Jesus never claimed to be God.

Thank you for your response. I'm going to finish this up.I'm going to start by addressing my fifth point and explain its signficance in the debate. After that, I'm going to try to go down the biggest points in the debate, and see if I can provide a full rebuttal (and I'm changing the numbers since this has become a list of summary points, not necessarily a continuation of the arguments from last round).1) Jesus was a sacrifice for the world:Romans 3:25 "God presented Christ as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his blood--to be received by faith. He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished--"My opponent claims that Jesus was not a sacrifice because God does not require one. However, I'm going to explain the way that contradicts the Bible aside from that last verse blatantly saying that Jesus was a sacrifice for sin.God has required sacrifice. In Levitical Law, God required sacrifices of the Hebrews. Sacrificing animals would've served no purpose unless God actually needed a sacrifice. The other laws did have a purpose. For example, they weren't allowed to eat certain animals due to diseases they could contract if they didn't cook it right. They weren't allowed to have tattoos mainly because that involved digging a rock into their skin and use crude ink, which led to diseases. However, there is no benefit to sacrificing other than God using it to cleanse their sins.Why does God require sacrifice? God is a God of justice as well as love. Sins are committed against him, and he must punish those according to his own nature (a nature that does not change ever). Animals are finite, therefore, God required sacrifices on them regularly to attone for sin. The reason God sacrificed himself as the person Jesus is because he needed an eternal sacrifice to be able to give mercy to people just for loving him. If Jesus was not God or perfect, then the death on the cross would've been meaningless, and the whole New Testament would've been largely false.If God never required sacrifice then most of the old testament is unneceessary. God would have just show mercy to people. Israel's role would've been completely unnecessary. God would've just gone around forgiving people, and the world would live happily ever after. God would've never asked for sacrifices in Levitical Law.This point is important.Because my opponent cannot uphold the Bible on his side, it is impossible for him to affirm a Biblical statement.2) Messianic prophesies.I disagree with my opponent's interpretation of the verse in Isaiah. First of all, Jesus could not have made the New Covenant if he was just a man. Only the Everlasting Father (directly meaning God) could have done that. And back to my point up there, it's impossible without Jesus being God.For Isaiah to call Jesus the Everlasting Father is absurd without actually implying that he is.I would also like to point out that the angels address Jesus as "the Lord." They used a definitive article in that case. Also, they would've been lying to call him a lord as a man. Jesus was not a lord. He wasn't even close. Jesus was a homeless man. Angels don't lie.This point is extremely important, because this is the Bible saying that Jesus is God.And one more time, I'll bring up John 5:17-18, which again states, "My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God." This verse is the Bible stating that Jesus equated himself with God. My opponent hasn't addressed here why the Bible is wrong in that statement.3) The point of Jesus was to be humbled.The Bible (specifically Paul) seems amazed that Jesus would lower himself to being a servant and submit himself to death on a cross. This isn't really that amazing if Jesus is just a man, because he doesn't really have a choice in the matter. It's just a fact. If he's God then that is amazing, and you can find the purpose to be that God wanted to live a perfect life as a model for our own.Aside from that, if Jesus had gone around telling everyone he was God, no one would've listened to him, and he would've been killed a lot sooner. All of Israel basically would've hated him if everything about him was the same except that he was claiming to be God. God is an effective God.4) Jesus casting doubt on the fact that he is God.In some ways, Jesus wanted to show us how to live, as stated above.However, it is reasonable for Jesus being God to also say that God the Father is greater than him. God's spirit can live in a man just as their spirit. However, a human body cannot manifest God's full power, meaning that Jesus was God only in spirit, not in power. His body was still that of a man, not taking away from the fact that he was God (because our body does not define who we are), but the body of Jesus was limited. Therefore Jesus could be God and still say, "The Father is greater than I." Jesus could speak like this in truth his entire ministry and still be God.So under my interpretation of the Bible, the entire Bible is coherent. However, as explained in my first point, the Bible is not coherent under my opponent's side. Thank you for reading this debate.