Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541691 May 31, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
most scholars nowadays have come to the conclusion that Jesus Christ was a real man that really existed.
Based on what? The bible? Isn't there just as much evidence for the historicity of Adam and Eve?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541692 May 31, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
you have also covered all your posts under the umbrella of nothing more than a "peaceful rebuke" since it is just words not actions. You ate the one who made this issue relevant by using it to claim your posts are all justified and moral.
Wrong as always, and rejected out of hand.

You know the rules: produce the quote and link, not your paraphrased misrepresentation.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541693 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
we will pray for you.
You have no idea how much that means.

And in return, I will focus my inner eye and astrally project your aura.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541694 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
Good evening Adam. I have posted scripture to prove my point
Well done. Nothing proves a point like scripture.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#541695 May 31, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. depends on how much force is used ..
Certainly.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#541696 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
Everything, because if you don't have spiritual discernment you can't make the connection that the preacher in your post is a false preacher with an anti-christ spirit.
No, you just don't have the noetic capacity to understand you've been duped.

You worship myth, and fear nonsense.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#541697 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text> But you idiots still fail to answer ehy isn't it in effect NOW?
Your deity is a myth.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541698 May 31, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
The only person in history that you seem to refute is Jesus Christ. The only... That seems quite odd.
I think you misunderstand. What I reject is the claim that a god name Jesus came to earth, was born to a virgin, did miracles, and rose from the dead.

I also question the claim that that story was based on the life of a real man.

If you want to compare the diversity and quality of evidence supporting the historicity of Julius Caesar and Jesus Christ, there is much for the former and virtually none for the latter, which is inexplicable if both accounts are true, since Jesus allegedly did much more impressive and memorable things.

The claims made for Caesar are believable. Many men have similar biographies: Alexander, Genghis Khan, Mohammed, and Napoleon, for example. What they did was extraordinary compared to their peers, but neither unbelievable nor unique, and require no belief in the supernatural or miracles. And to my knowledge, nobody benefits by lying about these people to me.

The claims made for Jesus are unique, and orders orders of magnitude more extraordinary. Furthermore, the value to others of telling this story and having me believe it is obvious. There IS incentive to lie there.

Finally, nobody is asking me to change my life based on a belief that Julius Caesar existed.

So, to put it all together, unlike with Jesus, I believe that Caesar lived and did most of what the history books claim he did because the feats attributed to him are believable, the evidence for the man and his accomplishments is from multiple sources and of multiple types, and includes physical evidence, because there is no apparent ulterior motive to lie about Caesar, and because there is no cost in believing the claims about Caesar and being wrong.

You can't make belief in these two stories equivalent by noting that I can't prove that either man existed beyond a shadow of a doubt, nor imply that I have a double standard for accepting one story while rejecting the other.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#541699 May 31, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Jupiter and Mercury appear on Roman coins so they must be real, right. IN fact, I have a few coins right her that have the Goddess of Liberty on them. <smile>
Sorry Scar, I am too ill to carry this out. It is one of my fave debates.
It points out how biased both sides are.
Another time, I hope.
Sure,@ Jupiter and Mercury, but those were said to be gods(in the mythic deity aspect).

I'm not so sure it's bias, but looking at the available evidences.

We could discuss Jupiter and Mercury, and both of those deities rest upon myth and legend, but no verifiable or corroborated evidences or proofs.

The Caesars, on the other hand, are a known reality within Roman society (for instance, we know that was a title) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_ (title).

I understand it's an intricate discussion and requires numerous posts.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#541700 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text> For once you are right when it comes to slavery and race relations ( and you have NOT answered that question before as we've never discussed this issue previously ) and so if it was God's will to be then and he condoned it, it would be in effect now.
That claim certainly imperils the Christian claim of freewill, no?

Lets face it - nothing - that you claim your deity wills or condones has ever happened.

Unless you know something the world doesn't and would like to provide an instance in which your deity willed or condoned something and it did, indeed, happen just as it desired.

Please, provide that. I'll verify the instances.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541701 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
I marvel at how naive you unbelievers really are, you take at face value any one proclaiming to he a Christian [...] you'll remember where the Lord said that many false pretenders will arise in the last days pretending to be him, this also includes false preachers and hypocrites misleading people
OK. So you are not a Christian. You are a pretender. How does that change anything? I rejected your opinions when I accepted that you WERE a Christian, and still do.
LAWEST100 wrote:
God ... didn't do anything to prevent [slavery]
At a minimum, that's condoning it.

What's your objection to pointing that out? That you think it besmirches your god's good name? That ship has sailed.

That you are offended because you are black and can't imagine your god doing that to you? I understand. But you readily accept that that same god would scapegoat gays and atheists, and carry water for those causes. Why wouldn't such a god do you the same way?

Since: May 11

London, UK

#541702 May 31, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO!
See my previous post to Wilder.
What a coincidence....
...what a generalisation.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541703 May 31, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
Anything is better than a Homosexual.
You're not. You despise the human race and separate yourself from it in the singular pursuit of saving your imagined soul. And you don't care about what anybody else thinks. What use are you?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541705 May 31, 2013
Mark wrote:
I think the truth of Jesus is simply too much for him The mind is a strange thing and not ruled by logic as we like to think. It is ruled by emotions on which we project logic.

The poor Christian is taught that Jesus is the greatest and that everything in the Bible is true. That is the perspective with which he reads the text. when Jesus says something not too bad, he takes it literal, but when Jesus says the most terrible things, he therefore concludes: this must be some deeper truth, since Jesus is the greatest.

He simply does allow himself to enter his mind that Jesus is telling horrible things even if the text is a clear as rain. This is the true nature of rationalizing, it is an instrument to fool yourself in believing what you want to believe.
Agreed.

Religious faith - unjustified certitude - is confirmation bias. One decides in advance and without evidence what one prefers to be true, and proceeds to filter experience to conform with that choice.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541706 May 31, 2013
Bongo wrote:
The Bible does not condone any aberrent behavior.
Except genocide, infanticide, slavery, and rape for starters.[I'm assuming that you meant immoral and not aberrant. Those behaviors are immoral even when they are the norm.]

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541707 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
Ironic, you don't have enough sense to understand that you are condemned by your OWN words.
Is it Scary Chicken time again?

You're being mocked instead of feared every time you bring out the Scary Chicken. Is that what you're going for? Maybe it's time for a new strategy.

Since: May 11

London, UK

#541708 May 31, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed.
Religious faith - unjustified certitude - is confirmation bias. One decides in advance and without evidence what one prefers to be true, and proceeds to filter experience to conform with that choice.
'motivational reasoning'.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541709 May 31, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
I think I may have hit the wall with the Dimwit, at least for a time. I used to post to him with enthusiasm and glee. Suddenly, dealing with him feel like labor.
Happy Lesbo wrote:
.. he's far too powerful for either of us ..
No, the Dimwit is impotent.

But he used to be entertaining. My problem here is that I've become bored with what used to be fun. It had to happen eventually.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#541710 May 31, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
you idiot, who in their right mind would listen to someone saying "a good God would have........"
Who would listen to somebody that is afraid to make a moral judgment about what he calls a good God?
LAWEST100 wrote:
God condemned the slaver for their mistreatment of their slaves and for enslaving them
The bible god - who whoever it is writing in its name - condones slavery. The bible authors provided rules for treating slaves.
LAWEST100 wrote:
why doesn't God backs slavery now?
Your god doesn't exist. But the words attributed to it still condone slavery.
LAWEST100 wrote:
I believe the scriptures in the NT are taken out of context
Every time you quote one, or quote anything else, you are removing it from its context. So what?

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#541711 May 31, 2013
wilderide wrote:
<quoted text>Aw! Thanks!

It is kinda sad to see Topix slowly fade away. It used to have so many more people commenting. Granted, it also had alot more garbage trolls too...
It might just be a lull, it might pull through and become populated again.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 27 min Bongo 100,536
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 47 min Sky Writer 31 184,288
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 hr guest 670,351
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 hr another viewer 980,168
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 3 hr Jehowa Witness 46,179
Treating others with respect 5 hr UnderstandPeople 14
Do any attractive cougars or milfs want to trad... (Dec '11) 6 hr Seejay 4
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 19 hr Pegasus 286,455
More from around the web