Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
prince zachary

did jesus really know what it's like to be "human"?

161 posts in this topic

Why would you think that no human being could know that God is real?

because we cant. if we were able to know, "faith" would have no purpose and there would only be 1 religion because we would have proof. yes, i know believers of every religion believe god is real and they talk to him and feel him, BUT that cant be true because they all believe in different gods, so either 1 of them is right, or all of them are wrong, but all of them cant be right, therefor we cant trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists. i dont know how dumb you have to be to deny this fact. i am in awe of you right now. i feel like you just wanted to show off your fancy debate skills by repeating everything i said in some organized fashion and then offer no reply other than "well, some people think they feel god." like seriously, are you insane? come on. step your debate game up and gimme some real answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because we cant. if we were able to know, "faith" would have no purpose and there would only be 1 religion because we would have proof. yes, i know believers of every religion believe god is real and they talk to him and feel him, BUT that cant be true because they all believe in different gods, so either 1 of them is right, or all of them are wrong, but all of them cant be right, therefor we cant trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists. i dont know how dumb you have to be to deny this fact. i am in awe of you right now. i feel like you just wanted to show off your fancy debate skills by repeating everything i said in some organized fashion and then offer no reply other than "well, some people think they feel god." like seriously, are you insane? come on. step your debate game up and gimme some real answers.

Did you read my post? I basically said that knowing whether or not God exists does not make you any more or less human. Also, I denied your claim that believing in God is what God judges you on.

Also, Christians believe in absolute truth. While there may be many people who believe many things, at least thing has to be the truth, right? So while there may be many people that claim to know the truth, there is a truth out there, and it is knowable, whether or not anyone can prove it right now or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read my post? I basically said that knowing whether or not God exists does not make you any more or less human. Also, I denied your claim that believing in God is what God judges you on.

Also, Christians believe in absolute truth. While there may be many people who believe many things, at least thing has to be the truth, right? So while there may be many people that claim to know the truth, there is a truth out there, and it is knowable, whether or not anyone can prove it right now or not.

dude what the fuck are you fucking retarded? MY POINT IS THIS: "JESUS DID NOT KNOW WHAT IT WAS LIKE TO BE A REAL HUMAN BEING BECAUSE HE DIDNT SUFFER THE PLIGHT OF ANY INTELLIGENT HUMAN BEING, WHICH IS PONDERING THE MEANING OF LIFE/IF THERE IS A GOD/ETC. ARE YOU TOO FUCKING STUPID TO REALIZE THIS IS A HUGE PART OF INTELLECTUALS' DAILY THOUGHTS?

i was pretty sure most people realize one of the biggest parts of being a human is wondering our purpose and if there is a god up there. jesus did not go through this, therefor he did not know what it truly was to be a human being. how does this not fucking make sense? are you guys 12?! what the fuck. i am seriously in motherfucking awe. holy fuck.

steppenwhale, david gomez FUCK YOU. seriously, this isnt about proving whether or not jesus is real. this is a question/observation aimed at CHRISTIANS. I DONT GIVE A FUCK IF YOU THINK JESUS ISNT REAL. THAT IS NOT THE POINT. IM NOT SAYING HE IS REAL. IM MERELY POSING A QUESTION TO CHRISTIANS. WHY ARE YOU GUYS DRIVING ME FUCKING INSANE.

god. damnit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, you should learn to read Zachary. I don't believe that's what it means to be a human at all. "A being that ponders his existence." I agreed with you that Jesus probably didn't experience that, but my point was that "pondering your existence" =/= being human a human being. Jesus didn't come down here for "the experience," he came down here to repay our debt, and that had nothing to do with experiencing doubt or pondering whether God existed.

You're officially the dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet. CAPSLOCKSHFKSHFKAFL!!! I can do it to so I must be right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, you should learn to read Zachary. I don't believe that's what it means to be a human at all. "A being that ponders his existence." I agreed with you that Jesus probably didn't experience that, but my point was that "pondering your existence" =/= being human a human being. Jesus didn't come down here for "the experience," he came down here to repay our debt, and that had nothing to do with experiencing doubt or pondering whether God existed.

You're officially the dumbest thing I have ever read on the internet. CAPSLOCKSHFKSHFKAFL!!! I can do it to so I must be right!

dude the whole point of me asking this is because i hear christians say all the time "jesus came down to earth and experienced what it was to be a human being. god became man to show us that we can have a perfect life and that its possible and also to show the god knows what its like to be a human being and he understands every temptation and thought that we have because he has been in our shoes" yes he also came to die for our sins, but thats not what im talking about.

thats the whole reason im posing this question. i grew up in the church and always heard this being said, but a couple weeks ago i came up with this question that i feel is fairly philosophical. i also dont understand how jesus could be sinless when there are so many billions of different little ways to sin every day, it seems like to be sinless is just literally impossible. isnt being a human about making mistakes and learning from them? how did jesus ever learn from a mistake if he never made any?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude the whole point of me asking this is because i hear christians say all the time "jesus came down to earth and experienced what it was to be a human being. god became man to show us that we can have a perfect life and that its possible and also to show the god knows what its like to be a human being and he understands every temptation and thought that we have because he has been in our shoes"

I disagree with your understanding of why Jesus came. He did not come to "show us that we can have a perfect life" or to "show us what it's like to be human." I think that's our main disagreement. He came to pay our debt so that God could enact a new covenant with us. Jesus teaching us how to live is just a byproduct of that.

thats the whole reason im posing this question. i grew up in the church and always heard this being said, but a couple weeks ago i came up with this question that i feel is fairly philosophical. i also dont understand how jesus could be sinless when there are so many billions of different little ways to sin every day, it seems like to be sinless is just literally impossible. isnt being a human about making mistakes and learning from them? how did jesus ever learn from a mistake if he never made any?

Being human isn't about making mistakes and learning from them. Being human means to be a mammal with a highly developed brain, and an erect body carriage with free hands for manipulating objects. That is what Jesus came as. One of us. He came as the only perfect human being. I believe it was possible for him to live a sinless life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hebrews 4:15---"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin."

The Bible never claims that Jesus actually doubted God, but it does claim that He has been tempted in every way. You can be tempted and not actually sin. Jesus was placed in many situations that tempted Him to doubt, but he did not doubt. An example would be when Satan tempts Jesus after fasting for 40 days in the desert:

Luke 4:1-4---"Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.” Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’”

He was tempted to doubt that the Father would provide for Him, but He did not doubt. Hebrews 4:15 makes it clear that Jesus did not have to actually sin in order to empathize with our weaknesses.

Could you explain why you think that unless Jesus has doubted God, He has no right to judge us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hebrews 4:15---"For we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet he did not sin."

The Bible never claims that Jesus actually doubted God, but it does claim that He has been tempted in every way. You can be tempted and not actually sin. Jesus was placed in many situations that tempted Him to doubt, but he did not doubt. An example would be when Satan tempts Jesus after fasting for 40 days in the desert:

Luke 4:1-4---"Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, left the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where for forty days he was tempted by the devil. He ate nothing during those days, and at the end of them he was hungry. The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.” Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’”

He was tempted to doubt that the Father would provide for Him, but He did not doubt. Hebrews 4:15 makes it clear that Jesus did not have to actually sin in order to empathize with our weaknesses.

Could you explain why you think that unless Jesus has doubted God, He has no right to judge us?

thank you for backing me up with that first passage. some proof im not crazy.

now, for your question. i feel that jesus had an unfair advantage than the rest of us. he knew god existed. we dont know god exists. we have no way of knowing, so how can we be judged on whether or not we believe some story passed down for thousands of years? thats stupid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what we are judged based on Zachary. We are not judged based on whether we believe or not. We are judged by our deeds and moral character. Unfortunately for us, we all suck at that because of sin, but we all have morality ingrained in us. We know we fall short. Luckily, God sent Jesus to take our place in that judgement. Where did you get the idea that God judges us based on whether or not we believe in him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what we are judged based on Zachary. We are not judged based on whether we believe or not. We are judged by our deeds and moral character. Unfortunately for us, we all suck at that because of sin, but we all have morality ingrained in us. We know we fall short. Luckily, God sent Jesus to take our place in that judgement. Where did you get the idea that God judges us based on whether or not we believe in him?

John 14:6, Ephesians 2:8-9 could start us off down that path. I'm curious what biblical references you know that show what you're saying, as I have never heard of humanity being judged simply on deeds and moral character.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John 14:6, Ephesians 2:8-9 could start us off down that path. I'm curious what biblical references you know that show what you're saying, as I have never heard of humanity being judged simply on deeds and moral character.

John 14:6 speaks to how we come to God, not how he judges us. Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks of how we are saved, again, not how God judges. Salvation and judgement are two different things. God judges us, Jesus saves us from that judgement.

Also, I wouldn't say that we are judged "simply" on deeds and moral character, but it is certainly written in the scripture that God does judge us that way. There are also several verses that talk about how God is really the only one who knows how we will be judged.

Here are some good verses:

Psalm 9:8 - He rules the world in righteousness, and judges the peoples in equity.

Psalm 96:13 - Let all creation rejoice before the LORD, for he comes, he comes to judge the earth.

He will judge the world in righteousness

and the peoples in his faithfulness.

There is also The Great White Throne Judgement, where we see God judging based on works. (Rev 20 11-15)

Finally, the most compelling verse for me is one that's quite common. Romans 6:3 says that "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

To me that says that for our sin, God judges us with the punishment of death, but Jesus has saved us through the cross.

I guess it's also important to point out that, though we may have been using the word "judge", you may be more at ease to think of it as our sin is separating us from him. God is all good so he cannot unite with sin so we cannot be with him. In a way, this is a "judgement" and God certainly has judged us in that way (Old Testament), but since he sent Jesus, we have a new covenant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gomez, seriously.

enough.

Are you discrediting associations between the Zodiac and Jesus Christ, care to elaborate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John 14:6 speaks to how we come to God, not how he judges us. Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks of how we are saved, again, not how God judges. Salvation and judgement are two different things. God judges us, Jesus saves us from that judgement.

Also, I wouldn't say that we are judged "simply" on deeds and moral character, but it is certainly written in the scripture that God does judge us that way. There are also several verses that talk about how God is really the only one who knows how we will be judged.

Okay, so what?

That does not prove neither the existence of the Christian God, nor does it validate Christ as a demi-God.

Here are some good verses:

Psalm 9:8 - He rules the world in righteousness, and judges the peoples in equity.

Psalm 96:13 - Let all creation rejoice before the LORD, for he comes, he comes to judge the earth.

He will judge the world in righteousness

and the peoples in his faithfulness.

There is also The Great White Throne Judgement, where we see God judging based on works. (Rev 20 11-15)

Finally, the most compelling verse for me is one that's quite common. Romans 6:3 says that "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

To me that says that for our sin, God judges us with the punishment of death, but Jesus has saved us through the cross.

I guess it's also important to point out that, though we may have been using the word "judge", you may be more at ease to think of it as our sin is separating us from him. God is all good so he cannot unite with sin so we cannot be with him. In a way, this is a "judgement" and God certainly has judged us in that way (Old Testament), but since he sent Jesus, we have a new covenant.

I'm not going to deny that consensus morality is a good idea, but why insult the intelligence of folks in today's world with fantastic stories about a bearded men in the sky that does not want peter and johnny to touch each other's wee-wee's?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, so what?

That does not prove neither the existence of the Christian God, nor does it validate Christ as a demi-God.

That's not the topic being discussed in this thread. The topic assumes that the Christian God exists and that Jesus is God

If you can't understand simple ideas like what subject is being discussed, how can you expect anyone to listen to you, let alone take you seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the topic being discussed in this thread. The topic assumes that the Christian God exists and that Jesus is God

If you can't understand simple ideas like what subject is being discussed, how can you expect anyone to listen to you, let alone take you seriously.

for real, david. we are not trying to disprove jesus. im asking a question within the boundaries that the bible is true.

do i believe its true? no. but some people do, and thats who this question is directed towards. to be fair, it seemed as if EVERYONE in this thread completely missed the point i made and tried to use this thread to spew their own bullshit that had nothing to do with what i asked, so... fuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for real, david. we are not trying to disprove jesus. im asking a question within the boundaries that the bible is true.

do i believe its true? no. but some people do, and thats who this question is directed towards. to be fair, it seemed as if EVERYONE in this thread completely missed the point i made and tried to use this thread to spew their own bullshit that had nothing to do with what i asked, so... fuck.

Actually, it seemed to me as if you already felt you had pulled the rug out from Christians with your question and were trying to get an "AHA!" moment for yourself, and failed miserably when people who knew a lot more then you about the subject responded to you honestly, and truthfully. Unless you want to respond to someone seriously instead of whining.

edit:

You made a few claims:

A. Experiencing doubt about God is what being human is all about.

I disagree with this claim.

B. Jesus didn't experience being human.

I disagree with this claim because I disagree with the first one.

C. God judges people based on if they believe in him.

I also disagree with this.

Your conclusion was that because Jesus could not doubt the existence of God, he did not experience humanity. Since he did not experience humanity, God can not understand us well enough to judge us.

I responded with why I disagree with all of the claims, and you seem content to respond with, "what are you FUCKING RETARDED?" instead of actually discussing it. So who is spouting bullshit?

Like I said, it sounds to me as if you came up with this question to make Christians look stupid, and anything they answered you were going to instantly disagree with instead of honestly seeking the answer to the question. You might as well have asked, "why are all you Christians so DUMB!?!?!! LOLFDSFSD"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John 14:6 speaks to how we come to God, not how he judges us. Ephesians 2:8-9 speaks of how we are saved, again, not how God judges. Salvation and judgement are two different things. God judges us, Jesus saves us from that judgement.

Also, I wouldn't say that we are judged "simply" on deeds and moral character, but it is certainly written in the scripture that God does judge us that way. There are also several verses that talk about how God is really the only one who knows how we will be judged.

What is salvation if not the effect of judgement? You may say they are two different things, but they go hand in hand. Jesus may save us from God's judgment because he died for our sins, but not all of us.

"And this is the will of Him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."

which I believe is what the OP is talking about. If you do not believe in the Lord, you are not saved by the Lord. Then again the revelations reference you made (20:11-15) makes it seem as if some of those who did not believe will be passed judgement on and they may make it into heaven, but I've always been under the impression that it more refers to those who have not seen or heard of Jesus/God who are being judged at that time. However, I agree with the part of your post that I put in bold, and thanks for clearing up why you think/feel that way, it made me look around and wonder about things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They do go hand in hand, but that's a far cry from calling them the same thing or hopping to the assumption that we are judged based on whether we believe or not. And that verse is one hundred percent, but it says that if you believe in the Son, you will have everlasting life.

Let me simplify what I am trying to say. God cannot be with sin. We have sinned. God cannot be with us. Jesus came to pay for our sin so that we may be with him. God still cannot be with sin!

Whether or not we believe in God or Jesus, God cannot commune with sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because we cant. if we were able to know, "faith" would have no purpose and there would only be 1 religion because we would have proof. yes, i know believers of every religion believe god is real and they talk to him and feel him, BUT that cant be true because they all believe in different gods, so either 1 of them is right, or all of them are wrong, but all of them cant be right, therefor we cant trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists. i dont know how dumb you have to be to deny this fact. i am in awe of you right now. i feel like you just wanted to show off your fancy debate skills by repeating everything i said in some organized fashion and then offer no reply other than "well, some people think they feel god." like seriously, are you insane? come on. step your debate game up and gimme some real answers.

Zachary, you claimed that it is not possible for any human being to know that God exists (right, that was one of your claims in your original posts, wasn't it?). Then, I asked you why you think that. In doing so, I was asking you what your reasons were for thinking that it is not possible for any human being to know that God exists. Your response to this is "because we cant" [sic]. However, I was asking your REASON for thinking this. You then argued that if we were able to know, then there would be only one religion, and since there is not only one religion, we must not be able to know that God exists.

Your argument goes as follows (if I understand it correctly):

P1: If we could know that God exists, then no one would disagree about God's existence (Logical form: if p, then q)

P2: People disagree about God's existence (Logical form: not-q)

Conclusion: It is impossible that we could know that God exists (Logical form: not-p).

Your argument is a specific case of the following general form, where I have replaced "God exists" with the variable X:

P1*: If we could know that X, then no one would disagree about X (Logical form: if p, then q)

P2*: People disagree about X (Logical form: not-q)

Conclusion*: It is impossible that we could know that X (Logical form: not-p).

Let's examine the second argument (the one that is the more general form). Certainly, if this argument is good, so is the first one, and if this argument is bad, so is the first one. Don't you think?

The second argument is logically valid, as it employs a type of modus tollens (denying the consequent). However, I would challenge the truth of its first premise P1*. The premise claims that if it is even possible that one person could know a thing, then no one would ever disagree about that thing. I think it is fairly easy to see that this premise is false.

Consider the following proposition:

Proposition 1: I exist (where "I" refers to me, drew_willy).

Now, I know that Proposition 1 is true, no matter if no one else in the world knows it. Heck, I know Proposition 1 is true even if each and every person on the planet besides myself denies that it is true. So, isn't it pretty clear that Proposition 1 is something that it is possible for a person to know, yet it is possible that other some people would disagree about it?

If you don't like that example, consider the following:

Proposition 2: During the Holocaust, the Nazis killed millions of Jews.

Now I know that Proposition 2 is true. A great many people know that Proposition 2 is true. Nevertheless, there are some people (present day Neo-Nazis, members of Mel Gibson's family) who deny the truth of Proposition 2. Clearly there is disagreement about Proposition 2 then. Still, I know that it is true. But then, Proposition 2 (like Proposition 1) proves P1* to be false.

So, what about P1, the premise in your actual argument? Well, given that both (i) P1* is false, and (ii) P1 is a specific form of P1* wherein the variable X has been replaced by the proposition [God exists], I have my doubts about P1. Now certainly, I have not PROVEN BEYOND THE SHADOW OF A DOUBT that P1 is false, but I think that it is at least suspect.

Furthermore, if we could find any human being who does have, or has had, knowledge of God, this would count as evidence against your claim.

Now, you've implied in several posts in this thread that your arguments presuppose the truth of the Bible and Christian theology in general. (It is my guess that you make these assumptions to the end of showing Christianity to be inconsistent.) Well, let's run with your train of thought that assumes these thing to be true. If they are true, then it seems that some people in the past have in fact known that God exists. For instance, Abraham, Noah, Moses, Isaiah, and Elijah all had veridical experiences of God (according to the Bible). These men were certainly human. So, if the Bible is true, then your claim that it is not possible for any human being to know that God exists has got to be false. I fail to see how your questions, inquiries, and arguments have begun to reveal an inconsistency in Christianity.

In short, the Christian is not at all going to be impelled to believe your claim that it is not possible for any human being to know that God exists, thus she is not at all going to be troubled by your arguments / inquiries.

What you've said in the response quoted above appears to me to betray a misunderstanding on your part regarding the beliefs of Christians, the status of religion, and the role of faith. It seems that you think that (i) religion requires faith and (ii) faith is a belief concerning something that cannot be known. I doubt any well-trained Christian theologian or priest / pastor or any well-read Christian lay person would agree with this assessment of the relationship between the Christian religion, faith, and knowledge. I bet there are plenty of Christians who think it possible for human beings to know that God exists. I think your view of faith owes more to David Hume than to the Bible, Christian doctrine, or any well-informed Christian. Certainly, CS Lewis, John Calvin, The Vatican Council, and Thomas Aquinas would all disagree with your assessment of faith and knowledge of God.

One final point. You said, "yes, i know believers of every religion believe god is real and they talk to him and feel him, BUT that cant be true because they all believe in different gods, so either 1 of them is right, or all of them are wrong, but all of them cant be right, therefor we cant trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists."

Your logic here is really flawed. It goes as follows:

p = "1 of them is right"

q = "all of them are wrong"

r = "all of them are right"

s = "we can't trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists."

P1: either p or q

P2: not-r

Coclusion: s

Yeah, that simply does not follow logically.

*Edited to correct an unintended emoticon. Silly boreds with your automatic emoticons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cue Zachary whining about something or other...

edit: I even looked up "queue" because I wasn't sure and it seemed like the right definition. Oh well, learn something new everyday I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One final point. You said, "yes, i know believers of every religion believe god is real and they talk to him and feel him, BUT that cant be true because they all believe in different gods, so either 1 of them is right, or all of them are wrong, but all of them cant be right, therefor we cant trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists."

Your logic here is really flawed. It goes as follows:

p = "1 of them is right"

q = "all of them are wrong"

r = "all of them are right"

s = "we can't trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists."

P1: either p or q

P2: not-r

Coclusion: s

Yeah, that simply does not follow logically.

Actually, upon reflection I don't think I have given your reasoning the best examination. How about I give them a fair shake and see what comes out as a result. Let's see if we can get your proposed result of "we can't trust a human who believes they know for a fact god exists."

Let's let

R = the property of being right

W = the property of being wrong (where not-R = W, and not-W = R)

∀ represent the universal quantifier("for all")

∃ represent the existential quantifier ("there exists")

~ represent the negation operator ("not-" or "it is not the case that"), so that R = ~W, and W = ~R.

So if I write 'Ra', that means "a is right" or "a has the property of being right".

Then we can use quantificational first-order predicate logic to symbolize your reasoning here.

If x and y are variables representing religions, then we have

P1: Either ( ∃x (Rx and ∀y (if Ry, then x = y))) or ∀x (Wx).

P2: ~∀x(Rx)

P1 is a symbolic representation of your statement "either 1 of them is right, or all of them are wrong", while P2 is a symbolic representation of your statement "all of them cant be right" [sic].

Since "not-all x are R" is logically equivalent to "there exists at least one x such that it is not-R", then P2 is equivalent to ∃x(~Rx), which is equivalent to ∃x(Wx), which is equivalent to ∃x(~Rx).

Also, since W = ~R, then the second disjunt of P1, which read ∀x (Wx) above, can be rewritten as ∀x (~Rx).

So now by replacing the original symbolic schemata with these equivalences we have

P1: Either ( ∃x (Rx and ∀y (if Ry, then x = y))) or ∀x (~Rx).

P2: ∃x(~Rx).

But this just comes to saying the following: either there is one right religion or all of the religions are wrong AND there is at least one religion that is wrong. You don't even need P1 for this; you simply need P2. You have NOT shown that all religions are wrong (which I take it was your point), but only that there is at least ONE that is wrong. You certainly have not shown that we cannot trust anyone who says they know for a fact that God exists. So, I will buy the result of your reasoning - there are people of different religions all claiming that their theologies are correct, yet there is at least one religion that is wrong. So? That is not really pertinent to the discussion of knowing that God exists.

So again, how is it that you are so confident that it is not possible for a human to know that God exists?

Give me logic

How was that for logic?

Queue Zachary whining about something or other...

Now we are going to line up Zachary's whining? orly? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, it seemed to me as if you already felt you had pulled the rug out from Christians with your question and were trying to get an "AHA!" moment for yourself, and failed miserably when people who knew a lot more then you about the subject responded to you honestly, and truthfully. Unless you want to respond to someone seriously instead of whining.

edit:

You made a few claims:

A. Experiencing doubt about God is what being human is all about.

I disagree with this claim.

B. Jesus didn't experience being human.

I disagree with this claim because I disagree with the first one.

C. God judges people based on if they believe in him.

I also disagree with this.

Your conclusion was that because Jesus could not doubt the existence of God, he did not experience humanity. Since he did not experience humanity, God can not understand us well enough to judge us.

I responded with why I disagree with all of the claims, and you seem content to respond with, "what are you FUCKING RETARDED?" instead of actually discussing it. So who is spouting bullshit?

Like I said, it sounds to me as if you came up with this question to make Christians look stupid, and anything they answered you were going to instantly disagree with instead of honestly seeking the answer to the question. You might as well have asked, "why are all you Christians so DUMB!?!?!! LOLFDSFSD"

i really hope you aren't christian, if so, you're one fucking pompous dick of a christian assuming stupid shit. "real" christians are humble, and arent quick to attack someone for asking a QUESTION. yes, i insulted a lot of your for fucking up my thread with bullshit, but never did i insinuate that i was trying to disprove christianity with my claim, it was merely a question to christians. who responded about the subject that knew more than i did? are you talking about the conspiracy shit? so far, no one has proven they know more than i do. im not saying no one does, im just saying no one has said anything intelligent yet... all just pseudo-intellectual wanking off. no one has said a damn thing.

1.) i never said doubting god was what makes us human, i merely said that all human beings (at least the majority of intelligent ones) are confused as to their purpose on earth, and are all (deep down) unsure if there is truly a higher power or not (you're stupid if you think people dont doubt their 'faith')

2.) jesus DID NOT experience what it meant to not know his purpose or whether he was truly alone in the universe, so i feel jesus did not get the full human experience. can you really say there is a human being out there who doesnt long to know why we are here? jesus knew for a FACT why he and all of us were here, therefor i feel he did not truly experience what it is to be a human being.

basically it's like me going to work with kids who had horrible childhoods/no parents growing up. i didnt have that, so i could never TRULY understand what they went through. i could help encourage them to be good people and give them self-esteem and love them, but i could NEVER know what they dealt with, therefor i could never really judge them if they acted a certain way i didnt understand. just like jesus has no idea what its like to wonder why he was born, to wonder if there is a god up above, etc. what dont you understand about this? i am in awe that this is such a hard topic to understand. is that not the whole fucking basis of "philosophy"?!

3.) god DOESNT judge people off of whether they believed in him? well, i guess i misunderstood the bible when jesus said the only way to the father was through him... I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT ONE. sorry for the misunderstanding!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dude, drew willy, dont fucking gimme your stupid ass college debate class bullshit. if you wanna respond in my thread, respond like a fucking human, not a robot. i'll gladly listen to any reply you want, but stop with these stupid math equations. you look like pretentious asshole and you arent making any points. do you actually have something to add to the discussion, or do you just wanna show off your stupid debate skills. i bet you 10 bucks you couldnt respond like a normal human being. its so pathetic. you guys are jokes. just answer my fucking question, jesus christ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So again, how is it that you are so confident that it is not possible for a human to know that God exists?

are you saying you can prove god exists? no? ok, then shut the fuck up.

if yes, please, give it your best shot.

but really, how fucking stupid are you? of course i cant "prove" that its impossible for a human to know god exists, but i'll bet you 5,000,000 that NO ONE can prove he DOES exist, therefor indirectly proving me right. how about that? are we cool? ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0