By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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

Pemalite said:
o_O.Q said:

"The difference between science and religion is that it doesn't care about yours or anyones feelings."

This is such a silly understanding of what science is

science is only as beneficial to humanity as its practitioners will allow it to be and its practitioners have routinely demonstrated that quite often it is not rationality that wins out in the end

"Science doesn't have any of this bullshit.
If science is used for "bad deeds" it's not the fault of science"

Isn't gun control requested, for example, because the type of science that has gone into creating guns has facilitated the ability to kill people more easily?

how is that not the fault of the types of experimentation that has lead to perfecting guns as killing weapons?

science is a practice, its something that someone does to solve a particular problem and if the problem is to say kill people, then experimentation is done to refine technology used for killing

You cannot tie Science to morality. They are completely different.

The scientific method gave us gunpowder, which originally was used for medical purposes.. It was later that it was used in warfare by those with less than honorable ideas.
Science doesn't control how something gets used, science is about explaining how it works.

Religion is the opposite, it dictates how we should treat others... And like the Bible verses I provided earlier... It doesn't care if it makes statements like telling  men to marry their rape victims. Science doesn't partake in any of that. It doesn't care about morality.

People need to stop trying to tie science to human emotion.

Immersiveunreality said:

Hehe, like a priest would say. 

Ontopic: I do know some good people that are Christian but most of them kinda worry for what happens to me after i die,part of me wants to be kinda offended by it,another feels pity for them and the last part is semi gratefull that they care for me.

The power of fear does some crazy shit to people, it can throw all rationality out the window.

Take the current Corona virus issue for example.




"You cannot tie Science to morality. They are completely different."

You cannot separate the two and to think you could shows a complete lack of understanding of what science actual is

Science as I have stated is a process carried out by people

The end result of that process is therefore dependent on the philosophies of those people

"Science doesn't control how something gets used"

Well it couldn't since again science is not a noun, science is a verb, an action and actions are obviously informed by philosophy when it comes to sentient beings 

"Religion is the opposite"

There's a kind of ridiculous notion that i think you are laboring under that all irrationality in humans can be tied back to religion and if we could just destroy religion people could become much more rational and that is such a wrong proposition that its absolutely incredible that anyone could entertain it

"it dictates how we should treat others"

all of the philosophy on the left when it comes to how society should be governed is atheistic and largely determined by what leftists would claim is science, do you disagree with that?

for example, when leftists say we should eat the rich, they claim this idea is based in scientific models showing increasing inequality correct?



Around the Network
dark_gh0st_b0y said:
Pemalite said:

Say what?
Science has existed before modern man, while we were still in caves and discovered primitive tools and fire, before we could form coherent sentences and speech, to even comprehend any religious doctrine.

That pegs it to about 1,000,000 years or more. Minimum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans

The Christian Religion? (Which is written on paper... A scientific invention...) was 6,000 years ago.

HMMM. Science > Religion.

The Aboriginals of Australia have existed for about 50,000-125,000 years and are genuinely an ancient civilization... It makes your Religion seem new by comparison... Almost like it was invented?
https://www.oldest.org/culture/civilizations/

Better without religion.

We probably wouldn't have had the crusades that wiped out millions.

We probably wouldn't have burned witches at the stake.

We probably wouldn't have attacked the LGBTQI community for thousands if years.

And we wouldn't have science deniers. - Flat Earthers will often reference the Bible to justify their flat-earth beliefs... Others use the Bible to deny evolution and basic geological factoids.

We wouldn't have terrorists who use Religion to kill people today.

So you can bet I stand by the belief we would be better off without religion.

There is no evidence that any of the spiritual hocus-pocus exists... So religion being based on that is irrelevant.

Movies, TV Shows, Books etc' that are fictional are ADVERTISED and KNOWN to be fictional... People aren't trying to pass something off like Independence Day as something that actually occurred in human history like Religion.
So no... They aren't a joke to a free thinking individual.

I disagree that everyone is born selfish and greedy.

Doesn't make indoctrination right.

My position is... That religion is a joke... And should be totally shut down from top to bottom until they can prove their assertions.

Of course fear, control, power and money were the drivers.

Christianity pretty much has a "storefront" in every single town, in every single suburb, in every single city, in every single state, in every single country on every single continent of Planet Earth.

They then have individuals walking around every sunday asking for donations/money.

They have massive influence in our political structure across the planet, even the educational systems.

Christianity uses the fear of death and torture to indoctrinate people into it's religion.

As for religious wars... Here is some reading.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades


I have provided plenty of examples prior in this thread where Christianity and Islam are not to dissimilar.

Islam is based upon the Bibles Old-Testament teachings... In that, both religions are absolutely similar... And before you say "That is old testament". - I shouldn't need to remind you that there are plenty of Christian denominations that stand by the old testament 100%.

Nor should I need to remind you of New Testament scripture that points to the Old Testament as still being binding.

In-fact... The Bible is a horrific and evil book from start to finish.
Have a read: https://www.evilbible.com/

False. And an apologetic perspective.

Science pretty much refutes the ENTIRE genesis account.

Everyone is born atheist.

Science isn't the cause of climate change, obviously your definition of science actually differs from what it actually is.

Science is an explanation of the nature world.

Cancer has always existed, it's a biological issue.

Miracle testimonies are bullshit. - And are thus not evidence.

I can get testimonies of people who have seen the Earth is flat.

You can explain colour to a blind person, the imagination doesn't stop you know, colour doesn't have to be visual.

And yes you are right... Heaven is a feel-good scenario where a mass-murderer, mass-rapist, pedophiles and so on can "apologize" and get accepted into heaven to live a life of luxury...

Yet a first responder who might have saved thousands of lives might get eternal damnation.

I can see how fair that is. Completely. Yep. Totally.

Christianity uses the fear of death and torture to indoctrinate people into it's religion.

not always, but those who do it is very wrong, that I agree

Science isn't the cause of climate change, obviously your definition of science actually differs from what it actually is. Science is an explanation of the nature world. Cancer has always existed, it's a biological issue.

excuse me? then religion is faith into a higher deity...! what bias, do we take the side-effects of both or we don't? if you criticize religion used in the wrong way you must also criticize science used in the wrong way, or you have no argument-

there are substances we take in and forms of radiation that did not exist before that are proved to cause cancer, tons of them, otherwise cancer would be very rare

Science (or rather the findings of science) and religion can both lead to bad consequences if misapplied.  The difference is the necessity of each.

Science leads to incredibly positive changes for society (vaccines, antiseptics, psychological breakthroughs, food production, etc.) that cannot be gained through other means.  Sacrificing all of the benefits to eliminate the potential harms would be a devastating loss for society.

While religion can also lead to benefits (community, charity), these are benefits that we can have without religion.  Studies done on religiosity and quality of life indicate that we can abandon religion without losing very much, and doing so would rid of a lot harm.

I'd also say there is an important distinction between side effects and primary effects.

If we take for instance Christianity, misogyny, prejudice against homosexuality, support of slavery, and so on are not side effects of religion.  They are accurate interpretations of the source material itself. For example, there is a specific commandment to kill a man who lies with another man. This isn't a side effect, it's a primary effect.

On the other hand, science is just a method of finding the most accurate model of reality.  Science for instance finds that we can split atoms and create huge amounts of energy by doing so.  However, there is nothing about the scientific method that commands us to use this knowledge to create bombs and kill people.

In other words, science only tells us what we can do.  We can then decide to do evil things.  Religion on the other hand (at least certain ones) actually tells us to do evil things.  



Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

Science hasn't been the sole reason no, but science also hasn't been around as long.

Say what?
Science has existed before modern man, while we were still in caves and discovered primitive tools and fire, before we could form coherent sentences and speech, to even comprehend any religious doctrine.

That pegs it to about 1,000,000 years or more. Minimum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans

The Christian Religion? (Which is written on paper... A scientific invention...) was 6,000 years ago.

HMMM. Science > Religion.

The Aboriginals of Australia have existed for about 50,000-125,000 years and are genuinely an ancient civilization... It makes your Religion seem new by comparison... Almost like it was invented?
https://www.oldest.org/culture/civilizations/

EricHiggin said:

Without religion ever existing, would things be better or worse now? Does anyone know the answer to that? Is there an answer? Science has done more good than harm, so far, but so has religion, so far. Both can be improved.

Better without religion.

We probably wouldn't have had the crusades that wiped out millions.

We probably wouldn't have burned witches at the stake.

We probably wouldn't have attacked the LGBTQI community for thousands if years.

And we wouldn't have science deniers. - Flat Earthers will often reference the Bible to justify their flat-earth beliefs... Others use the Bible to deny evolution and basic geological factoids.

We wouldn't have terrorists who use Religion to kill people today.

So you can bet I stand by the belief we would be better off without religion.

EricHiggin said:

Science is based on how the physical universe functions. Religion is based on the spirituality behind it. It's not comparing apples to apples. Do you also think movies, tv shows, books, etc, that are fictional, are a joke and an insult to a free thinking individual?

There is no evidence that any of the spiritual hocus-pocus exists... So religion being based on that is irrelevant.

Movies, TV Shows, Books etc' that are fictional are ADVERTISED and KNOWN to be fictional... People aren't trying to pass something off like Independence Day as something that actually occurred in human history like Religion.
So no... They aren't a joke to a free thinking individual.

EricHiggin said:

Everyone is also born selfish and greedy. If kids weren't 'indoctrinated' in some structured manner, the world would be absolute chaos compared to what we have now. The strong would absolutely cripple the weak. Is that natural default a better world to live in?

I disagree that everyone is born selfish and greedy.

Doesn't make indoctrination right.

My position is... That religion is a joke... And should be totally shut down from top to bottom until they can prove their assertions.

What now?

Discovered stuff in caves? Without advanced language or... advanced mathematics...etc, which meant no religious doctrine, as well as no science?

I'd like to see those cavemen's proofs. I can't imagine they would've suggested it to simply be "black magic".

---

Probably? 

Sure doesn't sound like unquestionable scientific proof. Sounds more like...

I'm not pointing out all the non religious, science related negatives, again. I think we both understand these by now.

---

There never used to be scientific evidence that gravity existed either. Did gravity only come about more recently? Something was going on behind the scenes. Better figure out how to prove what it is? How long do we wait to prove something before we give up? Still waiting on undeniable proof of exactly how the universe came into being. Guess that means the universe doesn't exist, or is irrelevant?

Is Independence Day possible though? Seems like plenty of people aren't against other forms of intelligent life in the universe. If they do exist, could they be as powerful and hostile? Something we don't know for sure and can't say for certain as of now? Sounds sort of like...

If it's important to know that this entertainment is fictional, why isn't that made more clear to kids? Why do we allow kids to play fight based on these idea's and sometimes even hurt each other? Why do we sometimes use this 'insulting' fiction to teach kids a valuable lesson? Does what a youngster learn, mold who they eventually become?

---

If you've spent much time around kids when their 'indoctrinating' parents aren't around, and they understand they can get away with more negative behavior, that's exactly what they do. You can literally watch their sympathy fade knowing they won't get in major trouble for not doing so. Now any good indoctrinated adult wouldn't let that go for long, but it doesn't change the fact that's what occurs as soon as you allow the rules to be bent or broken. Those rules are all part of the indoctrination process, and so why don't they happily and easily follow them? It's not natural, that's why.

Based on that, climate change for example is a joke and shouldn't be taken seriously whatsoever by the public. Until science can undeniably know all factors and what they lead to, exactly, then it should simply be scientific doctrine. No green energy projects, no subsidies for those projects, no green taxes.

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 28 March 2020

JWeinCom said:

Science (or rather the findings of science) and religion can both lead to bad consequences if misapplied.  The difference is the necessity of each.

of course they can, but the reason you underestimate the impact of religion this much is first because you take Jesus teachings for granted/common sense and do not realize the impact they had/have in the world, and second because you as an individual do not need it (I was actually atheist until the age of 25!), religion is the strongest long-term mental help one can have - if done right of course - and scientific studies prove just that!! less religious West Europe countries have higher depression rates than more religious East Europe countries even though they are richer!

Science leads to incredibly positive changes for society (vaccines, antiseptics, psychological breakthroughs, food production, etc.) that cannot be gained through other means.  Sacrificing all of the benefits to eliminate the potential harms would be a devastating loss for society.

of course!! there wouldn't be video games without scientific progress :P the point is that science does not disprove Christianity, therefore there is no damn reason to compare the two, and second, science can cure the body in most cases, but not the mind!! Christianity in its true and pure form can heal the soul

While religion can also lead to benefits (community, charity), these are benefits that we can have without religion.  Studies done on religiosity and quality of life indicate that we can abandon religion without losing very much, and doing so would rid of a lot harm.

without losing much? findings show that religious people are happier and more satisfied with their quality of life than atheists (research done in Christian countries) why on earth would you want to abolish something that is proved to make people happier?

and as I said above, Christianity collapses, values and common sense things that go with it will start to loosen in the decades as it is happening now, people who need religion will move to Islam which will make things very very bad

did you know that there is a 40% increase in cheating related murders since the 90s? this is because as people get less religious, the 6th commandment that forbids cheating is violated!! more divorces, more kids growing up not in a normal family, more mental problems... this is just one example of how the collapse of Christianity will vanish values, and lead to a more 'anything goes' society of mental problems, no thanks :/

I'd also say there is an important distinction between side effects and primary effects.

If we take for instance Christianity, misogyny, prejudice against homosexuality, support of slavery, and so on are not side effects of religion.  They are accurate interpretations of the source material itself. For example, there is a specific commandment to kill a man who lies with another man. This isn't a side effect, it's a primary effect.

in which source material does Christianity support misogyny and slavery? this is very wrong... homosexuality issue is only 5% of the population, so it is a side effect, I need to do more research on it to be fair, but it is not mentioned in the ten commandments, therefore LGBT is not a big sin at all... cheating on your wife/husband is much much worse

there is no commandment in Christianity to kill anyone for Christ's sake! if there is in Islam or smth, yes of course this is unacceptable by all means

O
n the other hand, science is just a method of finding the most accurate model of reality.  Science for instance finds that we can split atoms and create huge amounts of energy by doing so.  However, there is nothing about the scientific method that commands us to use this knowledge to create bombs and kill people.

very true!! there is nothing in Christianity that orders anyone to do anything bad either, the opposite, it is asking us to not bear a grudge and forgive as much as we can, what a great way to relief your mind from pointless hate and trouble

In other words, science only tells us what we can do.  We can then decide to do evil things.  Religion on the other hand (at least certain ones) actually tells us to do evil things.  

which is why I am against Islam spreading in Christian countries

and as a side note, the current generation has grown up being told that previous generations were being brainwashed to believe in Jesus, and now they think they are special and rebels by not doing so

this is laughable, cause they have grown up being fed with propaganda, see the good in everything except Christianity which they attack brutally but defend Muslims like there is no tomorrow, wtf is wrong with people

things have changed, the real rebels now are those who keep their faith and values against all the useless crap being forced onto us 24/7, see the good in everything and appreciate that we live in Jesus inspired countries above all

there is statistically increasing depression in young people, even though they have all they need to be happy, they have science and technology but it's never enough



don't mind my username, that was more than 10 years ago, I'm a different person now, amazing how people change ^_^

EricHiggin said:
OhNoYouDont said:

I don't know if this is a serious challenge or you're making a joke here...but...

The reason the scientific method is considered trustworthy is because of its predictive power. While science doesn't produce truths, its approximations and models are effectively considered facts as a result of this.

Your comparison to a dusty old collection of documents written by ignorant fools by today's standards does not hold a candle to this process.

Now if the Bible or other religious text had some ability to predict the future by warning us about COVID 19 on a certain date in a certain location that would surely be something.

Critical thinking is seriously lacking in the religious community, but it's not that religious folks are incapable of thinking critically. There are countless critical thinkers who are religious - no, it's the blind spot that religion produces that is most troublesome.

The low quality OP probably should have resulted in a thread closure in my opinion. It was clear from the beginning that this wasn't a discussion, but an opportunity to proselytize. You're not interested in learning at all are you?

Did science precisely predict this Covid outbreak? Has is saved us all from it since?

You're too focused on the religion and science, when the point here was the free individual that's accepting or denying what those offer.

You have some who are 100% all in on religion, which then goes against science, while you also have some who are 100% all in on science, which goes against religion.

If certain religion and it's one and only God's teachings aren't useful, then why should science and it's "God particle" be the one and only that's useful?

One and only one being useful and all others being discarded is Nazi type thinking, no matter the subject, and look what that type of thinking led to. 

Like what was said before, what's important is improving where possible when failures occur.

You did not comprehend a single point I made and proceeded to prove my emphasized statement.

Yes, science is saving tons of lives of those impacted by COVID 19. How many has religion saved? Oh right, people continued to have religious gatherings and now entire churches have COVID 19. 

No scientist refers to the Higgs boson as "god particle" - a media name only.

Discarding bad and unreliable epistemologies (methods to determine what is true) is what rational thinkers do. Only if a method works ought we retain it.

Prayer is equally as effective as tossing a coin in a wishing well, which is to say that it is no more effective than doing literally nothing at all.

o_O.Q said:

"Science doesn't control how something gets used"

Well it couldn't since again science is not a noun, science is a verb, an action and actions are obviously informed by philosophy when it comes to sentient beings 

"it dictates how we should treat others"

all of the philosophy on the left when it comes to how society should be governed is atheistic and largely determined by what leftists would claim is science, do you disagree with that?

for example, when leftists say we should eat the rich, they claim this idea is based in scientific models showing increasing inequality correct?

Not really sure how you would confuse secular with atheistic either...

Last edited by OhNoYouDont - on 28 March 2020

Around the Network
OhNoYouDont said:
EricHiggin said:

Did science precisely predict this Covid outbreak? Has is saved us all from it since?

You're too focused on the religion and science, when the point here was the free individual that's accepting or denying what those offer.

You have some who are 100% all in on religion, which then goes against science, while you also have some who are 100% all in on science, which goes against religion.

If certain religion and it's one and only God's teachings aren't useful, then why should science and it's "God particle" be the one and only that's useful?

One and only one being useful and all others being discarded is Nazi type thinking, no matter the subject, and look what that type of thinking led to. 

Like what was said before, what's important is improving where possible when failures occur.

You did not comprehend a single point I made and proceeded to prove my emphasized statement.

Yes, science is saving tons of lives of those impacted by COVID 19. How many has religion saved? Oh right, people continued to have religious gatherings and now entire churches have COVID 19. 

No scientist refers to the Higgs boson as "god particle" - a media name only.

Discarding bad and unreliable epistemologies (methods to determine what is true) is what rational thinkers do. Only if a method works ought we retain it.

Prayer is equally as effective as tossing a coin in a wishing well, which is to say that it is no more effective than doing literally nothing at all.

Neither did you. Imagine that.

Religion doesn't have anyone "social distancing" themselves? All science is on hold and nobody part of science has contracted or spread COVID 19?

I realize it's not the proper scientific term. It was a play on words. Science knows that it's findings are being misunderstood and misrepresented, and yet does little about it. If you want to say that's fine because science doesn't care about how it's used, then you're indirectly saying if science is used to destroy the world and end mankind, that science doesn't care. What good is science whatsoever if there's no one alive to continue it's research? If science can end itself, due to lack of logic and morality, doesn't that go against what science is after? Exploring the universe and finding more truth's? I wonder why there's a problem with suicide? I wonder why it's said that suicidal people have mental issues and need help? If it's not ok for people to stop caring and end themselves, for whatever reason, why is it ok for science to not care and potentially end itself?

Again, is it rational to use science to create something that could potentially be used to end the human race? I think many would agree it would be more rational if science also used logic and morals to make sure it was only used for good, but if science doesn't care, well.

What about the poor starving person who eventually collects those coins and uses that to feed themselves?

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 28 March 2020

OhNoYouDont said:
EricHiggin said:

Did science precisely predict this Covid outbreak? Has is saved us all from it since?

You're too focused on the religion and science, when the point here was the free individual that's accepting or denying what those offer.

You have some who are 100% all in on religion, which then goes against science, while you also have some who are 100% all in on science, which goes against religion.

If certain religion and it's one and only God's teachings aren't useful, then why should science and it's "God particle" be the one and only that's useful?

One and only one being useful and all others being discarded is Nazi type thinking, no matter the subject, and look what that type of thinking led to. 

Like what was said before, what's important is improving where possible when failures occur.

You did not comprehend a single point I made and proceeded to prove my emphasized statement.

Yes, science is saving tons of lives of those impacted by COVID 19. How many has religion saved? Oh right, people continued to have religious gatherings and now entire churches have COVID 19. 

No scientist refers to the Higgs boson as "god particle" - a media name only.

Discarding bad and unreliable epistemologies (methods to determine what is true) is what rational thinkers do. Only if a method works ought we retain it.

Prayer is equally as effective as tossing a coin in a wishing well, which is to say that it is no more effective than doing literally nothing at all.

o_O.Q said:

"Science doesn't control how something gets used"

Well it couldn't since again science is not a noun, science is a verb, an action and actions are obviously informed by philosophy when it comes to sentient beings 

"it dictates how we should treat others"

all of the philosophy on the left when it comes to how society should be governed is atheistic and largely determined by what leftists would claim is science, do you disagree with that?

for example, when leftists say we should eat the rich, they claim this idea is based in scientific models showing increasing inequality correct?

Not really sure how you would confuse secular with atheistic either...

now can you actually make an argument and articulate how anything I said has been contradicted?



why you guys so obsessed with science VS religion, science is about physical well-being and religion for mental well-being

two different things that can co-exist, “Does God exist?” science cannot answer the question, nor can it teach us what to do with the physical well-being it provides, Jesus told us how to live - even though it is taken for-granted today, to the level that he is brutally attacked like he is the bad guy

Last edited by dark_gh0st_b0y - on 28 March 2020

don't mind my username, that was more than 10 years ago, I'm a different person now, amazing how people change ^_^

dark_gh0st_b0y said:
why you guys so obsessed with science VS religion, science is about physical well-being and religion for mental well-being

Pemalite said:
craighopkins said:
Faith in Jesus Christ can save you from eternal darkness. Its the will of our heavenly Father that who ever believes in his son may have eternal life

Faith by definition is belief without evidence, it's an illogical position.

If there is a God/s... Then I believe he/they is not worthy of worship.

I have been to a roadcrash where I am cutting out a dying father out of the vehicle whilst his screaming child is in the back, wanting nothing but to hold him. - Where was your God then?

I have given my all to protect life, property and the environment for months at a time... (December-January-Februry this season!) while my entire country burned.
Where was your God then?

I have scaled down cliffs on a couple lengths of rope to retrieve mangled bodies from the bottom. - Where was your God then?

Thousands are dying today due to the Coronavirus, an insidious disease upon those who are immune-deficient and/or have respiratory issues... Aka. Society's most vulnerable. - Where is your God now?

If that is the "will" of your God, you can absolutely keep it.

Pretty much started with evidence being brought up and how belief isn't good enough. Different opinions on that around pg 30 were brought forward and then it went from there, but ya, for the amount of times not comparing apples to apples has been pointed out before, it's a little surprising it went this far before that became more evident. To some anyway.



dark_gh0st_b0y said:
why you guys so obsessed with science VS religion, science is about physical well-being and religion for mental well-being

The obsession comes from the fact that religion is pertained to a set of ideas that usually deal with the supernatural or spiritual factors, the vast majority of which cannot be checked and corroborated by science, which is humankind's best kit for the decoding of reality and that has proven again and again to be very reliable. Simple as that. It's important to note that religions don't exist solely for the purpose of the mental well-being. 



My bet with The_Liquid_Laser: I think the Switch won't surpass the PS2 as the best selling system of all time. If it does, I'll play a game of a list that The_Liquid_Laser will provide, I will have to play it for 50 hours or complete it, whatever comes first.