• 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.

Are you sure there is no God ? [W: 352]

Are you sure there is no God ?

  • Total voters
    76
Logicman said:
Got an example (with scripture #)?
Click to expand...

Primarily the idea that God became a Man, or that Man became a God. A central tenant of Judaism is that God does not have any physical characteristics. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: "God is not mortal" (Numbers 23:19); And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live." (Exodus 33:20); "The Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of the words, but saw no image, just a voice." (Deuteronomy 4:12).

To quote the Rambam:

We believe that this Oneness is neither a body nor a bodily force, nor is He subject to any bodily characteristics -- movement, rest, or dwelling -- be they inherent or by chance. Therefore the Sages repudiated [the possibility of any] cohesion or separation [concerning Him], as they said: "Above there is no sitting, standing, division, or ‘cohesion'" (a usage based on Isaiah 11:14). As the prophet (ibid., 40:18-25) said: "Who is comparable to the Almighty...?" For if He had a body, He could be compared to other bodies.

All the corporeal terms used in the Scriptures to describe Him -- such as walking, standing, sitting, speaking etc. -- are metaphorical. As the Sages have said: "The Torah speaks in the language of man."

This is the third Principle, as affirmed by the verse (Deuteronomy 4:15) "You have not seen any image," that is to say, you cannot conceive of Him as having any form because, as stated, He is neither a body nor a bodily force.
-- Maimonides, 13 Principles of Faith

This is just a very limited excerpt, but in short we believe in the complete and utter indivisibility of God. Anything that divides God, reduces his nature (such as by making him man), is heresy, and probably paganism.

As to the idolatry the iconography, mariolatry, devotion of saints, and worship before crucifixes is idolatrous according to most streams of observant Judaism.
 
Logicman said:
Why Israel Missed its Messiah

https://righterreport.com/2014/02/11/why-israel-missed-its-messiah/
Click to expand...

There honestly isn't much to read on this subject because the tasks that the Moshiach must fulfill are so clear. The Christian position relies exclusively on the argument that Jesus will complete these prophecies when he 'returns' however we reject this categorically.

A few of the prophecies he failed to fulfill:

A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).

However, he also doesn't fulfill basic qualifications of the Moshiach. He wasn't a descendant of the Davidic line:

The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father – and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David.

(1)According to Jewish sources, the Messiah will be born of human parents and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god; (2) nor will he possess supernatural qualities.

Two connected points: A) There is no biblical basis for the idea of a father passing on his tribal line by adoption. A priest who adopts a son from another tribe cannot make him a priest by adoption.

B) Joseph could never pass on by adoption that which he doesn't have. Because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Matthew 1:11) he fell under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30)


As only the father can pass on tribal identification this makes his claims to Davidic ancestry a nullity.

Moreover, the Moshiach will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all Mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)

The elements of Messianic prophecy that Jesus failed to fulfill are, from our perspective, rather voluminous and this is just a snippet.
 
Any Christian who wants to effectively proselytize to the Jews needs to learn Talmud. Otherwise they will seem hopelessly, almost childishly, uneducated to their listeners.
 
Sherman123 said:
Primarily the idea that God became a Man, or that Man became a God. A central tenant of Judaism is that God does not have any physical characteristics. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: "God is not mortal" (Numbers 23:19); And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live." (Exodus 33:20); "The Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire; you heard the sound of the words, but saw no image, just a voice." (Deuteronomy 4:12).

To quote the Rambam:

We believe that this Oneness is neither a body nor a bodily force, nor is He subject to any bodily characteristics -- movement, rest, or dwelling -- be they inherent or by chance. Therefore the Sages repudiated [the possibility of any] cohesion or separation [concerning Him], as they said: "Above there is no sitting, standing, division, or ‘cohesion'" (a usage based on Isaiah 11:14). As the prophet (ibid., 40:18-25) said: "Who is comparable to the Almighty...?" For if He had a body, He could be compared to other bodies.

All the corporeal terms used in the Scriptures to describe Him -- such as walking, standing, sitting, speaking etc. -- are metaphorical. As the Sages have said: "The Torah speaks in the language of man."

This is the third Principle, as affirmed by the verse (Deuteronomy 4:15) "You have not seen any image," that is to say, you cannot conceive of Him as having any form because, as stated, He is neither a body nor a bodily force.
-- Maimonides, 13 Principles of Faith

This is just a very limited excerpt, but in short we believe in the complete and utter indivisibility of God. Anything that divides God, reduces his nature (such as by making him man), is heresy, and probably paganism.
Click to expand...

Your conclusions on that are contrary to what we find in the Tanakh. God has appeared as a man on numerous occasions. These appearances are call ‘Theophanies’.

Theophanies in the Old Testament

https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/incarnation/theophanies-in-the-old-testament/

p.s. The Tanakh can still be true, as men have never seen God the Father, but they have seen God the Son. Otherwise you've got one heck of a contradiction there with all the theophanies.
 
Last edited:
Sherman123 said:
There honestly isn't much to read on this subject because the tasks that the Moshiach must fulfill are so clear. The Christian position relies exclusively on the argument that Jesus will complete these prophecies when he 'returns' however we reject this categorically.

A few of the prophecies he failed to fulfill:

A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).

However, he also doesn't fulfill basic qualifications of the Moshiach.
Click to expand...

That's sort of a strawman argument. The remaining Messianic prophecies will be fulfilled at the Second Coming. That was addressed in my prior link as one of the failed arguments of the anti-Christian Messiah crowd. You should have read that article.

Sherman123 said:
He wasn't a descendant of the Davidic line:

The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father – and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David.

(1)According to Jewish sources, the Messiah will be born of human parents and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god; (2) nor will he possess supernatural qualities.

Two connected points: A) There is no biblical basis for the idea of a father passing on his tribal line by adoption. A priest who adopts a son from another tribe cannot make him a priest by adoption.

B) Joseph could never pass on by adoption that which he doesn't have. Because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Matthew 1:11) he fell under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30)


As only the father can pass on tribal identification this makes his claims to Davidic ancestry a nullity.
Click to expand...

What you missed in all that is that the Messiah would be God Himself. It says so in Jeremiah 23:5-6 and elsewhere, and even ancient Jewish rabbis agree with that. It's all in the following link:

The LORD our Righteousness

Jeremiah 23:5-6 Shows That the Messiah Was to be God Himself

Jeremiah 23:5-6 - The Messiah as God

Sherman123 said:
Moreover, the Moshiach will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all Mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)
Click to expand...

Jesus is Jehovah

https://righterreport.com/2011/09/29/jesus-must-be-jehovah-god/

"THE" Angel ("messenger") of the Lord is Jesus.

"In Malachi Jehovah Sabaoth, the LORD of hosts promised... Behold, I am going to send My messenger (Hebrew = malak = one sent on business or diplomacy by another; LXX = aggelos/angelos one sent to tell or bring a message, to announce or proclaim = transliterated "angel" and in context referring to John the Baptist, as affirmed by Jesus Himself in Lk 7:27) and he (John the Baptist) will clear the way before Me (the LORD of hosts) and the Lord (Hebrew = adon, LXX = referring in context to the Messiah), Whom you seek, will suddenly (Hebrew = pitom = unexpectedly, surprisingly, all of a sudden - somewhat an ironic word here because the Jews should have known the day of His visitation according to Lk 19:44), which they could have known by studying Da 9:24, 25, 26, 27 {see notes Da 9:24; 25; 26; 9:27}) come to His temple and the MESSENGER OF THE COVENANT, (Malak = "Angel"; and thus the "Angel of the Covenant") in Whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the LORD of hosts. (Malachi 3:1-see commentary)"

Angel of the LORD | Precept Austin
 
Logicman said:
Nonsense.

By your common practice of discarding or attempting to marginalize ALL historical references to Jesus, you unwittingly would have people believe in a massive and complicated conspiracy by mostly common, uneducated fishermen, etc., to advance a false narrative of Christ. Let's review who would probably have to be in this unwitting conspiracy of yours (or be labeled as liars, charlatans, etc.)

1. Most or all of the disciples, including early unbelievers such as James and Thomas. You would, in effect, be assigning acts of deception to these men in spite of there being no narrative or history of dishonesty on their part.

2. The women at the tomb. Their testimony that a resurrection never occurred is absent in history.

3. Luke, the physician and author of his Gospel. He wasn't a disciple. He wrote that he carefully investigated "everything" from the beginning. There's no evidence he just focused on the words and accounts of the apostles alone. What's more, he continues his narrative with the Book of Acts, with additional miracles and people (including Paul, a person hostile to Christianity) claiming to have had experiences with Christ. Plus, Paul's companions on the road to Damascus "heard the sound" of Paul's experience with Jesus.

4. Eusebius and Josephus and others in the links and posts previously provided had to be lying, mistaken, or in on the conspiracy to defraud the populace.

5. We need to add Paul to the conspiracy (or at least to the list of people who were defrauded), since he wrote of the resurrection of Jesus in his epistles. According to Luke, Paul had an experience with Jesus on the road to Damascus.

6. Let's also add in all the other eyewitnesses of miracles and/or authors of the New Testament, since they must also be liars, madmen, or charlatans.

I can probably dredge up some more, but the list of people who would have to be liars, charlatans, etc., is now too long (and unsupported by any actual evidence on your part) to be believable.

It's like trying to believe Slick Willie Clinton when the interviewer asked him, "Why would all these women be lying about you?"

Why would all those New Testament figures be lying, insane, or deluded, but you're right on the money? Sure, Ramoss.
Click to expand...

You, of course, are mistaken. I will note your diversionary tactics for 1) doing a 'to the person' attack, rather than address the point, 2) bringing up politics in a place where it doesn't belong. As for the minimalist , that is a very time honored historical technique that is involved in ALL of historical points. That is what the more respected historians to. They go by what the evidence shows.

Then, of course, you are insisting that there are eye witnesses to the miracles. You don't have any writings from those eye witnesses, just claims for them. Paul was not an eye witness.. and Luke is not Paul.. and you would think in the vast writings of Paul, he would actually write his personal experiences.

Eusisubus was from 300 years later, and the passages in Josephus were modified at the very least, and out right forgeries most likely. That makes the source of Josephus to be worthess.


Now, the so called testimony of the women from the tomb.. Well.. that story was written down decades later, and they weren't doing the writing. You can't show that it actually happened, nor, even if it was true, all you cold say is 'The body is missing'. It does not say 'why the body was missing'. Your gospels are merely rieligiously motiviated dogma written down decades after the fact, for theological purposes.
 
Logicman said:
Yada yada yada...

Sorry, you haven't done your homework.
Click to expand...

You mean I haven't believed the stories that you think are literally true. There were no prophets and no prophecies. These are all made up religious stories. Stories that are evidence of nothing but the writer's promotion of beliefs in something that does not exist. Step outside of your bible stories and breathe the air of reality once in a while.
 
Logicman said:
Your conclusions on that are contrary to what we find in the Tanakh. God has appeared as a man on numerous occasions. These appearances are call ‘Theophanies’.

Theophanies in the Old Testament

https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/incarnation/theophanies-in-the-old-testament/

p.s. The Tanakh can still be true, as men have never seen God the Father, but they have seen God the Son. Otherwise you've got one heck of a contradiction there with all the theophanies.
Click to expand...

The revelation isn't the issue. It's the notion that God can actually be seen, or that he would become human. Both of which are not possible, the latter of which is flat heresy.
 
Logicman said:
That's sort of a strawman argument. The remaining Messianic prophecies will be fulfilled at the Second Coming. That was addressed in my prior link as one of the failed arguments of the anti-Christian Messiah crowd. You should have read that article.



What you missed in all that is that the Messiah would be God Himself. It says so in Jeremiah 23:5-6 and elsewhere, and even ancient Jewish rabbis agree with that. It's all in the following link:

The LORD our Righteousness

Jeremiah 23:5-6 Shows That the Messiah Was to be God Himself

Jeremiah 23:5-6 - The Messiah as God



Jesus is Jehovah

https://righterreport.com/2011/09/29/jesus-must-be-jehovah-god/

"THE" Angel ("messenger") of the Lord is Jesus.

"In Malachi Jehovah Sabaoth, the LORD of hosts promised... Behold, I am going to send My messenger (Hebrew = malak = one sent on business or diplomacy by another; LXX = aggelos/angelos one sent to tell or bring a message, to announce or proclaim = transliterated "angel" and in context referring to John the Baptist, as affirmed by Jesus Himself in Lk 7:27) and he (John the Baptist) will clear the way before Me (the LORD of hosts) and the Lord (Hebrew = adon, LXX = referring in context to the Messiah), Whom you seek, will suddenly (Hebrew = pitom = unexpectedly, surprisingly, all of a sudden - somewhat an ironic word here because the Jews should have known the day of His visitation according to Lk 19:44), which they could have known by studying Da 9:24, 25, 26, 27 {see notes Da 9:24; 25; 26; 9:27}) come to His temple and the MESSENGER OF THE COVENANT, (Malak = "Angel"; and thus the "Angel of the Covenant") in Whom you delight, behold, He is coming," says the LORD of hosts. (Malachi 3:1-see commentary)"

Angel of the LORD | Precept Austin
Click to expand...

A 'Second Coming' is anathema to the entire idea of the Moshiach and the Messianic Age. It is a central tenant of faith that if a possible Moshiach dies, such as Bar Kochba (who fulfilled far more requirements than Christ), then he is not the Moshiach.

I don't know what to say to your citation from Jeremiah other than that its probably one of the most inventive I've ever seen ;). That passage reinforces why we know it will be a mortal descendent of David, but there are a litany of them. Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5.
 
Sherman123 said:
It is the Word of God passed down to Moses at Mount Sinai. It is Torah.
Click to expand...

What was passed down to Moses at Mt. Sinai is in the Bible. The rest of what you say was passed down, if not in the Bible, cannot be undocumented.
 
Sherman123 said:
The revelation isn't the issue. It's the notion that God can actually be seen, or that he would become human. Both of which are not possible, the latter of which is flat heresy.
Click to expand...

It's in the Torah and the Tanakh - accounts where God appeared as a man. I documented it in the link that you quoted in Post #1036. There's nothing heretical about it.
 
Sherman123 said:
A 'Second Coming' is anathema to the entire idea of the Moshiach and the Messianic Age. It is a central tenant of faith that if a possible Moshiach dies, such as Bar Kochba (who fulfilled far more requirements than Christ), then he is not the Moshiach.
Click to expand...

The actual word for Messiah (Moshiach) is seen in Daniel chapter 9. Then Daniel says he is 'cut off' - an idiom for killed as in a sacrifice. After that, "...war continues until the end." It's documented.

As for Daniel chapter 9 speaking of the Messiah, two of your more celebrated rabbis confirmed it spoke of the Messiah:

Maimonides (Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon): "Daniel has elucidated to us the knowledge of the end times. However, since they are secret, the wise [rabbis] have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah’s coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that the End Times have already come but there is no sign of the Messiah" (Igeret Teiman, Chapter 3 p.24.)

"Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi: "I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures and have not found the time for the coming of Messiah clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the 9th chapter of the prophecy of Daniel (The Messiah of the Targums, Talmuds and Rabbinical Writers, 1971) p.141-142.

Sherman123 said:
I don't know what to say to your citation from Jeremiah other than that its probably one of the most inventive I've ever seen ;). That passage reinforces why we know it will be a mortal descendent of David, but there are a litany of them. Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5.
Click to expand...

The passage says, ""Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD (JEHOVAH) OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS." (Jeremiah 23:5-6)

The descendant would be the Son of God, and a descendant of King David (which he was by Mary). Both are confirmed in the New Testament as having been fulfilled.

Think about it. Is God the Savior of Man, or can a mere man who aspires to be the Messiah, be the Savior? God is the Savior in both Testaments.
 
Logicman said:
What was passed down to Moses at Mt. Sinai is in the Bible. The rest of what you say was passed down, if not in the Bible, cannot be undocumented.
Click to expand...

Nope, that is only a small portion of what was transmitted to Moses.
 
Logicman said:
It's in the Torah and the Tanakh - accounts where God appeared as a man. I documented it in the link that you quoted in Post #1036. There's nothing heretical about it.
Click to expand...

In neither the Torah, nor any of the other books of the Tanakh, does God appear to humanity as a man. That is simply untrue.
 
Logicman said:
The actual word for Messiah (Moshiach) is seen in Daniel chapter 9. Then Daniel says he is 'cut off' - an idiom for killed as in a sacrifice. After that, "...war continues until the end." It's documented.

As for Daniel chapter 9 speaking of the Messiah, two of your more celebrated rabbis confirmed it spoke of the Messiah:

Maimonides (Rabbi Moses Ben Maimon): "Daniel has elucidated to us the knowledge of the end times. However, since they are secret, the wise [rabbis] have barred the calculation of the days of Messiah’s coming so that the untutored populace will not be led astray when they see that the End Times have already come but there is no sign of the Messiah" (Igeret Teiman, Chapter 3 p.24.)

"Rabbi Moses Abraham Levi: "I have examined and searched all the Holy Scriptures and have not found the time for the coming of Messiah clearly fixed, except in the words of Gabriel to the prophet Daniel, which are written in the 9th chapter of the prophecy of Daniel (The Messiah of the Targums, Talmuds and Rabbinical Writers, 1971) p.141-142.



The passage says, ""Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD (JEHOVAH) OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS." (Jeremiah 23:5-6)

The descendant would be the Son of God, and a descendant of King David (which he was by Mary). Both are confirmed in the New Testament as having been fulfilled.

Think about it. Is God the Savior of Man, or can a mere man who aspires to be the Messiah, be the Savior? God is the Savior in both Testaments.
Click to expand...

5 Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when I will set up of David a righteous shoot, and he shall reign a king and prosper, and he shall perform judgment and righteousness in the land.
ההִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים נְאֻם יְהֹוָה וַהֲקִמֹתִי לְדָוִד צֶמַח צַדִּיק וּמָלַךְ מֶלֶךְ וְהִשְׂכִּיל וְעָשָׂה מִשְׁפָּט וּצְדָקָה בָּאָרֶץ:

6In his days, Judah shall be saved and Israel shall dwell safely, and this is his name that he shall be called, The Lord is our righteousness.
ובְּיָמָיו תִּוָּשַׁע יְהוּדָה וְיִשְׂרָאֵל יִשְׁכֹּן לָבֶטַח וְזֶה שְּׁמוֹ אֲשֶׁר יִקְרְאוֹ יְהֹוָה | צִדְקֵנוּ:

Rashi: The Lord is our righteousness: The Lord will vindicate us during this one’s days.

Nothing even close to God being the Moshiach.
 
I wonder what they are talking about in the Religion forum? Philosophy?
 
devildavid said:
I wonder what they are talking about in the Religion forum? Philosophy?
Click to expand...

There are stricter rules in that subforum... and such a thread about disbelief in any religion would be forbidden.
 
RAMOSS said:
There are stricter rules in that subforum... and such a thread about disbelief in any religion would be forbidden.
Click to expand...

That's like having a forum about drugs and the rules being that you can't talk about legalizing them.

I say they create an atheist forum and the rules are that no one can support the existence of God. That would be fair.
 
Brewdog said:
That's like having a forum about drugs and the rules being that you can't talk about legalizing them.

I say they create an atheist forum and the rules are that no one can support the existence of God. That would be fair.
Click to expand...

You can talk about atheism, you just can't be critical of specific religion
 
RAMOSS said:
You can talk about atheism, you just can't be critical of specific religion
Click to expand...

That doesn't really make it a discussion then does it? If there's no discourse allowed then it's mere propaganda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom