Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?

[beerisit]

I see by your title and post....you lean to Christian rant.
That's fine...good for you....

But you can see for length of this thread....there's plenty of nay saying to be done.

And nay... He did not die for our sins. He died because of them.
He died under false accusation...'king of the Jews'.

He died because His ministry was coming to an end....with nowhere to run.

Did your sinful nature die with Him?...nay.
Will you still be held accountable for what you say and do?....yeah.

Of Himself He did say...'brother and fellow servant'.
The real question will be when you meet Him face to face....
Will He say it again?...to you?

ooh ooh I know the answer. Who cares?

 

[waitasec]

You said, "no pain, no gain."

So, I'm saying.. What if gain can be more convenient than dealing with pain? Convenience doesn't seem so overrated then. Right?

is it convenient to cheat on a test? is cheating on a test overrated?
yes.

that's what i mean.

They seem to have to do with ignorance, carelessness.. lack.

exactly. but it's willful.
applying religion ...as in being willfully ignorant of it's own subjective truth and willfully being careless of the objective truth are mistakes that keep repeating.

When I use a word, I'm usually using the dictionary definition.

ok...this is the definition of reversion.
an act or the process of returning (as to a former condition)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/reversion
that is a mistake that keeps repeating.



so lets not loose track of the original question...
how do you know what the bible claims are absolute truths?

 

[Thief]

ooh ooh I know the answer. Who cares?

Yeah.....
You came naked into this life, into the arms of someone who cared.

You leave this world naked....and who will care?

 

[Sleeppy]

is it convenient to cheat on a test? is cheating on a test overrated?
yes.

that's what i mean.

You're not thinking far enough into it. I know what you meant. So what happens if the learning was more convenient than the cheating? Still overrated? No.

exactly. but it's willful.
applying religion ...as in being willfully ignorant of it's own subjective truth and willfully being careless of the subjective truths others hold are mistakes that keep repeating.

You can't say it's always willful. And you'd have to elaborate on the rest there.

ok...this is the definition of reversion.
an act or the process of returning (as to a former condition)
Reversion - Medical Definition and More from Merriam-Webster
that is a mistake that keeps repeating.

Returning.. Either returning to a good 'former condition,' or a bad 'former condition.'

so lets not loose track of the original question...
how do you know what the bible claims are absolute truths?

That's not the original question.. That seems to be a question between you and I seeing reversion yet again.

 

[beerisit]

Yeah.....
You came naked into this life, into the arms of someone who cared.

You leave this world naked....and who will care?

The people I leave behind. If a god exists and behaves in the manner you believe then I wouldn't worship him/her/it from now to eternity.

 

[Thief]

The people I leave behind. If a god exists and behaves in the manner you believe then I wouldn't worship him/her/it from now to eternity.

As I do believe in life after death...
That life and it's condition won't be in my hands.

As per my previous post....
Someone standing over me when I die, would have to care.

 

[waitasec]

You're not thinking far enough into it. I know what you meant. So what happens if the learning was more convenient than the cheating? Still overrated? No.

the process of learning is not a convenience...

You can't say it's always willful. And you'd have to elaborate on the rest there.

right...it's when it is

Returning.. Either returning to a good 'former condition,' or a bad 'former condition.'

a POV can never return to the former condition unless one is hell bent on :ignore: the process that led them there in the 1st place

That's not the original question.. That seems to be a question between you and I seeing reversion yet again.

it was the original question i asked you for which you have yet to answer...

There is a very important significance in this sacrifice. So, the question should rather be, "Why did He?"

what makes it significantly important?

if you answer the question in a manner that doesn't come off as a "know it all" this time, maybe we'll get somewhere.
'cause that would be cheating...which is very convenient, but very overrated.

 

[Sleeppy]

the process of learning is not a convenience...

It can be. To say otherwise is ignorant.

a POV can never return to the former condition unless one is hell bent on :ignore: the process that led them there in the 1st place

That's only one way for reversion to occur. But.. I won't say that came off as a "know it all" statement.

it was the original question i asked you for which you have yet to answer...

I've answered it numerous times in and out of this thread.

if you answer the question in a manner that doesn't come off as a "know it all" this time, maybe we'll get somewhere.
'cause that would be cheating...which is very convenient, but very overrated.

If it came off that way to you, it was you, not me. Hence that phrase, "came off." Quote my response back to the question you asked before, when you reply.

 

[waitasec]

It can be. To say otherwise is ignorant.

can you give me an example?

That's only one way for reversion to occur. But.. I won't say that came off as a "know it all" statement.

right, which is a mistake that keeps repeating throughout history and something religion and the greed for power keeps going back to.

I've answered it numerous times in and out of this thread.


If it came off that way to you, it was you, not me. Hence that phrase, "came off." Quote my response back to the question you asked before, when you reply.

you didn't answer the question because you didn't qualify your conclusion. had you done that, there wouldn't be a need for follow up questions


example
tommy-' mom, who was the 1st person?'
mom- 'adam'
tommy- 'how do you know?'
mom- 'because the bible says so...'

mom didn't answer the question...in essence, she cheated and gave a convenient answer that really didn't answer anything.
because tommy is going to ask how the bible got it's info...
and down the rabbit hole they go.
qualify the answer, if you can't thats perfectly understandable and acceptable.

so, what makes jesus' sacrifice significantly important?

 

[Sleeppy]

can you give me an example?

Have you ever heard of visual learners? Hands-on learners? Etc.

right, which is a mistake that keeps repeating throughout history and something religion and the greed for power keeps going back to.

Ok. I'll qualify my conclusion if you can qualify yours.

you didn't answer the question because you didn't qualify your conclusion. had you done that, there wouldn't be a need for follow up questions

Wait.. What question - the one below?

so, what makes jesus' sacrifice significantly important?

Quote back to me the answer I gave before.

 

[tempter]

Jesus did not have to die.He chose to because that was the only way for all men to be saved.note:until then unless you was jew or lived amoungst jews you was destined to hell.that is why Jesus had tyo sacrifice himself to shed blood for all sins.
How can people claim we have so much knowledge to defute God and be smarter than acients, when the acients had more knowledge than we, in building and math and the solar system?

Jesus as a god or deity isn't proven.
God existing isn't proven.
Claiming anything like like that is wishful thinking. You don't have to have "more knowledge" to understand that

 

[sojourner]

ooh ooh I know the answer. Who cares?

I care...

 

[sojourner]

Jesus did not have to die.He chose to because that was the only way for all men to be saved.note:until then unless you was jew or lived amoungst jews you was destined to hell.that is why Jesus had tyo sacrifice himself to shed blood for all sins.
How can people claim we have so much knowledge to defute God and be smarter than acients, when the acients had more knowledge than we, in building and math and the solar system?

...and other fantastic tales.

 

[waitasec]

Have you ever heard of visual learners? Hands-on learners? Etc.

how does one visually learn how to ride a bike?

Ok. I'll qualify my conclusion if you can qualify yours.

i thought i already did.
religion tends to hold the position that it holds all the answers without really qualifying the answer...'because the bible says so', isn't a qualifier...
as those who adhere to its tenants are in the convenient position to say....'i don't need to qualify my reasons, the bible does it it for me'. convenient.

Quote back to me the answer I gave before.

this is what you said...

It's the last piece of this life's puzzle. The consummation.. For the reconciling to faith in God's Fatherhood.

i would have accepted this statement had you said this instead..

It's the last piece of my life's puzzle...
your statement was all inclusive...not so.
The consummation.. For the reconciling of my faith in God's Fatherhood.
who needs to reconcile their faith, me? :no:
speak for your self not for me.

had you also said jesus sacrifice is significantly important to you....exclusively then how can i argue with that statement?
but you seem to be making blanket statements that reflect on me when it comes to something YOU see as significantly important to YOU...not to me.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Well I am glad you know more about what I think than I do, I was thinking it might only be God who you are qualified to judge. My point was that the bible in every claim it makes that can be verified is accurate and there by it's reliability is suggested not proven in areas where it cannot be verified. Also the prophetic truth of 2000 plus prophecy adds to the supernatural reliability but doesn't prove it either. If this was invalid why do so many opponents spend so much time trying to find a problem with a historical claim or prophecy if it has no effect on the bibles reliability as a whole. I apoligise if you find Atheist label I saddled you with offensive, I have a bad habbit of thinking people are certain things based on the arguments that they use.

And my point is that your statements regarding it's accuracy are false.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Why is the spiderman fallacy only to be found in an urban dictionary and the dog whisperer is only found in your head.

Yes, but that does not matter, since your reasoning is still fallacious; these two names are simply a classification of how.
The Spiderman fallacy is found only in the Urban Dictionary as of the moment, because I only codified it some time in 2007. The Dog Whisperer fallacy was created at the same time, it simply has not spread as widely as the Spiderman one did. It's possible that over time one or both may sit alongside the others in Wiki; in either case, they still accurately describe why your reasoning is false.

Additionally, I would be the first to admit, the Dog Whisperer fallacy is probably not a formal fallacy in the strictest sense. However, it is still a rational refutation of the idea that God may act irrationally.

That being said I will grant the spiderman fallacy sounds logic if you use it for what it supposed to be used for. I did not use 25,000 historical proofs to prove Jesus existed or God. It was used to establish a high degree of reliablility for the bible.

Yes, except it didn't establish that high degree, because YOU MADE THAT NUMBER UP. Not only did I state 'that number is false', you then, yourself, said that you did not in fact have 25,000 such checked facts.

For that use my claims were completely logical. "Being that the Chrstian faith is based primarily on a book that contains 25,000 historical claims that have been proven correct and is consistent with most accepted philisophical principles etc.........." This was the actual claim. Spiddy loses.

By the Gods, how dense are you?

That is not a stretch that is a butchery. The hammers are arguments against the bible. Where in the wild world of sports did you get this idea that the one defending the bible is actually not a person but an argument against it. Good Grief.

Wow. It appears to me that you really cannot follow a simple conversational flow, at all.

The colloquialism is 'dumber than a bag of hammers'. There's another that goes 'not the sharpest tool in the shed'. I then combined them to say that 'you are not the sharpest hammer in that bag'.

This is one of the most amazing conversations I've been involved in for some time.

It still doesn't make sense but I know what you are driving at. First of all Hell was created for Satan and his angels not for man, man just happen to want to exist apart from God so by default hells the place.

God does not have any Duty whatsoever to you or anyone above what his revelation promises. He has suffecient reasons to allow this period of time where sin exists, and you have no say in the matter whatsoever.

Yes, I am aware we have no say in it, but that does not make it right in any moral sense. I understand you are fine with the idea of 'might makes right', but that isn't moral. It simply makes God a bully.

Morality is the actual issue. While he's waiting around for when he's good and ready, humans are suffering in Hell; if he's going to remove it at some point, those people suffer for nothing. And it matters to them. For a God who's supposed to be so loving, he doesn't really give much of a **** about people, does he?

He's immoral.

I remembered another story of a man who thought he had the right and capacity to judge God. God told Job he did not have that right/capacity because of exactly the reasons I said you don't. God asked Job to tell him many things and if he could then he would answer him, Job soon wisely realised he didn't have the capacity and gave up. To posit a particular God and then attempt to judge him when that specific God said you do not have the ability is futile and illogical.

Yeah, I really don't care what the story says.

I have a book by Ravi Zacharias on my desk, an internationaly respected philosopher with 3 PhDs and several honarary ones and is infinately more qualified than both of us put together. This book exhaustivly lays out the philisophicaly consistent argument that defines freewill of love and your position is destroyed. I would have layed it out here but it is very long and since it is based on logic I don't know that it would help.

And I don't care what he says either. He's not part of his discussion and his statements don't explain away the immorality of the situation. I mean, he's a professional apologist, so he's going to stretch reason and rationality to make ANY excuse for his God, no matter how heinous his actions are, so it's no wonder you worship this guy's book. As I said I can also find quotes from other people who will agree; that isn't of any concern here, it's just quote-slinging baby wars. In addition you provide small bits of what he says, then assert more of his writing will 'destroy my argument', but asserting that something which you haven't provided satisfies the argument somehow, is ridiculous. I mean, what is his argument, even?

I have in front of me 87 books written by 5 authors who have 999 PhDs in everything between them, and their arguments in their books, destroy completely everything you have said. It's just too long to put down here.

By your pathetic logic, I win.

Then why do more people believe in the Christian God than all yours put together.

Because most people are extremely stupid; because that religion was forced onto the entire Western civilization as a cultural requirement for many centuries; because, perhapsd like you, they are desperate for some explanation fo something and they don't care where it comes from or whether it's even rational; there are a thousand possibles here, but look! APPEAL TO POPULARITY, another fallacy! The number of people who believe it does not change whether something is true or not.

Out of curiosity what set of Gods do you believe in and why them? Do they include the 350 million from india alone and if not why?

I am a Norse Heathen. You can look it up. As to the Indian Gods, I believe they might exist; I don't know enough about them to make a decision. However, since we, as Caucasians, are descended from the people of India, it would not surprise me if some of these Gods are other representations of my own. As for 'why them', they are the Gods of my people. We are related.

I looked them up or tried to in one case. The spiderman one makes since if used correctly, the other one is defined by you so I didn't bother further.

They both were defined by me, and they both make sense.

 

[Sleeppy]

how does one visually learn how to ride a bike?

By watching someone ride a bike. And/or visualizing themselves riding a bike. Look it up - "visual learners." There are actually several different learning methods and more and more are being developed for the convenience of learners/students.

i thought i already did.
religion tends to hold the position that it holds all the answers without really qualifying the answer...'because the bible says so', isn't a qualifier...
as those who adhere to its tenants are in the convenient position to say....'i don't need to qualify my reasons, the bible does it it for me'. convenient.

Prove your statement. Prove that religion and the hunger for power are the only causes of history's problems and reversions away from positive progression.

this is what you said...

i would have accepted this statement had you said this instead..

It's the last piece of my life's puzzle...
your statement was all inclusive...not so.
The consummation.. For the reconciling of my faith in God's Fatherhood.
who needs to reconcile their faith, me? :no:
speak for your self not for me.

had you also said jesus sacrifice is significantly important to you....exclusively then how can i argue with that statement?
but you seem to be making blanket statements that reflect on me when it comes to something YOU see as significantly important to YOU...not to me.

Which is why you responded to a question that could only possibly be directed at Christians? "Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?" I could find your reactions in some psychology textbook for sure.

 

[waitasec]

By watching someone ride a bike. And/or visualizing themselves riding a bike. Look it up - "visual learners." There are actually several different learning methods and more and more are being developed for the convenience of learners/students.

that is complete horse pucky...NO ONE learns to ride a bike with out riding a bike.
there are things in life that one must experience, to understand why things work the way they do.

Prove your statement. Prove that religion and the hunger for power are the only causes of history's problems and reversions away from positive progression.

did i say only?
i said religion and the greed for power are common threads which are associated with what i didn't highlight in red.
you just trying erase religion from the equation, :sorry1: that won't work.

Which is why you responded to a question that could only possibly be directed at Christians? "Did Jesus really have to die for our sins?"

oh brother....really?

I could find your reactions in some psychology textbook for sure.

don't bother, it's called fear and insecurity. and if i live in a world where people are subjected to religious ideology i have a lot to be fearful for.

 

[Sleeppy]

that is complete horse pucky...NO ONE learns to ride a bike with out riding a bike.
there are things in life that one must experience, to understand why things work the way they do.

Well actually people can and do learn that way and in many different ways. Like I said, LOOK IT UP! Forgetting the point though. It was about convenience not actually being overrated but highly desirable and beneficial. Companies like Microsoft and Apple capitalized on it. Oh and Google, too. Google can help you conveniently search for the phrase "visual learner."

did i say only?
i said religion and the greed for power are common threads which are associated with what i didn't highlight in red.
you just trying erase religion from the equation, :sorry1: that won't work.

What you highlighted from my list? The same list I had to produce to prove that your idea of 'common threads' is really "pretty picky." Are you being truthful here?

oh brother....really?

Really, really. Let's not forget.. Christianity has got to be one of your favorite subjects. After all, just about everyday we're conversing/debating me - my religion, not your lack of one.

don't bother, it's called fear and insecurity. and if i live in a world where people are subjected to religious ideology i have a lot to be fearful for.

You fear religious ideology? Really? Which ideology is that, specifically?

 

[waitasec]

Well actually people can and do learn that way and in many different ways. Like I said, LOOK IT UP! Forgetting the point though. It was about convenience not actually being overrated but highly desirable and beneficial. Companies like Microsoft and Apple capitalized on it. Oh and Google, too. Google can help you conveniently search for the phrase "visual learner."

the point is sleepy...visual learning cannot be exclusively applied to learning.
at one point ones hands will get dirty.

What you highlighted from my list? The same list I had to produce to prove that your idea of 'common threads' is really "pretty picky." Are you being truthful here?

all those things i didn't highlight are associated with religion and the greed for power, savvy?
no matter how much you don't want religion to be associated with those things it is. it's undeniable. again :sorry1:

Really, really. Let's not forget.. Christianity has got to be one of your favorite subjects. After all, just about everyday we're conversing/debating me - my religion, not your lack of one.

remember, you are the one who put yourself in that position.
you have a choice to either answer a question or move on. my guess is that you wished you picked the latter

You fear religious ideology? Really? Which ideology is that, specifically?

birth control
same sex marriages
euthanasia
sexual discrimination
over population
and the ideology that says..."i'm on gods side therefore,
no one else is on the right side."

that to me is frightening.