Quantcast
Why did Jesus Christ sacrifice his self for you?

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

Eagle367 said:
Pemalite said:

"Sin" is a religious invention... And I am of the belief that if said religions aren't able to substantiate their various religious assertions with actual empirical evidence... Then we can discard all of said claims with zero evidence... And Sin can go away with it.

That is a very abstract and philosophical conversation, not a scientific one. You can't shoehorn science into everything. Because science can measure the physical, not the abstract. Is murder wrong because it's an evolutionary advantage and is in our genes or is there actually a soul and a set morality that is ingrained in us not biologically but metaphysically. Is morality the consequence of our time or is there an absolute morality that we are following or not. These are questions beyond science. Science has a lot of advantages but can't do everything. All intellectuals including atheists acknowledge that. Try asking people at the top of their scientific fields and they will tell you the same

It's actually very pragmatic.
If assertions cannot be justified with empirical evidence.... I.E. Sin, God, Hell and so on, then they can be discarded.



Around the Network
Cerebralbore101 said:
Chris Hu said:

Did I miss something here you didn't present any decent evidence of Jesus existence to me.  The overwhelming evidence brought fourth in the last 20 years all supports the fact that Jesus never existed or at best he was just some regular guy that got turned into a legend after his death.  Anyway if you want some deep insides of how flawed Christianity is I'm not the guy to asked since I never considered myself to be true believer anyway I always believed that the Bible is nothing more then a loose collection of myth and fair tales and not a very good one either since it borrowed many of its myth from other religions.  I suggest you watch some videos from Seth Andrews.

So you don't think that the three Josephus passages, the Tacitus passage, or Paul's letter are good evidence? Why not? 

Any Seth Andrews videos you would like me to watch? Point them out, and I'll watch them. 

I'm an Atheist, but I think that Jesus Mythicism is almost as intellectually devoid as young earth creationism. Almost

Earl Doherty (the guy who originally put forth the Christ-Myth theory) doesn't have an actual degree in history as far as I can tell. He claims to have a degree in history, but when asked for proof, he dances around the subject. 

Richard Carrier (another Mythicist) doesn't have a degree in history either. 

Nearly all ancient historians and bible scholars agree that Jesus was a historical person. 

I mean, trust me man, if there were real evidence pointing to Jesus just being a myth, I'd jump all over it. I'd absolutely love to have such ammo to throw in the faces of proselytizerslike the OP of this thread. But sadly it isn't so. All the evidence points towards Jesus having existed. But I promise I'll watch any videos you link to, and keep an open mind. 

Bart Erhman 

Nope none of the evidence points towards Jesus having existed.  Nothing written about Jesus was written during his lifetime.  Everything written about Jesus was written by people that actually didn't know Jesus.  And if Jesus really was this awesome miracle worker as described in the New Testament somebody would have wrote something about him during his lifetime.



Chris Hu said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

So you don't think that the three Josephus passages, the Tacitus passage, or Paul's letter are good evidence? Why not? 

Any Seth Andrews videos you would like me to watch? Point them out, and I'll watch them. 

I'm an Atheist, but I think that Jesus Mythicism is almost as intellectually devoid as young earth creationism. Almost

Earl Doherty (the guy who originally put forth the Christ-Myth theory) doesn't have an actual degree in history as far as I can tell. He claims to have a degree in history, but when asked for proof, he dances around the subject. 

Richard Carrier (another Mythicist) doesn't have a degree in history either. 

Nearly all ancient historians and bible scholars agree that Jesus was a historical person. 

I mean, trust me man, if there were real evidence pointing to Jesus just being a myth, I'd jump all over it. I'd absolutely love to have such ammo to throw in the faces of proselytizerslike the OP of this thread. But sadly it isn't so. All the evidence points towards Jesus having existed. But I promise I'll watch any videos you link to, and keep an open mind. 

Bart Erhman 

Nope none of the evidence points towards Jesus having existed.  Nothing written about Jesus was written during his lifetime.  Everything written about Jesus was written by people that actually didn't know Jesus.  And if Jesus really was this awesome miracle worker as described in the New Testament somebody would have wrote something about him during his lifetime.

Josephus and Tacitus were almost certainly working from official government documents, which would have been written during Jesus' lifetime. Paul never met Jesus but he knew Jesus' literal brother as well as many of the original Apostles. So did all of the apostles that Paul met, just up and lie to him about how they spent a large portion of their lives with Jesus? Keep in mind that the Apostles Paul met were not the authors of the Gospels. The Gospels were written pseudoanonymously in their names. 

And if Jesus really was this awesome miracle worker as described in the New Testament somebody would have wrote something about him during his lifetime. 

True. But that just means he wasn't an awesome miracle worker. Not that he never even existed. He was just a man teaching parables out in a dusty corner of the Roman Empire. His followers were fanatics and made up a bunch of junk about him to the point that we'll never truly know what the real man was like. Some scholars have gone as far as to deconstruct the Gospels, finding a book within them that predates Mark. Said book only contains saying of Jesus, and no miracle stuff. It is called the book of Q, but scholars argue over whether it truly existed, or whether Mark, Luke, and Mathew's authors just copied most of Mark. But it is pretty interesting. Just a little side note I guess. 

 



NES, SNES, Genesis, PS1, PS2, GBA, GameCube, Wii, PS3,
Wii -U, PS4, Switch, and PC. 

Thing is ,if Jesus did exist and he knew how his name has been used as a tool for might and violence he most likely would have been very disgusted with it.
There is a good chance he existed but not in the way he is written down and used as.



...
Cerebralbore101 said:

Richard Carrier (another Mythicist) doesn't have a degree in history either. 

Wow, someone better call Columbia University, as

Richard Carrier has a Ph.D. from Columbia University in ancient history

And calling him "another Mysthicist" instantly disqualifies you in this discussion.



Around the Network
drkohler said:
...

Wow, someone better call Columbia University, as

Richard Carrier has a Ph.D. from Columbia University in ancient history

And calling him "another Mysthicist" instantly disqualifies you in this discussion.

And also ,a university degree is a good base to build on to but most knowledge comes from experience afterwards.



Well lets see God created the earth and the animals finally humans. But an angel who was power hungry deceived the humans by appealing to their selfishness and said you will be just like God with the knowledge of good and bad. Because of their actions they were banished from paradise. Like a disease imperfection spread to all men and woman due to this sin. Now Satan stood up when angels were assembled and he said humans could rule themselves without Gods help. God now because he believed in justice allowed this to happen he withdrew his help and allowed humans to rule themselves. But God would not allow this to go on forever. A perfect man sinned so to cover this he had to send a perfect man to cover this of course this was Jesus. A perfect man died to cover our sins. Of course God is perfect and his plan of an earthly paradise will happen. God will take 144.000 humans as co rulers with Christ. And the rest of God fearing humans will have a home on earth and grow to perfection. There is much more but my brain is tired



drkohler said:
...

Wow, someone better call Columbia University, as

Richard Carrier has a Ph.D. from Columbia University in ancient history

And calling him "another Mysthicist" instantly disqualifies you in this discussion.

I stand corrected. Still though, he's just one scholar out of hundreds. And his arguments are terrible. He's tried making the Osiris/Jesus connection before, and that argument is easily debunked by almost any book on the subject of Egyptian mythology. 



NES, SNES, Genesis, PS1, PS2, GBA, GameCube, Wii, PS3,
Wii -U, PS4, Switch, and PC. 

Immersiveunreality said:
Thing is ,if Jesus did exist and he knew how his name has been used as a tool for might and violence he most likely would have been very disgusted with it.
There is a good chance he existed but not in the way he is written down and used as.

Agreed. Even if Jesus did hypothetically exist... (I have heard people state there is evidence, but haven't scrutinized it myself, so not willing to take a definite stance yet.) - That still doesn't mean he was "Divine" or the "Son of God" or any of the other claims... That requires a whole heap of extra evidence to substantiate the original claims.

mhsillen said:
But God would not allow this to go on forever. A perfect man sinned so to cover this he had to send a perfect man to cover this of course this was Jesus. A perfect man died to cover our sins. Of course God is perfect and his plan of an earthly paradise will happen. God will take 144.000 humans as co rulers with Christ. And the rest of God fearing humans will have a home on earth and grow to perfection. There is much more but my brain is tired

Well. Jesus of the Abrahamic Bible never really died did he? If Jesus is the Son of God, then he himself is God and God is supposed to be everything and something that is everything cannot possibly die, right? Making the entire self-sacrifice circle a pointless affair.



Pemalite said:
Eagle367 said:

That is a very abstract and philosophical conversation, not a scientific one. You can't shoehorn science into everything. Because science can measure the physical, not the abstract. Is murder wrong because it's an evolutionary advantage and is in our genes or is there actually a soul and a set morality that is ingrained in us not biologically but metaphysically. Is morality the consequence of our time or is there an absolute morality that we are following or not. These are questions beyond science. Science has a lot of advantages but can't do everything. All intellectuals including atheists acknowledge that. Try asking people at the top of their scientific fields and they will tell you the same

It's actually very pragmatic.
If assertions cannot be justified with empirical evidence.... I.E. Sin, God, Hell and so on, then they can be discarded.

Nope because will and emotions by design make no sense through an empirical analysis. You can't measure emotion, intelligence, will and only consequences of it. Any biological being that feels in any way cannot be put in a box with just empirical evidence. I would say it's very close minded rather than pragmatic. Which is funny since atheists like to call religious people close minded without actually acknowledging any benefit of religion. The scientific method cannot and should not be applied everywhere, it was never meant to be applied everywhere and it can be very destructive whent Ake to the extreme, just as most extremes can be.



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also