The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is God
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
I believe the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is God. He coexisted eternally with the Father, but at the same time Jesus and His father are both the same God. They both are the same God, but yet two different persons with two different roles in the Godhead. They are the same in nature, essence, and being.
Please stay on topic. This is not a debate about whether or not God exists, or about how God can be two seperate persons and still one God. This is a debate about what the Bible teaches. Although I will explain the doctrine of the Trinity and how it could be logically possible if necessary.
The Word became flesh
Revelation 22:8-9 - Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things. Then he said to me, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”
1 Peter 2:22 - “Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
People interpret the bible, but it does not actually teach. This is why hate groups such as Westboro Baptist Church can read the same bible as U2, but decide on polar opposite morals are contained within. Some even interpret the bible as predicting the messiah Donald Trump.
Using Math books as an example, they teach that 2+2=4, and learning that lesson from them is not one of many interpretations of the information, it is what is taught.
In fact, no other group has studied the bible for as long as the Jews. Increased time with any potential lessons within, lead to the conclusion that Jesus is not God nor even messiah.
Early Christians did not even believe Jesus was God, they started that line basically to mock Romans who insisted their emperor was God.
II. Different Behaviors
To my understanding of the description of this debate, the holy trinity itself is off limits. This removes any time they/he talked to themselves/himself to negate, but likewise removes the directly contradictory behaviors as distinct aspects of a singular entity as a defense.
To use an analogy, even were they in the bible, Charles Manson and Jeffrey Dahmer are not God because they behaved differently than God. If Jesus likewise behaved differently than God, the bible has shown him to be a different entity from God.
This is a Modus Tollens refutation of pro's case:
P1: If the bible teaches that Jesus is God (X), THEN it must teach that Jesus and God exhibit matching behavior (Y).
P2: The bible does NOT teach that Jesus and God exhibit matching behavior (Y).
C1: Therefore, the bible does NOT teach that Jesus is God.
So quick Q&A (I could name a dozen, but that would be a Gish Gallop):
1. How many times does Jesus mind control someone into an action, to use an excuse to murder innocent children? God did this (Exodus 9:12).
2. How many times does Jesus set innocent people on fire over nothing related to any of their actions? God did this (Job 1:16).
3. How many times does Jesus prank his followers by ordering any of them to kill all their children? God did this (Genesis 22:2).
If the bible fails to show Jesus doing these atrocities (or like behaviors), Jesus is clearly depicted as not being (to quote pro) of “the same in nature, essence, and being” as God.
While my above arguments should be enough, I’ll also address pro’s points.
“The Word became flesh”
Obviously this makes no mention of Jesus, and is so open to interpretation that some believe it indicates Donald Trump (repeated source).
“Jesus being worshipped”
People give gifts to children all the time, it does not indicate that the children are God. It does not even indicate that the people think the children are God. Even by definition worship (Merriam-Webster: “to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion”) does not imply godliness, God could even worship people without them being so much as godly.
Sadly, I need to give a quick grammar lesson here. “You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.” Jesus commanded people to worship God, comma, and that they shall also serve God. Worship and service are clearly separate ideas. Further were Jesus also God, why would he speak of himself as a third person? Clearly the bible does not teach that they are the same entity, or else this and others would have been corrected in one of the many edits.
Clearly it is talking about Jesus.
First and the last.
Isaiah 44:6(Old Testament) - “Thus says the Lord, the King of Israel, And his Redeemer, the Lord of hosts: ‘I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God.
Everything was created through Jesus.
Isaiah 44:24(Old Testament) - Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, And He who formed you from the womb: “I am the Lord, who makes all things, Who stretches out the heavens all alone, Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself;John 1:3 - All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
Acts 20:28 - Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Jesus being called God.
Isaiah 9:6(Old Testament) - For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
Colossians 2:9 - For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;
Matthew 1:23 - “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”
Hebrews 1:8-9 - But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
early Christians did not believe Jesus was God has been wholly dropped
There is other proof early Christians believed Jesus was God as well.
Are you implying that no matter what interpretation someone has it will never match the authors original thoughts, intent, or purpose? If so, How could you possibly know this?
Because the book in question is not doing the teaching, people with agendas are.
Assuming you are not being bias when using the phrase "people with agendas." This logic makes no sense because the people that is doing the teaching learned it from the book itself. By this logic no one is taught anything from a book and whenever someone reads a book, if they speak about what it says it's just a interpretation and we can't actually know what the author originally intended for it to mean.
All I did was use straight Bible verses with some explanation.
John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (Don't say this isn't referring to Jesus because I clearly showed you context in the last round.)
Hebrews 1:8-11 - But to the Son He says:“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Matthew 28:20 - teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen
1 Peter 2:22 - “Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;Hebrews 4:15 - For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.
It wouldn't if they read context. The practice of hermeneutics would come in handy for this. people need to practice exegesis and not eisegesis.
I see what you mean here. I accept this refute, but take note that Jesus and the Father are both one God. Also you didn't refute my second argument after this.
Like I said in the last round, "Also I want to point out that normally you don’t want to look up modern English definitions when interpreting the New Testament. You want to use a Greek Lexicon."
This makes me think once again that my opponent doesn't understand the Trinity.
Note that pro has given no analysis within his “More Arguments,”
Did you want me to copy and paste the entire chapters or something so I could show you the context that it is talking about Jesus? I already showed the context of John 1:1 is talking about Jesus. That alone should prove it. Instead of saying that I am not giving analysis or not using context, tell me why they are out of context?
is merely copy/pasted spam lines of the bible without context from a website (one to which he did not even give credit).
What? I used Bible verses. All I did was use Bible verses and put a title over them. I guess I give credit to the Bible?
Men and women are equal, it does not make them the same.
I guess I am going to have to point out the context again.
It's one thing to say men and woman are equal. It's different to claim that you are equal with God the creator of everything that isn't human and higher in everyway than us. Also the Jews knew exactly what he was talking about because they said, "The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” He was claiming to be God. They knew exactly what He was claiming.
Once again you don't seem to understand the Trinity.
Once again putting words in my mouth that I never said. I didn't dismiss the books, and I never said I disliked the books. All I said was you are completely missing the point of those stories and were actually misleading about what God did. You were using words such as "murder" "mind control." when it wasn't that. So I didn't address those because it was irrelevant to the debate.
Actually you are wrong. The Trinity is all over the Old Testament as well.
Luke 24:44 - And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
There is a guy named Mike Winger who has a YouTube channel. He has an entire videos series about how Jesus is all over the Old Testament. So far he has like 22 videos and each are like 1 hour apiece because there is so much of Jesus in the Old Testament.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” – John 1:1, NIV
So quick Q&A (I could name a dozen, but that would be a Gish Gallop):1. How many times does Jesus mind control someone into an action, to use an excuse to murder innocent children? God did this (Exodus 9:12).2. How many times does Jesus set innocent people on fire over nothing related to any of their actions? God did this (Job 1:16).3. How many times does Jesus prank his followers by ordering any of them to kill all their children? God did this (Genesis 22:2).If the bible fails to show Jesus doing these atrocities (or like behaviors), Jesus is clearly depicted as not being (to quote pro) of “the same in nature, essence, and being” as God.
“One of my earlier sources already addressed the book of John, namely that superior books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke contradict it.” -R2, calling back to R1, now used again in R3.
Sin in this context means violation of the Torah Law. According to Christianity, Jesus was born under the Torah Law and thus must have kept that perfectly. With that, let’s begin by listing the sins of Jesus.Sin 1: Causing DamagesThe Gospel of Matthew records this interesting passage:"Not far away there was a large herd of pigs feeding. 31 So the demons begged Jesus, "If you are going to drive us out, send us into that herd of pigs." 32 "Go," Jesus told them; so they left and went off into the pigs. The whole herd rushed down the side of the cliff into the lake and was drowned. 33 The men who had been taking care of the pigs ran away and went into the town, where they told the whole story and what had happened to the men with the demons." Matthew 8:30-33.The pigs were the livelihood of the person who owned them. This certainly caused extreme emotional and financial damage to them.Sh'mot / Exodus 21:37 "If a man steals an ox or a sheep and slaughters it or sells it, he must pay back five head of cattle for the ox and four sheep for the sheep.”Jesus left town and failed to repay the damage done to the property owner. If Jesus is an all-powerful deity, surely he can cast out demons without causing financial loss.Sin 2: LyingJesus lied to the Jewish court. Here’s the text in question:John 18:20, "I spoke openly to the world, I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing.”But this statement is false. Jesus purposefully veiled his teachings and taught in parables to prevent people from repenting from their sins:Mark 4:11-12 “He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, ‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven.”This text is especially problematic. The entire goal for Jesus is to “save the sins of the world,” yet he did this to prevent people from being forgiven!
Alright, I think I am starting to understand my opponent. I didn't realize he wanted to know my source where I got my Bible verses. The reason I didn't source them is because I didn't realize not sourcing them would be a problem. Since Biblegateway didn't write the Bible I didn't feel like it was necessary to specifically say what website I got the verses from.The verses I spammed in "4. More arguments" in round 2. All those verses I used were from the NKJV of the Bible. I copied and pasted the verses themselves, but I didn't copy someone else's interpretation of them. The titles I put above the verses were my doing, and the bolding to use emphasis was my doing as well.
not only does it not end that way, but“Jesus” is not in it.
The reason I said that I clearly showed the context in the last round. Is because I believe I did. I will show why again.
I think it's clear it's talking about Jesus here.It is saying "the Word was God" Then "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us"
If you talking about the part about Jesus possessing divine names. I actually did put the source right after because I directly copied and pasted that. If it's the part about Jesus possessing the same attributes as God. I admit I used answers in Genesis for help with that as well. I didn't source that time and that was my fault. Sometimes I didn't feel like it was necessary to source, but I understand now you want me to source everything. Even including the Bible itself.
Bible verse Source, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Philipians+2%3A5-6%2C+Colossians+2%3A9%2C+Romans+9%3A5&version=NKJV "Bold Emphasis added"
Paul is saying Jesus didn't consider it robbery to be equal with God, and in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. Paul even literally called Him God in Romans 9:5.
merely complained that he does not like that it refutes him.
Could you please point out where I complained that it refuted me, because I don't ever remember complaining that it refuted me.
I actually learned Jesus was God from the Bible. You make it seem like no one who teaches Jesus is God has even read the Bible. All my verses that I have already pointed out I think makes it clear that it is teaching Jesus is God.
I didn't say God reaches down and decides what someone learns. I said you cannot understand his book properly without his help. If this is true then anyone other than a Christian is untrustworthy to teach the Bible.
This also shows that the bible does not get a chance to teach that message.
You are making an assumption that just because most claim to be Christian and few actually read there Bible that none can get taught from the Bible that Jesus is God. What about the few actual Christians that do read there Bibles all the time and study them and believe Jesus is God from what they read?
This is purely an off-topic Ad Hominem attack.
I wasn't trying to use an Ad Hominem attack. It's just somethings you were saying confuses me since you went to a Catholic University. Sorry if you thought I was using that against you.
To me this argument still doesn't make any sense. Even if they didn't do the exact same things that does not disprove He is God. It could possibly disprove He was God if there was nothing else showing Him to be God in the Bible, but there is so much other context, prophesy, foreshadows, christophanies, and verses. That show Him to be God. Which I have pointed out a lot so far.
I am going to use a source that I have already used in this same round because I think it is so important. "Why You Don't Let Bart Ehrman Interpret the Bible for You" Also I don't know of any of the other gospels that contradict Jesus being God. Please give me some verses and reasons why they contradict that Jesus is God in John.
Another Ad Hominem attack
I can't defend my position for the Trinity if you are not understanding the Trinity, because if you don't have an understanding of the Trinity. That will affect how you understand my responses, and it will affect the responses you give me.
I want the audience to notice that my opponent is warping what I am saying. He is basically putting words in my mouth and trying to make it sound worse than what I actually said. Throughout this debate he has done this. Please pay attention to that. Regardless of if you agree with me or not, please don't let him warping my words and putting words in my mouth affect how you vote against me.
They don't disagree on what generally happened. They just have different perspectives. It would be less convincing if they all said exactly the same thing. As much as you hate plagiarizing you would never believe it. Please read what a contradiction really is.
Now I want to use some of the Bible verses I have already used since you did not refute them.
And there is no God besides Me."
Last thing before round 4
That he has been editing the bible to say whatever he wants it to, has been wholly dropped.
“I didn't copy someone else's interpretation of them.”
This is verifiably untrue, as my opponent is confirmed to have copy/pasted no less than 28 lines from Dr. Rhodes (and more from another author I did not identify but he admitted), but only gave credit for the “Jesus is Theos” paragraph. Unless Dr. Rhodes is yet another name for God (which are not to be confused with names for Jesus), this is literally “someone else’s interpretation of them.”
“Could you point out where I refused to use quotation marks”?
R1, R2, and R3, roughly half the content. I have already given multiple samples of how to give credit, surround text with quotation marks, and/or use indents where warranted. I am not going to feed this latest Gish Gallop tactic by subjecting the audience to re-reading every line of pro’s spam.
I. The Bible Teaches Nothing, It Is Interpreted
“In your source...”
My opponent has chosen to wait literally three rounds to respond to a source (beyond his earlier mistaking it for Dan Brown, of whom it makes zero mention), likely in hopes that the audience will forget the context of the source. To quote myself:
“Early Christians did not even believe Jesus was God, they started that line basically to mock Romans who insisted their emperor was God.”
Another 1 hour 43 minutes, to add to the 22+ hours he previously asked the audience to watch to be able to understand his case. Without these outside videos, people would not be able to understand what those guys want us to think the bible teaches, because the bible does not teach those things in and of itself. Ironically, one of those videos is even against letting people interpret the bible for you!
R3 under the heading “Because the book in question is not doing the teaching, people with agendas are.” This paragraph was complaining about the scientific information without refuting it; unless pro was serious when he claimed Christianity sprang into existence only last generation (“the people that is doing the teaching learned it from the book itself.”), which I took to be a simple typo to be forgiven without comment.
News stories for verification of this claim? It’s a pretty big one; someone spontaneously becoming Christian in isolation, having not been told Jesus is God (at least not by any figure of authority) before opening the bible. If true, you’re probably in at least a couple scientific journals.
More complaining about scientific information, without refuting it… To be clear, they form that belief before they read the bible, thus are not taught it by the bible.
Voters, please forgive him this typo in misattributed quotes. Those are his own words not mine, even if that simplification touches on part of my case.
The law as seen in Exodus:
“...take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.” -Exodus 21:23-25, NIV
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” -Matthew 5:38-40, NIV
My opponent again concedes: “I said you cannot understand his book properly without his help.” This means the book fails to teach. Were the debate that God teaches, he would have a great point, as I explained last round.
II. Different Behaviors
If the bible fails to show Jesus doing these atrocities
Pro asserts some terrible math (1+1=1) in an attempt to dismiss how blatantly their natures and essences differ. It is not about if “they didn't do the exact same things,” it’s about like-behavioral trends. Pro is accusing Jesus of being guilty of every crime committed by God, but cannot find any fault committed by Jesus to suggest he’s the type to execute such horrible misdeeds.
Using math as additional support: We know God is addicted to killing large numbers of people. Looking at only the wholesale slaughters, the estimated total from just the old testament is 20.3 million (20,329,070, again this is excluding various individual killings). At least according to biblical literalists, the bible apparently says the earth is roughly 6,000 years old. To be charitable, we’ll leave that figure alone instead of subtracting years after the old testament.
Their specific exclusion from saying something that would have been so fundamentally important is the evidence, it'd be about like if Columbus refused to mention land in his reports about the Americas. But for an example, Matthew specifically says that Jesus is the genetic son of Joseph (being of that paternal line was required for him to be eligible to be the messiah):
“This is the genealogy a of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham… [39 lines omitted] ...and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.” -Matthew 1:1-16, NIV
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” -Genesis 1:1, NIV
Regarding the pigs: The act of destroying someone else's property is a sin, even if later made right, the sin has still been committed. That we have have a record of him incurring the massive debt but and none of him paying, marks an additional sin. If the bible wanted to teach that he was without sin, it could have had him pre-pay for the pigs, but it did not.
They sinners of different categories and magnitudes. The most well known biblical rule is to not murder people, of which need I remind the audience what God did to the Egyption children? For Jesus to be God, Jesus would need to at least be a sinner of the same category.
“warping what I am saying”
This was his defense to criticism for trying to get the audience to watch 22+ hours of videos… To be a broken record, if the bible was teaching these things, the videos trying to teach that the bible teaches these things would not be necessary. Again, his burden is to prove that the bible teaches those things, not that some people interpret it as teaching those things.
IV. Gish Gallop
As for the biblical quotes pro Gish Galloped…
- Revelation 1:4-8
This specifically refers to God and Jesus as separate, even speaking separately, implying Jesus is a servant and not the same as God whom speaks.
“even those who pierced Him” marks a time limit if Jesus Christ from the rest of the bible is the one in question, because these events must happen before the last Roman from his execution has died; or else wait for a different messiah to be pierced fatally.
Plus it calls Jesus Christ “who is the faithful witness,” which as we know the Jesus seen earlier is a liar, so on multiple accounts it is a different person being called Jesus; possibly due to a translation error and/or the commonality of the name Jesus (Christ was not his last name, it was a title which can be bestowed).
- Revelation 1:5
Proof of pro intentionally making his Gish Galloping worse, is that he then repeats what is already contained within 1:4-8. So see my above response.
- Revelation 1:17-18
This removes the context that the author was hallucinating (something John openly admits), taken from Revelation 1:16, “In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.” If Jesus looked like that, Matthew or another would have said something about it, like that time he got slapped instead of the guy running away in fear at the sword sticking out his mouth. His appearance was actually specified in Hebrews 7:14 as being quite normal and human.
- Acts 20:28
First this is talking about blood offerings to God. It even speaks of animal sacrifices (lambs), which does not mean the bible is teaching that God is a Lamb… The passage goes on to explain the danger of wolves, and the need to use violence to pay in blood for safety. This does not mean Jesus is God and will come kill the wolves, it never even calls Jesus one with God.
- 1 Peter 1:18-19
Jesus having blood does not make him God, any more than animal cruelty make the animals God.
Pro is again editing the words of the bible, claiming Acts says “He was God” which is fundamentally untrue, he even showed a translation of it that is absent that phrase. The actual wording can be verified as:
“Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, a which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock.” -Acts 20:28-29, NIV
I want to resay something I said in round 4.
My opponent was misrepresenting God and the Bible throughout this debate.
To say Jesus sinned you will have to make assumptions, add to the text, and twist the text around and make it say that. There is nothing straightforward that says Jesus to be a sinner. Matter of fact it's the opposite. Like I pointed out in round 1 and 3.
1 Peter 2:22 - “Who committed no sin, Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
if the bible was teaching these things, the videos trying to teach that the bible teaches these things would not be necessary.
I guess I can agree with this. The only problem is that a video actually showing you would be more convenient, and it would take less time and effort to learn.
This is putting me in an unfair no-win or lose-lose situation.
Hebrews 1:8-11 - But to the Son He says:“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
Matthew 28:20 - teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
Titus 2:13 - looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
I want to thank my opponent for debating with me. I really enjoyed it, and maybe sometime we will have another debate about something. He gave me an interesting challenge and some new things to study and think of, and I really appreciate it.
- A review of the Resolution (written before reading pro’s closing arguments)
- My Education (a skippable review of the Ad Hominem attacks)
- Plagiarism (continued from previous rounds)
- Interpretations (continued from previous rounds)
- Different Behaviors (continued from previous rounds)
- Refutations (continued from previous rounds)
- Gish Gallop (continued from previous rounds)
- Voting Suggestions
- Source List
“Or why was I not hidden like a stillborn child,Like infants who never saw light?There the wicked cease from troubling,And there the weary are at rest.”
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (Don't say this isn't referring to Jesus because I clearly showed you context in the last round.)”
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (If you have doubt that this is talking about Jesus. Relook at the context I provided in round 2 and 4)”
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.”
- “Eternal” I have previously covered the 28 year lifespan of Jesus, and with this unchallenged he is not eternal.
- “self existent” I have previously shown that Jesus is the genetic son of Joseph and Mary, and with this unchallenged he cannot be said to exist without another cause, as he was directly caused by his parents having sex.
- “Omnipresent” nonsense, he never could have escaped the pig debt if he was stuck always there; nor would he have needed to travel and arrive by boat and other means.
- “He created everything the earth and heavens” I’ve already covered that God did that in Genesis, thousands of years before Jesus’ father Joseph was born.
- “He had power over diseases, demonic spirits, and nature.” This is actually true, but fails to prove the conclusion intended. Antibiotics cure more diseases than Jesus ever did, yet the church has replaced statues of Jesus with statues of pill bottles. Plus this again opposes God who inflicts diseases, as was seen with Job and the innocent Egyptians.
- “He even raised someone from the dead.” An action God has not been shown to do once. God kills, Jesus unkills; a case could be made that they are competing divine beings opposing each other, but such has not been done by pro, he is trying to use how different they are as proof they’re the same.
Pro did challenge this one, that it meant the same thing...
One of pro’s plagiarized sources (he admitted there were more).
Apologies for switching dictionaries, the phrase was not in Merriam-Webster.