Do you agree or disagree with this statement?

[amariselle]

It took thousands of years for humans to discover that the simple act of washing your hands will reduce transmission of disease significantly, thereby reducing mortality / morbidity rates. Jesus had ample opportunity to educate humanity, yet he chose not too.

Jesus didn't come to instruct people on personal hygiene and cleanliness. He came to save sinners, to tell them about God, and to die that we may have eternal life with Him forever if we believe in Him, repent and call upon His name to be saved.

To suggest that Jesus should have spent the limited time He had instructing people on bacteria is missing the point.

Although, since you suggest that He should have done so, it also must be admitted that not every single thing Jesus said or did is recorded in Scripture. We do not know a whole lot about His childhood for instance, or even much about what He was doing before He began His earthly ministry around the age of 30. We do know that His earthly father, Joseph was a carpenter, so maybe he worked alongside his father all those years.

Regardless. He came for a very specific and important reason, a reason that has implications far beyond this life. And as He said, His kingdom is not of this world. When people try to suggest He should have done more worldly things, they miss the point entirely.

And when His teachings and instructions were written down, the writers chose that which God inspired them to record. In this way God ensured that all future generations would know of the real purpose in Jesus' birth, life, death and resurrection.

There are simply some things that matter more than this life. Now, I am not saying God hasn't blessed us with the knowledge we now have, I believe He has and I am very thankful for it. However, that doesn't change what Jesus' mission here on earth was, and trying to say He should have done something He never came to do in the first place in no way invalidates His purpose and His place as our Saviour and Lord.

 

[HitchSlap]

Jesus didn't come to instruct people on personal hygiene and cleanliness. He came to save sinners, to tell them about God, and to die that we may have eternal life with Him forever if we believe in Him, repent and call upon His name to be saved.

To suggest that Jesus should have spent the limited time He had instructing people on bacteria is missing the point.

Although, since you suggest that He should have done so, it also must be admitted that not every single thing Jesus said or did is recorded in Scripture. We do not know a whole lot about His childhood for instance, or even much about what He was doing before He began His earthly ministry around the age of 30. We do know that His earthly father, Joseph was a carpenter, so maybe he worked alongside his father all those years.

Regardless. He came for a very specific and important reason, a reason that has implications far beyond this life. And as He said, His kingdom is not of this world. When people try to suggest He should have done more worldly things, they miss the point entirely.

And when His teachings and instructions were written down, the writers chose that which God inspired them to record. In this way God ensured that all future generations would know of the real purpose in Jesus' birth, life, death and resurrection.

There are simply some things that matter more than this life. Now, I am not saying God hasn't blessed us with the knowledge we now have, I believe He has and I am very thankful for it. However, that doesn't change what Jesus' mission here on earth was, and trying to say He should have done something He never came to do in the first place in no way invalidates His purpose and His place as our Saviour and Lord.

Sorry, but I don't accept this. This is special pleading.

What kind of an individual would withhold simple instruction, that would alleviate untold suffering and death thousands of years earlier, before humans figured this out?

 

[amariselle]

Sorry, but I don't accept this. This is special pleading.

What kind of an individual would withhold simple instruction, that would alleviate untold suffering and death thousands of years earlier, before humans figured this out?

You are free to reject it as you choose. Your issue is with Jesus, not with me. We all have the choice to make for ourselves.

And interestingly enough, the Jewish people already had ceremonial practices in place that dealt with cleanliness. Don't forget that.

In any case, Jesus came for one reason, willingly laying down His life for the lost that we may be redeemed if we choose Him.

 

[KWCrazy]

No, I'm saying that you don't know what you're talking about and that your understanding of evolution is too poor to have a productive conversation.

Obviously, you're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Common descent describes how, in evolutionary biology, a group of organisms share a most recent common ancestor. There is evidence of common descent that all life on Earth is descended from the last universal ancestor.
Common ancestry between organisms of different species arises during speciation, in which new species are established from a single ancestral population.

Evolutionists claim a single common universal progenitor; one cell that morphed into all living things, both plant and animal.
This is YOUR theory, not mine.
Fruit flies irradiated for 50,000 generations remained fruit flies, despite hopes that multiplying the rate of mutations would somehow demonstrate a process of increasing complexity. Nothing of the sort happened. That's an equivalent, by the way, of a million years of human reproduction.

You can be a condescending name caller until the end of time, but that doesn't change the fact that evolution has never been observed and every attempt to test it has failed. Apparently you don't even understand your own theory so maybe you should go read up on it before pretending to know things you do not.

And by the way, we ALL know that we are referring to generations, not a single organism, so you can put that straw man away as well.

 

[amariselle]

Sorry, but I don't accept this. This is special pleading.

What kind of an individual would withhold simple instruction, that would alleviate untold suffering and death thousands of years earlier, before humans figured this out?

"This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true."

"Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." (John 21:24-25)

And we have no way of knowing what each and every one of those "many other things" are.

 

[HitchSlap]

You are free to reject it as you choose. Your issue is with Jesus, not with me.

Actually, since Jesus isn't here to represent himself, my issue is with your claims. Please don't deflect.

We all have the choice to make for ourselves.

I don't believe one can "choose" their beliefs.

And interestingly enough, the Jewish people already had ceremonial practices in place that dealt with cleanliness. Don't forget that.

Are those the same "ceremonial practices" that claims when women are menstruating, they're "unclean"?

In any case, Jesus came for one reason,

As I said, he's not here to defend himself, all I can do is take your word for it.

willingly laying down His life for the lost

Knowing full well he'd back in heaven with his father / himself in three (or four days - depending on which gospel) short days.
Wow, how magnanimous of him.

that we may be redeemed if we choose Him.

I find human sacrifice repugnant, barbaric, and completely unnecessary for the "redemption" of anything. I don't accept the Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[HitchSlap]

And we have no way of knowing what each and every one of those "many other things" are.

Bummer.

 

[Winken]

It's why the highest classification of theory is conferred on it.

Ah, yes.... theory.

 

[Winken]

Actually, since Jesus isn't here to represent himself, my issue is with your claims.

Yep, He is here.

 

[HitchSlap]

Ah, yes.... theory.

Right. It's tough to know everything, but this should help.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

 

[HitchSlap]

Yep, He is here.

Is that him in your avatar?

 

[Winken]

Is the purpose of a single-cell organism to bring glory?

Actually, it was two mosquitoes.

 

[amariselle]

Actually, since Jesus isn't here to represent himself, my issue is with your claims. Please don't deflect.

You are able to learn more about Jesus if you so choose. Test my claims then. Pick up a Bible. Don't take my word for it.

I don't believe one can "choose" their beliefs.

We are ALL free to choose or reject Jesus, we all have free will. Jesus forces Himself on no one.

Are those the same "ceremonial practices" that claims when women are menstruating, they're "unclean"?

Sure, it is actually quite fascinating if you look more deeply into it.

As I said, he's not here to defend himself, all I can do is take your word for it.

No, you are incorrect. You can take HIS word for it, and so you should. It is available for each and every one of us. If you don't have a Bible in your possession, you can search for an online version in any translation. No one should take anyone else's word on God, but should test their words against His.

Knowing full well he'd back in heaven with his father / himself in three (or four days - depending on which gospel) short days.
Wow, how magnanimous of him.

You are mocking and trivializing Jesus' sacrifice for our sins. Just because you do not understand it, does not mean it was nothing. God Himself gave everything for us, sinners who are helpless without Him.

I find human sacrifice repugnant, barbaric, and completely unnecessary for the "redemption" of anything. I don't accept the Stockholm Syndrome.

Your choice. Jesus died for you too, but you must choose to either accept Him as your Saviour or not.

 

[Winken]

Yes, science involves conceptual revision. Would you rather that science remain unyielding and dogmatic instead?

It also doesn't mean that they are real. That science is unable to answer some question does not imply that religion can answer it. It just means that we are ignorant. How else can we resolve our ignorance except by further inquiry?

Christianity is not a religion. HE answers it all. It is known as Grace, not methodical interdictions.

 

[Winken]

I think the implication was that they are encouraging their children to be ignorant by teaching them to not learn about evolution. Being ignorant is not the same as lacking in intelligence. We are all ignorant to some degree about certain topics. The problem, as I understand it, is that some Christians are wilfully encouraging ignorance by instructing their children not to learn, and to thereby remain ignorant about one of the most fundamental theories of biology.

On the contrary, they continually remain Spiritually informed.

 

[Winken]

Well ... I use the quote function but it doesn't always work.

AHA! The quotes from the ones I am blocking don't appear! Divine intervention?

 

[amariselle]

Well ... I use the quote function but it doesn't always work.

AHA! The quotes from the ones I am blocking don't appear! Divine intervention?

Ha ha, I've never used the block function myself. (Though I have been blocked by at least two people)

 

[HitchSlap]

You are able to learn more about Jesus if you so choose. Test my claims then. Pick up a Bible. Don't take my word for it.



We are ALL free to choose or reject Jesus, we all have free will. Jesus forces Himself on no one.



Sure, it is actually quite fascinating if you look more deeply into it.



No, you are incorrect. You can take HIS word for it, and so you should. It is available for each and every one of us. If you don't have a Bible in your possession, you can search for an online version in any translation. No one should take anyone else's word on God, but should test their words against His.



You are mocking and trivializing Jesus' sacrifice for our sins. Just because you do not understand it, does not mean it was nothing. God Himself gave everything for us, sinners who are helpless without Him.



Your choice. Jesus died for you too, but you must choose to either accept Him as your Saviour or not.

I'm sorry if I gave you an impression of misunderstanding. I actually understand it very well, it's why I'm atheist. I know too much, as it were, that unbelief is a natural progression of my knowledge. There was never a point in which I chose not to believe. It was rather, a process in which I realized that I no longer believed the claims of Christianity and the bible.

And I'm sorry if you think I'm trivializing what you hold to be sacred, but there is much to be learned if you would actually take a critical run at your own beliefs.

As for the claim that a human sacrifice is necessary for the redemption of supposed "sins," well this idea is repugnant to me. I suppose if a god existed, it could probably think of a trillion better ways to redeem the perceived "sins" of humans.

 

[amariselle]

I'm sorry if I gave you an impression of misunderstanding. I actually understand it very well, it's why I'm atheist. I know too much, as it were, that unbelief is a natural progression of my knowledge. There was never a point in which I chose not to believe. It was rather, a process in which I realized that I no longer believed the claims of Christianity and the bible.

We all have choices in life. None of us are robots. You may not be able to identify one single moment when you chose not to believe, but more often what happens is that it's all of the little choices we make over time that get us to one place or another. It is, in the end, still OUR choice.

And I'm sorry if you think I'm trivializing what you hold to be sacred, but there is much to be learned if you would actually take a critical run at your own beliefs.

How do you know I haven't? You have no idea how much I HAVE struggled in my faith and seriously questioned things.

As for the claim that a human sacrifice is necessary for the redemption of supposed "sins," well this idea is repugnant to me. I suppose if a god existed, it could probably think of a trillion better ways to redeem the perceived "sins" of humans.

Jesus was not a mere human sacrifice, He is God and He willingly laid down His life, no one took it from Him.

 

[Hoghead1]

Obviously, you're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Common descent describes how, in evolutionary biology, a group of organisms share a most recent common ancestor. There is evidence of common descent that all life on Earth is descended from the last universal ancestor.
Common ancestry between organisms of different species arises during speciation, in which new species are established from a single ancestral population.

Evolutionists claim a single common universal progenitor; one cell that morphed into all living things, both plant and animal.
This is YOUR theory, not mine.
Fruit flies irradiated for 50,000 generations remained fruit flies, despite hopes that multiplying the rate of mutations would somehow demonstrate a process of increasing complexity. Nothing of the sort happened. That's an equivalent, by the way, of a million years of human reproduction.

You can be a condescending name caller until the end of time, but that doesn't change the fact that evolution has never been observed and every attempt to test it has failed. Apparently you don't even understand your own theory so maybe you should go read up on it before pretending to know things you do not.

And by the way, we ALL know that we are referring to generations, not a single organism, so you can put that straw man away as well.

You yourself do in fact fall into inappropriate personal attacks as well and are doing so in this post.