Quantcast
Why did Jesus Christ sacrifice his self for you?

Forums - General Discussion - Why did Jesus Christ sacrifice his self for you?

AbbathTheGrim said:
0D0 said:
To all those asking for scientific proof:

Well science said that butter is bad for us, then everybody went to margarine and them science said that butter is better than margarine and then margarine is the real problem.

Science said animal fat was bad, industry food went to vegetal fat, everybody got heart diseases and heart attacks for decades, then science found out that animal fat vs vegetal fat is not that simple and that animal fat can actually be better, like butter.

Science said that eggs are bad to our hearts, then it's not, science says it's actually good, because they found out stuff that they haven't found out before.

Science said that coffee is bad, now it's not so bad.

Science can't make up its mind about Wine.

Science said that the world would go to a new ice age. Then global warming. It didn't work very well. Now it's climate change (neigher very hot nor very cold). Tomorrow is gonna be something else.

Science thought that diseases were cause by lots of things. Doctors used to perform surgeries with bare dirty hands. Then they found out that bacteria exist. They didn't know before that bacteria exist. They know now. It exists.

Science said that the black race was inferior to white race. The overall non Western race was underdeveloped. It was taught on many universities. Then it became racism, DNA came out and such. Science knows now that it was all nonsense.

What science knew yesterday or never knew, they know today, or doesn't, they can change their minds. They can see today things that they didn't see and in the future they'll see things that they don't today.

You don't look at a single study and claim it is definite truth. When a headline about how something works or is pop ups in the news, even if it comes from scientists and a scientific group, you need to research how much has that study been subjected to peer reviews and recreated.

The media is the one guilty of having us constantly bombarded by single studies that have not been peer-reviewed. There is no easy solution that can align ourselves to the truth but by doing the work ourselves and doing a research of studies when we want to get to the core truth about something.

There is absolutely NOTHING that those who claim the magical sky daddy exist have submitted for falsification. There is NO descriptive nature of reality that includes the magical sky daddy. You don't raise a stone, look inside a tree and find a tag that says: "Made in Heaven".

There is accountability and correction in the field of science and that demonstrates it's ultimate goal to pursuit the truth and science has given us  countless of advances in technology that have benefited our species achieved thanks to the way science has revealed absolute behaviors of the nature of reality that we then manipulate at our will.

The people from the parties of god do nothing but apologetics and offer nothing for corroboration.

Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.

Thank you for the well written reply.

My point is: science can be wrong, science was wrong about a lot of subjects, science can be wrong today about a lot of things. Science couldn't see other planets, couldn't see atoms, couldn't see bacteria. Today they can see all of it. One day they may see God and when they see, they'll say, yeah God always existed, we couldn't see. Like atoms, it always existed, they couldn't see. Like human beings, they were always equal in its biology, but science thought that Africans/Asians were inferior anyway.



My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


Around the Network
0D0 said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Just to get this right.... your dig at Science is that it challenges the results to ensure the beliefs of science can be proven rather than just believing tales about someone with wine for blood passed on by illiterate people 2000 years ago and never changing any views regardless of how obviously flawed those views are?

This cleared it up for me, Science is awesome.

The point of my post is, yes, science is awesome, I agree, even though it didn't know that bacteria did exist and even though it was wrong a lot of times.

There's a limit to what science can see. They can see today a lot of things that they couldn't in the past. They still can't see God though.

Science do can be wrong and needs to correct itself all the time.

Yes, that's because new evidence and new studies can enlighten us. The purpose of science is to be malleable and change as new information comes to us. Without that, it's stagnant. Can science be wrong? Yes, it certainly can. However, the advent of the scientific method has gone to great lengths to minimize such inaccuracies and we've made leaps and bounds towards knowing what's around us. 

Religion, on the other hand, doesn't have any of that. It's rigid in its presentation of facts and yet up for interpretation from its believers. It brings nothing new to the table, doesn't allow new facts and evidence influence it, and demands respect while refusing to adapt with the times. 

Religion is your racist grandfather, set in his ways and convinced the world was better when black folk or women weren't given the same rights as white men. 

That's why religion has no place outside of ancient history class, and certainly no place next to science. 



I got it all, baby! 

PS4, Switch, WiiU, XBO, PC
Vita, 3DS, Android

Top 3 this generation: 
Bloodborne, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III

0D0 said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Just to get this right.... your dig at Science is that it challenges the results to ensure the beliefs of science can be proven rather than just believing tales about someone with wine for blood passed on by illiterate people 2000 years ago and never changing any views regardless of how obviously flawed those views are?

This cleared it up for me, Science is awesome.

The point of my post is, yes, science is awesome, I agree, even though it didn't know that bacteria did exist and even though it was wrong a lot of times.

There's a limit to what science can see. They can see today a lot of things that they couldn't in the past. They still can't see God though.

Science do can be wrong and needs to correct itself all the time.

The limit of science has a symbiosis with our own brain and how good we can consume and adapt an understanding of new information so that limit is actually a slow moving border and that is also why we constantly need to correct our past mistakes.

We cannot grasp how much time is needed to know everything and we most likely will never get there because we are so tiny in this great universe and beyond ,in science itself there exists a possibility of a godlike being but there are possibility's for almost everything.



0D0 said:
To all those asking for scientific proof:

Well science said that butter is bad for us, then everybody went to margarine and them science said that butter is better than margarine and then margarine is the real problem.

Science said animal fat was bad, industry food went to vegetal fat, everybody got heart diseases and heart attacks for decades, then science found out that animal fat vs vegetal fat is not that simple and that animal fat can actually be better, like butter.

Science said that eggs are bad to our hearts, then it's not, science says it's actually good, because they found out stuff that they haven't found out before.

Science said that coffee is bad, now it's not so bad.

Science can't make up its mind about Wine.

Science said that the world would go to a new ice age. Then global warming. It didn't work very well. Now it's climate change (neigher very hot nor very cold). Tomorrow is gonna be something else.

Science thought that diseases were cause by lots of things. Doctors used to perform surgeries with bare dirty hands. Then they found out that bacteria exist. They didn't know before that bacteria exist. They know now. It exists.

Science said that the black race was inferior to white race. The overall non Western race was underdeveloped. It was taught on many universities. Then it became racism, DNA came out and such. Science knows now that it was all nonsense.

What science knew yesterday or never knew, they know today, or doesn't, they can change their minds. They can see today things that they didn't see and in the future they'll see things that they don't today.

The things you listed probably aren't actual science though. There's propably no peer reviewed, well researched and tested clain that wine is good for you or eggs are bad for you or white people are inherently superior ect most claims like that typically come from random jack asses or take an actual well researched idea and skews the facts to push a narrative. Scientists probably said something like there's a specific chemical in wine that is linked to good health then you get a hundred health blogs posting "wine is good for you" over and over again when the actual scientific fact is that it's only this 1 specific chemical that is loosely related to health in specific circumstances. As for climate change it's just the more accurate term. global warming isn't as simple as the entire world being 3 degrees hotter a rise of like .5 degrees in the artic circle can cause a snow storm in California, a drought in the rainforest, floods in africa ect. 



0D0 said:
Ganoncrotch said:

Just to get this right.... your dig at Science is that it challenges the results to ensure the beliefs of science can be proven rather than just believing tales about someone with wine for blood passed on by illiterate people 2000 years ago and never changing any views regardless of how obviously flawed those views are?

This cleared it up for me, Science is awesome.

The point of my post is, yes, science is awesome, I agree, even though it didn't know that bacteria did exist and even though it was wrong a lot of times.

There's a limit to what science can see. They can see today a lot of things that they couldn't in the past. They still can't see God though.

Science do can be wrong and needs to correct itself all the time.

There is as much chance that Science invents some form of telescope that can see a man chilling out in the clouds in a robe as there is of them inventing a ray gun that fires one long stream of ginger kittens. You're hoping science fiction might find the man in the clouds someday, nothing else.

This logic leap though from "they were incorrect about X being good for you because they didn't know it could increase the chances of Y" is sort of like suggesting that a Kid corrected himself after getting ABC's wrong so at some stage in his life he might discover how to flap his arms and fly because he currently cannot and he has corrected shortcomings before.



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

Around the Network

Jesus Christ of Nazarath wasn't a real person. He's a complete work of fiction; as well as the Bible. Jesus Christ and everything about him was a Christian reinterpretation of the Egyptian Sun God, Horus.

Being born on December 25th, virgin birth, walking on water, 12 disciples, crucifixion, resurrection...all of it to be credited to Horus. Jesus Christ is just a plagiarization of Egyptian mythology...



pokoko said:
That's not the question that's always puzzled me.

What I want to know is, in what way was it even remotely necessary? How does any of this make sense? God only forgave us because his kid allowed himself to be tortured and executed? Which god allowed to happen in the first place? I mean, are you kidding me?

Jesus aside, god doesn't sound like someone I can respect.

completely agree.  I'm still very supprised that there are people who believe these kind of stories from the Bible, but also simular stories from the Koran etc. Even high educated people believe in GOD, Alah and היה . I really would like to know how those people think! Because if you would investigate on History, you would see that older(much older stories then the bible) mystical stories from the greek, Sumer and Vedic period have almost the same story as Jezus!



Science is awesome. I love reading new discoveries and even figuring out ways to use it in my job. That said, Science has yet to figure out why humans sleep, something that we do for 33% of our lives and is completely against logical evolution. We can also barely detect what approx 75% of the universe is made up of (dark matter/energy). Like I said, science is awesome, but to use it as some basis to disprove an unknowable is....flimsy at best.

And even an overwhelming number of athiests agree that a man named Jesus existed, that was baptized by John the Baptist, and crucified. Almost nothing else is agreed upon, however. Check out Ehrman's (an atheist) book on if Jesus existed. I've read a crap ton of books on Christian apology, the fact that a man named Jesus existed is almost universally settled, other than fringe people. Just like some people believe the earth is flat, there are some who will believe Jesus didn't exist. Most have done almost no research on the subject.



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

He never, for to do the act he would first have to exist ;)



TranceformerFX said:
Jesus Christ of Nazarath wasn't a real person. He's a complete work of fiction; as well as the Bible. Jesus Christ and everything about him was a Christian reinterpretation of the Egyptian Sun God, Horus.

Being born on December 25th, virgin birth, walking on water, 12 disciples, crucifixion, resurrection...all of it to be credited to Horus. Jesus Christ is just a plagiarization of Egyptian mythology...

You shouldn't take the movie Zeitgeist / Religolous as a source. That part is completely made up.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti 11GB VRAM | Asus PG27UQ gaming on 3840 x 2160 @120 Hz GSYNC HDR| HTC Vive Pro :3

Reached PC Masterrace level.