Why NOBODY has any excuse denying Jesus after this.

[Atomic344]

Proof in one sentence:
Over 500 years before Jesus, the prophet Isaiah in Book of Isaiah chapter 53 described a servant who would be rejected, suffer, die for the sins of others, and yet be vindicated by God, and Zechariah in Book of Zechariah 12:10 says people will “look on Me whom they pierced,” which Christians see fulfilled in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.


Why the “a book says it” objection fails in one sentence:
It isn’t circular reasoning because the claim is that historically documented texts written centuries before the events predicted specific details later recorded in the life of Jesus Christ, so the argument is about prophecy and fulfillment across time, not merely believing a book because it says so.

When people lazily sneer “it’s just because the Bible says so,” they are not refuting anything at all but refusing to face the evidence, because the claim is precisely that ancient prophecies written long before the events point directly to Jesus Christ, and dismissing that without addressing the prophecy itself is not an argument but an excuse to avoid the truth.

 

[Antonlord7]

It's not why you think it
Jesus was extremely smart and God send him to protect us and prepared us and prevent us to come this far at this hell fake reality life
He told us that if we keep following this path we'll be where we're now
Most people only read and tell but never take action and make others to believe and take action with them and make a beter word without system
Most people try to build something new on this destroyed system and that's why everything keeps falling apart to make something and to keep it you need to build it on a new land out of these system and this land doesn't exist anymore we have come close to the end and we're at the beginning of the end now make sure to do right choices and take action and leave in nature without hurting anyone and anything

 

[Atomic344]

It's not why you think it
Jesus was extremely smart and God send him to protect us and prepared us and prevent us to come this far at this hell fake reality life
He told us that if we keep following this path we'll be where we're now
Most people only read and tell but never take action and make others to believe and take action with them and make a beter word without system
Most people try to build something new on this destroyed system and that's why everything keeps falling apart to make something and to keep it you need to build it on a new land out of these system and this land doesn't exist anymore we have come close to the end astnd we're at the beginning of the end now make sure to do right choices and take action and leave in nature without hurting anyone and anything

STFU TROLL STFU

 

[itssoover0457]

god wants me to date big booty white mtbs

 

[Atomic344]

god wants me to date big booty white mtbs

OH SO NO GOD DAMN FUCKING REAL HONEST ANSWER?

 

[hye732]

You can believe wtv you want to. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

But these are not empirical claims that you can quantitively measure. They are subjective normative statements that are open to interpretation.

If you study in any academic field there is no way you can prove/disprove "a servant who would be rejected, suffer, die for the sins of others, and yet be vindicated by God". There is no clear quantitative metric for "vindication" or the extent to which someone is rejected and suffering for their "sins".

They are vague statements which you choose to agree/disagree depending on your own subjective interpretation. They are not hypothesis you can prove with empirical evidence.

 

[Atomic344]

You can believe wtv you want to. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

But these are not empirical claims that you can quantitively measure. They are subjective normative statements that are open to interpretation.

If you study in any academic field there is no way you can prove/disprove "a servant who would be rejected, suffer, die for the sins of others, and yet be vindicated by God". There is no clear quantitative metric for "vindication" or the extent to which someone is rejected and suffering for their "sins".

They are vague statements which you choose to agree/disagree depending on your own subjective interpretation. They are not hypothesis you can prove with empirical evidence.

Same Gaythiest empty wordsalad BS... I will tell you why -
What you wrote sounds thoughtful on the surface, but it actually misunderstands what the claim is.
First, the issue is not measuring a prophecy like a laboratory variable. History is not Physics or Chemistry where you repeat experiments. In fields like History, Classics, or Textual Criticism, scholars evaluate claims by documents, dating, context, and whether later events match earlier texts. That is exactly the kind of claim Christians make about Jesus Christ.
Second, the prophecies are not merely vague moral ideas. In Book of Isaiah 53 the servant is described as rejected by his people, suffering for the sins of others, killed, and yet afterward seeing vindication and life. In Book of Zechariah 12:10 the text says people will “look on Me whom they pierced.” Those are concrete narrative claims that Christians argue correspond to the rejection, crucifixion, and later belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Third, saying “you cannot empirically measure it” does not disprove anything, because most historical conclusions cannot be measured quantitatively either. You cannot empirically measure whether Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon or whether Socrates was condemned unjustly, yet historians still evaluate the documentary evidence and decide what best explains the records.
So the real question is not whether prophecy can be tested with laboratory instruments, but whether texts like Book of Isaiah and Book of Zechariah genuinely predate the life of Jesus Christ and whether the events described in the New Testament plausibly correspond to those earlier descriptions. That is a historical argument, not merely a subjective opinion.

 

[Centurion_Hunter]

Proof in one sentence:
Over 500 years before Jesus, the prophet Isaiah in Book of Isaiah chapter 53 described a servant who would be rejected, suffer, die for the sins of others, and yet be vindicated by God, and Zechariah in Book of Zechariah 12:10 says people will “look on Me whom they pierced,” which Christians see fulfilled in the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.


Why the “a book says it” objection fails in one sentence:
It isn’t circular reasoning because the claim is that historically documented texts written centuries before the events predicted specific details later recorded in the life of Jesus Christ, so the argument is about prophecy and fulfillment across time, not merely believing a book because it says so.

When people lazily sneer “it’s just because the Bible says so,” they are not refuting anything at all but refusing to face the evidence, because the claim is precisely that ancient prophecies written long before the events point directly to Jesus Christ, and dismissing that without addressing the prophecy itself is not an argument but an excuse to avoid the truth.

Christ is kind brocel

 

[hye732]

Same Gaythiest empty wordsalad BS... I will tell you why -
What you wrote sounds thoughtful on the surface, but it actually misunderstands what the claim is.
First, the issue is not measuring a prophecy like a laboratory variable. History is not Physics or Chemistry where you repeat experiments. In fields like History, Classics, or Textual Criticism, scholars evaluate claims by documents, dating, context, and whether later events match earlier texts. That is exactly the kind of claim Christians make about Jesus Christ.
Second, the prophecies are not merely vague moral ideas. In Book of Isaiah 53 the servant is described as rejected by his people, suffering for the sins of others, killed, and yet afterward seeing vindication and life. In Book of Zechariah 12:10 the text says people will “look on Me whom they pierced.” Those are concrete narrative claims that Christians argue correspond to the rejection, crucifixion, and later belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Third, saying “you cannot empirically measure it” does not disprove anything, because most historical conclusions cannot be measured quantitatively either. You cannot empirically measure whether Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon or whether Socrates was condemned unjustly, yet historians still evaluate the documentary evidence and decide what best explains the records.
So the real question is not whether prophecy can be tested with laboratory instruments, but whether texts like Book of Isaiah and Book of Zechariah genuinely predate the life of Jesus Christ and whether the events described in the New Testament plausibly correspond to those earlier descriptions. That is a historical argument, not merely a subjective opinion.

If you reject empirical evidence or quantitative metrics, the key point is that you are making a normative claim. In academics you cannot seriously present a normative claim as fact, even in history.

Youre right, I dont study humanities or social history, so I can only evaulate your methodology from a STEM/economics perspective. If you wanted to argue with someone over a subjective/normative claim, you would need to find a philosophy, humanities etc. major. But no serious academic would ever present this as a proven fact/law.

Historians know this, when they publish papers they do not reach a descriptive/positive conclusion or claim to do so. When they decide which document "best" explains the records they reach a normative conclusion based on their own work and opionions.

 

[Atomic344]

If you reject empirical evidence or quantitative metrics, the key point is that you are making a normative claim. In academics you cannot seriously present a normative claim as fact, even in history.

Youre right, I dont study humanities or social history, so I can only evaulate your methodology from a STEM/economics perspective. If you wanted to argue with someone over a subjective/normative claim, you would need to find a philosophy, humanities etc. major. But no serious academic would ever present this as a proven fact/law.

Historians know this, when they publish papers they do not reach a descriptive/positive conclusion or claim to do so. When they decide which document "best" explains the records they reach a normative conclusion based on their own work and opionions.

You got fucking BAKED bitch i aint even gonna read your BS everyone can see I won

So fuck you bitch stupid gaythiest LOL you mf think ur smart but COOKED

 

[hye732]

You got fucking BAKED bitch i aint even gonna read your BS everyone can see I won

So fuck you bitch stupid gaythiest LOL you mf think ur smart but COOKED

I nvr said I was smart. This is the shit they literally teach you day 1 of any bachelors course. Even if you do a humanities subject like arts or history...

Also why are you so grumpy brah