Open Debate Challenge: Forgiveness w/o the Temple

[themuzicman]

That is the only argument the Christian side is putting forth so far.

Are you arguing that forgiveness in Judaism apart from the temple is sufficient for eternal life?

[Gavriel]

Are you arguing that forgiveness in Judaism apart from the temple is sufficient for eternal life?

I'm asserting exactly what the debate topic is: Forgiveness is possible without the Temple.

It goes w/o saying I'm not refering to the J-man since only Tanach verses are used.

[sylvius]

Gav, I guess you are now declared the automatic winner of this debate since no one has the Chutzpah to take your challenge in a gym debate.

I guess the scribes mentioned in Mark 1:1-12 are no one else than Gavriel and Menachem, since also, of course, Capernaum, "Kfar Nachum", is the village where Menachem resides.

Winners.

[Christian2]

I think I gave the best answer, so I am the winner.

The absence of any rebuttals to my contribution speaks volumes.

[Gavriel]

I think I gave the best answer, so I am the winner.

The absence of any rebuttals to my contribution speaks volumes.

If your confident with your reasoning and stance then post a debate acceptance response here.

Will be waiting!

[Christian2]

If your confident with your reasoning and stance then post a debate acceptance response here.

Will be waiting!

I wish I could. I am working on getting someone else who is more qualified then I to challenge you. This particular person could argue both sides. He knows the Hebrew Scriptures like the back of his hand. But I do not know if he has the interest or the time to do it.

I posted your challenge to him. Let's wait and see what happens. I hate to see your challenge go unchallenged.

If he does not accept, then I think you should make your challenge an open topic. Under no circumstances have you won this "debate" by default because there has been no debate.

Don't accept congratulations for a hollow "victory."

Gavriel, you do know that what I say is in respect and friendship, do you not?

C2

[Gavriel]

I wish I could. I am working on getting someone else who is more qualified then I to challenge you. This particular person could argue both sides. He knows the Hebrew Scriptures like the back of his hand. But I do not know if he has the interest or the time to do it.

I posted your challenge to him. Let's wait and see what happens. I hate to see your challenge go unchallenged.

Well I hope he or anyone for that matter is interested and accepts the challenge.

If he does not accept, then I think you should make your challenge an open topic.

It will wind up here in open topic regardless if it's a gym debate or not. I would prefer to do the gym debate first, that's all.

Under no circumstances have you won this "debate" by default because there has been no debate.

Don't accept congratulations for a hollow "victory."

I know a lack or responce isn't a "victory" for me, but I still believe it looks bad for the other side.

Gavriel, you do know that what I say is in respect and friendship, do you not?

C2

Of course!

[LindaK]

I think I would like to debate you, Gavriel. You are articulate, seem well versed (much more learned than I - which is always great challenge) and have interesting input.....but on this topic...not sure it's anything but a no-brainer...in that I agree with your assertion.

As an aside….I wonder from which part of the TaNaK that Paul was quoting or referring to in Romans, as it was my understanding that the Torah was accepted as authoritative in about 400 B.C.E. and the Prophets about 200 B.C.E. (both well before the destruction of the second temple), but the entire TaNaK was not completed until about 100 C.E.

Just curious. Don’t mean to derail your thread, here.

[Gavriel]

I think I would like to debate you, Gavriel. You are articulate, seem well versed (much more learned than I - which is always great challenge) and have interesting input.....but on this topic...not sure it's anything but a no-brainer...in that I agree with your assertion.

You'd be surprised how enlightening playing devil's advocate can be. I changed my view on capital punishment and abortion after arguing the opposing view. But I understand if you don't want to debate something you don't agree with. If you'd like to pick a different debate topic shoot me a PM.

Oh, and thanks for the compliment!

ShilohAs an aside….I wonder from which part of the TaNaK that Paul was quoting or referring to in Romans, as it was my understanding that the Torah was accepted as authoritative in about 400 B.C.E. and the Prophets about 200 B.C.E. (both well before the destruction of the second temple), but the entire TaNaK was not completed until about 100 C.E.

Just curious. Don’t mean to derail your thread, here.

Thanks for respecting the integrity of the thread. I'll gladly answer those topics in a new thread.

[LindaK]

I accept the challenge, Gavriel. Though, I'm not convinced that I'm equal to the task.

I've never participated in such an activity (I'm pretty new here) and read the debate rules, now what do I do?

[themuzicman]

I accept the challenge, Gavriel. Though, I'm not convinced that I'm equal to the task.

I've never participated in such an activity (I'm pretty new here) and read the debate rules, now what do I do?

Post here saying that you accept the terms of the debate.


(From the forum, that thread is in the Coach's Quarters.)

It's a moderated forum, so a moderator will have to approve the post (shouldn't take too long)

Then someone will start a thread in the Wrestling ring, where you two will have carte blanche to have it out!

Just FYI, posts in the wrestling ring are moderated, too, to make sure that you two are the only participants.

Michael

[Gavriel]

I accept the challenge, Gavriel. Though, I'm not convinced that I'm equal to the task.

I've never participated in such an activity (I'm pretty new here) and read the debate rules, now what do I do?

Yeah!

What you want to do is go HERE. Post a reply stating I accept and will debate the negative.

After your reply is released by moderators I have one week (don't worry I will respond the day it is released) to respond with my opening statement, after that you have one week, etc. The rest is explained in my challenge. Please double check my rules in my opening post as well.

[LindaK]

Yeah!

What you want to do is go HERE. Post a reply stating I accept and will debate the negative.

After your reply is released by moderators I have one week (don't worry I will respond the day it is released) to respond with my opening statement, after that you have one week, etc. The rest is explained in my challenge. Please double check my rules in my opening post as well.

OK, roger that!

Is there a particular frame of reference or point of view you would like to limit this to (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform interpretations, etc)?

[themuzicman]

OK, roger that!

Is there a particular frame of reference or point of view you would like to limit this to (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform interpretations, etc)?

1st century Rabbinic..

[Gavriel]

OK, roger that!

Is there a particular frame of reference or point of view you would like to limit this to (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform interpretations, etc)?

You're not limited toward any POV, however since you are arguing the negative (forgiveness not possible w/o a Temple) you’re going to be using a Christian POV most likely. I’m not aware of any Orthodox/Conservative/Reform Jews that agree with the negative.

You're free to pick your Tanach translation, just cite which one you use in your thread please.