Why was Jesus necessary?

Why was Jesus necessary?
Why wouldn't an omniscient God just give people the right rules to begin with?

Jesus never existed. God, also, doesn't exist.

God's a sadist.

>american education

There's a lot of historical evidence that there indeed existed some dude whose name was Jesus.

>finnish education
Other than the writings of Josephus Flavius referring to secondhand accounts of such a man, there is literally no evidence whatsoever.

Wait so now you think there ISN'T enough Jesus in American education?
Scholars agree that Jesus existed, was baptized, and was crucified. That's it.
And that's what we learned in school.

Jesus was white, Mary had the fucc with a Gaulish roman soldier.

This. Theres no other explanation

God has been giving the right rules for over 6000 years. Problem is, no one wants to obey.

The original sin is literally disobedience. Humankind could have lived forever in paradise, but the knowledge of good and evil was too tempting. Whelp, now we know...evil sucks and leads to billions and billions of atrocities.

God can do anything except force you to obey, because then you wouldn't have free will, and God wants you to have free will.

Oh you poor, naive summer child. You'll see the error in your ways one day.

>Humankind
Oh, you mean the only two people that shouldve ever existed?

Tell me about God! Why is he hiding?

Evil is simply a matter of perspective. it doesnt exist

From my point of view the Jedi are evil

Then you are lost

Because the christian god is a human creation.
I don't say there is no gods though but every single civilization on this earth since the history is recorded (and even before, see the Venus figurines) had his own gods.

I am not advocating one side or the other, just popping off the philosophy behind this belief:

A perfectly just being is incapable of tolerating injustice.

If there is an injustice, a debt is created that must be paid somehow. This is where we get the phrase "paid his debt to society" when talking about criminals. So, if there is a transgression, a payment must be made to compensate for it. Now, generally, the debt would be payed directly by the one who broke the law. However, in many older cultures, someone other than the criminal was allowed to make restitution for the crime in place of the one who broke the law. This could take the form of paying a fine or even going to jail in place of the criminal to serve the criminal's prison term in his place. It is this principle that is found in the story of Jesus.

Basic rundown:

1. Man broke God's law and was not only permanently corrupted (unrighteous) by the act, but was also criminally indebted to God.

2. Man's corruption meant that his payment for sin would always be tainted and unacceptable, because man would always be prone to sin after the fall. Think about it, would a judge let a criminal off the hook for a crime if the judge KNEW for SURE that the criminal would commit another crime the next day? No. So, any pleading or acts of atonement would be insufficient if offered by the criminal.

3. Since man was corrupted (unrighteous), indebted, and unable to pay his own restitution, another person would have to step in to make restitution for him. Namely, it would have to be someone who was sinless and not already indebted themselves. Since Christ was the only one matching this description, only Christ could take the place of man in the place of judgment.

4. Christ steps in and makes restitution for man by taking the punishment meant for man.

5. The substitution made, God can then grant pardon to those who accept the substitutionary sacrifice made on their behalf.

6. People get saved.

Even if you believe in God, it's silly to believe Jesus was God.
You could keep up the christian fight, but deep down everyone knows this.
Now, Jesus was necessary because he brought an equivalent of Buddhism to the West. Europe didn't go full cuck, so it was enough to restart the power of the Empire.

>>> r/atheism

Because Age of Pisces. Who'll be a savior in the next age? Age of Aquarius?

Why would God create permanently corrupted (unrighteous) criminals?

RARE
for the keks

I'm not condemning religion at all, I just take into account the demographics.

>my only argument is a forced meme
>1 post by this ID

that image was produced by a team of ((((((israeli researchers))))))

>there indeed existed some dude whose name was Jesus.
>Jesus
No there wasn't a guy whose name was Jesus.
Why would a carpenter in Nazareth give his wife's son a Latin name?

That was very well worded and i thank you for your sincere response. Still sounds bizzare and silly to me.

God would have given us Jesus even if Adam and Eve never fell from Eden, He loves us that much.

Really?

Milton says it well in Book 3 of Paradise Lost.

Not a fucking argument
Christians are more edgy than atheists nowadays

>Even if you believe in God, it's silly to believe Jesus was God.

The first pages of the book of John unequivocally refer to Jesus as God. It is rather disingenuous to state that the belief is ridiculous if one were to accept the bible as having any sort of truth.

One COULD take a piecemeal approach and say that just some of the bible is true, while rejecting other parts, but it is still silly to accept just part of the bible while also declaring the rest to be fairly tales.

I would not take anyone seriously who says that they think the story of Noah and the ark is impossible, but that they still believe in a literal 6 day creation story that would make the Earth 6000 years old. It is just disingenuous.

>John 1:1

>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

>and the Word was God.

That is what it says. It doesn't declare anything otherwise, nor does it make some other declaration. It says right there that Jesus is God.

Again, don't get me wrong. I am not advocating one side or the other. Just stating what the book says and what people believe.

If you were trying to make some biscuits from a recipe that said to use two cups of flour, but then you claimed that there was no way anyone could believe that the recipe called for two cups of flour, that would be a bit retarded.

It's all real in his mind.

>>The first pages of the book of John
It's a book made by humans, unless you prove it otherwise. As such, it has no more theological evidence than other "holy" books.
>it is still silly to accept just part of the bible while also declaring the rest to be fairly tales
Not at all. Just like how the Popol Vuh records astronomical events written as silly myths, the Bible records historical events mixed in with flying wheels and magic wine.

>Why would God create permanently corrupted (unrighteous) criminals?

That is a belief that has been in dispute with Christians since the earliest Church Fathers began compiling what would later become the bible nineteen centuries ago.

Seriously, the debate is that old. Almost invariably, every branch of Christianity has a different answer. It is, sadly, too complex a subject to comment on without a specific question targeted as a specific branch of Christendom.

If I had to throw something out there? Well, I would say that many believe that just because an all knowing being has foreknowledge of something does not necessarily mean that said being determined the destiny of all things to all ends. This would mean that God had foreknowledge of Adam's fall, but that God himself did not actually cause it.

At least, that is one view that many espouse. There are many, many, many others though.

>It's a book made by humans, unless you prove it otherwise.

You are coming at me as if I advocated one position over another, which I did not. I merely listed the information and mentioned certain logical consequences of a particular stance on the matter.

Don't get caught up in the "us versus them" mindset. I am not advocating anything here. All I am doing is just engaging with the material found in this case.

Because by giving forgiveness to those who could never possibly deserve it shows His grace. Man then since we are made in his image and possess the knowledge of God via our original sin can recognize the magnanimity of His grace and ultimately emulate it and become as Christ his son who is he. God's end game is quite possibly just to have people to talk to.

>tip fedora

Every christian argument ever

A nice consequence of that idea is that He saw that and still decided to go through with it. There is something in Humanity's future that is so good that God let us kill by the millions in order to get there.
I don't get why this isn't discussed more often. It's theocentric and humanistic at the same time, it's even "fuck yeah" enough for America.
Arguing is not fighting, user. I just point out that if you're really trying to argue that Jesus is God, you need external sources, because of course the Bible will say that.

>Why doesn't God just do everything for us?

Not how that works m8.

>if you believe in god

>Why was Jesus necessary?
Because if there's one thing you learn reading kike myths it's that they are the dumbest shit. Kind of like a SyFy channel movie, it's not too bad of a ride if you don't think about it and just let it happen.

>hates Jews
>sends telepathic messages to a dead Jew
>wants to get to Jewish Heaven
>cuts his dick like a Jew
>read about Jewish prophecies
>claims to be European

Read Laibniz's "monadology" for answers on how if there is a God, the world would still have to be as it is

In the Bible, it says that when the roman guards came for Jesus, Judas needed to signal them which one was Jesus with a kiss because Jesus looked no different from his followers.

His followers, given where they lived at the time, would've been semitic and looked like that picture.

You might argue there were some white people in the area at the time, depending on your definition, and Christ could have been one of them. But all of his followers too?

subvert and conqueror europe and far beyond

fucking kikes! rome should burn a 4th tymu if you ask me

>Fucking white christ bastard!

>all these shilling attempts

Because Gods are not omniscient, Amaterasu is the highest God and she isn't omniscient

Question though. God allowed for many religions. Are his rules more properly states in the Bible, the Quaran, the Jew book, the Bhagavad Gita or The Guru Granth Sahib?

>Are his rules more properly states in the Bible, the Quaran, the Jew book, the Bhagavad Gita or The Guru Granth Sahib?
Depends who you ask.

The bible, retard.

Proofs?

Because all religions are fake nonsense. Yahweh wasn't even originally supposed to be the lone god of the universe, he was just one of many gods and eventually over time, Jews started putting him on a pedestal until eventually they rejected the existence of their other gods.

nice meme undergrad!