Jesus Christ is the Savior of Man and Son of God

Rebuttals: 'Why Jesus is the Son of GodSubstantial Evidence has been given, proving that Jesus Christ is the "Messiah" spoken of in the Jewish scriptures.It is worthy to also note that Jesus himself claimed to the the Messiah spoken of-* see John 4:25-26* see Mathew 16:15-17.'Firstly, Pro only references Christian verses; which again, as the Messiah (Mashiach) is a Jewish concept outlined in the first five books (Torah) and the Tanakh...cannot be used as a realiable source. Of course the Christian bible is going to proclaim that Jesus is the Messiah--doesn't sufficiently prove that he is so. 'Before I move into my clauses, I would like to point out that contrary to what my opponent has said in regard to Judaism's authority, It is not Judaism that defines the criteria for the Messiah, but only God Himself.' Actually, it does have an authority (see above.) Simarily to how Islam has an authority on its Holy Book, Judaism most certainly has an authority on its Holy Book as well...and it is only because of that Holy Book that we are aware of the concept of a Jewish Messiah. [1.] http://www.jewfaq.org...Once again, as the above source says, there also certain requirements for the Messiah; and mentioning that another indivdual, Bar Kokba, actually came far more close to being the Messiah than Jesus ever did. However, the Messiah is yet to come. 'Given these quotes prove that Jesus himself claimed to be the Messiah predicted.'The verses referenced by Pro do not prove anything, on the contrary, they do not come from an objective source. 'Jesus Christ of Nazareth preformed Miracles among thousands of peoples, and his apostles. This is well recorded in the Gospels. This can easily be proven true when we take into account that all of the apostles were either tortured or killed at the hands of Romans, Jews, or Gentiles for their faith. David Limbaugh, author of Jesus on Trial, and a prominent lawyer, proved Jesus's miracles, death, and resurrection to be sustainable facts in a court of law. Initially, David Limbaugh was an Atheist according to his post-authorship commentary, but was compelled to believe that Jesus did in fact preform such miracles due to the conviction of those who witnessed him.' Empty claim. It's on Pro to affirm thsi statement and prove that Jesus indeed did peform miracles. Certainly in Judaism (or any other more impartial sources for that matter), there isn't one reliable historical reference alluding to a miracle worker named Jesus. Pro is also going to have to support the claim that Jesus rose from the dead. 'Given that the Miracles, Death, and Resurrection of Jesus is proven to be true under standard law practices, and given that Jesus himself claimed to be the Messiah, we can move on to question Jesus's motives.Why would Jesus subject himself to starvation, stress, and constant poverty if he knew that he was not the Messiah?And again, I would ask why did every single one of the Apostles suffer to the point of death for the testimony of Jesus's Gospels without Apostatizing?Many people have suggested that Jesus had a mental issue, but this "solution" is laughable, as it does not explain his ability to preform miracles, nor does it explain why the Pharisees would attempt to kill him if they knew he was merely insane. (At the time, it was not customary to crucify mentally ill people, but to exile, or stone the individual).The Pharisees Once attempted to say that it was by Demons that Jesus preformed miracles, but they were quickly rebutted.'This is all going on the assumption that Jesus was the Messiah, which is Pro is yet to prove. 'More than 100 Messianic prophecies were fulfilled through Jesus Including:Micah 5:2, Isaiah 7:14, Genesis 12:3, Genesis 22:18, Genesis 17:19, Genesis 21:12, Numbers 24:17, Hosea 11:1, Jeremiah 31:15, Isaiah 40:3-5, Malachi 4:5-6, Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 11:1, Psalm 78:2-4, Isaiah 6:9-10 and countless others.'I invite Pro to support this claim, by displaying specific verses. I have already listed Messianic Tanakh verses myself, which Pro has left ignored. 'To successfully Rebut my position, I would like to see Con disprove at least the Majority of the prophecies I randomly listed above using the KJV Bible.'I would like to see Pro rebutt mine (see round one), using the original Tanakh source, perhaps it would help if he also read it in the original Hebrew language; to avoid misunderstanding of any kind. 'Ezekiel 37: 26-28 Refers to Jesus Christ himself being the Third temple of God.'Indeed Ezekiel does not refer to that, it is a prophecy of the third temple being built...the Messiah himself is not the temple in question. Pro is mixing up Jewish and Christian verses, instead he should display the primary verses that he's referring to in a specific order. 'The Idea that the Messiah was supposed to bring World peace instantly is false. In fact, Jesus fulfilled the prophecy given by the prophet Micah in Micah 7:6.' The idea (of world peace), is not false. The Messiah was supposed to bring this while he was living, as the Tanahk says. 'Here are some thoughtful, but contradicting views of multiple Rabbi on the coming of the Messiah:''How is it that the Jewish people could expect world peace from the Messiah, if many claim in contrast that he will Wipe out the Arabs? And how can others claim to know the signs of the times, if Rabbi Uziel Eliyahu claims that it is impossible to know?'Quoting Rabbis achives nothing, as the Tanakh is the ultimate origin of the Messianic concept. The Tanakh does not claim any group of persons (in this case Arabs) will be wiped out, so Pro has made a useless argument. 'Next, Pro confuses Jewish and Christian verse yet again; and only references Christian belief in response to the two verses. 'This statement is false, According the the Gospel of Mathew, the Genealogy listed from Jesus's Father clearly describes Jesus being from the line of David, and Bathsheba.' According to Christianity, Jesus was born to a virgin...and to God, but yet somehow is God as well...but anway, given that he was born without father, Pros statement is inadequate and false; Jesus was not descended from King David, which the Messiah is supposed to on his fathers side. 'Jesus was in fact a king. We clearly see here that Jesus was in fact claiming to be a king, and looking from a spiritual perspective (and not an earthly one), Jesus was a King!'Jesus claiming that he was a king does not make him so, simarily to him claiming that he is the Messiah. The fact remains that Jesus never experienced Kingship. 'Lastly, it was said that Jesus broke the Law. I would beg to differ: It was the pharisees that had diverged from the law into hypocrisy.'The law back then included violation of the Shabbat, therefore, Jesus broke the law. The Pharisees' main contentin against Jesus was that he was a rebel and a law breaker, something the Messiah would not be. It's worth noting that even non-Jewish scholars rebutted Christianity, some Greek philosophers were also strong opponents due to the ludocrous nature of Christian belief [2.] Robert E. Van Voorst, Jesus outside the New Testament, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. pp 65-66 and [3.] Raymond Edward Brown, Mary in the New Testament, Paulist Press, 1978. pp 261-262'You are right to say that God is One. He is In fact One, and like you quoted, "Besides him is No Other". But, like a three leaf clover, God is One, but expresses himself in Three Forms.You also claimed that the Trinity came about through mis translation, but the Hebrew word for "God" (Elohim) used in reference to Yahweh, is actually a plural noun, yet is referred to in-arguably as "One God" Additionally, look into Genesis where God says "Let US make man in OUR image and OUR likeness"- The words "Us" and "Our" are properly conveyed from Hebrew Sources.'Now, in regards to God being one--he is indeed 'one', but by one, we mean 'one'. Not two or three. He is one being that is not triune and does not express himself in three forms. The Tanakh references a monotheistic God, not a Polyteistic one. And any belief that God is more than one, falls under the definition of Polytheism. [4.] Doctrine of the Trinity, Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (1974) art.Indeed 'Elohim' is referred to in a fully singular context in the Tanakh, so Pro is rebutted here. The extra singular is 'Elo', which is also widely used for 'God'. [5.] Gesenius Hebrew Grammar: 124g, without article 125f, with article 126e, with the singular 145h, with plural 132h,145iAlso there is no such word as 'Yahweh' in Hebrew, so Pro is rebutted here too! I assume Pro is referring to 'YHVH', which actually translates as 'Yod Hey Vav Hey'. and it more or less means 'eternal', HaShem is largely used in its place. Rather, it is more conceiavable that God is speaking to angels in heaven, or simply to himself in Genesis; he is absolutey not referring to any other Gods, or any other non-existent parts of himself. 'In conclusion to my argument, I will address Con's request for proof of my belief that "all religions not accepting Jesus Christ are false". The New Testament constantly enforces the belief that no individual can have a relationship with God without Jesus Christ. According to multiple passages, Jesus is the "Only mediator between God and man", and "High Priest who ascended into heaven".'Con finally responds to my question regardinng 'proof' for other religions false, but fails to provide it. Christians verses do not constitute valid evidence as they are obviously biased, and even bias alone, they still do not show how other religions are 'false'. The question has thus been left unawswered.