not the same man as the god we created him to be after he was martyred.
Click to expand...

He has no backing for such a claim though. you can contend all you want to. There has to be evidence of that contention. The fact is that there were plenty of people saw him die.
we also have documented evidence by luke that talked to personal witnesses of at least 500 people that saw him alive after the fact.

so you are saying that 500 people had a delusion? you know the same people that saw him die on a cross.
 
calamity said:
My point was Christians of Rome were martyrs. How many they killed in their effort is a good question though. This needs to be investigated. But we know they weren't pacifists and that they played a large role in the Roman army begining in the years AD.
Christians in the Roman Army: Countering the Pacifist Narrative | Rivers From Eden - The Ancient Near East and its Legacy
Click to expand...


no they didn't. this a huge falsehood and not based on any historical evidence. the persecution of Christians in Rome went on for 300 years.
to the point that they would not just kill you for being a christian but your whole family.

your information is severely flawed and is factually inaccurate.

while i am sure there were people that were christian in the army they were secretive about it. in fact the emperor Diocletian tried to purge them out of the army.
they were not welcome in Rome at all. It wasn't until Constantine came along as emperor that the killing of Christians in Rome stop.
 
ludin said:
He has no backing for such a claim though. you can contend all you want to. There has to be evidence of that contention. The fact is that there were plenty of people saw him die.
we also have documented evidence by luke that talked to personal witnesses of at least 500 people that saw him alive after the fact.

so you are saying that 500 people had a delusion? you know the same people that saw him die on a cross.
Click to expand...

That isn't germane to the argument at all. Even if he was ressurected, that doesn't make him God.
 
calamity said:
The Spanish killed more people in the name of Christ than Hitler did for his Aryan Brotherhood. That's if you believe the Indians of North and South America, Haiti and the rest of the Caribbean were people. :roll:
Click to expand...

Which has what, to do, with all the many, many, many more Christians of all nationalities that have not participated in such murders?

Wouldn't it make more sense (although still be mostly bigoted nonsense) to blame Spaniards, in general, for these crimes, than to blame Christians?
 
RGacky3 said:
That isn't germane to the argument at all. Even if he was ressurected, that doesn't make him God.
Click to expand...
he never claimed to be God.

He always claimed to be the Son of God. in the bibles case he referred to himself as the Son of Man. Either way he never claimed to be God.
 
ludin said:
he never claimed to be God.

He always claimed to be the Son of God. in the bibles case he referred to himself as the Son of Man. Either way he never claimed to be God.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, we're on the same page.
 
calamity said:
My point was Christians of Rome were martyrs. How many they killed in their effort is a good question though. This needs to be investigated. But we know they weren't pacifists and that they played a large role in the Roman army begining in the years AD.
Christians in the Roman Army: Countering the Pacifist Narrative | Rivers From Eden - The Ancient Near East and its Legacy
Click to expand...

Being killed is a far cry from committing murder-suicide.

So what? They served in the army.
 
Paleocon said:
Being killed is a far cry from committing murder-suicide.

So what? They served in the army.
Click to expand...

IMO, most soldiering deaths are a form of murder suicide. And, your most effective soldiers are probably those willing to martyr themselves. Hence the advantages of brainwashing people into believing in life after death. Constantine was no fool.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Which has what, to do, with all the many, many, many more Christians of all nationalities that have not participated in such murders?

Wouldn't it make more sense (although still be mostly bigoted nonsense) to blame Spaniards, in general, for these crimes, than to blame Christians?
Click to expand...

No. Definitely not only the Spanish.

Spanish Inquisition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Spanish Inquisition was established in 1478 by Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. It was intended to maintain Catholic orthodoxy in their kingdoms and to replace the Medieval Inquisition, which was under Papal control. It became the most substantive of the three different manifestations of the wider Christian Inquisition along with the Roman Inquisition and Portuguese Inquisition.
Click to expand...

Nice try though ;)
 
ludin said:
no they didn't. this a huge falsehood and not based on any historical evidence. the persecution of Christians in Rome went on for 300 years.
to the point that they would not just kill you for being a christian but your whole family.

your information is severely flawed and is factually inaccurate.

while i am sure there were people that were christian in the army they were secretive about it. in fact the emperor Diocletian tried to purge them out of the army.
they were not welcome in Rome at all. It wasn't until Constantine came along as emperor that the killing of Christians in Rome stop.
Click to expand...
nonsense. Constantine came along in mid 200 AD. Christians themselves were maybe around from 100 AD forward. So, the little bit of persecution they received from Romans is not really worth discussing...unless, of course, you are a Christian looking to play the victim card.
 
ludin said:
He has no backing for such a claim though. you can contend all you want to. There has to be evidence of that contention. The fact is that there were plenty of people saw him die.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I am not even sure that the evidence exists which proves that a man named Jesus even died on the cross. There's certainly a debate about it.
Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar - Telegraph

we also have documented evidence by luke that talked to personal witnesses of at least 500 people that saw him alive after the fact.

so you are saying that 500 people had a delusion? you know the same people that saw him die on a cross.
Click to expand...
I do not consider that which is written in "Luke" evidence. Sorry.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/luke.html
 
calamity said:
nonsense. Constantine came along in mid 200 AD. Christians themselves were maybe around from 100 AD forward. So, the little bit of persecution they received from Romans is not really worth discussing...unless, of course, you are a Christian looking to play the victim card.
Click to expand...

LOL little bit of persecution?

During the reign of nero they were covered in tar tied to a pole and burned alive to light the streets.
other times they were stuck in the arena with live lions or bears given no weapon and massacred.
others were beat to death or crucified.

this went on for about 300 years.

your lack of knowledge of history doesn't add to your starting OP.
 
ludin said:
LOL little bit of persecution?

During the reign of nero they were covered in tar tied to a pole and burned alive to light the streets.
other times they were stuck in the arena with live lions or bears given no weapon and massacred.
others were beat to death or crucified.

this went on for about 300 years.

your lack of knowledge of history doesn't add to your starting OP.
Click to expand...

Nero needed a scape goat to blame for the great fire of rome.

actually the Romans were tolerant of other religions, apart from the religons that rejected the authority of the roman emperor of course. the general policy of the roman empire was one of toleration of established religions, as long as they accepted the rule of the roman emperor and paid tribute to the cult of the emperor there were no problems.
 
calamity said:
Are you sure? I am not even sure that the evidence exists which proves that a man named Jesus even died on the cross. There's certainly a debate about it.
Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar - Telegraph
Click to expand...

lol one guy that like your OP has no evidence to support himself. what is his support of his theory? no evidence. which is not an argument anywhere.
there is evidence and proof of crucifixion since the persian empire dating back to 200 BC well before the birth of Christ. It was adopted by the Romans as capital punishment around 100 BC.

I do not consider that which is written in "Luke" evidence. Sorry.

The Story Of The Storytellers - The Gospel Of Luke | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS
Click to expand...

Luke is a noted historian and factually backed up his writings to the point that other historians (even today)use his notes that have survived to find other towns and civilizations. they have linked his writings to proper roman officals and leaders that were missing or were not known during that time frame.

i consider him a much better source on the issue than someone who starts off an article as The Story of the Storytellers.
i think you need to do some better fact checking on your sources. they are heavily biased and contain little to 0 support for anything you have proposed so far.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Nero needed a scape goat to blame for the great fire of rome.

actually the Romans were tolerant of other religions, apart from the religons that rejected the authority of the roman emperor of course. the general policy of the roman empire was one of toleration of established religions, as long as they accepted the rule of the roman emperor and paid tribute to the cult of the emperor there were no problems.
Click to expand...

actually this is true to an extent. the only religions they were tolerant of were those that ended up with the emperor being God. if you didn't worship the emperor then you were arrested and jailed. if you continued not to then you were sentenced to death.

Christians refused to worship anyone other than God himself. Therefore they were automatically considered criminals. It didn't help that the Jewish Sanhedrin at the time were spreading other lies about them.

That still doesn't stop the fact that for about 300 years to be a christian in rome was to put your life on the line.
 
ludin said:
lol one guy that like your OP has no evidence to support himself. what is his support of his theory? no evidence. which is not an argument anywhere.

there is evidence and proof of crucifixion since the persian empire dating back to 200 BC well before the birth of Christ. It was adopted by the Romans as capital punishment around 100 BC.
Click to expand...
Lots of people question the cross story
65 Reasons to Believe Jesus Did Not Die on the Cross | The Muslim Times
Jehovah Witnesses, who actually believe in Christ, do not believe Christ was killed on a cross.


Luke is a noted historian and factually backed up his writings to the point that other historians (even today)use his notes that have survived to find other towns and civilizations. they have linked his writings to proper roman officals and leaders that were missing or were not known during that time frame.

i consider him a much better source on the issue than someone who starts off an article as The Story of the Storytellers.
i think you need to do some better fact checking on your sources. they are heavily biased and contain little to 0 support for anything you have proposed so far.
Click to expand...

Luke is a story---fiction. There is more evidence that the book is literature, a historical novel, than that it was an account of historical fact.
 
ludin said:
LOL little bit of persecution?

During the reign of nero they were covered in tar tied to a pole and burned alive to light the streets.
other times they were stuck in the arena with live lions or bears given no weapon and massacred.
others were beat to death or crucified.

this went on for about 300 years.

your lack of knowledge of history doesn't add to your starting OP.
Click to expand...
How could Christians have been tortured by Romans for 300 years when Constantine began converting them in late 200 AD and the sect didn't catch on at all until the mid to late 100's?

Are you arguing that there were hoards of Christians from the day Jesus was born?
 
calamity said:
IMO, most soldiering deaths are a form of murder suicide. And, your most effective soldiers are probably those willing to martyr themselves. Hence the advantages of brainwashing people into believing in life after death. Constantine was no fool.
Click to expand...

Well your opinion is ridiculous.

Do you even your own sources? If you did, then you should have noticed that the source you cited discussed pre-Constantine soldiers.
 
Paleocon said:
Well your opinion is ridiculous.

Do you even your own sources? If you did, then you should have noticed that the source you cited discussed pre-Constantine soldiers.
Click to expand...

no he doesn't i have already caught him doing this several times already. this is a horrible attempt to bash christians and he has failed miserably.
the claims in the OP have already been refuted.

so it doesn't matter.
 
calamity said:
How could Christians have been tortured by Romans for 300 years when Constantine began converting them in late 200 AD and the sect didn't catch on at all until the mid to late 100's?

Are you arguing that there were hoards of Christians from the day Jesus was born?
Click to expand...

Because the edic didn't happen until 313, and even then probably took a few years to get through the whole empire so yea it took about 300 years. (sigh).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom