Why Was Jesus Baptised???????????

Started by Nellinator6 pages

I never said that he did. I have clearly said that Jesus's baptism was not for the remission of sins before because he was sinless. It was a rhetorical question.

Originally posted by Nellinator
I never said that he did. I have clearly said that Jesus's baptism was not for the remission of sins before because he was sinless. It was a rhetorical question.

My bad.

😮

No problems.

LMAO, just the amount of conflict between CHRISTIANS on whats what is enough to tell anyone around not to take the relegion seriously.

No, it was one reason that you should take it very seriously.

Originally posted by Nellinator
No, it was one reason that you should take it very seriously.

yea, as a potential war for dominance by each faction of a relegion for lunatics. 😄 .

or rather, a relegion OF lunacy, followed by deluded average joes and men driven mad by the ideology , alike.

Yah, you really nailed it there... Lolz 'cuz I'm a lunatic right? HARHARHAR!!

Originally posted by Nellinator
Yah, you really nailed it there... Lolz 'cuz I'm a lunatic right? HARHARHAR!!

i know you prefer deluded average joe more 😉 . really it is upto you isnt it?

Originally posted by Nellinator
Yah, you really nailed it there... Lolz 'cuz I'm a lunatic right? HARHARHAR!!
Originally posted by Nellinator
Very true. Buddhism sucks.

Is this what you are reverting to now ? 😬

First one because he called me a lunatic in an indirect and cowardly way with such poor grammar that it hurts my brain to read. Hence, he gets a jackass comment in return that acknowledges the stupidity of his comment.

The second one was a joke. Read the conversation please, I didn't think it was that hard to see...

Originally posted by leonheartmm
i know you prefer deluded average joe more 😉 . really it is upto you isnt it?
You are very poor at this. You see, it doesn't work, it's false, and really really pointless. But hey, whatever makes you sleep better at night.

Originally posted by Nellinator
First one because he called me a lunatic in an indirect and cowardly way with such poor grammar that it hurts my brain to read. Hence, he gets a jackass comment in return that acknowledges the stupidity of his comment.

The second one was a joke. Read the conversation please, I didn't think it was that hard to see...

You are very poor at this. You see, it doesn't work, it's false, and really really pointless. But hey, whatever makes you sleep better at night.

nope, i SPECIFICALLY, stated in the post that its "RATHER" A RELEGION OF LUNACY. followed by DELUDED AVERAGE JOES{I.E "YOU"}, AND PEOPLE DRIVEN MAD BY IT{I.E "JIA"}. the second sentence was there exactly for YOU. i dont have to be cowardly in calling any1 a lunatic if i feal like it, your not in my oppinion, the relegion on the other hand most definately IS.

and please, dont refer to your porno as my sleeping pill 😛 . capice.
peace out.

You have a poor definition of "average joes" because that usually refers to high school educated blue collar workers. Which simply doesn't apply to millions of Christians including me. Therefore, it is erroneous.

And your "sleeping pill" is you feeling better about yourself trying to justify your lack of belief in God with erroneous attacks. I can accept that you don't believe, but falicious attacks are boring and annoying.

Originally posted by Nellinator
You have a poor definition of "average joes" because that usually refers to high school educated blue collar workers. Which simply doesn't apply to millions of Christians including me. Therefore, it is erroneous.

And your "sleeping pill" is you feeling better about yourself trying to justify your lack of belief in God with erroneous attacks. I can accept that you don't believe, but falicious attacks are boring and annoying.

nope, it was just a VAGUE, non literal definition referring to the average man. now you might be above or below average, but in this context, average was supposed to linguistically contrast the MAD and LUNATIC, so its a compliment, and attesting to the fact that many followers are normal people lead astray as opposed to being posessed of LUNACY, like their relegion posesses. GET IT. it isnt erronous, you just need to be abit more flexible with your understanding.

um, how would JUSTIFYING my lack of belief make me feal BETTER about myself????????? thayt would only be true if i felt guilty for my lack of belief, guess what, i DONT. i just feal bad for the world which is being poisoned by this thing you call FAITH{which is anything but the literal definition of the word}. the attacks are not erronous, and thas a lil rich, as the case for relegion has always been undermined by lack of logic on these threads/forums in so long as i have been here. the attacks only seem fallacious to you because your "faith" is clouding your judgement and wont allow anything contrary to it be truly registered by your brain.

No, the attacks are repeatedly debunked, recycled, and debunked again. Like the whole parallelomania thing. It's stupid and been proven wrong by many people all over the world and yet it get recycled over and over. I'm rather flexible and my faith doesn't cloud anything. There simply isn't any credible attacks on the Bible that work. If they were that credible Christianity would have collapsed a long time ago and been replaced with some other religion. It hasn't for a reason. The case for religion isn't undermined by a lack of logic, but by the lack of understanding and knowledge of many people that follow it. There are millions of intelligent and logical Christians. Christianity does not support or create lunacy. That is an erroneous attack. Calling faith a poison is really really stupid because it is erroneous.

Why whole point about you sleeping better night is that you attack Christianity without a clear purpose? If you simply don't believe you won't attack it. The only acceptable attacks are when people see something based on a religion influencing non-believers. That's a legitimate attack, even if I disagree with the person on the issue. Attacking it a "why be Christian because look at all the contradictions lolz" way is stupidity and usually based in insecurity and/or superiority complexes. Both are issues with that person.

Speaking of erroneous conclusions:

Originally posted by Nellinator
There simply isn't any credible attacks on the Bible that work. If they were that credible Christianity would have collapsed a long time ago and been replaced with some other religion. It hasn't for a reason.

Re: Why Was Jesus Baptised???????????

Originally posted by leonheartmm
why was jesus baptised by john the baptist{as many christion sects believe}?????
baptism is a way {according to most christians} to purge onesself from the ORIGINAL SIN of adam/eve that all men inherit.

yet the main REASON, why CHRIST is called the savious etc, is because "HE WAS THE ONLY ONE BORN SINLESS"!!!!!!!!! if he was born with sin, then he wouldnt be qualified {by christianity's standards} to be the saviour!

so how come a man supposedly born COMPLETELY sinless, inherit the original sin and had to be BAPTISED to clean away that sin. in my oppinion, a total contradiction.

Though Jesus was the son of god, he was still man.Everything he did in his life was that of setting an example. Being baptised, set an example for his fellow man to follow. I cant remember, did Jesus get baptised after he met the devil or before?

During, it was Satan who gave him his special "water", which Jesus drank from and bathed in. Despite it being sticky, Jesus loved that water.

Originally posted by Nellinator
No, the attacks are repeatedly debunked, recycled, and debunked again. Like the whole parallelomania thing. It's stupid and been proven wrong by many people all over the world and yet it get recycled over and over. I'm rather flexible and my faith doesn't cloud anything. There simply isn't any credible attacks on the Bible that work. If they were that credible Christianity would have collapsed a long time ago and been replaced with some other religion. It hasn't for a reason. The case for religion isn't undermined by a lack of logic, but by the lack of understanding and knowledge of many people that follow it. There are millions of intelligent and logical Christians. Christianity does not support or create lunacy. That is an erroneous attack. Calling faith a poison is really really stupid because it is erroneous.

Why whole point about you sleeping better night is that you attack Christianity without a clear purpose? If you simply don't believe you won't attack it. The only acceptable attacks are when people see something based on a religion influencing non-believers. That's a legitimate attack, even if I disagree with the person on the issue. Attacking it a "why be Christian because look at all the contradictions lolz" way is stupidity and usually based in insecurity and/or superiority complexes. Both are issues with that person.

r u in the right frame of mind my friend? 😕 😕
everytime in these forums, christiany is brought up to be illogical, christians try to argue logically. the arguemtn collapses in on itself, every time, christiany is founfd to be positively self contradictory and illogical. no debunking. the old relegious arguments are recycled by believers, but again collapse. really as i said before, your faith is deluding you. almost all attacks on the bible are credible, given that it gives room for most attacks.

and really by your arguement, the only way we can prove that christiany is true is because even after ages of these attacks, it hasnt TOPPLED. going by that logic, all OTHER "WRONG" relegions like islam/buddhism/hinduism/zoarastrianism/judasim{all of which other than islam are older than christianty} who have received equal attacks SHUD have toppled. shud i then take that as evidence of their truthfulness too! absolutely illogical, chritianity has survived on dogma just like the other relegions just like war has survived on frustration even when almost any logical person can easily argue{and have argued for millenia} that BOTH are utterly wrong. your argument has no logical ground there im afraid. and if afraid, history is testament to the opposite, in the vast majority of people in history, christianty has created strife, war, fear, conformity, intolerance, superstition, and suffering. not to mention stagnation of progress, intellectual, moral, scientific and social. christianity does promote lunacy, stupidity{the relegion not the people, read before coming at my throat} and fear, of illogical things.

i havent attacked it without a clear purpose. i know its an evil design. and i wont sit around when its trying to be sumthing its not to appeal to newer masses{again the RELEGION not the poeple necessarily 😄 }, and further propogates stupid and detrimental ideas. i wudnt attack when all harm in the ideology is gone, since thatll never happen with christianity, u cant expect me to just agree or have no comment on a forum on it when christians discuss it. and i think ur again deluding urself by trying to blame it on "people's pathetic insecurities to attack relegion" when by its very nature, your relegion caters utterly to your own insecurites in the most vile of ways. i dont see non believers as being part of me and believers as sumthing seperate who i shudnt bother, evry1 is human, and christianty is detrimental for evey1, furthermore, the PERSISTANCE, of the ideology is even more detrimental to the innocent children of christians on whom these evil views are forced upon, so really, i have all the reason in the world to attack christianty. its a vile relegion for the most part{and those being the ones which are most significant cause they cater the most to believer's insecurities}

I'll just wait on an example of a proven contradiction where the Christian apologetic collapsed and was proven false.

I got lost in the rest of it, in its grammatical nightmare. So, when I see the above we shall continue.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Very true. Buddhism sucks.

You took the words right out of my mouth 👆.