{"id":23443,"date":"2025-03-21T07:52:49","date_gmt":"2025-03-21T11:52:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=23443"},"modified":"2025-04-17T07:05:19","modified_gmt":"2025-04-17T11:05:19","slug":"5101-5150","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=23443","title":{"rendered":"5101-5150"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>(5101) Judaeo-Christianity makes no sense<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Just using casual thinking renders Christianity obscenely ridiculous when you consider the implications of how it developed. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j0ygov\/the_universe_is_too_big_for_any_religion_to_make\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j0ygov\/the_universe_is_too_big_for_any_religion_to_make\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><a name=\"post-title-t3_1j0ygov\"><\/a>The Universe is Too Big for Any Religion to Make Sense<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1j0ygov-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">You&#8217;re telling me the creator of this universe that is so ridiculously massive that we can\u2019t even wrap our heads around it.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Galaxies stretching billions of light-years away, black holes out there casually swallowing entire solar systems, and exoplanets that might have alien civilizations doing their own thing.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And yet\u2026 you\u2019re telling me that out of all this, an all-powerful, all-knowing creator looked at one tiny rock orbiting a completely average star in a run-of-the-mill galaxy and thought,<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;Yeah, this is where I\u2019ll set up my grand plan.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And not even the whole planet, just a tiny little patch of land in the Middle East. That\u2019s where all the big religious events happened. Really?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">So what, people in ancient China, India, the Americas, and Australia just got left out? They had to wait thousands of years for some missionaries to show up and be like,<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;Hey, you\u2019ve been worshiping the wrong gods this whole time, our god is the real one.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And even then, it wasn\u2019t exactly a friendly conversation. A lot of it came through colonization, war, forced conversions, and straight-up cultural erasure.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Apparently, God\u2019s grand communication strategy involved picking one small group of people, in one specific time period, in one specific place, and then expecting the rest of the world to just\u2026 figure it out.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And let\u2019s not even get started on what this supposed creator actually cares about.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">You\u2019ve got an infinite cosmos, stars exploding, planets forming, black holes merging, maybe even entire other universes\u2026 and this god is apparently sitting there going,<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;No mixed fabrics. No pork. Oh, and women? Better cover your hair, or else.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">These rules, conveniently, always reflect the culture and biases of the specific time and place they came from.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">None of this looks like the work of an all-powerful, all-knowing creator.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It looks exactly like the work of humans making up stories, enforcing traditions, and trying to explain the world the best they could with the knowledge they had at the time.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>We can be certain that if a universal all-powerful god had interacted with the humans on our planet, it would look a lot different than Judaeo-Christianity. It would be much better evidenced, universal in nature, and untied to the parochial customs of the <a name=\"5102\"><\/a>time.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5102) Christianity kills<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Any false belief system rigidly adhered to can be dangerous. Christianity is such a false belief system and in the following situation, it took away a teenage girl\u2019s mother:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1j2usn2\/today_i_found_out_that_my_mom_died\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1j2usn2\/today_i_found_out_that_my_mom_died\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I (15F) came home from school today, just wanting to jump in bed and sleep. I&#8217;m on my period and you know it sucks.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">My dad then came in and said that my mom passed away, due to cancer. She was in the hospital for a long time&#8230;and it was disturbing to see the cancer strip my mom away into a frail and very unhealthy skinny woman on the hospital bed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">They spotted it earlier&#8230; like 2 years ago. She rejected the treatment and thought that God will heal her and that it&#8217;s fake. She even got a second opinion and when the results came back the same she still rejected it. All because God can heal her.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Many warned her about it especially those who had the cancer, but she ignored them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Religion took my mother away from me. Now she can&#8217;t live to see my siblings graduate or get married or see my older brothers child grow up. She died at the age of 43, and that&#8217;s SO DARN YOUNG. Very disturbingly young.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I saw firsthand the cancer sucking the life out of her. The last time I talked to her was on Sunday. Her last words was &#8220;Tomorrow I will fill in the track and field form for you, don&#8217;t worry.&#8221; I told her about the track and field team and she had to fill it in online because that&#8217;s how it works in my school board.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">My last words to her &#8220;Bye, see you soon.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But soon and tomorrow never came for her. I dialed her on Sunday around 8-9pm and she didn&#8217;t answer. I thought that maybe she fell asleep.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">She did fall asleep but she never woke up from that sleep.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Now here I am, drying my tears. She could have lived you know, if religion didn&#8217;t infest her and make her reject actual treatment. It made me realize how horrible Christianity is.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The doctors didn&#8217;t make my mom die, Christianity did. That God she prayed to for &#8220;healing&#8221; never came to save her at all.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It&#8217;s just so hard. I don&#8217;t know what to do, she&#8217;ll never come back home. This is so sad. Now I have to live with my dad. I have no mother figure now.<\/p>\n<p>Faith in a non-existent protector can be fatal, as above, or result in a myriad of bad outcomes. Any diseased person relying on Yahweh, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit, to the exclusion of tested therapies, is in the danger zone. These supernatural entities cannot help you because <b>they do not <a name=\"5103\"><\/a>exist<\/b>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5103) Resurrection nonsense<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Although there is no way to confirm or deny the resurrection of Jesus in a definitive manner, it is instructive to use inductive reasoning when considering the events that were claimed by the gospels to have occurred concurrently. The following discusses these events and why their lack of contemporary documentation matters:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1j3hqqf\/thoughts_on_evidence_for_resurrection\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1j3hqqf\/thoughts_on_evidence_for_resurrection\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The resurrection is essentially impossible to confirm. we have a few references written decades later claiming he was resurrected, but we have absolutely zero contemporaneous evidence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But the resurrection didn&#8217;t happen in isolation, it followed Jesus death, so before we look for evidence of Jesus resurrection, we should be able to look for evidence of the claimed events that accompanied his death. According to the bible, these miraculous occurrences happened at the time of Jesus death:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li>Darkness covered the land for three hours during the crucifixion.<\/li>\n<li>An Earthquake shook Jerusalem<\/li>\n<li>The veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.<\/li>\n<li>Graves opened and the dead wandered the streets of Jerusalem<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And these events are things that\u00a0<em>would<\/em>\u00a0have been noticed. ok, maybe not the tearing the temple veil, but the other three of those seem pretty fucking notable. And contrary to the claims of your friend, we have\u00a0<em>a lot<\/em>\u00a0of historical documentation from the era, including from people who wrote about things like earthquakes and eclipses, and\u00a0<em>certainly<\/em>\u00a0would have written about fucking zombies wondering the streets.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Yet we have no&#8211; none, zero, nada, zilch&#8211; evidence from any source suggesting that any of these events occurred.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It is nonsense.<\/p>\n<p>If you claim that Event A occurred and that Events B, C, D, and E occurred at the same time and place, but the evidence expected for Events B, C, D, and E is missing entirely, then it makes it somewhat difficult to believe that Event A happened \u2013 even if the lack of direct evidence of Event A can be explained. Thus we have a good reason to induce that the resurrection of Jesus did not <a name=\"5104\"><\/a>occur.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5104) Christianity is a man-made religion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following lists many reasons to conclude that Christianity was originated by humans without any divine guidance:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j4htqh\/christianity_is_a_manmade_religion\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j4htqh\/christianity_is_a_manmade_religion\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">In my honest opinion, Christianity, like all other religions, are man-made belief systems that have evolved over time due to historical, cultural, and political influences. While I believe every religion and mythology is man-made, this post will focus on Christianity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">One major piece of evidence for this is the Bible itself, which contains historical inaccuracies, later additions, and mistranslations that have shaped modern Christian beliefs.<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ol>\n<li>Historical Inaccuracies in the Bible<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The Bible contains many historical claims that contradict archaeology, historical records, or even internal consistency. Some of the most well-documented examples include:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1.1 The Exodus and the Lack of Evidence<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The biblical account of the Israelites\u2019 enslavement in Egypt, the ten plagues, and their subsequent exodus led by Moses (Exodus 1\u201315) is a central narrative of Judaism and Christianity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 However, there is no archaeological evidence for a mass exodus of millions of Israelites from Egypt.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Egyptian records, which are extensive and detailed, make no mention of the events described in Exodus.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The Sinai Desert, where the Israelites supposedly wandered for 40 years, shows no evidence of large-scale habitation during the supposed time period (13th\u201315th century BCE).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1.2 The Conquest of Canaan<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The Book of Joshua describes the Israelites conquering Canaan through military campaigns, including the destruction of Jericho.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Archaeological evidence suggests that Jericho was already in ruins long before the supposed conquest (~1550 BCE).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Many cities said to have been conquered (e.g., Ai, Hazor) either did not exist or were uninhabited at the time.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1.3 The United Monarchy of David and Solomon<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The Bible describes a grand, powerful kingdom under King David and Solomon (~1000 BCE), ruling over a vast territory with a magnificent temple in Jerusalem (1 Kings 6\u20137).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Archaeological evidence suggests that Jerusalem was a small, modest settlement at the time, not the capital of a large empire.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 There are no contemporary inscriptions or records of David or Solomon outside the Bible, except for the Tel Dan Stele, which only briefly mentions a \u201cHouse of David\u201d but does not confirm the biblical accounts.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1.4 The Census of Quirinius and the Nativity Contradiction<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The Gospels of Matthew and Luke both describe Jesus\u2019 birth but contradict each other.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Luke 2:1\u20132 states that Jesus was born during the \u201ccensus of Quirinius,\u201d which happened around 6 CE.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Matthew 2 states that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BCE.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 This means there is at least a ten-year discrepancy between the two accounts, making them historically incompatible.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2. Later Additions and Revisions in the Bible<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If you\u2019re still not convinced then don\u2019t fret! I\u2019m not nearly done because many parts of the Bible were not originally present in the earliest manuscripts but were added later. Some of the most famous examples include:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2.1 The Ending of Mark (Mark 16:9\u201320)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The earliest manuscripts of Mark end at 16:8, where the women flee the empty tomb in fear.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The longer ending (Mark 16:9\u201320), which includes Jesus appearing to the disciples and commanding them to spread the Gospel, was added later.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 This addition significantly impacts Christian doctrine, as it contains Jesus\u2019 instructions about baptism and belief.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2.2 The Story of the Woman Caught in Adultery (John 7:53\u20138:11)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The famous story where Jesus says, \u201cLet him who is without sin cast the first stone\u201d does not appear in the earliest manuscripts of John.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The passage was likely added later to emphasize Jesus\u2019 message of forgiveness.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2.3 The Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7\u20138)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The King James Version includes a passage explicitly stating the Trinity:<\/p>\n<pre class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022       \u201cFor there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.\u201d<\/pre>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 This passage does not appear in the earliest Greek manuscripts and was likely added in the Middle Ages to reinforce Trinitarian doctrine.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3. Mistranslations That Have Affected Christian Beliefs<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Over centuries, mistranslations have shaped Christian theology in significant ways. I am so delighted to get to share these with whomever reads this. This part is my second favorite.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3.1 The \u201cVirgin\u201d Birth (Isaiah 7:14)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The Hebrew word almah in Isaiah 7:14 means \u201cyoung woman,\u201d not necessarily \u201cvirgin.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 However, the Greek Septuagint translated it as parthenos, meaning \u201cvirgin,\u201d leading to the Christian belief in the virgin birth of Jesus.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3.2 Lucifer as Satan (Isaiah 14:12)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The passage about the \u201cmorning star\u201d (Latin: lucifer) in Isaiah 14:12 originally referred to the fall of the Babylonian king, not Satan.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Due to later Christian interpretation, \u201cLucifer\u201d became associated with Satan, despite the original context.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3.3 The Ten Commandments Translation Issues<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 In the commandment \u201cThou shalt not kill\u201d (Exodus 20:13), the Hebrew word ratsach actually means \u201cmurder,\u201d not general killing.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 This distinction changes interpretations of warfare and capital punishment in Christian ethics.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4. Theories and Beliefs About the History of Yahweh<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Now this part is my favorite. I\u2019ve been trying to learn about the Ancient Near Eastern history, religion, and development into monotheism from henotheism. The development of Yahweh from a regional deity to the sole God of Judaism and Christianity is a complex process influenced by historical events. If you\u2019d like to study this history for yourself then the timeframe would be from the late Bronze Age to the middle Iron Age.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4.1 Yahweh\u2019s Origins in Canaanite Religion<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Early Israelites were originally part of the Canaanite culture, worshiping multiple gods.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Yahweh may have been a minor storm or warrior god, similar to Baal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 The name Yahweh appears in ancient Egyptian inscriptions (the \u201cShasu of Yhw\u201d), suggesting early nomadic worship.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4.2 The Shift from Polytheism to Monotheism<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Early Israelites worshiped multiple gods, including El (the chief Canaanite god) and Asherah (a goddess).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Yahweh was later merged with El, becoming the supreme deity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Biblical evidence suggests Asherah was once worshiped alongside Yahweh (e.g., inscriptions mentioning \u201cYahweh and his Asherah\u201d).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4.3 The Babylonian Exile\u2019s Role in Monotheism<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 After the Babylonian exile (~586 BCE), Jewish elites redefined their faith, rejecting other gods and emphasizing Yahweh as the only true God.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 This period also led to the writing and editing of many biblical texts, reinforcing monotheism.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4.4 Yahweh\u2019s Transformation into the Christian God<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 In Second Temple Judaism, Yahweh was associated with wisdom and intermediary figures (e.g., the \u201cLogos\u201d in Greek philosophy).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 This influenced early Christian beliefs, where Jesus was seen as the divine \u201cWord\u201d (John 1:1).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2022 Over time, Yahweh evolved into the Trinity concept, which was not present in early Jewish thought.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Closing: Given these historical, textual, and linguistic developments, it is clear that Christianity was not divinely revealed in a pure, unchanging form but was instead shaped and constructed by human hands over centuries. If a religion were truly divinely inspired, one would expect consistency and historical accuracy, yet Christianity\u2019s origins reflect the same human-driven evolution seen in all other religious traditions.<\/p>\n<p>A true religion would be consistent from the start, free from contradictions, exhibiting far-reaching knowledge, and stand out as unique among other human-created faith traditions. Christianity strikes out in each of these areas. It is a man-made <a name=\"5105\"><\/a>religion.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5105) Why Christianity persists (when it shouldn\u2019t)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Although belief in Christianity is waning, it still remains remarkably resilient even while facing the strong headwinds of science and the dis-confirming revelations recently coming out of biblical research. Perhaps the main reason for his persistence was captured by the following author:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/exchristian\/comments\/1j4hon2\/i_finally_get_why_people_cling_to_religion_and\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/exchristian\/comments\/1j4hon2\/i_finally_get_why_people_cling_to_religion_and\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I\u2019ve spent my whole life in church. Sunday after Sunday, sermon after sermon. Sometimes I\u2019d stop going for a while, but I always found myself back in a pew. Not because I believed, because I never have. Not even as a kid.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I was raised in it. My family went to the little church down the road from my grandparents\u2019 house, where we sat in the same wooden pews every Sunday, listening to the same fire-and-brimstone warnings. My grandparents were backhills Kentucky types, my grandpa couldn\u2019t even read, but faith was the cornerstone of their existence. They didn\u2019t question. They just knew.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And honestly, I understood why they bought into it. My grandparents were rough around the edges. They ran off to Tennessee when they were 15 and 17, got married with fake IDs and forged birth certificates, and somehow made it work. They weren\u2019t exactly the kind of people who sat around contemplating theology. Religion probably kept them in line just enough.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But my mom? My mom is smart. Always has been. And that\u2019s what never made sense to me.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Even as a kid, I\u2019d sit in church listening to stories about a man building a boat big enough for every animal, a talking snake, a virgin birth, people dying and coming back to life, and I just couldn\u2019t believe that someone as intelligent as my mom really thought this was all true. I understood my grandparents believing it. But her? It didn\u2019t add up.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">As I got older, I started seeing the bigger picture. Religion isn\u2019t just about faith, it\u2019s about control. The laws we follow, the way society is structured, the way people think it\u2019s all tangled up with religion. And once you step back, it\u2019s obvious: If you convince people that questioning authority means eternal damnation, they\u2019ll keep themselves in line. No whips or chains needed just the fear of the afterlife.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I first tried to explain this to my mom when I was ten. It did not go well. I was told it was not Christian-like to question God\u2019s word. That doubting was dangerous. And in that moment, I realized just how deep this runs.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Anytime I even hinted at skepticism, my mom reacted like I had slapped her across the face. It wasn\u2019t just that she believed, she needed to believe.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">So, over the years, I kept going to church. Half to keep the peace, half for my own quiet amusement. To me, it was just an elaborate Sunday performance, a one-hour production designed to entertain, inspire, and keep people coming back. And honestly? The community aspect of church is great. If there were a place like that without the religious baggage, I\u2019d be all in.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But here\u2019s the part that took me 37 years to fully understand:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I used to ask myself, Why does someone as smart as my mom believe in this? And now, I think I finally get it.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It\u2019s not about intelligence, it\u2019s about legacy.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">My mom was raised on this. Her mother was, too. And her mother before her. And if she were to question it now, it wouldn\u2019t just mean admitting she was wrong, it would mean admitting her mother was wrong. And her grandmother was wrong. And that every generation before her spent their lives clinging to a lie and passing it down like an heirloom.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And that? That\u2019s too heavy for most people to carry.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">So, the cycle continues. Not because people are stupid, but because they are invested. Because questioning it means unraveling not just their own beliefs, but the beliefs of the people they love. It means rewriting the history of their family, their identity, their entire worldview.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">That\u2019s a hell of a thing to face.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">So, they don\u2019t. And the system thrives.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And here\u2019s the kicker, despite everything, I still try to be a good person. Not because I fear hell, not because I think some higher power is watching, but because I believe in helping people. I volunteer twice a week at a homeless shelter. I cook for everyone down there once a week. And I do it not for a reward, not for salvation, but because I want to. Because it\u2019s the right thing to do.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Anyway, that\u2019s where I\u2019ve landed after nearly four decades of sitting in pews. Maybe I\u2019m wrong, maybe I\u2019m not. But I finally feel like I get it.<\/p>\n<p>This theory is one that should alleviate a lot of peoples\u2019 disgust with how their loved ones cling to their faith, despite all of the arguments that should persuade them to abandon it. Christianity is more of an embedded tradition than a true, ardently-held belief anchored in reality. And it is almost certain that most Christians have a sneaky sense that it is untrue, but they suppress those thoughts to keep the peace with living family members and to preserve the legacy of their <a name=\"5106\"><\/a>ancestry.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5106) Jesus fumbles badly<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In the following scripture Jesus encourages people to cut off parts of their body if it causes them to sin. Although this passage is normally considered to be figurative, the text itself can be read as literal-especially how it is capped off by threatening eternal torture to those violators who fail to maim themselves.<\/p>\n<p>Mark 9:43-48<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u201c\u2018the worms that eat them do not die,<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">and the fire is not quenched.\u2019<\/p>\n<p>It is wildly irresponsible to even joke about this matter, notwithstanding introducing the ghastly threat of eternal conscious torment. And, to make matters worse, many zealous Christians extended the concept of this scripture to include self-castration for sexual sins. Whether or not Jesus actually made these statements is not so important. What really matters is that Yahweh, <i>if he exists<\/i>, allowed this scripture to be included in his holy book, to the needless detriment of many of his followers for the past twenty <a name=\"5107\"><\/a>centuries.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5107) Rational and just god does not exist<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One of the fatal problems of Christianity is that it invented a god that does not deliver a rational or just system of interaction with humans, considering the purported intent to judge them based on their belief in him. It\u2019s unjust because sincere, intelligent people doing their due diligence can understandably come to the conclusion that this god does not exist. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j6vmdc\/a_rational_and_just_god_wouldnt_make_reason_lead\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j6vmdc\/a_rational_and_just_god_wouldnt_make_reason_lead\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">A Rational and Just God Wouldn\u2019t Make Reason Lead to Disbelief<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1j6vmdc-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">If God exists and gave humans the ability to reason, then that reasoning should be <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">reliable in leading to true conclusions<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> when used properly. Because if our rational minds were unreliable in discovering truth, then <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">belief in God itself would also be unreliable<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Across history, some of the most <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">intelligent and sincere<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> scientists, philosophers, theologians and everyday people have examined religion and found it unconvincing. If God\u2019s existence were as obvious as the sun in the sky, <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">why do so many rational minds miss it<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">? You don\u2019t need a Ph.D. to see sunlight. <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">God can\u2019t have it both ways. If He\u2019s hiding on purpose, <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">that\u2019s cruel<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. Imagine a parent playing hide and seek with their child but never revealing themselves. Then <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">punishing the kid<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> for not finding them. If God only reveals Himself to some (through miracles, personal experiences, etc.), then He\u2019s favoring those humans arbitrarily. <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">That\u2019s unjust.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Either our reasoning works, or doesn&#8217;t<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. If atheism is a reasonable conclusion, then punishing disbelief is like failing a student for correctly solving a math problem. But if our rational minds can\u2019t be trusted to reach truth, then believers have no reason to trust their faith either because they\u2019re using the <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">same mental tools<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> as skeptics. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The only logical conclusion is a truly just and rational God wouldn\u2019t create a world where using our God given reasoning often leads away from Him. Either God created reason to function <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">properly<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">, in which case atheism is a rational conclusion and <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">should not be punished<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. Or God created reason <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">improperly<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">, in which case theists have <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">no justification<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> for trusting their own reasoning either. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Either way, we can concluded that <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">a just and rational God does not exist<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">There is no way to massage this issue into a logical defense of Christianity. Either God clearly demonstrates his existence to those who sincerely search for him, or else he is an unjust <a name=\"5108\"><\/a>god.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>(5108) Realizing this is it<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A moment of lucidity is all that\u2019s needed to realize the inevitable fate of every human being, sharing the same end game as every gorilla, shark, donkey, skunk, and mosquito- when it\u2019s over it\u2019s over. The following testimony talks about this:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1j74crm\/i_finally_understand_nothing_happens_after_death\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1j74crm\/i_finally_understand_nothing_happens_after_death\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I finally understand nothing happens after death<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1j74crm-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I considered myself agnostic for my entire life. For reference, I am 24 years old. I always leaned toward &#8220;It&#8217;s most likely that nothing happens. But I choose to believe something does.&#8221; I hoped deep down that there would be a pleasant afterlife&#8211; not immortality, but something akin to The Good Place afterlife, where you can reunite with friends and family for a couple hundred or thousand years, have fun, and then peace out. I also started to low-key believe in the whole &#8220;souls come to Earth to choose their life so they can develop into a higher being&#8221; spirituality bullshit.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But, in the end, it recently finally clicked that nothing happens. I&#8217;m not sure how I made this shift. I think learning about Marxist materialism did it for me&#8230; There&#8217;s nothing in collective human experience or the material world to suggest there is an afterlife. Absolutely nothing, and we should trust that fact. I suppose, in theory, there could be a non-zero chance. But personally, I don\u2019t believe there is an afterlife. Not even close. It&#8217;s both depressing and a relief at the same time. It&#8217;s strange knowing my dead relatives don&#8217;t exist anywhere. They&#8217;re gone, and one day I will be too. But still, I guess I&#8217;m an atheist now.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>There is no basis for concluding or even conjecturing that anyone will be more aware of what is happening after death as they were before they were born. In fact, there is no reason to think that we will be more aware after death than what we experience every night in deep (Stage 4) sleep. To be sure, it would be even less. Life is finite, confined to this biological experience. Once a person understands this, life takes on a new meaning and it can cause them to be energized to use this precious time more <a name=\"5109\"><\/a>wisely.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5109) Mark\u2019s over-emphasis on exorcism<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The author of the Gospel of Mark made exorcism of evil spirits a central theme of his work. But subsequent gospels did not renew this concept. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1j85tck\/why_does_the_gospel_of_mark_put_such_an_emphasis\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/1j85tck\/why_does_the_gospel_of_mark_put_such_an_emphasis\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I think there\u2019s an argument that Mark, as the earliest gospel, is more or less preserving the eschatological element of Jesus\u2019 ministry more than the later gospels. That\u2019s sort of my interpretation, but it\u2019s also just clear that Mark sees exorcism as an essential feature of Jesus\u2019 ministry. I\u2019ll quote from Marcus\u2019 commentary on the first encounter with a demon in 1:21ff. This is from the comment on that section, although I don\u2019t have page numbers since I accessed it online:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u201cIn Mark 1:16\u201320 Jesus has called four men to abandon their day-to-day pursuits and follow him into battle in the eschatological war that was inaugurated in 1:13 by his one-on-one combat with Satan. These same four disciples now become witnesses to the first extensively reported encounter in that war, a powerful exorcism. As Meier (Marginal Jew, 1.409) points out, Mark consciously places this striking set piece near the outset of Jesus\u2019 public ministry, just as Matthew leads his Gospel off with the Sermon on the Mount, Luke with the inaugural sermon in the Nazareth synagogue, and John with the wedding feast at Cana (Matthew 5\u20137; Luke 4:16\u201330; John 2:1\u201311). Each evangelist thereby tips his hand as to what, in his mind, Jesus was, and is, all about. In Mark\u2019s case, it is \u201cclearing the earth of demons\u201d (K\u00e4semann, Jesus, 58); the whole mission of the Markan Jesus is encapsulated in the implicit affirmative response to the demon\u2019s question, \u201cHave you come to destroy us?\u201d (1:24). It is not surprising, therefore, that later in the Gospel the unpardonable sin will be identified as misinterpretation of Jesus\u2019 exorcisms (3:28\u201330).\u201c<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u201cThe spirit\u2019s words to Jesus progress logically from (feigned?) surprise at Jesus\u2019 hostility (\u201cWhat do we have to do with you?\u201d) to alarm at his power (\u201cHave you come to destroy us?\u201d) in an attempt to gain magical control over him through disclosure of his identity (\u201cI know who you are\u2014the holy one of God!\u201d). The key here is the middle clause, in which the demon, speaking in the first person plural on behalf of all demons, expresses their terror at Jesus\u2019 advent. For Jesus is no ordinary exorcist, who has learned techniques for channeling and manipulating spirits; he comes, rather, as the sign and agent of God\u2019s eschatological reign, in which there will be no room for demonic opposition to God (cf. 3:27 and see Kee, \u201cTerminology,\u201d 243). As Zech 13:2 puts it, in an eschatological passage that is associated with exorcisms in rabbinic traditions: \u201cOn that day, says the Lord of hosts \u2026 I will remove from the land \u2026 the unclean spirit\u201d (cf. e.g. Num. Rab. 19.8; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:7). In later Jewish traditions, the agent for this eschatological removal could be the Messiah, as in Pesiq. R. 36:1: \u201cAnd when he saw him, Satan was shaken, and he fell upon his face and said: Surely, this is the Messiah who will cause me and all the counterparts in heaven of the princes of the earth\u2019s nations to be swallowed up in Gehenna \u2026\u201d (Braude trans.).\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I guess I could be begging the question here, but it seems that answer to \u201cwhy does Mark emphasize it so much?\u201d is \u201cbecause Mark thinks it\u2019s important.\u201d That author thinks that exorcism is essential to God\u2019s work and essential to the operation of the messiah.<\/p>\n<p>Some apologists will defend this point by saying that Jesus was about a lot of different themes and that each gospel author decided to highlight the ones that they felt were most important. This is plausible, but far more likely is that each author was inventing Jesus script to match their own concept of <a name=\"5110\"><\/a>eschatology.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5110) Primitive people invented a primitive god<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In the following, it is asked why a god as imagined by Christianity could become so enmeshed in the parochial aspects of the archaic society that he allegedly chose as his own. Something here makes no sense:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j4opgs\/have_yet_to_hear_a_satisfactorysensible_answer_to\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j4opgs\/have_yet_to_hear_a_satisfactorysensible_answer_to\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Considering the belief in scripture as the infallible and inerrant word of a perfect, omniscient, and omnipotent God, how can the text&#8217;s depiction of God be reconciled with the same character flaws and principles as the socially primitive humans who originally scribed the scriptures?&#8230;the same archaic views on slavery, race, genocide, sex, gender roles, and tendencies toward jealousy, rage, a thirst for vengeance, violent retribution, capital punishment, manipulation, and deceit.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">How could a perfect being display such seemingly sinful flaws and inclinations? Are these somehow not considered flaws when embodied by God? Is it simply a remarkable coincidence that they appear to mirror the imperfect personalities and beliefs of the people from that ancient time the scriptures were written?<\/p>\n<p>Christians usually punt on this issue by saying that God had to meet humans where they were, not where they would eventually go. This cop-out really makes no sense. Why would God pass on an opportunity to set his people on the path of an enlightened future, rather than have them to continue to wallow in their primitive and often-destructive ways? Instead it appears <i>considerably more<\/i><i> like<\/i><i>ly<\/i> that <b>primitive <\/b><b>people<\/b><b> invented a primitive <a name=\"5111\"><\/a>god.<\/b><\/p>\n<p><strong>(5111) Wouldn\u2019t God want to convince more people?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>If God exists, wouldn\u2019t he at least try to convince more people of his existence?<\/p>\n<p>That is, if God is loving and compassionate, wouldn\u2019t he make his existence easier to believe so that more people could be saved, and thereby avoid the torture of hell?<\/p>\n<p>Any decent human in an analogous position would take measures to help people, even those they don\u2019t know, and even those they don\u2019t like, to avoid unnecessary pain and suffering.<\/p>\n<p>But this god doesn\u2019t seem to respond to this logic, keeping himself hidden, and allowing a lot of sincerely-searching people to justifiably conclude his non-existence.<\/p>\n<p>So back to the original question- wouldn\u2019t God at least try to convince more people of his existence?<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">A <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">g<\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">od who wanted worship <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><i><b>would<\/b><\/i><\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. A <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">g<\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">od who punishes people for non-belief <\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><b>should<\/b><\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>But, an evil god who <u>wants<\/u> to punish people for not believing? That god seems to be following the dream of purposefully causing lots of non-believers to burn in hell.<\/p>\n<p>What? You wouldn&#8217;t worship such a God? Neither would I.<\/p>\n<p>Anyway, this universe really isn&#8217;t consistent with a god, or at least a god that deserves our respect and worship. So, live a good life and don&#8217;t worry about the imaginary asshole in the sky. And (hint, hint)- <i>he\u2019s not <a name=\"5112\"><\/a>there<\/i>.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5112) Faith built on fear is not free will<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christians often state that God grants everyone free will in how they will establish their faith. But when the rules of Christianity impose an infinitely horrible punishment for lacking faith in Yahweh, it completely erodes the concept of free will. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jar40m\/a_faith_built_on_fear_contradicts_the_idea_of\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jar40m\/a_faith_built_on_fear_contradicts_the_idea_of\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">A faith built on fear contradicts the idea of free will.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">True free will means choosing without coercion. Yet in many religious traditions, belief is reinforced not by love alone, but by the looming threat of eternal punishment. This contradicts the idea of a freely chosen faith. If hell did not exist, many would not follow at all.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>Faith built on fear is not faith, but submission.<\/b> If belief were truly a choice, it wouldn\u2019t need the consequence of damnation to keep people in line. This raises the question: do you follow out of love, or out of fear?<\/p>\n<p>Any person who believes in the truth of Christianity, no matter how confident they may feel that they are saved, must have in the back of their minds a tingling doubt about the status of their salvation- that is, a tiny fear that they will fail to meet the admission requirements for heaven. This fear is kryptonite to free will- there is no freedom when the threat of bodily harm is ever present. Christianity is not an exercise in free will, rather it is a system of fretful <a name=\"5113\"><\/a>submission.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5113) No one can have a personal relationship with God<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christianity posits two mutually contradictory assumptions- that there exists an omniscient, omnipotent, omni-present god and that humans can have a \u2018personal relationship\u2019 with this god. The following argues that these propositions cannot be simultaneously true:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j9j1ax\/no_one_can_possibly_have_a_relationship_with_god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j9j1ax\/no_one_can_possibly_have_a_relationship_with_god\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">No one can possibly have a relationship with God.<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1j9j1ax-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This post is specifically for people who believe in a Classical theism so a God that is characterized by attributes such as omnipotence, omniscience, and perfect goodness.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Imagine for a second an ant.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ants are pretty successful creature they have managed to pretty much conquer the entire planet however you probably never give them a second thought unless they bite you or you have an infestation of them after all they are ants they are beneath you.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Humans to ants are forces of nature we can stomp them wipe out their entire &#8220;Civilizations&#8221; kill scores of them with very little effort all before the ant ever realizes what is happening to an ant we might as well be gods.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Now Imagine trying to talk to an ant&#8230; do you think that an ant is capable of comprehending what you are trying to tell them? Imagine trying to explain to an ant how a nuclear bomb works or trying to explain the plot to your new favorite show to them or how tax breaks work or the architecture of the empire state building do you think an ant is capable of understanding that? Of course not because it is an ant it literally cannot comprehend anything we are saying it probably can barely comprehend our physical forms.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Even if you some how managed to figure out how to communicate with an ant do you think it could possibly understand complex Ideas like philosophy, quantum mechanics, physics etc. -concepts that we ourselves can barely understand?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\">Even if you could communicate with an ant do you think you could develop a meaningful relationship with an ant? <\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\">T<\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\">o the point where your one goal in life is to attempt to guide the ants to a utopia? to the point you\u2019r<\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\">e<\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\"> willing to spend millennia trying and reshape their entire civilization? to the point where you are willing to be\u00a0<\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">tortured<\/span><\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><span style=\"font-family: Liberation Serif, serif;\">\u00a0to death in order to save them?<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Now imagine a being which is the pinnacle of all life in existence which has no physical form that is constantly everywhere, knows everything that ever can, will or might happen, and is capable of creating or destroying all that in a snap of its metaphorical fingers? AKA an Omni-God.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">In comparison to an Omni-God we might as well be ants and that&#8217;s putting it generously and in that case how can we possibly think that an Omni-God is capable of truly loving us, truly caring about us, truly seeing us as his children?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Based on this it seems impossible that someone could not only believe in a Omni-God but also as the same to believe to have a meaningful relationship with a being that we cannot even begin to comprehend.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Now let compare an Omni-God to a much lesser god say&#8230; Odin from Norse mythology. The Norse Idea of a god is significantly more human like then the Abrahamic one. Odin can get drunk, Odin can get hungry, Odin can get injured, Odin can die, Odin can get pissed off, Odin can fall in love, Odin can be comprehended, Odin can (Theoretically) be seen and touched.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">That is the kind of God I can see one having a relationship with because Odin is essentially a supped up human kind of like spider man and not a being comparable to something out of H.P Lovecraft&#8217;s work.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Based upon this reasoning I believe that it is impossible for someone to have a relationship with an Omni-God.<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Christianity over-designed their imaginary god to be beyond the ability of humans to form a personal relationship, and thereby left itself open to this valid <a name=\"5114\"><\/a>criticism.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5114) Christians don\u2019t really believe<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The case can be made that many, if not most, Christians don\u2019t really believe in what they profess to believe. The evidence for this assertion is discussed below:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jbz4zl\/christians_dont_really_have_faith_theyre_larping\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jbz4zl\/christians_dont_really_have_faith_theyre_larping\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I don&#8217;t believe Christians really believe the things they claim. Obviously this is not EVERY Christian but I thought I should state that so someone doesn&#8217;t whine about how I&#8217;m generalizing. I&#8217;m aware you don&#8217;t do that for anyone, just like you wouldn&#8217;t say all atheists are bad people because a couple were, even though many Christians will actually do this, it&#8217;s irrelevant here.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Imagine you, a Christian, are accused of a crime. You&#8217;re in court on trial, and the judge says &#8220;OK, the jury will now pray to God for the verdict.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Would you have faith in this moment that God is going to say you&#8217;re innocent? No, you wouldn&#8217;t. You wouldn&#8217;t believe that. It&#8217;s crazy. You would want a fair trial with human sentencing. You wouldn&#8217;t trust that some people you don&#8217;t know would pray to God and actually get an answer and give the proper sentence, they could just make it up, and it would be proven if they actually did this and they were not in 100% agreement with each other.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">You have faith when it benefits you in a social situation. When you&#8217;re watching an online pastor and you see all the &#8220;God bless!&#8221; and &#8220;Amen!&#8221; comments, you feel the desire to fit in by leaving the same comment. When two family members are together and experiencing a family member with lets say cancer, one will offer to pray for the other, just as people often online say &#8220;I&#8217;ll pray for you.&#8221; They&#8217;re not actually going to do this unless it&#8217;s to make themselves feel better, they&#8217;re just doing something socially acceptable to the other person.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When you&#8217;re at church it becomes even more extreme. Look at a Pentecostal church service. One person is tapped on the forehead by the pastor and they start going nuts, writhing and wiggling with that holy spirit, and then everyone else follows. It&#8217;s not because the holy spirit is actually in these people, it&#8217;s because the social pressure is causing them to follow the initiator. This is the reason the churches have a leader, he initiates the cosplay and the rest follow in a big larp session. It&#8217;s all pretend. When a Christian in face to face with someone they disagree with, they pretend that other person is now their foe, Satan, and they yell &#8220;I rebuke you, Satan, in the name of the Father! Begone from my presence!&#8221; This is laughable to me and I&#8217;ve seen it in person and a ton of times online, and sometimes I engage with them in an unserious manner because I know what&#8217;s happening. I sought a serious conversation, they wanted to have fun, so I decided to have a little fun myself.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">These people know what they believe is absolute nonsense, they&#8217;re just playing along, and I think this is the reason some people seem unreasonable and unreachable in a back and forth when you&#8217;re serious and they just vanish. It&#8217;s because you weren&#8217;t reacting the way they wanted you to and they got bored. Christians want atheists to larp with them, to play the role of Satan and express how we &#8220;hate God&#8221; and be the stereotype so they can tell us how Satan has a hold of our soul, to which I would reply with something goofy like &#8220;You&#8217;re right, he&#8217;s got me by my soul balls and he&#8217;s squeezing tight!&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">My final contribution to this post, is a miracle that actually took place. It&#8217;s called the miracle of Fatima. Basically, a bunch of people heard the rumor that a miracle would be seen in the sky, that is the Virgin Mary would appear to people. Over 70,000 people showed up from all over to witness this miracle, many of them were skeptics, but they all had one thing in common &#8211; they were all desperate to see a miracle and they were huddled together in a very tight social space, a powerful space that gave the power to one little girl who yelled &#8220;Look at the sun! There she is!&#8221; Then a bunch of doofuses actually looked at the sun, burning their retinas and causing eye damage which caused them to see the sun appear to dance and radiate multiple colors. Some other people made things up like their soaking wet clothes from the rain completely dried up, because that&#8217;s such an AMAZING miracle, and other people liked the sound of this as evidence so they went along with this claim and told it to other people. It was a mass delusion with people convincing each other of total nonsense, and the skeptics that came to witness this event reported that they saw nothing except a bunch of crazy people staring at the sun and some optical illusions and such.<\/p>\n<p>It would seem that in a world where Christianity was true this situation would be reversed. Essentially all Christians would be certain of their beliefs while non-Christians would be wary that they might be wrong. Instead Christians fret and worry while atheists have a healthy degree of certainty that they are right. The underlying theology of Christianity suggests that it could be true only in a world where evidence for it is abundant- rather than, as it is, being extremely <a name=\"5115\"><\/a>sketchy.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5115) Predicted second coming was missed<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christian apologists try to massage the gospel scriptures to dispel the apparent implication that Jesus predicted the end times to occur within the lifetimes of people living at the time. The following definitively refutes this theory:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jckxav\/mark_91_and_mattthew_1628_were_not_referring_to\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jckxav\/mark_91_and_mattthew_1628_were_not_referring_to\/<\/a><\/p>\n<div id=\"subgrid-container\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Mark 9:1 and Mattthew 16:28 were not referring to the Transfiguration &#8211; Putting the Debate to Rest<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1jckxav-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<p>There&#8217;s a persistent debate in biblical scholarship about whether Jesus and the early Christian community believed the &#8220;end times&#8221; (the Parousia, or Second Coming) were imminent. I believe a very strong case can be made that Mark 8:38-9:1 and Matthew 16:27-28 are clear predictions of a universally witnessed Parousia within the lifetime of some of Jesus&#8217; original audience, and that attempts to reinterpret these passages as referring to the Transfiguration or the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD are unsustainable. Here&#8217;s the evidence:<\/p>\n<p><strong>1. Contextual and Terminological Unity: The Same Event<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Mark 8:38-9:1:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">comes<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0in his Father\u2019s glory\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">with the holy angels<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.\u201d And he said to them, \u201cTruly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">see<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">the kingdom of God<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">come with power<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:27-28:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;For\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">the Son of Man is<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">going to come<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0in his Father\u2019s glory\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">with his angels<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">, and then he will reward each person according to what they have done. Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">see<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">the Son of Man<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">coming in his kingdom<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Notice the crucial connections:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Immediate Succession:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0These verses are directly connected within the\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">same speech<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0of Jesus. There&#8217;s no indication of a topic shift or a change in referent. To separate and assign them to completely different events is to impose an artificial division on the text.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Terminological Overlap:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0&#8220;Coming&#8221; (\u1f14\u03c1\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">erchomai<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">) is used in both passages. Matthew 16:28&#8217;s &#8220;Son of Man\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">coming<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0in his kingdom&#8221; is clearly linked to the\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">antecedent<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0in 16:27: &#8220;the Son of Man is\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">going to come<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8230;&#8221; This is not a coincidence; it&#8217;s a deliberate connection.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Shared Imagery:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Both passages describe the Son of Man coming &#8220;in glory&#8221; and &#8220;with his angels.&#8221; This is classic apocalyptic imagery associated with the final judgment.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Universal Judgment:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0The context of judging &#8220;each person according to what they have done&#8221; (Matthew 16:27) implies a universal, eschatological event, not a limited, localized occurrence like the Temple&#8217;s destruction or a private vision like the Transfiguration.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The Transfiguration and the destruction of the Temple simply do\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">not<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0fit the described events. Neither involved the Son of Man coming in glory with angels to judge all humanity. The language used in these passages is not consistent with what is seen in the Transfiguration, which is a private, revelatory experience for a select few. While it may be seen as a foretaste of the glory to come, the Transfiguration does not involve the cosmic, judgmental imagery and so simply cannot serve as a fulfillment of Mk. 9:1\/Mt. 16:28.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>2. &#8220;Kingdom of God Come with Power&#8221; (\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9): A Parousia Term<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The earliest phrase from Mark 9:1 &#8211; &#8220;kingdom of God come\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">with power<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0(\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">dunamei<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">)&#8221; is critical. This isn&#8217;t just a generic statement about God&#8217;s power. &#8220;Dunamis&#8221; is used in Mark 13:26-27 to describe the Parousia itself:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;At that time people will see the Son of Man\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">coming<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0in clouds\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">with great power (\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">duname\u014ds<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">) and glory. And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The linguistic parallel strongly suggests that Mark 9:1 is referring to the\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">same event<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0as Mark 13:26-27 \u2013 the Parousia, not a lesser event.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;The perfect participle \u201chas come\u201d (lit., \u201chaving come\u201d) implies that the kingdom of God will arrive fully, that is, be fully manifested, before all those listening to the Markan Jesus have died. This arrival is the next stage after the \u201cdrawing near\u201d of the kingdom (Mk. 1:15) in the activity of the earthly Jesus&#8230;.Thus 9:1 should be interpreted as referring to the coming of the Son of Man. It is at that time that the kingdom of God will be manifested. The claim that some who heard Jesus (either those who heard the historical Jesus or those who heard him as members of the audience of Mark) would live until the coming of the Son of Man is evidence of the imminent expectation of that event on the part of the author of Mark.&#8221; &#8211; Adela Yarbro Collins, Mark: A Commentary, pp. 412-13.<\/p>\n<p><strong>3. The Solemnity of the Oath: &#8220;Amen, I Say to You&#8221;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus prefaces his statement with &#8220;Amen (truly) I say to you&#8221; (\u1f00\u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03c9 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">am\u0113n leg\u014d humin<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">), a solemn oath formula. This emphasizes the seriousness and certainty of the prediction. It would be utterly bizarre to use this formula to state the obvious: that some of his disciples would still be alive a mere six days later (when the Transfiguration occurs in Mark 9:2 and Matthew 17:1).<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The phrase &#8220;will not taste death&#8221; doesn&#8217;t imply immediate fulfillment. It suggests a timeframe long enough for\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">some<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0of those present to have died naturally. This fits better with a generational expectation, not a one-week timeframe.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>4. Parallel Descriptions of the Parousia: Matthew&#8217;s Triad<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Matthew 16:27-28 provides a concise description of the Parousia that aligns perfectly with other, more detailed descriptions in Matthew:<\/p>\n<table style=\"margin-left: 40px;\" width=\"824\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"2\">\n<thead style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<tr style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"270\"><strong>Matthew 16:27-28<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"269\"><strong>Matthew 24:30-31<\/strong><\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"272\"><strong>Matthew 25:31-33<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<tr style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"270\">Son of Man comes \u201cwith angels\u201d<\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"269\">Son of Man comes \u201cwith angels\u201d<\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"272\">Son of Man comes \u201cwith angels\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"270\">\u201cIn his Father\u2019s glory\u201d<\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"269\">\u201cWith power and great glory\u201d<\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"272\">\u201cIn his glory\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"270\">\u201cReward each person\u201d<\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"269\">\u201cGather his elect\u201d<\/td>\n<td style=\"padding-left: 40px;\" width=\"272\">\u201cSeparate the sheep and goats\u201d<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">These are not three separate events; they are three descriptions of the\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">same<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0event: the Parousia. The &#8220;Son of Man coming in his kingdom&#8221; (Matthew 16:28) is synonymous with the &#8220;coming of the kingdom of God with power&#8221; (Mark 9:1). They both refer to the full, visible establishment of God&#8217;s reign, accompanied by the return of the Son of Man. The shared elements (coming, power, angels, glory, judgment) solidify this interpretation.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>5. The Kingdom of God: A Universally Observed Event<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">To understand what Jesus meant by seeing &#8220;the Kingdom of God has come with power&#8221; or &#8220;the Son of Man coming in his kingdom,&#8221; we must look at the contemporary Jewish understanding. This was\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">not<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0a private, internal experience, nor was it limited to a select few. It was understood as a cosmic, universally witnessed event.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Consider the Testament of Moses 10:1-7:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;And then\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">His kingdom shall appear throughout all His creation<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8230;For the Heavenly One will arise from His royal throne&#8230;And the earth shall tremble&#8230;the high mountains shall be made low&#8230;the horns of the sun shall be broken&#8230;&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p>This is a dramatic, world-altering event. Similarly, the Targums (Aramaic paraphrases of the Hebrew Bible) often speak of the Kingdom being &#8220;revealed&#8221; to all. For example:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Tg. Obad. 21: &#8220;&#8230;the kingdom of the Lord shall be revealed over\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">all the inhabitants of the earth<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;In the targum, Zech 13\u201314\u2019s elaborate description of \u201cthat day,\u201d which includes the bold claim that \u201cthe Lord will become king over all the earth\u201d (14:9), is rewritten as, \u201cand the kingdom of the Lord will be\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">revealed upon all the inhabitants of the earth<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.\u201d&#8221; &#8211; Tucker Ferda, Jesus and His Promised Second Coming: Jewish Eschatology and Christian Origins<\/span><\/li>\n<li>Compare this to Mt 16:27 &#8211; &#8220;reward each person according to what they have done&#8221;, Mt. 24:30 &#8211; &#8220;all the peoples of the earth\u00a0will mourn&#8221;, Mt. 25:32 &#8211; &#8220;All the nations will be gathered before him&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>This context makes it clear that the &#8220;coming of the Kingdom&#8221; was understood as a public, universally visible event, utterly incompatible with the private, limited nature of the Transfiguration. The destruction of the temple, while significant, also falls short of this cosmic scale as Matthew indicates the judgment was to be universally applied and not limited to a judgment on just Jerusalem or Israel.<\/p>\n<p><strong>6. The Evolution of Imminence: A Trajectory of Delay<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The New Testament itself provides evidence of a shift in expectations regarding the timing of the Parousia. The earliest writings (Paul&#8217;s letters) display a strong sense of imminence:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 Thess 4:15-17:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0&#8220;We who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord&#8230;&#8221; (Paul expects to be alive when Jesus returns). The context of this passage alone demonstrates that the Thessalonians were wondering why Jesus hadn&#8217;t returned yet and were concerned because some were starting to die v. 13.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 Cor 7:29:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0&#8220;&#8230;the time has been shortened.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 Cor 10:11:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0&#8220;&#8230;written down for our instruction, on whom the\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">end of the ages has come<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 Cor 15:51-52:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0&#8220;We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed&#8230;&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Rom. 13:12:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0&#8220;The night is nearly over; The day has drawn near.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Mark also maintains a strong sense of imminence (Mark 1:15, 9:1, 13:30, 14:62).<\/p>\n<p>However, as time passed and the Parousia did not occur, we see adjustments in the sources:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0While still expecting the Parousia (Mt. 10:23), the question posed to Jesus in Mt. 24:3 now separates the &#8220;end of the age&#8221; from the Temple&#8217;s destruction whereas Mk. 13:4 lumps the events together and narrates everything that follows happening in quick temporal succession without any interruption. Matthew also adds parables that suggest a possible delay (Mt. 24:42-48; 25:5, 19).<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luke:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Luke significantly downplays the imminence found in Mark, often altering Jesus&#8217; sayings to remove any sense of immediate expectation. Examples:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 4:43<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Recasts Mk. 1:15 (\u201cThe kingdom of God has come near\u201d) to emphasize preaching over imminent fulfillment.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 9:27<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Removes Mark 9:1\u2019s phrase \u201cwith power\u201d (\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9), weakening the link to a witnessed Parousia.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 17:20-21<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 The author inserts these words onto Jesus&#8217; lips: \u201cThe coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed&#8230;&#8221; which is an idea totally foreign to Mark&#8217;s Jesus.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 19:11<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Adds that Jesus told a parable because people wrongly thought \u201cthe kingdom of God was about to appear immediately.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 21:8<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Adds a warning: \u201cBeware that you are not led astray; for many will come in my name and say, \u2018The time is near!\u2019 Do not go after them.\u201d This contradicts Jesus&#8217; own statement from Mark 1:15 &#8211; \u201cthe time has come, the Kingdom of God has come near.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 21:9<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Inserts \u201cthe end will not come right away\u201d as a corrective to Mark 13\u2019s urgency.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 21:19<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Omits Mark 13:13\u2019s phrase \u201cthe one who endures to the end will be saved,\u201d diluting the call to perseverance.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 21:23-24<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Deletes Mark 13:19-20\u2019s \u201cthose days will be cut short,\u201d replacing it with vague language about \u201cthe times of the Gentiles.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 21:31<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Strips Mark 13:29\u2019s \u201cat the very gates\u201d to avoid implying proximity.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Lk. 22:69<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u2013 Rewrites Mark 14:62:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Mark:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u201c<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">You will see the Son of Man<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0seated at the right hand of the Power and\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">coming with the clouds of heaven<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luke:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0\u201c<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">From now on<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">the Son of Man<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0will be seated at the right hand of God\u201d \u2013 shifting focus to Jesus\u2019\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">current<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0heavenly status from a witnessed return in the near future.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">2 Thessalonians 2:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Addresses the issue of those claiming the Parousia has\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">already<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0happened, indicating a growing concern about its delay.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">2 Peter 3:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Directly confronts scoffers who question the Parousia&#8217;s delay, arguing that God&#8217;s timetable is different from ours.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">John 21:22-23:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0A rumor had spread of the disciple whom Jesus loved not dying before Jesus came. Overall, any other imminence in John is completely non-existent.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">This trajectory \u2013 from strong imminence in Paul and Mark to increasing explanations for delay in later writings, to complete absence in John \u2013 strongly suggests that the early Christian community\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">did<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0expect a near-term Parousia, and had to grapple with the fact that it didn&#8217;t happen as expected. This points in the direction that Jesus shared in these imminent expectations but was just wrong.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The cumulative weight of this evidence \u2013 contextual unity, terminological parallels, the solemn oath, the understanding of the Kingdom, and the evolving trajectory of eschatological expectations \u2013 points to a clear conclusion: Mark 8:38-9:1 and Matthew 16:27-28 are best understood as predictions of an imminent, universally witnessed Parousia expected within the lifetime of some of Jesus&#8217; followers. While this interpretation may be theologically challenging, it is the most faithful to the text and its historical context. Alternative interpretations, such as those linking these verses to the Transfiguration or the Temple&#8217;s destruction, fail to account for the full range of evidence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>What this means is that Christianity is a failed religion. What Jesus prophesized did not come true. Objectively, this means that Christianity should have died by the end of the 1<sup>st<\/sup> Century. It has survived only by creatively mis-interpreting the <a name=\"5116\"><\/a>scriptures.<\/p>\n<p><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">(5116) <\/span><\/strong><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Christian considers Paul to be a fraud<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">A large portion of the New Testament is attributed to Paul, as well as a large portion of Christian theology is based on his writings. In the following a Christian makes a case that Paul was a fraud <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">and <\/span><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">that his letters should not be included in the New Testament:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jd9684\/why_paul_is_not_trustworthy\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jd9684\/why_paul_is_not_trustworthy\/<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul &#8211; Apostle or Apostate<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Who was Paul?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">His past is unknown<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Citizen of Tarsus (claims to be the child of Jews\/Pharisees)<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Parents are unknown<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Had a nephew in Jerusalem<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Self-proclaimed apostle<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Founder of many Christian communities, especially among the Gentiles in Europe<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Main author of the New Testament<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">13 out of the 27 books in the New Testament are attributed to him<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">There is debate on whether the Gospel of Mark was also written by him<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Was a persecutor of Christians<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">According to his own account, a luminous figure appeared to him on the way to Damascus, claiming to be Jesus<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul&#8217;s Belief<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Believes Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God (according to Christian interpretation, this means he is a Redeemer God; however, Jews believe the Messiah is a human who will later lead the Jewish people and that the Messiah is not God)<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;Son of God&#8221; in Christianity means the second person of the Trinity, whereas in Judaism, it means someone very pious<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Believes that the law (Torah or Mosaic laws) is invalid<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Now, to the main topic: I claim that Paul was a liar. But what is a lie?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Definition of a Lie:<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;A deliberately false statement made with the intent to deceive; a knowingly and intentionally expressed falsehood.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What does Paul think about the law?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, Philippians 3:8:<br \/>\n&#8220;Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake, I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Here you can see what Paul thinks of the law. Remember, the law refers to the Torah, which was given by God to prophets like Moses, Isaiah, and others. He considers it rubbish!? God&#8217;s law is rubbish? Didn&#8217;t Jesus say: &#8220;Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.&#8221;<br \/>\nHow can Paul claim it is rubbish?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, Galatians 3:10-13:<br \/>\n&#8220;10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, &#8216;Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.&#8217; 11 Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for &#8216;The righteous shall live by faith.&#8217; 12 But the law is not of faith, rather &#8216;The one who does them shall live by them.&#8217; 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us\u2014for it is written, &#8216;Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.'&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Here, Paul mentions that the law revealed by God is a curse, and not just here, but throughout the entire letter to the Galatians, he speaks negatively about the law. If that were all, he then states in the next sentence that Jesus is a curse for Christians and that everyone who hangs on wood is cursed. So, not only are Christians cursed, but Jesus himself is cursed by God.<br \/>\nDo you really believe that Christians are cursed by God? Or that Jesus himself\u2014who is a prophet for us but God for you\u2014is cursed? Your God is cursed? Be honest, you don&#8217;t actually believe that God became a curse for you.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, Romans 7:6:<br \/>\n&#8220;6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Here, I don\u2019t have much to add, but Paul states that Christians are free from the law. Remember this, as it will be important later.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The Jerusalem Council<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What was the Jerusalem Council?<br \/>\nThe Jerusalem Council was a meeting of apostles, scholars, and elders to discuss a highly controversial topic.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What is the definition of an apostle?<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0The Bible provides a definition when the apostles needed to choose a twelfth member after Judas&#8217; betrayal. According to the Bible, an apostle is:<br \/>\n&#8220;One of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was among us, beginning from John&#8217;s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0This is the definition of an apostle according to the Bible. An apostle is someone who was with Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) from the time of his baptism until his ascension. Someone who heard his voice, saw him, traveled with him, witnessed his miracles, and was a witness to his resurrection.<br \/>\nPaul fulfills none of these criteria. He neither heard Jesus&#8217; voice nor saw him, nor was he a witness to his miracles or resurrection. Nor was he with Jesus between his baptism and ascension.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The only thing we have is his claim that he saw Jesus in a vision and that he appointed himself as an apostle. Let that sink in. We have proof that the twelve apostles saw, heard, and experienced Jesus. Then, 30 to 40 years later, this Paul appears\u2014who was responsible for the deaths or imprisonment of who knows how many Christians\u2014and claims, without any proof, to be an apostle.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">It is as if a Nazi soldier who had killed many Jews suddenly claimed to be a prophet of the Jews\u2014without any proof.<\/span><\/p>\n<h1 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What Happened at the Council of Jerusalem?<\/span><\/h1>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Some Pharisees, after becoming Christians, claimed that Gentiles had to be circumcised. This was one of the main points the apostles debated. Peter argued that the law was too burdensome for the Gentiles and that they could not adhere to it. Afterward, other matters were discussed, and in the end, the leader of the early Christians, James, the half-brother of Jesus, took the floor.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">He said in Acts 15:19-20:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;19 Therefore, my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God,<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">20 but should write to them to abstain from the pollutions of idols, from sexual immorality, from what has been strangled, and from blood.&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Here, the leader of the Christians, James, states that Gentiles should only be instructed to abstain from idolatry, sexual immorality, strangled meat, and blood. These are the only prohibitions for them.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Accordingly, James drafted letters and gave them to the missionaries to spread the message. He assigned an apostle to each missionary so that people would recognize the legitimacy of the message\u2014otherwise, the apostles would not have accompanied them. Paul was assigned Barnabas, who was an apostle. What is interesting is that, from James&#8217; perspective, Paul was not an apostle; otherwise, he would not have needed another apostle to accompany him. For James, Paul was merely a missionary. Later, during their journey, Paul and Barnabas had a dispute and went their separate ways. Now, I would like to point out: who is Paul to argue with one of the twelve apostles? But never mind.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">After completing his missionary journey, Paul wrote to the church in Galatia, saying in Galatians 2:6-10:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;6 And from those who seemed to be influential\u2014what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality\u2014those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles),<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0The ones &#8220;who seemed to be influential&#8221; are the apostles. Paul is essentially saying that he does not care who the apostles are or what they were before, disregarding their status, knowledge, and importance\u2014which is already problematic. But that is not all. He claims that the apostles gave him no further instructions except to remember the poor, which he claims to have done. This is a clear lie. In Acts, James explicitly commands Paul to instruct the Gentiles to abstain from idolatry, sexual immorality, strangled meat, and blood. But Paul claims that nothing was imposed on him. He does not say, &#8220;There were a few things I was told, but the most important was to remember the poor.&#8221; No, that would have been acceptable. Instead, he outright denies having been given any instructions, which is simply false. One could at least say that he misled the Galatian church.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Christian scholars confirm that the Letter to the Galatians was written after Acts 15, so it cannot be argued that Paul was unaware of James&#8217; &#8220;command.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<h1 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What Was Paul&#8217;s Relationship with the Apostles?<\/span><\/h1>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, 2 Corinthians 3:1:<br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;1 Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some do, letters of recommendation to you or from you?&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">It is unclear exactly what Paul is referring to here, but I would like to remind you of James, who always had letters drafted whenever a decision was made\u2014letters of recommendation so that people would know the apostles had made these decisions. However, Paul says such letters are unnecessary and that people themselves are the letters. In other words, he argues that it is unimportant for Christians to know whether the apostles made certain decisions because the believers themselves are the testimony. But if you think about it, that does not make much sense.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, 2 Corinthians 11:4-5:<br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;4 For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough!<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">5 Indeed, I consider that I am not in the least inferior to these &#8216;super-apostles.'&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">This is very interesting. Is there anywhere in the New Testament where we can determine who these &#8220;super-apostles&#8221; (which is obviously meant sarcastically or even mockingly) are? Yes, there is. In Galatians 2, we find a clue. After having a dispute with Peter and Barnabas, Paul writes:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Here, we see that the &#8220;super-apostles&#8221; refer to the apostles and those who uphold the law.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, 1 Corinthians 9:20-21:<br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law\u2014though not being myself under the law\u2014that I might win those under the law.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law\u2014not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ\u2014that I might win those outside the law.&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0This verse is highly controversial even among Christians. Paul says, &#8220;To those without the law, I became as one without the law, though I am still under the law.&#8221; No matter how you interpret it, this is another deception by Paul. If he became everything to everyone just to convert them, then he was deceiving them. If I were to tell you, &#8220;I became a Christian,&#8221; while I am actually a Muslim, just to convert you to Islam, I would still be lying. My intentions may be good, but I would still be lying. And I would not trust my eternal life to someone who lies.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luther Bible 2017, Galatians 5:2-4:<br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Here, Paul states that anyone who gets circumcised to follow the law loses Christ. According to Paul, anyone who follows the law is no longer a Christian.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Then, in verse 12, he uses very harsh words:<br \/>\n<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves!&#8221;<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">This means he believes that those who promote circumcision should go as far as castrating themselves. Do you really think Jesus would agree with this statement, especially since Jesus himself was circumcised?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">But does Paul stand by his words?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Acts 21:21,24,26 shows that he later contradicts himself, implying that he also followed the law when necessary.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Acts 21:21, 24, 26:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"><br \/>\n<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;21 But they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to live according to the customs. 22 What then? Certainly, they will hear that you have come. 23 So do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. 24 Take them and purify yourself with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads. Then everyone will know that what they were told about you is not true, but that you yourself also live in accordance with the law and observe it. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we have written and decided that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day he purified himself with them, went into the temple, and announced the completion of the days of purification when the offering would be made for each of them.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Note:<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0Here, James is speaking to Paul. He is concerned because he has heard that Paul is commanding the Jews who live among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, meaning he is telling them not to follow the law and not to circumcise their children, even though Paul himself claimed to be under the law. Then James tells Paul that, in order to show everyone that the rumors about him are false, he should go to the temple with four men and offer a sacrifice, so that people can see that he follows the law. Paul does exactly that.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">And here we see another lie. Paul told the Galatians that circumcision is no longer required and that the law is no longer valid. If that were true, why would James say, &#8220;Do these things so that the Christians know you follow the law,&#8221; if the law was no longer in effect? The answer is simple: Paul lied. He lied about circumcision, and he said that those who follow the law have fallen from the grace of Christ. If that were really true, why would James want Paul to demonstrate to the people that he still follows the law and that the rumors are false? But Paul had indeed done all the things that James had heard about. Now he acts as if he never said those things\u2014otherwise, he would have responded, &#8220;Yes, James, I did these things because Jesus commanded me to.&#8221; But why didn\u2019t he say that? Because he was afraid. He knew that he had lied.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Now, what kind of sacrifice are they talking about? James is referring to the Nazarite vow, which can be read about in Numbers, chapter 6. This is a sacrifice made as atonement for sins. Now think about this: all of this is happening after the crucifixion of Jesus. Jesus has already died for sins and paid for them with his blood. So why are the Christians going with Paul to offer an animal sacrifice to atone for their sins, even though Jesus already did that? But that is a discussion for another time.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What can we now see from all these verses?<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">One can recognize that Paul is at least lying to the Galatian church, lying to the apostles, and pretending to believe in the validity of the law in Jerusalem, even though he rejects it.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Before I conclude, I want to quote a passage from Paul in the New Testament and a verse from the Old Testament.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Here, allegedly God speaks in Deuteronomy 27:26: &#8220;Cursed is anyone who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out.&#8221; And all the people shall say, &#8220;Amen!&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Deut. 28:1: &#8220;If you fully obey the Lord your God and carefully follow all his commands I give you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the nations on earth. 2 All these blessings will come on you and accompany you if you obey the Lord your God:&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul quotes this very verse in Galatians: Luther Bible 2017, Galatians 3:10-13: \u201c10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse. As it is written: &#8216;Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.&#8217;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">But Paul contradicts God. God says that anyone who does not keep the law is cursed, and anyone who follows it will be blessed, but Paul says that anyone who keeps the law is cursed.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Now my question: do you listen to God, or to a liar who falsely claims to be an apostle and contradicts God?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus says in Matthew 5:17, &#8220;Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore, anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus (peace and blessings be upon him) says that he has NOT come to abolish the law. He says that until heaven and earth pass away, not even the smallest letter will be invalid, and anyone who tries to abolish even the smallest command will be the least in the kingdom of heaven. In conclusion, Jesus says that the law is valid until the end of the world, which law? The law of Moses! Whoever tries to abolish it will be the least in the kingdom of heaven.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Now, what does Paul say about the law? Paul says that the old law is not valid and that he has come with a new one.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">But didn&#8217;t Jesus say that the law is valid until the end?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">My Last Point: Paul&#8217;s Prophecy<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 Corinthians 15:51-52: \u201c51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed \u2013 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">He speaks here about the coming of Jesus, the Parousia. A professor of theology from the University of Darwin says in his commentary on this verse: &#8220;Paul expects that when Jesus comes, he will not be among the dead but among the living. He expects the return of Jesus during his lifetime.&#8221;<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul prophesied something that did not happen, so it is a false prophecy. Fortunately, we can read in the Old Testament about those who make false prophecies.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Deut. 18:20-22: \u201c20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death. 21 You may say to yourselves, &#8216;How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?&#8217; 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Here, God allegedly explains how to recognize a false prophet \u2013 by the prophecies that do not come to pass. Paul made a prophecy, and it did not come true, making him a false prophet.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">My Conclusion<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">My conclusion is that Paul contradicts the apostles, he contradicts Jesus, and he contradicts God. He lied to the people in Galatia and to the apostles and pretended to follow the law, even though he told the Gentiles that the law was not valid.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus, the apostles, and the Christians all adhered to the law, but Paul hated it. He called the law, which comes from God, &#8220;filthy.&#8221; He made prophecies that were untrue. He fought with the apostles.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">With my research, I have proven that Paul was a liar, a hypocrite, not an apostle, and a false prophet.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Listen to what Jesus tells you, not what your church or Paul says. Many important scholars say that today&#8217;s Christianity was founded by Paul and not by Jesus. Read these passages carefully with an open heart and see the truth, for that is the first step.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">If Paul was not trustworthy, then an all-powerful God would have ensured that his letters would not be included in the Bible, thereby leading people astray with a false doctrine. The most likely truth is that Paul distorted the theology of the Jerusalem (apostles) \u2013 based Christians, and that no omnipotent god existed at the time to prevent this from <a name=\"5117\"><\/a>happening.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>(5117) Early Christianity was a cult<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The earliest forms of Christianity contained elements that are consistent with the term \u2018cult.\u2019 The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/phg6oz\/early_christianity_was_pretty_obviously_a_cult\/?share_id=K5HwtFBiTA0_pgoFFtCBA&amp;utm_content=2&amp;utm_medium=ios_app&amp;utm_name=ioscss&amp;utm_source=share&amp;utm_term=1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/phg6oz\/early_christianity_was_pretty_obviously_a_cult\/?share_id=K5HwtFBiTA0_pgoFFtCBA&amp;utm_content=2&amp;utm_medium=ios_app&amp;utm_name=ioscss&amp;utm_source=share&amp;utm_term=1<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"color: #24890d;\"><span style=\"background-color: #d5d5d5;\">\u00a0<\/span><\/span>Early Christianity was pretty obviously a cult<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ol>\n<li>Leader claims world is ending imminently (1 John 2:18, Matthew 10:23, Matthew 16:28, Matthew 24:34)<\/li>\n<li>Wants you to sell or give away your belongings (Luke 14:33, Matthew 19:21, Luke 18:22)<\/li>\n<li>Wants you to cut off family who interfere, and leave your home\/job to follow him (Matt. 10:35-37, Luke 14:26, Matthew 19:29)<\/li>\n<li>Unverifiable reward if you believe (Heaven, i.e. the bribe)<\/li>\n<li>Unverifiable punishment if you disbelieve (Hell, i.e. the threat)<\/li>\n<li>Sabotages the critical thinking faculties you might otherwise use to remove it (Proverbs 3:5, 2 Corinthians 5:7, Proverbs 14:12, Proverbs 28:26)<\/li>\n<li>Invisible trickster character who fabricates apparent evidence to the contrary in order to lead you astray from the true path (So you will reject anything you hear\/read which might cause you to doubt)<\/li>\n<li>Targets children and the emotionally\/financially vulnerable for recruitment (sunday schools, youth group, teacher led prayer, prison ministries, third world missions)<\/li>\n<li>May assign new name (as with 3 of the apostles), new identity\/personality to replace yours<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Imminent end of the world:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 John 2:18\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew 16:27-28\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew 24:34\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew 10:23\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Sell your belongings:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luke 14:33\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew 19:21 *Jesus answered, &#8220;If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.&#8221;*Luke 12:33\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201cSell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Luke 18:22 When Jesus heard this, he said to him, &#8220;You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">(Please note that only Luke 18:22 and Matthew 19:21 concern the story of Jesus advising the wealthy young man about the difficulty of entering heaven.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">These verses are included for completeness, and to acknowledge the existence of this story because the most common objection I receive to the claim that Jesus required followers to sell their belongings is that I *must* be talking about this particular story and misunderstanding the message it conveys.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">However in Luke 12:33 and Luke 14:33 Jesus is not speaking to that man but to a crowd following him, and in 14:33 he specifically says that those who do not give up everything they have cannot be his disciples. It is therefore not a recommendation but a requirement, and is not specific to the wealthy.)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Cut off family members who try to stop you:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Luke 14:26\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters&#8211;yes, even their own life&#8211;such a person cannot be my disciple.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matt. 10:35-37\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201cFor I have come to turn a man against his father a daughter against her mother a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law&#8212;a man\u2019s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew 19:29\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Do not apply critical thought to doctrine:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Proverbs 3:5\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201cTrust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">2 Corinthians 5:7\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201cFor we live by faith, not by sight.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Proverbs 14:12\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201cThere is a way that appears to be right, but in the end it leads to death.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Proverbs 28:26\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201cThose who trust in themselves are fools, but those who walk in wisdom are kept safe.\u201d<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">With respect to &#8220;no contemporaneous outside source corroborates these claims&#8221; they will cite the accounts of Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny the Elder. What they hope you will assume is that these are independent accounts of Jesus&#8217; miracles. If you actually check into it however what you will find is that the Josephus account was altered by Christian scribes to embellish mentions of Jesus (in the case of Josephus portraying him as though he were convinced of Jesus\u2019 divinity, despite not being a Christian) and the remaining accounts only mention a Jewish magician who founded a cult.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">None of them corroborate the miracles, or resurrection, as will be implied. Maybe even Christians don&#8217;t know this, not having personally fact checked their own apologetics. (EDIT: Only the Josephus account is known to be a pious fraud. The Tacitus account isn&#8217;t, but is also not an eye witness record of miracles or the resurrection, only confirmation of Jesus as a historical person which I do not dispute)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">As an aside it&#8217;s important to make this distinction because today the word cult gets thrown around carelessly by people who only just learned of the B.I.T.E. model, which dilutes it. This gives actual cult members the cover of &#8220;You say I&#8217;m in a cult? Well people these days call everything a cult, so what.&#8221; Making this distinction is also important to understanding how cults mature into religions over time, as evidenced by the increasing degree of high control cultic policy the younger a religion is, and vice versa.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Scientology is very young, everybody identifies it as a cult. Mormonism and Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses are a little older, recognized as religion but widely identified as cultic and high control. Islam is older, considered by all to be a religion but still immature and expansionist. Christianity&#8217;s older still, considered by all a religion, mostly settled down compared to Islam. Judaism much older, tamest of the lot.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This is because as a cult grows, beyond a certain membership threshold the high-control policies like disconnection and selling belongings are no longer necessary for retention and become a conspicuous target for critics. The goal is to become irremovably established in the fabric of society then just kind of blend into the background, becoming something everybody assumes the correctness of but doesn&#8217;t otherwise think much about.<\/p>\n<p>Many of the cult-like elements of early Christianity have been massaged out of the faith, to make it appear to be more legitimate, but its foundational theology remains very cult-like. As in every religion to date, Christianity will follow the same <a name=\"5118\"><\/a>formula: charismatic leader \u2192 cult \u2192 religion \u2192extinction.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5118) Ineffectiveness of prayer is swept under the rug<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One of the litmus tests of Christianity\u2019s truth is whether prayers to the Christian God or Jesus show any sign of effectiveness. To date all studies on the matter have indicated that prayers do not work, or even worse, often result in less favorable outcomes. This fact alone should cause the end of Christianity. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1jfudus\/why_is_the_fact_that_prayer_provably_doesnt_work\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1jfudus\/why_is_the_fact_that_prayer_provably_doesnt_work\/<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Why is the fact that prayer PROVABLY doesn\u2019t work, not really talked about in society?<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1jfudus-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<p>I mean, if it did work, that would be the ultimate trump card against every atheist. That would be the evidence we\u2019re always asking for. There wouldn\u2019t be any need for faith at all, because it would be provable.<\/p>\n<p>Talk to God and you win more games, make more money, heal faster, live longer, and be a better person. All measurable. That would be a fact of nature just like gravity.<\/p>\n<p>Every scientist would be on board, there\u2019d be no atheism except as a fringe conspiracy theory.<\/p>\n<p>But that\u2019s obviously NOT the case. It\u2019s provably not the case. Why is it not more widely known that prayer doesn\u2019t work?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>It is a good question- WHY is this not more discussed, and why do so many Christians dismiss this reality and cling to their faith? It should be a <a name=\"5119\"><\/a>game-ender.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5119) Luke versus Paul on atonement<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There exists a troubling difference between Luke and Paul\u2019s ideas of atonement. Luke did not endorse the idea that atonement can be attained solely through acceptance of Jesus\u2019 sacrifice on the cross, but rather that it was an incentive to attain salvation through repentance. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/xpxbcq\/does_lukeacts_lack_a_doctrine_of_atonement\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AcademicBiblical\/comments\/xpxbcq\/does_lukeacts_lack_a_doctrine_of_atonement\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">In Ehrman&#8217;s less technical discussion (than in the blogpost), in &#8220;Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene,&#8221; he contrasts the Luke\/Acts view of salvation with Paul&#8217;s own view as expressed in his letters:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;According to Paul, Christ&#8217;s death provides an atonement for sins; according to Luke, Christ&#8217;s death leads to forgiveness of sins. These are not the same thing.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;The idea of atonement is that something needs to be done in order to deal with sins. A sacrifice has to be made in order to compensate for the fact that someone has transgressed divine law. The sacrifice satisfies the just demands of God, whose law has been broken and who requires a penalty. In Paul&#8217;s view, Jesus&#8217; death brought about an atonement: it was a sacrifice made for the sake of others so that they would not have to pay for their sins themselves. This atonement purchased a right standing before God.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;The idea of forgiveness is that someone lets you off the hook for something you&#8217;ve done wrong, without any requirement of payment. That&#8217;s quite different from accepting the payment of your debt from someone else (which would be the basic idea of atonement). In Paul&#8217;s own way of looking at salvation, Christ had to be sacrificed to pay the debt of others; in Luke&#8217;s way of looking at it, God forgives the debt without requiring a sacrifice.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;Why then, for Luke, did Jesus have to die, if not as a sacrifice for sins? When you read through the speeches in Acts the answer becomes quite clear. It doesn&#8217;t matter whether you look at Paul&#8217;s speeches or Peter&#8217;s, since, if you&#8217;ll recall, all these speeches are pretty much alike (they were, after all, written by Luke). Jesus was wrongly put to death. This was a gross miscarriage of justice. When people realize what they (or their compatriots) did to Jesus, they are overcome by guilt, which leads them to repent and ask for forgiveness. And God forgives them.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">&#8220;Thus Jesus&#8217; death, for Luke, is not an atonement for sins, it is an occasion for repentance. It is the repentance that leads to the forgiveness of sins, and thus a restored relationship with God (see, for example, Peter&#8217;s first speech in Acts 2:37-39). This is fundamentally different from a doctrine of atonement such as you find in Paul.&#8221; (pp.143-144).<\/p>\n<p>Repentance versus acceptance. Luke versus Paul. The manner of salvation is critical to Christian theology and yet the separation on this issue by two of its historical luminaries leaves a lot of doubt- doubt that should not exist if a supernatural being inspired the <a name=\"5120\"><\/a>Bible.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5120) Where\u2019s Susan and Steve?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The author(s) of the creation story(ies) in Genesis blundered by creating a necessity for incest to propagate the human race. The problem could have been solved easily by creating another pair of humans- perhaps Susan and Steve. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jhh37n\/the_problem_of_adam_and_eve_in_christianity_islam\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jhh37n\/the_problem_of_adam_and_eve_in_christianity_islam\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">As we know, incest is forbidden and seen as an immorality in any respectable religion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This contradicts the human creation story as taught in Abrahamic faiths, since only Adam and Eve were created by God and subsequently left to their own devices.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It was fine for Adam and Eve to have children together &#8212; both being brand new creations of God, they weren&#8217;t related to each other (I don&#8217;t think?)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But the problem arises when their children get to an age where they need to have their own children themselves. The children of Adam and Eve faced the choice of having to procreate with either a sibling or a parent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There was no third option.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God, being omniscient, knew that all he had to do to avoid this regrettable dilemma was create just\u00a0one\u00a0more pair of humans to go alongside Adam and Eve &#8212; all he had to do was create Susan and Steve. That way, the whole incest thing wouldn&#8217;t be necessary.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The fact that God failed to create Susan and Steve is exactly the kind of blunder we would expect to find in a man-made mythology, a story susceptible to plot holes and bloopers.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Therefore the creation story is most likely false.<\/p>\n<p>Man-made mythology is subject to human fallibility, but god-inspired biblical text should be immune. Right off the bat, in the first two chapters of Genesis, we can see an oversight that only a human could have <a name=\"5121\"><\/a>overlooked.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5121) Three-point de-conversion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In the following testimony, the writer details the three points that led him to conclude that Christianity is not true:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1jfphqr\/what_made_you_leave_christianity_for_good\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1jfphqr\/what_made_you_leave_christianity_for_good\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It was sort of a long process, but essentially, it comes down to things not making sense, and the stuff I was being taught not reflecting reality.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There were 3 major points that I can remember, which happened by the time I was 13:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The story of Abraham and Isaac is one of the first things taught to us as kids. God tells Abraham to kill Isaac in a test of loyalty. Abraham goes to do so, but is stopped at the last minute. At one point, I heard a story of a man claiming that God told him to kill somebody, and I asked my mom how we knew that God didn&#8217;t tell him to do so. Upon further questioning to her and pastors, I always got the same answers, which essentially broke down to, &#8220;God wouldn&#8217;t do that&#8221; or &#8220;you&#8217;ll understand when you&#8217;re older.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Then, around age 10-12, I heard a sermon that essentially said that anything that took your attention from God was evil, regardless of what you thought about it. Had it stopped there, I might not have been affected by it, but then the guy went on to mention both the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and the power rangers in very derogatory terms. It seems silly now, but as a kid, especially me in the 90s, those two things brought me some of the only joy I had in life. The ability to escape in to the fantasy of those worlds was some of the only safety that I had at the time. To say that these good guys were evil bothered me and further made me question the whole idea.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Finally, when I was 13, my brother, a devout christian, murdered three people then was killed by police during a hostage situation. At his funeral, his pastor said that there was a bright spot to all the death and destruction my brother had caused: he was going to heaven because he believed in Jesus. I was shocked by this statement.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">At that time, I thought my brother was evil. That lack of safety I spoke over the previous paragraphs was due to him. I was so afraid of him that he was dead for 4 years before I could talk about what he had done to me. Now I don&#8217;t believe him to be evil, because I know that he was just a fucked up kid who had some fucked up shit done to him as well, but at the time, especially after the murders, I thought he was evil. To hear this pastor say my brother would go to heaven was bonkers.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I was even more flabbergasted to look over at his living victims and the families of his dead victims and see them nodding along in agreement.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I just couldn&#8217;t believe that my religion thought this. So I set out to prove them wrong. It took me a while, because this was the 90s and it was harder to find information back then, but it wasn&#8217;t too long after that that I discovered that there is a major debate within Christianity about this. About half of Christians think that you have to believe in Jesus and be a good person to go to heaven while the other half believe that nothing you do will change whether you go to heaven or not. Both require you to believe in Jesus, but only one requires you to be a good person.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The fact that there was a debate at all about this very basic doctrinal point killed my Christianity in an instant.<\/p>\n<p>These three points are the tip of the iceberg. There are so many inconsistencies, incongruities, and downright absurdities that must be navigated and essentially ignored for a person to believe in the truth of Christianity. If, by chance, it is true, then God should be taken to court for presenting his \u2018great project\u2019 in such a haphazard <a name=\"5122\"><\/a>manner.<\/p>\n<p><strong> <span style=\"font-size: medium;\">(5122) Failed Eschatology of the New Testament<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christian apologists have tried to squirm out from what is a straightforward reading of the New Testament, relating a firm prediction that Jesus would return soon, and certainly before the end of the First Century. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateAChristian\/comments\/1jic6ok\/again_on_the_failed_errant_eschatology_of_the_new\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateAChristian\/comments\/1jic6ok\/again_on_the_failed_errant_eschatology_of_the_new\/<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">My claim is quite simple and has broad consensus among biblical scholars and historians, most of whom are religious. It is not really a debate in the academy, but I am sure most here don&#8217;t care about that: The Book of Daniel, the person of Jesus, and the New Testament writers in general <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">expected and hoped for the imminent, near end of history<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">. Their hopes were egregiously wrong. Unfulfilled. Errant. What the implications of this are for the Christian faith, I leave it to you, but I think it indeed calls for the abandonment of traditional views about the bible and its supposed &#8220;authority.&#8221; <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">You may think me arrogant for claiming this, but this really <\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">shouldn&#8217;t<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> be a debate at all. According to the plain meaning of words, the &#8220;plain meaning of the text&#8221; (a phrase I so often heard in my evangelical upbringing), the <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">sensus literalis<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">, these authors had an imminent expectation of the end. They believed that the great eschaton, the final judgment of the righteous and the wicked, was right around the corner, and their generation would live to see it. <\/span><\/p>\n<h1 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Daniel<\/span><\/h1>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Of course, my analysis will be brief due to space limitations. I start with the Book of Daniel because it became very important to Jesus and the NT authors for their depictions of the end. It colors much of the NT&#8217;s eschatological imagery. It has also been a cornerstone for millennia of Christian and Jewish eschatological thinking. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The prophetic visions of Daniel, especially chapters 7\u201312, were composed mainly during the oppressive reign of Antiochus IV (167\u2013164 BCE). Daniel 11 gives a detailed (and mostly accurate) account of Hellenistic history up to the time of Antiochus IV. But in Daniel 11:40\u201345, the predictions become inaccurate. The text describes a final conflict where Antiochus invades Egypt, returns to Israel, and meets his end in a specific, dramatic way. This doesn&#8217;t match historical events. Antiochus died in Persia, not in the Holy Land, during a climactic final battle. Regardless, the real problem comes in Daniel 12. &#8220;<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">At that time<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> shall arise, Michael, the great prince who has charge of your people. And there shall be a time of trouble, like never has been&#8230;&#8221; What is the &#8220;at that time&#8221;? It is the time of Antiochus and the war of the Hellenistic kingdoms, as presupposed by the context of chapters 10-11. This is not thousands of years later in the modern period and beyond when Michael appears. This is in the ancient world, during the Maccabean revolt. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The resurrection of the dead and the final judgment are also said to happen when Michael appears, and an explicit timeframe is attached for when this is to happen. \u201cAnd from the time that the regular burnt offering is taken away&#8230; there shall be 1,290 days.\u201d (12:11). This is an <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">explicit timeframe<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> (about 3.5 years) for when the end will come, in response to Daniel&#8217;s question about when this will happen. Later, the text adds another variant: <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1,335 days<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> (12:12), suggesting an adjustment or delay of the expected end. The author&#8217;s prophecy of the eschaton, the resurrection, the vindication and restoration of Israel, and the appearance of Michael did not happen. <\/span><\/p>\n<h1 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus (Texts from Mark and Matthew)<\/span><\/h1>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus predicted the imminent end of the world and the eschaton to happen within his lifetime. First of all, Mark states that it was the characteristic preaching of Jesus to announce the imminent arrival of the kingdom of God \u03b7\u0314 \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u0301\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u0342 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u03c5\u0342. Mark 1:14\u201315: &#8220;Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, \u201cThe time is fulfilled, and <\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">the kingdom of God is at hand<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">; repent and believe in the gospel.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What is the Kingdom of God? Apologists have often argued that what Jesus means by such a saying is the coming of the Church. But that is not what Jesus talks about in the gospels. The &#8220;Kingdom of God&#8221; was an eschatological term that referred to the end times when God&#8217;s full reign and judgment would be realized on earth. Mark 9:1: And he said to them, \u201cTruly, I say to you,\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.\u201d Does this refer to the Church or the transfiguration, as some apologists have claimed? The answer is no. In the previous verse, Jesus defines what he means: Mark 8:38: &#8220;For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u201d There is an explicit link between the Kingdom of God and the &#8220;coming of the Son of Man&#8221; with the angels in judgment. Jesus seems to have predicted the imminent arrival of a heavenly figure for judgment. Such ideas were well-known in Judaism, such as in 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, etc. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Again, in Mark 13, Jesus predicts the imminent arrival of God&#8217;s kingdom, the Son of Man&#8217;s descent from heaven, and the gathering of the &#8220;elect.&#8221; Jesus said that all this would happen before his generation passed away. Mark 13:30: Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">all these things take place<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">.&#8221; &#8220;All these things&#8221; means exactly that, and just a few verses before, in vv 24-27, Jesus says that after the destruction of the temple (an event which did occur in 70 CE), the Son of Man would arrive in judgment with the angles and gather the elect. &#8220;Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my word will never pass away.&#8221; (v. 31) <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Matthew makes Mark even more explicit about the meaning of the Kingdom: Matthew 16:27\u201328 &#8220;For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. Truly, I say to you,\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Jesus predicted the imminent eschaton. He was wrong. <\/span><\/p>\n<h1 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul<\/span><\/h1>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The apologetic that Jesus was referring to the Church, spiritual renewal, or the transfiguration is refuted. Many other verses in synoptic gospels speak of the same thing. Our earliest Christian writings confirm this view of Jesus, that of Paul. Paul was also an apocalypticist. Interestingly, Paul cites a bit of Jesus tradition in one crucial passage to confirm the imminent return of the Lord and the arrival of God&#8217;s Kingdom: 1 Thessalonians 4:13\u201318 &#8220;But we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope. For since we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so, through Jesus, God will bring with him those who have fallen asleep. For this we declare to you by a word of the Lord, that\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">we who are alive, who are left<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord. Therefore encourage one another with these words.&#8221; <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">1 Corinthians 7: Paul advises the Christians at Corinth to stay in their social structures (i.e. not getting married, staying single, staying as a slave) because the &#8220;present form of this world is passing away.&#8221; (v. 31) Paul couldn&#8217;t be clearer: &#8220;I think that in view of the impending distress, it is good for a person to remain as he is.&#8221; (v. 26). The &#8220;distress&#8221; he is referring to is the Day of the Lord which would be a day of wrath. In the same letter, Paul says the\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">parousia<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0(return) of Jesus will happen soon, and he will live to see it. 1 Corinthians 15:51\u201352: &#8220;Behold! I tell you a mystery.\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">We shall not all sleep,<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0but\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">we shall all be changed,<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.&#8221; <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Romans 13:11\u201312: &#8220;Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For\u00a0<\/span><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed.<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light.&#8221; Most scholars see the &#8220;salvation&#8221; being referenced here as the return of the Lord. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">A failed eschatology equates to a failed religious faith. Christianity is running on fumes, dealing with its long overdue savior, as well as the ineffectiveness of prayers, and a lack of any verified miracles. All it has to go on is tradition and the subservience of followers who believe without applying critical <a name=\"5123\"><\/a>thought.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>(5123) Christian churches are bad for society<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>It should go without debate that if Christianity was true, then Christian churches would be a highly effective salve for our word- a source of truth, assistance, and enlightenment. But the opposite is true as discussed below:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2024\/12\/blog-post.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2024\/12\/blog-post.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It\u2019s considered bad form to condemn all versions of Christianity, so most leading voices in religious journalism will only speak negatively of \u201chigh-control\u201d religions or simply \u201ccults.\u201d However, the subtle implication of those terms is that \u201clow-control religions\u201d or \u201cnon-cults\u201d are not harmful. This has always caused me to stop in my tracks. It\u2019s wrong. Even though Christianity is a continuum of beliefs, all versions of Christianity are indeed harmful.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">For the purpose of this article, I need to define the word \u201cChristian\u201d? Any version of \u201cChristianity\u201d that does not believe in the redemption from original sin through the crucifixion of Christ is probably misnamed. Based on this definition, every Christian, in spite of all the good things they might do, are still partly responsible for America\u2019s toppling into the chasm of a police state. They are all responsible for making parishioners chronically insecure and susceptible to strong-man leadership. They are all responsible for enabling Christian Nationalism and the myriad of abuses done at the hands of terrible church leaders.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">So as much as I\u2019d like to say this nicely, all Christians are bad for our society. Let me explain why.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ailment 1: The Requirement to Believe Without Evidence<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">My friend\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/link.sbstck.com\/redirect\/ead549df-4385-4624-9ece-6644cf12f356?j=eyJ1Ijoic24zZCJ9.Vq74UW93b_qizwpdkkwr95tKlNV3DXbWRo4Hi_yzVAg\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Robb Smith<\/a>\u00a0has a saying:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">\u00a0\u201cWhen it comes to Conspiracy Theories, all roads lead to Auschwitz.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This sounds like hyperbole, but it\u2019s not. I\u2019ve been saying something similar for years: any belief system that requires you to believe without evidence WILL, eventually, be taken over by sociopaths who will ask its followers to commit atrocities.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">We\u2019re about to see a very clear example of this happening in the US.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Every religion (not just Christianity) has this self-condemning prerequisite: you must believe something without ample evidence. If a group does not do this, I would argue that group is not a religion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Belief in Christianity requires a leap of faith. You have to jump across a chasm of ignorance, believing without evidence that there is an imaginary island on the other side.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This non-evidentiary path to \u201ctruth\u201d is inextricably bound to every conceivable version of evidence. This has created a fatal flaw in the Christian American mentality and even the best of Christians not only possess it, but are responsible for it.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Christian tenets of faith (which change year over year) do not come from the Bible, they come from people. Usually men, and usually white men. This has set the stage for a certain type of creepy, smarmy authoritative voice to evolve over the decades. That voice has become an emotionally coded language for evangelical Christians. When they hear that code, it\u2019s as if they fall under hypnosis and believe whatever is spoken.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This condition is a cancer on our society. It has allowed Right-Wing Extremists to hack into 30 &#8211; 40% of our population simply by issuing a few dog whistles and mimicking that sickening code. Not all Christians have been hacked, but 80% of White Evangelicals have. This embrace of \u201cfaith,\u201d as if it were a virtue, is the line of source code that has left all Christians susceptible to being hacked. If you\u2019re not a White Evangelical, you might fall prey to the next scam.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">All of Christianity is guilty because they all adhere to tenets of faith that cannot be proven with evidence, and that is where the fatal flaw begins.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ailment #2: Christianity\u2019s Toxic Doctrine<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Millions of Americans have been taught that they have \u201coriginal sin\u201d and are evil by nature. This idea resonates with normal human insecurities, so many follow the prescription and surrender to God in order to receive forgiveness. For a person to believe they have a \u201csin nature\u201d is wrong and profoundly unhealthy. Sin is an imaginary construct, but natural human behaviors are not. By asserting that a person is ugly to their core robs them of a much more beautiful version of their life that they might have lived had they never met a Christian.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Additionally, implying that someone is doomed to sin creates a tendency to make unethical choices when they might not have without this condemnation put upon them. If you believe you are bad, you will do bad things.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Religions indoctrinate people with this toxic idea, year after year, to millions of people who were born innocent. For that reason, I say all Christian churches are part of the problem. Its doctrine is toxic.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ailment #3: The Ambiguity of Your Scripture Allows All Manner of Evil to Lie Dormant<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Violent extremism is on the rise for a number of reasons, and Christianity is apparently helpless to defend against it happening within its own ranks. I believe this is because of the ambiguity of its scripture, and for this reason, all versions of Christianity will always be a danger to society.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There might be a few splinters of Christianity who do not imbue any version of The Bible with any magical powers. Those splinters are extremely scant, so I apply this condemnation to all Christians. They adhere to a religion that is based on an amorphous scripture. The Bible can be used to justify loving one\u2019s neighbor, or stoning a fornicator. On one page God desires mercy, and on another page he wants his chosen people to commit genocide.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This ambiguity allows religious people to dine on their faith cafeteria-style. Most often, religious people choose to apply the good or benign elements of scripture to their culture or religion. They blithely disregard the depiction of their God as a violent dictator who will send you to hell if you don\u2019t pay him homage. This is why Christians take umbrage when people blame their religion on violence perpetrated in its name. Religious adherents who commit acts of violence, they claim, have lost sight of what defines their faith. They aren\u2019t \u201ctrue Christians.\u201d But unfortunately, they are.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Christians have integrated themselves deeply into American society. Everyone assumes the faithful have peaceful intentions, until they don\u2019t. Their scripture allows plenty of leeway to invoke violence, and many Christians will as soon as they believe it has become necessary.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Allowing Christianity to exist without criticism is similar to allowing a Country Club in your neighborhood that still has a \u201cno Negroes\u201d clause in its by-laws. Even though the Club might not enforce that by-law, it should not be allowed to remain.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ailment #4: You participate in and contribute to a culture of unearned trust.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Certain roles in society garner automatic respect: doctors, lawyers, professors, state officials, scientists and clergy.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The automatic respect given to all of those professions is generally deserved. Their professions are backed by organizations that provide oversight and self-correcting measures. Those organizations will disbar bad lawyers, take away licenses to practice medicine, removed bad professors from tenure, or vote them out of office. The outputs of those professions can be measured both qualitatively and quantitatively.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Except the Clergy.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Their respect is illusory, and every Christian who attends church contributes to the illusion. They grant unearned trust to the person behind the podium, who claims to preach \u201ctruth\u201d but is making assertions without ample evidence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I\u2019m going to be fair: many church leaders are fine people, who, even though they proffer gibbering delusion, might actually give people a warm sense of well-being. As John Lennon says, \u201cWhatever gets you through the night.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Christianity has no central governing body that consistently and justly ensures that pastors who molest children are permanently banished. They have no self-correcting measures to reliably, and without bias, makes sure Pastors aren\u2019t preaching toxic political messages, or using their positions of power to unfairly manipulate people, or saying that climate change is a hoax, or that the election was stolen, etc. Every day, average Americans fall prey to pastors because they are given unearned respect. All Christians contribute to this.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">While many churches might be completely innocuous love-fests and pot-luck dinners, each one is neatly arranged in a field that is well-traveled by humanity, and it is minefield.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Conclusion<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Leaders in religious journalism should not be afraid of pointing out these ailments that afflict every type of Christian church. While its true that \u201chigh control\u201d churches have a worse effect, all churches spread these ailments, and they make our society vulnerable to very real danger.<\/p>\n<p>The world would be better off without the minority-bashing, fear-mongering, science-denying Christian churches. A real god would have done a much better job of structuring a religious faith for the benefit of <a name=\"5124\"><\/a>all.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5124) Divine misdirection<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>If Christianity is true, then Yahweh is playing a game of misdirection, devising a religious faith that appeals most fervently to less-educated, less-intelligent, and less-inquisitive people. On the other hand, punishing those who are the opposite. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jj1zcb\/the_negative_correlation_between_intelligence_and\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jj1zcb\/the_negative_correlation_between_intelligence_and\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Thesis: There is a negative correlation between intelligence metrics and religious belief, which is what we would expect to find in a world absent of a personal god, such as the Abrahamic God. If such a god existed, they would not make the world such that intelligence has a negative relationship with religious belief as this paints religion in a bad light and drives people away from religious belief, which is the opposite of what God wants.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Research shows, consistently, that non-religious people are more intelligent on average (see links below).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Whatever the explanation is, arrogance or what have you, the bottom line is that religious conviction is linked with lower levels of intelligence. That&#8217;s a fact, as studies all around the world have concluded the same thing.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If Christianity, for example, was true (any of the hundreds of versions if it) then God would have absolutely no reason to mislead so many people away from Christianity with these revealing facts.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Why did God make the world so that the more intelligent ones are\u00a0<em>less<\/em>\u00a0religious? To test us? To trick non-believers into being even more confident in their non-belief?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If non-religiousness causes higher intelligence, why didn&#8217;t God make it so that religiosity leads to attainment of higher intelligence to give believers advantage and faith?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If higher intelligence leads to non-religiousness, why did God make it so that religion seems to be the less attractive option to smarter people?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If intelligence fosters arrogance or whatever, then\u00a0<em>why<\/em>\u00a0did God make it so?\u00a0<em>Why<\/em>\u00a0did God make intelligent people less likely to be saved? Why is there no satisfying answer in the thousands of pages in the Bible or Quran? Why is this issue not even addressed?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This isn&#8217;t just Divine Hiddenness anymore, this is divine misdirection &#8212; purposeful, intentional misdirection by God, making religion seem less and less plausible the more you learn and the more you think.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This shows that it&#8217;s much more likely for God to not exist, at least not in the way that you believe.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">References:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[1]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/abs\/pii\/S0160289608000238?utm_source=chatgpt.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/abs\/pii\/S0160289608000238?utm_source=chatgpt.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[2]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https:\/\/bigthink.com\/articles\/the-more-intelligent-you-are-the-less-religious-and-vice-versa\/&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjPltiouqKMAxWSVUEAHfXqO0s4ChAWegQILBAB&amp;usg=AOvVaw2kB9azloiZHJrdr-XyUbS1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https:\/\/bigthink.com\/articles\/the-more-intelligent-you-are-the-less-religious-and-vice-versa\/&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjPltiouqKMAxWSVUEAHfXqO0s4ChAWegQILBAB&amp;usg=AOvVaw2kB9azloiZHJrdr-XyUbS1<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[3]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/23921675\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/23921675\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[4]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/abs\/pii\/S0160289617301848?utm_source=chatgpt.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.sciencedirect.com\/science\/article\/abs\/pii\/S0160289617301848?utm_source=chatgpt.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[5]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https:\/\/www.asanet.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/savvy\/documents\/spq\/Kanazawa_2010_SPQ_Snap.pdf&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjPltiouqKMAxWSVUEAHfXqO0s4ChAWegQINhAB&amp;usg=AOvVaw2dt0jhTIk1778yLGGyUAP8\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.google.com\/url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;opi=89978449&amp;url=https:\/\/www.asanet.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/savvy\/documents\/spq\/Kanazawa_2010_SPQ_Snap.pdf&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjPltiouqKMAxWSVUEAHfXqO0s4ChAWegQINhAB&amp;usg=AOvVaw2dt0jhTIk1778yLGGyUAP8<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[6]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/hilo.hawaii.edu\/campuscenter\/hohonu\/volumes\/documents\/TheRelationshipofReligiosityAtheismBeliefandIntelligenceKristyLungo.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/hilo.hawaii.edu\/campuscenter\/hohonu\/volumes\/documents\/TheRelationshipofReligiosityAtheismBeliefandIntelligenceKristyLungo.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[7]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2011.12425?utm_source=chatgpt.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/2011.12425?utm_source=chatgpt.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[8]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/richardlynn.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality-2006.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/richardlynn.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality-2006.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[9]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.bps.org.uk\/research-digest\/are-religious-people-really-less-smart-average-atheists?utm_source=chatgpt.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.bps.org.uk\/research-digest\/are-religious-people-really-less-smart-average-atheists?utm_source=chatgpt.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[10]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.newsweek.com\/atheism-intelligence-religion-evolution-instinct-natural-selection-610982?utm_source=chatgpt.com#google_vignette\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.newsweek.com\/atheism-intelligence-religion-evolution-instinct-natural-selection-610982?utm_source=chatgpt.com#google_vignette<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[11]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/neurosciencenews.com\/religion-atheism-intelligence-8391\/?utm_source=chatgpt.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/neurosciencenews.com\/religion-atheism-intelligence-8391\/?utm_source=chatgpt.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[12]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/34449007\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/34449007\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[13]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.psychologytoday.com\/us\/blog\/the-human-beast\/201005\/the-real-reason-atheists-have-higher-iqs?utm_source=chatgpt.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.psychologytoday.com\/us\/blog\/the-human-beast\/201005\/the-real-reason-atheists-have-higher-iqs?utm_source=chatgpt.com<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[14]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.livescience.com\/59361-why-are-atheists-generally-more-intelligent.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.livescience.com\/59361-why-are-atheists-generally-more-intelligent.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[15]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/15982104\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/15982104\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[16]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1384630\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1384630<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[17]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1385179\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/1385179<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[18]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.journals.uchicago.edu\/doi\/abs\/10.1086\/223231\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.journals.uchicago.edu\/doi\/abs\/10.1086\/223231<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[19]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/20504860\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/20504860\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[20]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/31610740\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/31610740\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[21]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/psycnet.apa.org\/record\/1930-03121-001\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/psycnet.apa.org\/record\/1930-03121-001<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[22]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/psycnet.apa.org\/record\/1930-02399-001\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/psycnet.apa.org\/record\/1930-02399-001<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[23]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/articles\/PMC8836311\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov\/articles\/PMC8836311\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[24]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.independent.co.uk\/news\/science\/atheists-more-intelligent-than-religious-people-faith-instinct-cleverness-a7742766.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.independent.co.uk\/news\/science\/atheists-more-intelligent-than-religious-people-faith-instinct-cleverness-a7742766.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[25]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.sciencedaily.com\/releases\/2017\/05\/170517101208.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.sciencedaily.com\/releases\/2017\/05\/170517101208.htm<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[26]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.psychologytoday.com\/gb\/blog\/the-scientific-fundamentalist\/201004\/why-atheists-are-more-intelligent-the-religious\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.psychologytoday.com\/gb\/blog\/the-scientific-fundamentalist\/201004\/why-atheists-are-more-intelligent-the-religious<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[27]\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.churchtimes.co.uk\/articles\/2014\/30-may\/features\/features\/why-atheists-are-brighter-than-christians\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.churchtimes.co.uk\/articles\/2014\/30-may\/features\/features\/why-atheists-are-brighter-than-christians<\/a><\/p>\n<p>The playing field for Christian salvation is heavily tilted depending on where someone was born and into whatever family. But it is further tilted away from those who pursue advanced academic degrees, those who carefully study religious texts, and those who exhibit high intelligence. This would not be the case if Christianity was true- in fact, it would be the direct <a name=\"5125\"><\/a>opposite.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5125) Christianity- the myth that calls other myths false<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christians are disturbingly indulgent when it comes to asserting their faith to be true and all others false. Especially without a shred of evidence to back up the claim. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/christianity-myth-that-calls-every.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/christianity-myth-that-calls-every.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It is absolutely\u00a0<strong>infuriating<\/strong>\u00a0that Christians\u2014of all people\u2014have the gall to declare that their religion is the\u00a0<em>one<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0<em>only<\/em>\u00a0truth while dismissing every other belief system as fantasy, delusion, or outright deception. The sheer arrogance required to make such a claim is astounding. They ridicule Greek mythology, laugh at Hindu deities, and mock indigenous spiritual traditions\u2014all while demanding that everyone accept\u00a0<em>their<\/em>\u00a0set of supernatural absurdities as objective reality.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Let\u2019s be crystal clear:\u00a0<strong>Christianity is mythology<\/strong>. It\u2019s a collection of ancient stories, borrowed traditions, and heavily edited scriptures, repackaged as divine truth. The only reason it gets a pass is because it wormed its way into political power centuries ago and has been gaslighting people ever since. If the Roman Empire had favored some other sect, modern Christians might be worshiping Mithras and claiming\u00a0<em>that<\/em>\u00a0was the one true faith. But no, because history played out in their favor, they now stand atop their artificially elevated pedestal, wagging their fingers at every other faith and calling them false.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>The Staggering Absurdity of Christian Exclusivism<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Christians who insist their religion is\u00a0<em>the<\/em>\u00a0truth love to talk about divine revelation. But if God revealed himself only to a tiny Middle Eastern tribe a few thousand years ago, what does that say about the billions of humans who lived before that? Were they just collateral damage? Why should a child born in rural India today be doomed to eternal damnation because they weren\u2019t lucky enough to be born into the \u201cright\u201d culture?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If Christianity were truly self-evident, why would\u00a0<strong>the vast majority of humanity throughout history not believe in it?<\/strong>\u00a0Even today, billions reject it. Yet Christians wave this off with condescending nonsense about \u201cblindness\u201d and \u201cspiritual deception.\u201d In their minds, the billions of Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and atheists are just\u00a0<strong>wrong<\/strong>, while they alone have stumbled upon the Ultimate Truth\u2122.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This isn\u2019t faith\u2014it\u2019s unchecked\u00a0<strong>narcissism<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Faith Is a Delusion, Not a Virtue<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">One of the most pathetic defenses of Christianity is that it \u201cbrings comfort\u201d and \u201cgives life meaning.\u201d So what?\u00a0<strong>So does insanity.<\/strong>\u00a0If a man walks around believing he\u2019s the Emperor of the Universe and it makes him happy, should we validate his delusion? If a cult convinces its members that they\u2019ll be rewarded in an afterlife, does that make their belief real?\u00a0<strong>Delusion is often more comfortable than reality\u2014but that doesn\u2019t make it true.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Christians brag about how their faith gives them hope. Hope in what? That the universe was handcrafted just for them? That an invisible cosmic dictator is watching their every move, waiting to punish or reward them like a celestial game show host? That their dead loved ones are waiting for them in some paradise?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The fact that these ideas feel good doesn\u2019t mean they\u2019re anything more than wishful thinking. In fact, that\u2019s\u00a0<em>exactly<\/em>\u00a0why they\u2019re so seductive. People cling to Christianity for the same reason they cling to any comforting lie\u2014it spares them from dealing with the terrifying uncertainty of reality. But that doesn\u2019t make it profound. It makes it\u00a0<strong>intellectually dishonest<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Stop Shoving Your Myth Down Everyone\u2019s Throats<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">What makes Christian arrogance so unbearable isn\u2019t just their belief in their mythology\u2014it\u2019s their\u00a0<strong>obsession with forcing it on others.<\/strong>\u00a0They want schools to teach it, governments to reflect it, laws to enforce it. They sneer at other religions while demanding that society cater to theirs. They pretend to be persecuted whenever someone dares to challenge their\u00a0<strong>unearned privilege<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Enough is enough. Believe whatever you want, but\u00a0<strong>don\u2019t pretend your myth is anything more than what it is<\/strong>\u2014one story among countless others, no more valid than the legends of Odin or Zeus. And certainly don\u2019t expect rational people to indulge your fantasy.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The world has suffered enough from Christian arrogance. It\u2019s time to\u00a0<strong>call it what it is\u2014delusion, wrapped in entitlement, masquerading as truth.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>If Christianity enjoyed an advantage of evidence against other faith traditions, this would be a different story, but it doesn\u2019t. If this was baseball, Christianity would strike out. Strike 1- contradictory scriptures replete with mythology and fantasy elements. Strike 2- scientifically-proven ineffectiveness of prayer to Jesus, Yahweh, or the Holy Ghost. Strike 3- no evidence of miracles now or previous. Actually there are more strikes, but that\u2019s enough to get it to limp back into the <a name=\"5126\"><\/a>dugout.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5126) Second Commandment fail<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christians rarely confront the entire text of the Second Commandment in Exodus 20 (neglecting for the moment that the only place where the term \u2018Ten Commandments\u2019 is used is a wholly different list in Exodus 34). If they did, they would confront the disturbingly odious concept of punishing children for the deeds of their parents. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1jjbbza\/ever_notice_that_christians_censor_the_ten\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1jjbbza\/ever_notice_that_christians_censor_the_ten\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This is an argument that I&#8217;ve not seen very often, but IMO, it&#8217;s extremely revealing of the dishonesty of Christians when it comes to the Mosaic commandments. (We all know there&#8217;s a lot more than 10, but that&#8217;s not the main point here.)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Specifically, commandment #2 always gets cut and usually also edited. Here&#8217;s what the passage actually says (emphasis added) (Exodus 20:4-6, NIV)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">You shall not make for yourself an image\u00a0in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship\u00a0them; for I, the\u00a0Lord\u00a0your God, am a jealous God,\u00a0<strong>punishing the children for the sin of the parents\u00a0to the third and fourth generation\u00a0of those who hate me, <\/strong>but showing love to a thousand\u00a0generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Everyone, including Christians, knows it wrong to punish children for what their parents have done. In our era, it&#8217;s a war crime. So when they post the &#8220;ten commandments&#8221; in the public square, they always leave out that part. In fact I&#8217;m convinced many Christians don&#8217;t even realize that&#8217;s in there.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Let&#8217;s also notice that there are really a couple of commandments here. The first one (verse 4) is that you cannot make statues of any kind, period. And the second one (verse 5) is that you cannot worship any statues of any kind. So, at minimum, in Exodus 20, we really have 11 commandments.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The few times I&#8217;ve seen Christian apologists deal with the jealous god who punishes children and grandchildren and great grandchildren and even great great grandchildren, they say he didn&#8217;t really mean it that way, and those children were going to end up being bad anyway because of their parents, so it&#8217;s not Yahweh&#8217;s fault it&#8217;s the parent&#8217;s fault.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">But what it means in practical purposes, if you take it literally, is that if any one of your 16 great-great grandparents worshiped anybody but Yahweh&#8230;. you&#8217;re cursed. Better go research that family tree!<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It&#8217;s the closest thing I&#8217;ve found to a knockout punch for the average Christian. They never have an adequate answer. Best they can do is handwave and say Jesus fixed it.<\/p>\n<p>If God is omnipotent then the text of the Second Commandment must have met his approval, meaning that he endorses the punishment of children for what the parents have done. If he doesn\u2019t, then he is neglectful for allowing such a concept to be presented in his holy message to <a name=\"5127\"><\/a>humankind.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5127) Absurdity of the Jesus story in modern times<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The story of Jesus is pounded into the defenseless brains of millions of children every year, leaving a permanent mark on their minds. Obviously, some overcome this stain, but for many, the damage remains until death. The story itself is absurd, especially when we compare it to the day-to-day reality that we all live in. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/a-three-day-death-sentence-absurdity-of.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/a-three-day-death-sentence-absurdity-of.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Imagine, for a moment, that someone told you today that a man was executed, stayed dead for three days, then got up, dusted himself off, and walked out of his grave like a guy waking up from a nap. You\u2019d assume they were joking\u2014or that they had been taken in by some fringe internet conspiracy. Yet, this is the foundational claim of Christianity, a belief held by billions, despite being the sort of thing that, if it happened now, would be filed under &#8220;bizarre hoax&#8221; on Snopes within hours.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">To make it even stranger, the story doesn\u2019t end there. After a few weeks of post-death appearances\u2014appearing to his disciples, having breakfast, and showing off his spear wound like a party trick\u2014Jesus decides to leave Earth by\u00a0<em>ascending<\/em>\u00a0into heaven. This was before we knew about outer space, of course, because &#8220;going up&#8221; in those days just meant &#8220;going where God lives.&#8221; Today, we know better. If a man literally ascended into the sky, he wouldn\u2019t be transported to some celestial paradise\u2014he\u2019d eventually either suffocate, freeze, or get cooked by radiation. At best, he&#8217;d be orbiting as the world&#8217;s first accidental astronaut.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The absurdity of these stories becomes even clearer when you compare them to the miraculous claims of modern cults or fringe religions. We laugh at Scientologists believing in Xenu, the galactic overlord, or at Heaven\u2019s Gate members thinking a spaceship was hiding behind the Hale-Bopp comet. But how is Jesus teleporting through locked doors or turning water into wine any less ridiculous? If someone today claimed their spiritual leader had just fed five thousand people with a couple of loaves and some fish, we\u2019d demand video evidence. Yet, because these stories were written down in an old book, they are treated as profound instead of preposterous.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Consider the other supernatural highlights from the Jesus mythos:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li>Walking on water\u2014something only possible if you\u2019re a magician performing a Vegas trick.<\/li>\n<li>Healing the blind with spit and dirt\u2014medieval folk medicine at best, unhygienic at worst.<\/li>\n<li>Cursing a fig tree for not having fruit\u00a0<em>out of season<\/em>\u2014the divine equivalent of throwing a tantrum at an ATM for being out of cash.<\/li>\n<li>Raising Lazarus from the dead\u2014if this happened today, medical experts would want to study the case, not canonize it.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And yet, many of the same people who dismiss UFO sightings or ghost stories will insist that these ancient supernatural claims are true. Why? Because they were told the stories as children, and childhood indoctrination is powerful. It allows bizarre tales to be accepted uncritically, even when they defy everything we know about reality.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">At the end of the day, the Jesus narrative isn\u2019t significantly different from the wilder tales of modern religious movements\u2014it\u2019s just older, polished by tradition, and protected by social norms that discourage people from pointing out its obvious absurdities. If a new cult leader today tried to sell the exact same story, they\u2019d be ridiculed. And yet, here we are, treating the resurrection as sacred while laughing at the likes of L. Ron Hubbard.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Perhaps in another 2,000 years, people will look back on today\u2019s bizarre religious claims with the same unquestioning reverence. Or maybe\u2014just maybe\u2014future generations will see them for what they are: elaborate fairy tales, nothing more.<\/p>\n<p>Human minds are highly susceptible to brainwashing. Although children are most effected, it can happen in adults as well. Christianity\u2019s bizarre claims are the stuff of fantasy fiction and the entire faith would die out if children were inoculated from this bullshit from birth to 18 years <a name=\"5128\"><\/a>old.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5128) Luke\u2019s adoptionist view squelched<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There is ample evidence that the author of the Gospel of Luke considered Jesus to have been the adopted son of God, and not the pre-existing eternal son of the Lord, as per standard modern Christian theology. His original writings were later distorted to coincide with the majority view. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jlxa39\/proof_that_codex_sinaiticus_the_earliest_codex_is\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jlxa39\/proof_that_codex_sinaiticus_the_earliest_codex_is\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Majority of the translations in Luke 3:22 says &#8220;You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased&#8221;. But is it what Luke or the original author actually wrote?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This picture here, which shows the\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/imgur.com\/a\/rSHIDwB\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Codex Sinaiticus<\/a>\u00a0manuscript, actually says that. However, the\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/imgur.com\/a\/p7tPQO1\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Codex Bezae<\/a>\u00a05th century manuscript says a different thing altogether. According to this particular manuscript, it says &#8220;You are my son, today I have begotten you&#8221;, possibly mimicking Psalms 2:7.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Justin Martyr, who was one of the earliest church father, actually appeals to the newer manuscript of Codex Bezae, same as Clement of Alexandria.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Justin Martyr says &#8220;but then the Holy Ghost, and for man&#8217;s sake, as I formerly stated, lighted on Him in the form of a dove, and there came at the same instant from the heavens a voice, which was uttered also by David when he spoke, personating Christ, what the Father would say to Him: &#8216;You are My Son: this day have I begotten You;&#8217; [the Father] saying that His generation would take place for men, at the time when they would become acquainted with Him:\u00a0<strong>&#8216;You are My Son; this day have I begotten you.'&#8221;<\/strong>\u00a0(Dialogue with Trypho Chapter 88)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Clement of Alexandria says &#8220;For we were illuminated, which is to know God. He is not then imperfect who knows what is perfect. And do not reprehend me when I profess to know God; for so it was deemed right to speak to the Word, and He is free. For at the moment of the Lord\u2019s baptism there sounded a voice from heaven, as a testimony to the Beloved,\u00a0<strong>\u201cThou art My beloved Son, today have I begotten Thee.\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0(The Instructor, book 1 ,Chapter 6)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It seems like Justin and Clement version allude to a different kind of &#8220;lost&#8221; manuscript. They could not have possibly be citing the 2nd century\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/imgur.com\/a\/m4Q0EuA\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">P4 manuscript<\/a>\u00a0as shown here, because it parallels with the 4th century Sinaiticus. This proofs that it is highly possible that the scribes of Luke changed and interpolated text even early within or a bit after Justin&#8217;s time.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Below are one of the commentaries from critical scholars:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">New testament scholar Bart Erhman says &#8220;This is the reading of codex Bezae and a number of ecclesiastical writers from the second century onward. I will argue that it is in fact the\u00a0<strong>original text of Luke,<\/strong>\u00a0and that orthodox scribes who could not abide its adoptionistic over\u00ac tones \u201ccorrected\u201d it into conformity with the parallel in Mark, \u201cYou are my beloved Son, in you I am well pleased\u201d (Mark 1:11)&#8230; Granting that the reading does not occur extensively after the fifth century, it cannot be overlooked that in witnesses of the second and third centuries, centuries that to be sure have not provided us with any superfluity of Greek manuscripts, it is virtually the only reading that survives. Not only was it the reading of the ancestor of codex Bezae and the Old Latin text of Luke, it appears also to have been the text known to Justin, Clement of Alexandria, and the authors of the Gospel according to the Hebrews and the Didascalia. It is certainly the text attested by the Gospel according to the Ebionites, Origen, and Methodius.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Somewhat later it is found in Lactantius, Juvencus, Hilary, Tyconius, Augustine, and several of the later apocryphal Acts. Here I should stress that except for the third century manuscript p4, there is no certain attestation of the other reading, the reading of our later manuscripts, in this early period. The reading of codex Bezae, then, is not an error introduced by an unusually aberrant witness. This manuscript is, in fact, one of the last witnesses to preserve it. Nor is it a \u201cWestern\u201d variant without adequate attestation&#8230; The magnitude of the textual changes in Luke, coupled with the virtual absence of such changes in Matthew or Mark, suggests that\u00a0<strong>the change was made for doctrinal reasons pure and simple\u2014to eliminate the potentially adoptionistic overtones of the text.<\/strong>&#8221; (The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament pg 62)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The question now is this. If this claim is true, then what else could the scribes maliciously change? Could it be that some other stories inside the current bible be fake? How can we verify without having any manuscript tracement back to the original authors?<\/p>\n<p>Evidence of scriptural manipulation is rampant in the Bible, as theologians frantically raced to make what it says consistent and in compliance with their wishes. A competent, omnipotent god would have had no need for such human assistance to \u2018perfect\u2019 his holy <a name=\"5129\"><\/a>scriptures.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5129) Three reasons to discredit prayers<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Jesus in the gospels promoted prayer as a sure-fire way to get God to do whatever you wanted. Real-world results have failed to confirm this promise. The following, presenting three problems with standard Christian claims about prayer, was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2025\/03\/precise-reasons-why-prayer-is-fantasy.html#more\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2025\/03\/precise-reasons-why-prayer-is-fantasy.html#more<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There are three primary reasons for suspecting that prayer is a fantasy exercise.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>One: We reside on an extremely tiny speck in the Cosmos: How are we\u00a0NOT\u00a0lost in space?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Over many millennia, humans have imagined\/invented gods who pay close attention to our deeds and thoughts. Because humans assumed that our habitat was the center of divine attention, which is the attitude we find in the Bible. But now we know there are hundreds of billions of galaxies, with trillions of planets\u2014and we can only guess at how many life-forms there may be scattered across the light-years. It should be noted as well, that since the spectacular discoveries about the Cosmos have been made, cosmologists\u00a0have not detected\u00a0a creator deity that matches in any way whatever the one depicted in the Christian scriptures\u2014supposedly all knowing, all powerful, and obsessed with human behavior\u2014which theologians have been redefining endlessly over the centuries. And the theologians themselves have failed to show us where we can find reliable, verifiable, objective data about gods. Billions of the laity\u2014thanks to brainwashing at an early age\u2014have accepted their speculations, guesswork and fantasies.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">In view of these realities, what are the probabilities that such a creator deity pays careful attention to life forms on trillions of planets? What are the chances that he\/she\/it wants to help humans find parking spaces\u2014or that it cares about those in the trauma\/distress of illnesses, especially since horrible diseases happen to be part of his intelligent design?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Given the very low probabilities, it\u2019s hard to escape the conclusion that prayer is talking to yourself.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Two: By what mechanisms do the thoughts bouncing around inside our skulls escape to reach a god?\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/theonion.com\/report-32-of-prayers-deflected-off-passing-satellites-1819569691\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">A recent article published<\/a>\u00a0by\u00a0The Onion\u00a0was titled:\u00a0Report: 32% of Prayers Deflected Off Passing Satellites. It includes this sentence:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">\u201cOf the remaining prayers, research confirms 64 percent fail to make it past the stratosphere because they aren\u2019t prayed hard enough, 94 percent of those with enough momentum are swallowed by a supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If nothing else, this bit of satire should prompt curiosity about how prayers manage to get from human heads to god. Christians don\u2019t seem to object to the affirmation in Romans 2:16. In this text the apostle Paul stated: \u201c\u2026on the day when, according to my gospel, God through Christ Jesus judges the secret thoughts of all.\u201d Paul was certain that his god was able to monitor human brain activity\u2014although he may not have realized what a \u201cbrain\u201d is. But how does that work? The clergy are so fond of claiming that \u201cgod works in mysterious ways,\u201d but this has become a clich\u00e9 to cover a wide range of things we don\u2019t understand about god. However, for us to accept that a divine being knows what each and every human being is thinking, at any time of the day or night, we need an explanation: how is this possible? \u201cWell, our god knows everything\u201d\u2014also fails as an explanation. It\u2019s no more than a clich\u00e9 too, which the devout accept because they\u2019ve heard it since they were toddlers. No, this won\u2019t do: Please, clergy and theologians, tell us exactly how our thoughts escape our heads to be heard and understood by a creator deity\u2014who might be settling major problems in distant galaxies. Don\u2019t forget, our tiny planet is lost in space.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Three: There is overwhelming evidence that prayers are not heard by god(s).<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This reality has been summed up well by Darrell W. Ray, in his book\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/gp\/product\/0970950519\/ref=as_li_qf_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;tag=tentoughpro0e-20&amp;creative=9325&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;creativeASIN=0970950519&amp;linkId=459b7247426fb73de4a82f53e472cddb\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The God Virus:\u00a0How Religion Infects Our Lives and Cultur<\/a>e:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">\u201cIt took two world wars for Europeans to realize that the prayers of millions of people were not answered. It doesn\u2019t take much intelligence to see that the god isn\u2019t working too well when 92 million people died in two world wars, or to see the complicity and cooperation of the Pope, Lutheran clergy and Christians with Hitler during WWII.\u201d (p. 75)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There was one horrendous event that illustrates the inattention of god especially. On 10 June 1944, just a few days after the Allied landing at Normandy, German soldiers assaulted a small village in France, Oradour-sur-Glane. Their goal was to murder everyone. The men were herded into barns, which were set on fire. The woman and children\u2014452 of them\u2014were packed into the church, then machine-gunned and firebombed. Only one woman managed to escape.\u00a0This happened in a church.\u00a0Was god not in a mood to hear their prayers that day? (See especially, Sarah Farmer,\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Martyred-Village-Commemorating-Massacre-Oradour-sur-Glane\/dp\/0520224833\/ref=sr_1_4?crid=3QX86DRYKZFOV&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.4ZSfUnLrimU8g52BlPnoZvnjHWk8MN_MpZTmssV16QIEh0YRSSeEamiu7uzmsveOmTnQjddVdYGREBfLHshkGmf5gJTA3CIjE2HaQKcA02FdMIGnq16pcmrRv5g5IgDyVazIwakLHCi5aw0D_0u1RlzsIoq-gOwsqQJ5rrvgPVbnebyDxojnvM8jcmNrpDEVxkuwuBMAE1MV1i_7S7hYB5B7c2ONJxX59_insPzd6Iw.EqEHLAcNAphGoUyd5cCRptZ8-3ksjq80GHkmRZNW3wY&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=sarah+farmer&amp;qid=1743126187&amp;s=books&amp;sprefix=sarah+farmer%2Cstripbooks%2C84&amp;sr=1-4\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Martyred Village:\u00a0Commemorating the 1944 Massacre at Oradour-sur-Glane<\/a>)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Of course, the Holocaust\u2014one of the most thoroughly documented crimes in human history\u2014makes us extremely skeptical that prayer works in any way. As one stinging meme has put it: \u201cHow did you sleep last night? Like God during the Holocaust.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Such realities are commonly ignored by the faithful, who embrace confirmation bias. That is, they know their prayers have been answered when a cancer patient they pray for beats the disease. \u201cSee, prayer works!\u201d Their cherished assumptions are confirmed. But the cancer patient in the next bed, whom no one prayed for, dies. What does that tell you about god? If a creator god has the power to cure one cancer patient, why doesn\u2019t he\/she\/it eliminate cancer from the planet altogether?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There are far too many things about prayer that the devout do not want to admit, that they decline to think about. Because to do so would jeopardize their religion instilled during formative years.<\/p>\n<p>The failure of prayers to show any meaningful impact on everyday outcomes is extremely strong evidence against the truth of Christianity. In fact, it represents, by itself, sufficient enough to conclude that Christianity is <a name=\"5130\"><\/a>false.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5130) Fifteen questions that stump Christians<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Logic is a stumbling block to much of Christian theology. In the following, 15 questions are asked about which Christian answers would leave any objective questioner unsatisfied.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jmo0wk\/believers_typically_have_a_problem_explaining\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jmo0wk\/believers_typically_have_a_problem_explaining\/<\/a><\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1jmo0wk-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<ol>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ol>\n<li><strong>If God is all-powerful, why does evil exist?<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This is the classic \u201cproblem of evil\u201d that theologians have struggled with for ages. If God is omnipotent and benevolent, how can he allow innocent people to suffer? Free will is often invoked as an explanation, but it doesn\u2019t account for natural disasters or childhood illnesses. Saying \u201cGod works in mysterious ways\u201d feels like a cop-out. Atheists want to know how you reconcile the existence of a loving God with the reality of profound, undeserved suffering in the world. Atheists also note that the Christian God admits to deliberately creating natural disasters at least (Isaiah 45:7)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2.\u00a0<strong>Why does God require worship and praise?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">For an all-powerful, self-sufficient being, God seems awfully preoccupied with being adored by his creations. The idea of an omnipotent deity demanding constant worship and submission seems petty and insecure. What does God get out of it? Is his ego really that fragile? Atheists wonder why a God who is supposed to be the embodiment of perfect love would be so hungry for validation from flawed, finite humans.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3.\u00a0<strong>Why are there so many religions, each claiming to be the one true faith?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There are thousands of religions in the world, each with its own set of doctrines, rituals, and truth claims. They can\u2019t all be right, but they can all be wrong. Isn\u2019t it more likely that they are all human constructs, reflecting our cultural and psychological needs rather than divine revelation? Atheists are skeptical of any religion claiming a monopoly on truth, especially when those claims are based on faith rather than evidence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4.\u00a0<strong>How can you be certain that your religion is the right one?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Building on the previous question, atheists wonder how religious people can have such unshakable confidence in their particular belief system. Is it simply an accident of birth, or did you objectively evaluate all the world\u2019s religions before settling on yours? Have you ever seriously considered that you might be wrong? Atheists are wary of certainty, especially when it comes to existential questions that humans have grappled with for millennia.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">5.\u00a0<strong>Why does God communicate through ancient texts and not directly?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God wants to have a relationship with humans, why does he rely on cryptic, contradictory texts written thousands of years ago? Why not just speak to us directly, or at least provide unambiguous, contemporaneous evidence of his existence? The fact that God\u2019s alleged communication is indistinguishable from human writings suggests that it is human writings. Atheists struggle to understand why an all-powerful deity would choose such an inefficient and unreliable mode of communication. Any deity who knows everything would surely know exactly what would help to persuade (not coerce) the skeptical better than at present &#8211; so why not just do it?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">6.\u00a0<strong>How can you reconcile science with religion?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Science has provided natural explanations for phenomena that were once attributed to God or the supernatural. From the Big Bang to evolution to neuroscience, the more we learn about the world, the less we need to invoke a divine creator. Many religious beliefs, such as young earth creationism or the efficacy of prayer, directly contradict scientific evidence. Atheists want to know how you integrate scientific knowledge with religious doctrine, or if you simply compartmentalize them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">7.\u00a0<strong>Why does God care about what we believe, rather than how we behave?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Many religions place a heavy emphasis on holding certain beliefs or accepting certain doctrines, sometimes even more so than on moral behavior. But why would God care more about what we think than how we act? Isn\u2019t it more important to be a good person than to have the right theology? Atheists are puzzled by the idea that a loving God would condemn someone to eternal punishment for not believing in him, regardless of their actions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">8.\u00a0<strong>How can you derive morality from religion when religious texts contain so much violence, misogyny, and oppression?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The Bible and other religious texts are full of passages that condone or even celebrate horrific acts, from genocide to slavery to the subjugation of women. These texts reflect the cultural norms and biases of their time, not timeless moral truths. Atheists question how anyone can claim that religion is the source of morality when its supposed moral authority is so deeply flawed and contradictory. Many atheists believe that morality is derived from reason, empathy, and a concern for human wellbeing, not from ancient scriptures.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">9.\u00a0<strong>Why does God intervene in some situations but not others?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Many religious people attribute positive events or narrow escapes to God\u2019s intervention, such as surviving a car crash or finding a job. But this raises the question of why God doesn\u2019t intervene more often, especially in cases of great suffering or injustice. If he has the power to stop a tragedy but chooses not to, doesn\u2019t that make him complicit in the suffering? Atheists see claims of divine intervention as a form of confirmation bias, where people selectively attribute good fortune to God while ignoring all the times he apparently doesn\u2019t show up.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">10.\u00a0<strong>Why does God require faith rather than evidence?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">In most areas of life, we base our beliefs on evidence and reason. But religion often demands that we accept extraordinary claims on faith alone. Why would God create us with rational minds but then expect us to believe without proof? Isn\u2019t that a setup for confusion and deception? Atheists think that if God really wanted us to know him, he would provide clear, verifiable evidence of his existence that didn\u2019t require a leap of faith.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">11.\u00a0<strong>How can heaven be perfect if our loved ones are in hell?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Many religions teach that those who don\u2019t accept the right beliefs or live the right way will be condemned to eternal torment in hell. But how can heaven be a place of perfect bliss if some of our loved ones are suffering forever? Would you really be able to enjoy paradise knowing that your child or parent or spouse was in agony? Atheists find the idea of hell morally repugnant and logically inconsistent with the concept of a loving God.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">12.\u00a0<strong>Why does God need a blood sacrifice to forgive sins?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The central tenet of Christianity is that Jesus died on the cross to atone for human sin. But why does God require a blood sacrifice to grant forgiveness? Can\u2019t he just forgive us without someone having to die? The whole concept of substitutionary atonement seems primitive and barbaric, more like an ancient ritual than a moral necessity. Atheists question why an all-powerful, all-loving God would set up such a convoluted and violent system of redemption.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">13.\u00a0<strong>Why do prayers go unanswered?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God is all-knowing and all-powerful, why does he so often fail to answer prayers, even those that are sincere and heartfelt? When a child dies of cancer or a natural disaster wipes out a community, were they just not praying hard enough? The apparent inefficacy of prayer suggests that either God doesn\u2019t exist, or he doesn\u2019t intervene in human affairs the way many religious people believe. Atheists see prayer as a form of wishful thinking, not a reliable way to affect change in the world.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">14.\u00a0<strong>Why do religious beliefs and practices vary so widely by culture?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If there is one true God and one true religion, why do religious beliefs and practices differ so dramatically across cultures? From polytheism to monotheism, from animism to ancestor worship, the diversity of human religious experience is staggering. Even within a single religion like Christianity, there are countless denominations and interpretations. Atheists see this as evidence that religion is a human construct, shaped by cultural and historical factors rather than divine revelation.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">15.\u00a0<strong>Why do many religious people fear or distrust atheists?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Studies consistently show that atheists are among the most disliked and distrusted groups out there (particularly in America), and that they\u2019re often considered immoral or unpatriotic. But why? Atheists are just people who don\u2019t believe in God, not necessarily bad people. In fact, many atheists are deeply moral and ethical, basing their values on reason and compassion rather than religious doctrine. So why the stigma? Is it because atheists challenge the assumptions and authority of religion? Is it because religious people fear that without God, anything goes? Atheists want to know why their lack of belief is so threatening to some religious people, and how we can build bridges of understanding and respect.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Most answers to these, quite reasonable, questions tend towards special pleading, creative exegesis or fallacious Arguments, those either from Ignorance (God moves in mysterious ways, indeed) or Authority (our scripture is divine and so must be true). In case of question 1. the claim is ultimately that genocide is &#8216;justified&#8217;, an egregiously immoral defense known as Command Theory. My argument is that believers cannot adequately answer these questions, at least other to their own satisfaction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>A world with a true religion would look very different. First, there wouldn\u2019t be a lot of competing religions as the one true one would easily win out and dominate. Second, there would be verifiable evidence that meets scientific scrutiny. Neither of these exists, so we can confidently state that all religions are <a name=\"5131\"><\/a>false.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5131) Six flat tires<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>If you imagine Christianity as a truck sporting six tires, then consider the amount of air in each tire, it turns out there\u2019s a good case to assume that they are all flat, and the truck is stuck in place. The following discusses six aspects (tires) of Christianity that are going nowhere:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2025\/03\/with-so-many-flat-tires-how-does.html#more\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2025\/03\/with-so-many-flat-tires-how-does.html#more<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I can think of at least six Christian tires that have been totally, permanently destroyed. They will be flat forever.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>(1)\u00a0\u00a0God is good, loving, and all powerful.<\/strong> Horrendous human and animal suffering\u2014ongoing for millennia\u2014provide abundant evidence that this claim is feeble, indeed ridiculous.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>(2)\u00a0\u00a0The resurrection of Jesus, that is, god raised Jesus from the dead, thereby rescuing humans<\/strong>\u2014those who believe in it\u2014from eternal punishment. Yet the accounts of Easter morning in the gospels are contradictory and confusing. There are no reports of anyone\u00a0actually seeing the resurrection happen.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>(3)\u00a0\u00a0We can be guided and inspired by the god portrayed in the Bible.<\/strong> Anyone who has read the Bible cover-to-cover can see that his claim is baseless. The god described in both the Old and New Testaments is cruel, bad-tempered, vindictive. Apologists deflect attention from this painful truth by quoting feel-good texts\u2026and most churchgoers are none the wiser.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>(4)\u00a0\u00a0The Bible was divinely inspired\u2014it was imparted to human authors by the Holy Spirit.<\/strong> Yet it\u2019s so easy to see that individual authors did not agree on theology. I have often issued this challenge: read the gospel of Mark, straight through without stopping. Take a break, then do the same with the gospel of John. These two glaringly different portraits of Jesus undermine the claim of divine inspiration.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>(5)\u00a0\u00a0The Christian god watches everything that every human does, says, thinks.<\/strong> This claim is based on the biblical concept of the Cosmos: our earth (the Bible authors didn\u2019t even know it is a planet) is just below the heavenly realm where its god resides (above the clouds and below the Moon). Thus this deity is able to spy on, monitor, everybody on earth. But this biblical view has been thoroughly discredited by smart humans who have, for centuries, been searching for facts about reality. Our earth is one of trillions of planets in our galaxy alone, and there are hundreds of billions of galaxies. What are the probabilities? Is a creator god\u2014yet to be discovered by cosmologists\u2014really obsessed with every human, and keeping track of our sins?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>(6)\u00a0\u00a0We can feel god\/Jesus in our hearts, thus we know our Christian religion is the one true faith.<\/strong> When we don\u2019t understand things, we are assured by apologists that god moves in mysterious ways. This is perhaps the worst flat tire of all: theologians, apologists, and clergy have never been able to show us where we can find reliable, verifiable, objective data about god(s). Feeling god\/Jesus in your hearts falls far short of this requirement. What believers feel in their hearts in\u00a0only\u00a0evidence of what they\u2019re feeling. Period. Why would devout Christians accept feelings as proof of their religion, but brush aside such feelings as expressed by Jews, Muslims, and Mormons? John Loftus has famously suggested\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/dp\/1616147377?&amp;linkCode=li2&amp;tag=wwwdebunkingc-20&amp;linkId=1a5f6faab2fdd5def0b0b54f66f0dece&amp;language=en_US&amp;ref_=as_li_ss_il\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The\u00a0Outsider Test of Faith<\/a>, that is, apply to your own religion the standards by which other religions are said to be false.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">These flat tires\u2014and many others as well\u2014have been noticed and discussed by hundreds of serious thinkers since the time of the Enlightenment. Yet the huge ecclesiastical bureaucracy keeps chugging along, even as it has fractured into thousands of different brands that don\u2019t agree on theology. This is a major defect, yet another embarrassing flat tire!<\/p>\n<p>The point cannot be over-emphasized that in a reality where Christianity is true, none of these \u2018tires\u2019 would be flat- they would all be fully inflated. Critical analysis of the faith would be practically laughable in its insincerity, rather than powerfully convincing, as it <a name=\"5132\"><\/a>is.<\/p>\n<p><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">(5132) The virgin birth didn\u2019t happen<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">There is compelling evidence to disprove the virgin birth of Jesus, thus providing a solid anti-proof of Christian theology. The following was taken from:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jmm15o\/the_virgin_birth_disproves_christianity_and_islam\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jmm15o\/the_virgin_birth_disproves_christianity_and_islam\/<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Thesis: The Virgin Birth of Jesus Christ is part of Christianity and Islam, but it didn&#8217;t happen, therefore Christianity and Islam are false <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Pre-emptive rebuttal<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Before even making the argument, I have to get this out of the way. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence!&#8221; <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">That&#8217;s a good saying, but have you heard of this one? &#8220;EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE!!!&#8221; <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Don&#8217;t forget it&#8217;s Christians and Muslims that make the positive claim that Jesus had a miraculous birth. Something something teapot in space. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Technically, all I have to do is sit here and ask people for evidence that it happened. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">But I&#8217;m not gonna do that. I&#8217;m gonna go above and beyond. I&#8217;m gonna show you significant, compelling evidence that the Virgin Birth <\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">didn&#8217;t<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> happen. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Argument Section<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Some of you may know that there are four gospels which each attempt to recount the story of Jesus in their own (contradictory) way &#8212; we have Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">We know the order in which these gospels were written &#8212; Mark is the earliest source and John is the latest source <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Can you guess which gospel <\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">DOESN&#8217;T<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\"> have the Virgin Birth? Do you think it&#8217;s the earliest source Mark? Or the latest source John? <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">That&#8217;s right! It&#8217;s both! <\/span><\/p>\n<h4 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">(1) Mark, the earliest gospel, fails to mention the Virgin Birth even though we expect it to be there &#8212; to make matters worse, John doesn&#8217;t mention it either<\/h4>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The fact that the earliest gospel fails to mention such an important detail is evidence that the Virgin Birth myth was invented later. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">And do you know what was written even before any of the gospels? Paul&#8217;s Epistles. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">We would expect Paul to write about Jesus&#8217; miraculous birth, especially if he wrote about Jesus&#8217; origins to argue for his authority, which he did in Galations 4:4 where Paul mentions that Jesus was born of a woman but doesn&#8217;t mention the miraculous conception. He asserts that Jesus is descended from David in Romans 1:3, and we know that Joseph is descended from David, not Mary. So, <\/span><\/p>\n<h4 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">(2) Paul&#8217;s Epistles, written before all the gospels, also doesn&#8217;t mention the Virgin Birth even though we expect him to mention it<\/h4>\n<h4 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">(3) Out of the four gospels, only Matthew and Luke recount the Virgin Birth, but their stories contradict each other<\/h4>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">So that the post doesn&#8217;t become too long, I won&#8217;t dive too deep into this one, but trust me. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Did you know Jesus had a brother? <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">James the Just, the first bishop of the first church in Jerusalem, headed the Jewish Christians, the earliest group of Christians. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The Ebionites were another very early group who had close ties to Jesus&#8217; family. <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">What do they both have in common, apart from their closeness to Jesus? <\/span><\/p>\n<h4 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">(4) The earliest churches, comprised of Jesus&#8217; own family and closest followers, didn&#8217;t believe in his miraculous conception<\/h4>\n<h4 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">(5) There are virgin birth myths that predate Christianity &#8212; for example Horus in Ancient Egyptian mythology and others &#8212; suggesting that the Virgin Birth may have been added to the narrative to make Jesus appear to have more divine authority<\/h4>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">You would think that if the virgin birth actually occurred, that this would have been a vital component of Christian theology, and therefore it would have been a consistent and well-understood theme of Christian history. Instead, it appears to have been an added-on myth during the early development of the faith. <\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">If the virgin birth had actually occurred, God would have been careful to make sure that it was consistently documented as such from the start.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">If the virgin birth had not occurred, God would have been careful to exclude it from his holy scriptures.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The above two conditional statements collide, resulting in a major self-own for <a name=\"5133\"><\/a>Christianity.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>(5133) The mind virus of religion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>We have reached a point where we know enough about the world to realize that the ancient myths of religions were not based on objective facts, but rather superstition and fantasy. Yet, wide swaths of the human population remains enslaved by these delusions. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/the-mind-virus-of-religion-why-are-we.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/the-mind-virus-of-religion-why-are-we.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It is 2025. We have sequenced the human genome, mapped the cosmic microwave background, and developed artificial intelligence capable of composing symphonies and diagnosing diseases. And yet, somehow, vast swaths of humanity\u2014including, heartbreakingly, young people\u2014are still pledging allegiance to ancient fables, clinging to a mythology that has been refuted by reason, evidence, and basic common sense for centuries.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If religion were simply a personal quirk\u2014like an affinity for astrology or homeopathy\u2014it would be one thing. But it\u2019s not. Religion is a mind virus, an intellectual parasite that thrives on uncritical thinking and the suppression of doubt. As Richard Dawkins put it in\u00a0<em><a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/43wOvHL\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The God Delusion<\/a><\/em>,\u00a0religion is &#8220;a process of non-thinking&#8221; and &#8220;a meme that prays on the gullible and the indoctrinated.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And indoctrination is key. Why else would a 19-year-old raised in a world of science, reason, and instant access to information suddenly decide that the unprovable metaphysics of Christianity hold &#8220;The Truth?&#8221; It\u2019s certainly not because of some grand revelation that stands up to scrutiny. No, it\u2019s because belief is a social contagion, passed down from peer groups, emotional experiences, and the relentless grip of religious institutions that have mastered the art of manipulating young minds.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This isn\u2019t just an academic concern. The consequences of religious belief are real and often destructive. Christopher Hitchens, in\u00a0<em><a href=\"https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/03\/God%20Is%20Not%20Great\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">God Is Not Great<\/a><\/em>,\u00a0reminded us that<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">&#8220;religion poisons everything.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It warps moral reasoning, demanding obedience rather than ethical reflection. It replaces curiosity with dogma. It turns perfectly intelligent people into willing participants in their own intellectual captivity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">And so, in 2025, here I am: watching a relative of mine, a freshman in community college\u2014who could be exploring philosophy, science, and the grandeur of a universe without divine micromanagement\u2014choose instead to subjugate his mind to a 2,000-year-old belief system based on fear, submission, and unearned certainty. Instead of seeking knowledge to ensure he is not wasting his life, he seeks my conversion. Instead of questioning the claims of Christianity, he memorizes apologetic answers. When asked why he thinks his religion is true, he responds he feels it is true in his heart, and that&#8217;s confirmation enough.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">What can be done to fight back against this lunacy? Teach? Challenge? Push for rigorous education in critical thinking and the scientific method.? Remind people\u2014especially the young\u2014that believing something doesn&#8217;t make it true? That feelings are not facts? That an ancient book is not an authority on reality?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Carl Sagan once warned in his book,\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/4jcNRny\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">The Demon-Haunted World<\/a>,<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">&#8220;Avoidable human misery is more often caused not so much by stupidity as by ignorance, particularly our ignorance about ourselves.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If religion is allowed to continue its viral spread unchallenged, are we surrendering to ignorance, choosing fables over facts, and resigning ourselves to a future where truth is optional and delusion is celebrated?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It is way past time to stop tolerating this nonsense.<\/p>\n<p>Very slow progress is being made, too slow for most of us, but eventually humankind will rid itself of these stultifying myths and emerge into the wonderful world of <a name=\"5134\"><\/a>reality.<\/p>\n<p><strong><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">(5134) Paul was excessively self-indulgent<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Although it doesn\u2019t prove Christianity false, the fact that Paul was a major self-promoter tends to suggest that he would not have been the man chosen by God to promote a faith that is based on humility and modesty. The following was taken from:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=22229\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/02\/paul-apostle-original-i-connoisseur.html<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Imagine for a moment scrolling through your favorite social media feed, only to find that every post is a selfie\u2014with a divine twist. That\u2019s Paul the Apostle for you. His letters, replete with the singularly majestic &#8220;I,&#8221; might just qualify him as the original poster obsessed with himself, albeit with heavenly credentials.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">The Many, Many \u201cI\u2019s\u201d<\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">If Paul were alive today, his Instagram bio might read, \u201cI, me, and I\u2014delivering divine revelations one letter at a time.\u201d A quick glance at his epistles reveals an unabashed love affair with the first-person singular. In a literary world where collaborative spirit is often celebrated, Paul\u2019s incessant \u201cI received,\u201d \u201cI saw,\u201d and \u201cI declare\u201d almost reads like the ancient equivalent of a Twitter feed completely dominated by his own thoughts. Is it narcissism, or is it just really, really, really confident storytelling? One might joke that if self-absorption were a sport, Paul would have been the undefeated champion of the apostolic games.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Divine Calling: The Ultimate One-Man Show<\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul didn\u2019t just stop at frequent self-mentions; he elevated his spiritual calling to headline status. His conversion story isn\u2019t a humble tale of transformation\u2014it\u2019s the blockbuster origin story where he stars as the uniquely chosen hero. Picture Paul as the lead in a divine biopic titled\u00a0<\/span><em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">&#8220;I, Paul: Chosen Above All.&#8221;<\/span><\/em><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">\u00a0In his letters, he repeatedly positions his revelatory experience as the pinnacle of spiritual encounters, subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) suggesting that his mission outshone those of the original disciples. It\u2019s as if he were saying, \u201cMove over, guys\u2014I got the special guest role from the Big Guy upstairs!\u201d This self-aggrandizement might seem less like modesty and more like an epic case of spiritual super-ego.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">A Rhetorical Renaissance of Self-Promotion<\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Sure, some might argue that Paul\u2019s style was the norm in his cultural context\u2014akin to a modern-day keynote speaker recounting personal triumphs to establish credibility. Yet, when his letters are scrutinized with a knowing wink, his relentless emphasis on his own divine appointments borders on what we\u2019d today recognize as narcissistic flair. Think of it as an ancient version of humble brags: \u201cI was once a persecutor, but now I\u2019m an apostle!\u201d It\u2019s hard not to laugh at the sheer volume of self-references that make Paul\u2019s epistles seem like an endless loop of \u201cme, myself, and I.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">When Self-Promotion Meets Spiritual Authority<\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul\u2019s exhaustive documentation of his personal transformation and unique calling was his version of saying, \u201cI\u2019m not just any apostle\u2014I\u2019m THE apostle.\u201d Whether this amounts to genuine narcissism or a brilliant rhetorical strategy remains up for debate, but it certainly bears thoughtful investigation.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3 class=\"western\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Conclusion<\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">In the end, Paul\u2019s letters offer a fascinating glimpse into a style of self-expression that, by any ancient or modern standards, might be labeled as narcissistic. His prolific use of \u201cI\u201d and his recurring claims of a singular, superior calling create an impression of a man who couldn\u2019t resist putting himself in the spotlight\u2014divinely appointed or not. So next time you find yourself rolling your eyes at a friend\u2019s incessant self-promotional posts, remember that Paul set the precedent centuries ago, proving that even the most sacred texts can have a self-indulgent twist.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">Paul promoted Paul as much as he did Jesus, a man he never met, and whose theology he distorted to bend to his own ridiculous substitutionary punishment fantasy. Christianity would be on firmer ground if Paul had not <a name=\"5135\"><\/a>existed.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><strong>(5135) Why was Jesus\u2019 sacrifice necessary?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christian theology states that Jesus (Yeshua) had to die so that Christians could be forgiven and gain entrance into heaven. But this contrasts with God forgiving multiple times in the Old Testament without the need for a blood sacrifice. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=22229\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"font-size: medium;\">https:\/\/new.exchristian.net\/2025\/02\/paul-apostle-original-i-connoisseur.html<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If Yeshua\u2019s Sacrifice Was Necessary, Why Did God Forgive Sins Before It?<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1jpo69m-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<p>Christian doctrine claims that Yeshua\u2019s death was necessary for salvation because God is just and cannot forgive sins without blood sacrifice (Hebrews 9:22). However, the Old Testament repeatedly shows God forgiving sins without blood sacrifice. This forces Christians into an impossible position. If blood sacrifice is required for forgiveness, then how did God forgive people before Yeshua\u2019s death?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ezekiel 18:21-22 God forgives the wicked if they repent, with no mention of sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2 Chronicles 7:14 If people humble themselves and pray, God forgives them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Jonah 3:10 The people of Nineveh repented, and God forgave them without sacrifice.<\/p>\n<p>If God could forgive without Yeshua&#8217;s sacrifice before, why did He suddenly need it later?<\/p>\n<p>If Christians say, &#8220;God changed the rules,&#8221; that contradicts Malachi 3:6: &#8220;I the Lord do not change.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>If they say, &#8220;The old way wasn\u2019t enough,&#8221; then they admit that God\u2019s original system was flawed.<\/p>\n<p>Christians will either have to admit that blood sacrifice wasn\u2019t always necessary (destroying the foundation of Yeshua\u2019s atonement) or claim that God changed His standards (which contradicts His unchanging nature).<\/p>\n<p>No matter how they answer, they are forced to contradict either their own theology or the Bible itself.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>This is an example of where Christianity would be better off if it had divorced completely with Judaism and was started singularly by Jesus as a brand-new religion. Instead, it is saddled with this disturbing contradiction that has no viable <a name=\"5136\"><\/a>solution.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5136) Christianity can\u2019t be the continuation of Judaism<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christianity, at least as currently practiced, cannot be the theological sequel of Judaism, strictly because of its polytheistic nature. Yeshua (Jesus) should have made this clear. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jmq2n2\/christianity_is_pure_polytheistic_religion\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jmq2n2\/christianity_is_pure_polytheistic_religion\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If Christianity is truly the continuation of Judaism, a strictly monotheistic faith, how do you reconcile the fact that for over 1,500 years, Jewish theology never included a &#8216;God the Son&#8217; or &#8216;God the Holy Spirit&#8217; as separate divine persons? If Yeshua\u2019s earliest Jewish followers, such as the Nazarenes and Ebionites, rejected his divinity and continued worshiping God alone, but later Gentile Christians developed the doctrine of the Trinity formally established only after centuries of debate at the Council of Nicaea (325 CE) and the Council of Constantinople (381 CE) doesn&#8217;t this indicate a shift from pure monotheism to a belief system that mirrors polytheistic influences?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If the core principle of Judaism is that God is absolutely One (Deuteronomy 6:4), and Yeshua himself worshiped and prayed to the Father alone (John 17:3), how can Christianity claim to uphold the same monotheism while maintaining that God consists of three co-equal persons, a concept never taught by Moses, the prophets, or even Yeshua himself?<\/p>\n<p>Jews are justified to reject Christianity while holding to the concept that Jesus was a legitimate preacher who gained some influence during his time. But for a Jew to accept the tri-une nature of God is a game-ender. Christianity cannot qualify as Judaism, <a name=\"5137\"><\/a>Part 2.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5137) Consistent physiological pattern to NDEs<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One of the arguments for life after death is a pattern of experiences that are associated with people who have close shaves with death, but these claims have been severely damaged by recent scientific research into this subject. If near-death-experiences (NDEs) are indeed purely natural phenomena, this would remove one of religion\u2019s \u2018go-to\u2019 pieces of evidence for the existence of an \u2018afterlife.\u2019 The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/news\/2025-04-neuroscientific-death-physiological-pattern.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/news\/2025-04-neuroscientific-death-physiological-pattern.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Neuroscientific model of near-death experiences finds consistent physiological pattern<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">A multidisciplinary team led by the University of Li\u00e8ge has proposed a unified neuroscientific model explaining the mechanisms behind near-death experiences (NDEs), drawing on converging empirical findings across neurobiology, psychology, and evolutionary theory.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Findings suggest that factors such as oxygen deprivation, increased carbon dioxide, and disrupted\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/tags\/brain+energy+metabolism\/\">brain energy metabolism<\/a>\u00a0can initiate\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/tags\/brain+responses\/\">brain responses<\/a>\u00a0that lead to vivid perceptual and\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/tags\/emotional+experiences\/\">emotional experiences<\/a>\u00a0often reported during NDEs.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Subjects reporting NDEs describe a wide range of phenomena, though typically only certain types of experiences are elevated to the level of public interest. Some of the more commonly retold types of NDEs include:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li>Out-of-body experiences, where there is a dissociative sense of leaving the physical body.<\/li>\n<li>Distorted awareness of time, with a sense that time has slowed down, stopped, or accelerated.<\/li>\n<li>An emotional sense of calm, peace, and well-being.<\/li>\n<li>A flood of memories or having one&#8217;s life &#8220;flash&#8221; before their eyes.<\/li>\n<li>Bright lights, long tunnels, and visitations by deceased relatives or unknown figures perceived as sentient, mystical, or spiritual imagery.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Many intriguing NDEs capture the imagination, and selection bias pushes us toward focusing on experiences that appear thematically repetitive. Less retold are NDEs that, though just as vivid, contain nightmarish, mundane, or nonsense themes. Subjective states resembling NDEs can occur in both life-threatening and non-life-threatening situations, such as fainting and drug use.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Scientifically, NDEs are described as episodes of disconnected consciousness that occur in contexts involving actual or perceived physical threats. Reported experiences are highly varied in phenomenology, with content and interpretation shaped by triggering conditions such as the individual&#8217;s psychological state and\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/tags\/physiological+responses\/\">physiological responses<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Previous theories to explain NDEs have included psychological, neurophysiological, and evolutionary models, typically developed independently of a broader research framework.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">In the review article, &#8220;A neuroscientific model of near-death experiences,&#8221;\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41582-025-01072-z\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">published<\/a>\u00a0in\u00a0Nature Reviews Neurology, researchers conducted a narrative review that draws on human and animal studies, psychedelic neuroscience, and\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/tags\/clinical+data\/\">clinical data<\/a>\u00a0to explain how altered states of awareness can emerge at critical moments.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">No single experimental cohort was analyzed as the authors synthesized data from a range of previously published studies. Animal studies and neuroimaging data from\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/medicalxpress.com\/tags\/critically+ill+patients\/\">critically ill patients<\/a>\u00a0provided insight into the physiological breakdown that may initiate NDEs.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">A consistent pattern of physiological disruption emerged during cardiac arrest and other critical events. Reduced cerebral blood flow triggers hypoxia and elevates carbon dioxide levels.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">A cascade of factors then induces cerebral acidosis and depletes ATP, the cell&#8217;s primary energy source, and produces a surge in neurotransmitter release across multiple brain systems, including serotonin, dopamine, glutamate, noradrenaline, GABA, acetylcholine, and endorphins.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Key mechanistic details include elevated serotonin levels and 5-HT2A receptor activation, potentially contributing to visual hallucinations and feelings of hyper-reality. Dopamine release may influence emotional salience. Noradrenaline and acetylcholine appear linked to memory encoding. GABA and endorphins are proposed to induce calming sensations.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Researchers found parallels between NDEs and psychedelic-induced states, particularly with substances like DMT and ketamine, which affect similar receptor systems.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Psychological traits such as dissociation proneness and REM sleep intrusion tendencies may predispose individuals to experiencing NDEs under stress. Findings also suggest that NDEs and death-feigning behaviors (thanatosis) may share evolutionary roots as coping mechanisms.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Based on the convergence of neurobiological and psychological responses to severe physiological stress, researchers crafted NEPTUNE (Neurophysiological Evolutionary Psychological Theory Understanding Near-death Experience), a model to provide a comprehensive framework integrating diverse lines of evidence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">According to the study authors, &#8220;Our NEPTUNE model, although theoretical at present, provides a foundation for the next research phase, which will entail empirical testing of each mechanism.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Future research aims to empirically test aspects of the NEPTUNE model using neuroimaging, physiological monitoring, and continued exploration of brain activity near death.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">NEPTUNE also raises questions about consciousness during critical illness and the potential reevaluation of brain death protocols in light of documented surges in brain activity after cardiac arrest.<\/p>\n<p>It should be intuitive that life ends at death, but religious people have trouble accepting that fate. They latch on to whatever gives them a sliver of hope. If they are honest with themselves, and do the research, they will cease using NDEs as one of their <a name=\"5138\"><\/a>\u2018proofs.\u2019<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5138) Genesis- if God had written it<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following alternate opening to the Book of Genesis was generated by ChatGPT. It presents what we should have expected if Yahweh existed and if he had inspired the author to present a more accurate story of creation:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1. In the beginning was the void; and the void was without form, and time was not yet come.<br \/>\n2. And from the midst of the void there came forth a great expansion, swift and exceeding mighty; and space was stretched out upon nothing.<br \/>\n3. And time began, and the heavens were born.<br \/>\n4. And the fire of the beginning was hot, and the light thereof could not yet shine forth; for the world was cloaked in a great and burning fog.<br \/>\n5. And the particles that were without number did strive together, and from their striving came the first atoms, small and simple.<br \/>\n6. And the evening and the morning were the first age.<br \/>\n7. And the atoms did gather, drawn one unto another; and lo, clouds were formed in the deep.<br \/>\n8. And from the clouds were born the stars also, and they gave light to the vastness.<br \/>\n9. And the stars burned with great fire, and within their hearts were forged the elements, each after its kind.<br \/>\n10. And the stars perished, and in their perishing cast their substance abroad.<br \/>\n11. And from the dust of the dead stars were made new stars and their companions, the worlds also.<br \/>\n12. And among the worlds was one, where the waters covered the face thereof.<br \/>\n13. And in the waters did the elements combine, and life arose, though it knew not itself.<br \/>\n14. And the life did change and grow, and with the passing of ages became many things; and from one form came another, greater than the former.<br \/>\n15. And the heavens were stretched still further, and the stars did wander in their courses.<br \/>\n16. And the universe grew vast and old, yet its tale is not yet ended.<br \/>\n17. These are the generations of the cosmos, from the first fire unto the living world.<\/p>\n<p>If this had been the actual text of Genesis, instead of a silly story about snakes and ribs, future scientists would have been amazed at the accuracy of the description of the order of events- being well beyond the human knowledge of its time. It would have provided significant evidence that Yahweh had inspired these verses, bolstering the theological claims of <a name=\"5139\"><\/a>Judeo-Christianity.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5139) Withholding miracles<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One of the tasks of Christian apologetics is to explain the noticeable lack of miracles happening currently as opposed to what is alleged during biblical times. There seems to be two possibilities- God has decided to limit or eliminate them, or the miracles in scripture are not factual. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateAChristian\/comments\/1jp0b2q\/miracles_are_gods_most_effective_tool_for\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateAChristian\/comments\/1jp0b2q\/miracles_are_gods_most_effective_tool_for\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><a name=\"post-title-t3_1jp0b2q\"><\/a>Miracles are God\u2019s most effective tool for bringing people to repentance\u2014Yet He refuses to use it<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1jp0b2q-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<p>If we take the Bible seriously, then miracles are the most effective tool God has for bringing people to repentance\u2014and ultimately, salvation. The Bible provides numerous examples of miracles leading to mass conversions:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li>On the Day of Pentecost, <strong>3,000 people<\/strong> converted in a single day, initiated by the miraculous gift of tongues. Without this miracle, the people wouldn\u2019t have gathered to hear Peter\u2019s message. (Acts 2)<\/li>\n<li><strong>5,000 men<\/strong> believed after witnessing Peter heal a crippled beggar. (Acts 3-4)<\/li>\n<li>In <a href=\"https:\/\/www.biblegateway.com\/passage\/?search=Acts%205%3A12-16&amp;version=ESV\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Acts 5,<\/a> we\u2019re told that <strong>\u201dmore than ever believers were added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women\u201d<\/strong> due to the many signs and wonders regularly performed by the apostles.<\/li>\n<li>Philip cast out demons and healed the sick in Samaria, leading many to repent and be baptized\u2014including <strong>Simon the Sorcerer!<\/strong> (Acts 8)<\/li>\n<li><strong>Paul converted<\/strong> after a miraculous appearance of the risen Jesus and the healing of his blindness. (Acts 9)<\/li>\n<li>Even <strong>Dr. Bart Ehrman,<\/strong> the world-renowned atheist Bible scholar, acknowledges that reports of miracles played a prominent role in converting pagans to Christianity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>I could go on, but I think this suffices to make the point. No other method has proven to be as effective as miracles. Anticipating a few objections, I offer the following responses:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Objection #1:<\/strong> The Israelites saw loads of miracles, yet they still rebelled against God.<br \/>\n<strong>Response:<\/strong> First, let\u2019s not forget that miracles are what led the Israelites to believe in God in the first place. Exodus 14:31 says <em>\u201dIsrael saw that great work which the Lord did upon the Egyptians: and the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord, and his servant Moses.\u201d<\/em> Yes, they later rebelled. But in the long-term, the devotion of the faithful few ultimately laid the foundation for billions of people to be saved.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Objection #2:<\/strong> God doesn\u2019t just want people to believe. Even the demons believe. He wants a genuine relationship.<br \/>\n<strong>Response:<\/strong> True, miracles alone don\u2019t always lead to sincere repentance. But if we take the Bible seriously, miracles are highly effective at <em>initiating<\/em> that relationship. It is a first step. For example, Paul states that the Corinthian church was converted through a demonstration of God\u2019s power (1 Cor 2:4-5). They still needed to go through a process of sanctification. But their faith <em>began<\/em> with a demonstration of the supernatural.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Objection #3:<\/strong> Miracles have ceased. They were meant to authenticate the apostles&#8217; message and now are no longer necessary.<br \/>\n<strong>Response:<\/strong> This is not an argument against miracles being God\u2019s most effective tool for bringing people to repentance. At best, it\u2019s simply saying \u201cGod chooses not to do that anymore.\u201d But that\u2019s precisely my argument: God refuses to use the most effective tool in His toolkit for bringing people to repentance.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Objection #4:<\/strong> God still works miracles. It just happens more rarely.<br \/>\n<strong>Response:<\/strong> First, I\u2019d love to see your evidence for this. However, even if we grant this, it still needs to be explained why God only <em>occasionally<\/em> works miracles, especially if we agree that miracles are His most effective tool. If He desires all to come to repentance, why would He handicap Himself in this way?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Objection #5:<\/strong> Miracles happened infrequently in the Bible. God wasn\u2019t performing miracles all the time. They happened very rarely. So we shouldn\u2019t expect them to be frequent today.<br \/>\n<strong>Response:<\/strong> That may have been the case in the Old Testament. But in the New, miracles were happening all the time. The Book of Acts is a testament to this.<\/p>\n<p>Given that miracles are violations of the laws of nature, it should be easy to dismiss reports of them by ancient authors. But if there were verifiable miracles happening today, this would not be an issue. Given the lack of present-day miracles, it is a safe bet to assume they were absent in the past as well, and that the miracles chronicled in Christian scriptures did not <a name=\"5140\"><\/a>happen.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5140) Standard of evidence for religions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following essay develops a rationale for concluding that the Abrahamic religions, in particular, fail to meet the standards of evidence that would exist if they were true:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/TrueAtheism\/comments\/1jtzfrm\/can_any_religion_truly_prove_divine_revelation_a\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/TrueAtheism\/comments\/1jtzfrm\/can_any_religion_truly_prove_divine_revelation_a\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">There are three possibilities when it comes to the existence of God and divine revelation:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God does not exist \u2014 in which case no divine revelation has ever occurred. This is not the focus of this inquiry.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God exists but did not send revelation \u2014 in which case every religion that claims divine inspiration is mistaken. These religions are then the product of human culture, psychology, or power structures, not divine will.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God exists and did send revelation \u2014 in which case we must ask: which revelation is true? Is it one of the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), or some other tradition?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">To determine whether possibility 2 or 3 is correct, and if 3 is true, to evaluate which religion (if any) has a valid claim to divine authorship, we must apply a rigorous and fair standard of proof. Without it, belief in revelation is arbitrary.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>The Rational Standard for Divine Revelation<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">For any claim of divine revelation to be accepted, it must meet five criteria:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Universally Accessible:<\/strong> The evidence or sign must be available to all people, not limited to a time, place, or elite group.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Logically Exclusive to God:<\/strong> The content or event must be of such a nature that it is in principle impossible for any created being (no matter how intelligent or powerful) to have produced it. This is the strongest and most important criterion. Lack of current explanation is not enough; it must be unexplainable by anything but an uncreated, unlimited being.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Unique to One Religion:<\/strong> The revelation must not share foundational elements with other religions, or be replicable or derivable from human traditions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Compatible with Reason:<\/strong> The message must not violate logic, metaphysical coherence, or require beliefs that contradict foundational reasoning.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Present and Verifiable Today:<\/strong> The claimed revelation must still exist in a form that is testable, analyzable, and consistent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">These criteria follow from the theological claim itself: that a perfect, all-powerful God has chosen to reveal His will. If that claim is true, then the proof must reflect the perfection and clarity of its source.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This standard may be seen as demanding, but it is proportionate to the magnitude of the claim. If a religion requires belief, obedience, and even the imposition of its laws on others, it must carry the burden of irrefutable evidence. Faith without evidence may be meaningful personally, but it cannot form the basis of universal obligation.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">It is argued that this framework might be too rational or abstract, privileging logic over other forms of knowing. However, logic is not culturally exclusive\u2014it is the only shared evaluative framework humans possess. While personal experience or emotion may have subjective value, they cannot justify universal religious authority. For a religion to claim truth binding on all people, it must pass the test of public reason.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Others suggest that the standard is too high and could never be met. Yet the standard reflects the gravity of the claim. If someone says they speak for an infinite being who demands submission, it is not only reasonable but necessary to expect evidence that cannot possibly come from anything less than that being. If such a standard cannot be met, then belief is not required.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Some also argue that this standard does not account for human limitations. That is acknowledged. But if God gave humans reason, and holds them accountable for belief or disbelief, then God knows the threshold they require for certainty. Therefore, the standard is not too high\u2014it is exactly as high as it should be to match the claim&#8217;s seriousness and its implications.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The idea that God might deliberately avoid providing proof to preserve free will or moral autonomy is also addressed. If belief is morally commanded, ambiguity becomes unjust. If there are consequences for disbelief, then the evidence must be clear. Otherwise, the system becomes arbitrary and coercive. Responsibility requires clarity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Lastly, this framework does not claim to define what a divine sign should be. It only states what such a sign must accomplish: eliminate all possible sources other than God. If revelation is to be believed, it must point to its source in a way that no alternative explanation remains logically possible. Until such a sign exists, revelation remains an unjustified belief.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Rejection of the &#8220;Need&#8221; for Revelation to Give Meaning or Morality<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Some argue that if God exists, then He must give us purpose, law, or guidance through revelation. This argument projects human notions of wisdom and meaning onto God. But if God is truly beyond our comprehension, then what we consider wise is not necessarily what God deems necessary.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If we say God decrees morality, then we cannot also say that our understanding of what is moral (like sending prophets) is a necessary divine act. That would undermine divine transcendence by implying that God must follow human logic or ethical reasoning.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Therefore, the absence of revelation does not imply a lack of divine purpose or that humans cannot live meaningful, moral lives. It simply means we have no rational basis to submit to specific religious claims.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Why Existing Revelations Fail<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Judaism<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Judaism relies on a historical claim of revelation to a specific people in a specific context. Its scripture is culturally and theologically exclusive, inaccessible for direct verification, and does not present a universally compelling sign that excludes all human authorship.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Christianity<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Christianity depends on belief in past events, including miracles and the resurrection, and the theological doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation. These are not logically necessary truths, nor are they universally intelligible. They introduce contradictions into the concept of divine perfection and unchanging nature.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Islam<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Islam makes the strongest epistemic claim among the Abrahamic traditions: that the Qur&#8217;an is inimitable and of divine origin. However, while the Qur&#8217;an is unique and profound, it is not in principle impossible that a powerful but created being could have authored it. The argument from inimitability remains vulnerable to the objection: just because humans have not replicated it, does not mean it must have come from God.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If revelation is from God, it must meet a standard appropriate to God: one of logical necessity, universal accessibility, and inimitable proof. No religion has met this bar. Consequently, there is no rational obligation to believe in any specific religion. Nor can any religious system justify moral laws, legal systems, or divine authority by claiming they are from God unless they prove it.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim. In the absence of such proof, one is justified in remaining uncommitted, and in deriving morality, meaning, and purpose from reason, conscience, and shared human experience\u2014not from unverifiable scripture.<\/p>\n<p>At the very least, given the paucity of evidence for any of the Abrahamic religions, not to mention every other religion every conceived, it should be the duty of every person to park their beliefs on the sidelines, admit that they don\u2019t know which, if any, of the current religions or denominations are true, and maintain this posture until, and if, new, verifiable evidence becomes <a name=\"5141\"><\/a>available.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5141) Paul, as a fictional character<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>There is compelling evidence that the self-made prophet, Paul, was a fictional character who was fleshed out from a reference to his name in the Book of Acts. The following is taken from Nina Livesey\u2019s\u00a0<em>The Letters of Paul in their Roman Literary Context<\/em>\u00a0(pp.83-91):<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u201cWe have no external evidence of Paul; no noncanonical or non-extracanonical sources refer to him. While to argue against Pauline authorship based on a lack of outside evidence of Paul could be construed as an <em>argumentum e silentio<\/em>\u00a0\u2013 and proving or disproving his existence is not possible\u2013 his absence from contemporaneous Hebraic, Greek, and Roman sources is nonetheless telling. The Roman name \u2018Paulus,\u2019 from which the name \u2018Paul\u2019 likely derives is also largely unattested as a cognomen (a nickname) in the ancient world. As a\u00a0<em>nomen gentilicium<\/em>\u00a0(family name), it belongs to noble patrician families inside Italy. From the way in which we come to know Paul in canonical sources, there is reason to believe that he, like other characters named in Acts, is fictional. [\u2026] While scholars routinely assess that the book of Acts postdates the seven \u2018authentic\u2019 Pauline letters\u2013 with several scholars arguing that the author of Acts relied on the Pauline letters as a source \u2013 one can also argue for the reverse scenario. Namely, that Pauline letters succeed the book of Acts and are dependent upon it. In this scenario, the character Paul is first made known in Acts and the letters promote a characterization different from Acts\u2019 biographical account of him.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Likewise from pp.132-134:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u201cIn this chapter, I have problematized some of the primary assumptions on which the authentic-letter perspective is based, the historicity of Paul, Pauline activity dated to the mid-first century, and the historicity of Pauline communities. As indicated, there is no nonbiblical early evidence of the Apostle Paul. Biographies and chronologies of Paul are in large measure crafted only from \u2018Paul\u2019s\u2019 autobiographical statements within the \u2018authentic\u2019 letters, a method that is circular. Although the statements are considered to be historically reliable, they are inadequately determined as such. Based on false understandings of the function of an ancient letter, Pauline epistolary scholarship uncritically assesses that with his letters Paul becomes as though virtually present to his communities. Without sufficient methodological rigor, this scholarship falsely reifies Paul as historical. By contrast, the character Paul takes shape in a fanciful passage in Acts (13:6-12) and as the result of a common-to-Acts change in character name. Nearly all the many characters in Acts 13:6-12 &#8211; including Paul\u2013 are historically unverfiable. The sole exception, Sergius Paulus, known to Galen as prefect or governor of the City of Rome and trained in Aristotelian philosophy, appears to function as Paul\u2019s namesake. [\u2026] In Chapter 3, I provide a model for understanding Pauline letters as mock letters, as those that exploit the letter genre for the advancement of teachings. My model deploys Seneca\u2019s Moral Epistles as comparanda. All Senecan letters to Lucilius are unsent mock correspondence, letters-in-form-only. Lucilius and the \u2018situations\u2019 which he is made to inhabit are fictional, but function productively to enable the author to advance Stoic teachings. I argue that the pseudonymous authors of Pauline letters have similar rhetorical objectives, namely, to advance theological teachings. As with other contemporaneous pseudonymous letter collections, the authors of Pauline letters deploy a known character as their purported author\/letter sender. In this case, they adopt the fictive figure (Paul), made known in the book of Acts, and explicitly name him the \u2018Apostle Paul\u2019.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The issue here is not so much whether Paul was historical or not. It is rather that such a consequential person to Christian theology should even be open to such inquiry. Wouldn\u2019t an omnipotent god have ensured that his principle architect of Christian theology was an established historical person, beyond all doubt? And also, wouldn\u2019t he have assured that all of the biblical letters attributed to Paul were actually written by <a name=\"5142\"><\/a>him?<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5142) Ezekiel contradicts Christianity<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Book of Ezekiel paints the picture of a different god than what is promoted in the New Testament, and particularly by Paul\u2019s letters. It shows a god who judges each person separately, only by their own actions, and shows no sign of requiring an alternate person to be punished in order to forgive. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jujbme\/ezekiel_contradicts_christianity\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jujbme\/ezekiel_contradicts_christianity\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The chapter of Ezekiel 18 completely contradicts Christian theology about original sin and the need of a saviour.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The chapter starts off with god questioning the children of Israel about this proverb: \u201cThe parents eat sour grapes, and the children\u2019s teeth are set on edge\u2019?\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Meaning that because the parents ate sour grapes, their children will now be affected as well. The rhetorical goal of this proverb is that a parents actions will affect and corrupt their offspring which the children of Israel believed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God rebukes them in Ezekiel 18:3-4 saying that everyone belongs to him and says this in verse 4 \u201cThe one who sins is the one who will die.<br \/>\nGod presents an example in verses 5\u20139 of a man who lives righteously\u2014doing what is just and right, avoiding evil. Then, in verses 10\u201313, that man has a son who lives in complete contrast to him, engaging in violence and wrongdoing. In verses 14\u201317, this second man has a son who, after witnessing his father\u2019s sinful behavior, chooses a different path and lives righteously. God then declares in verse 18: \u201cHe will not die for his father\u2019s sin; he will surely live. But his father will die for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother, and did what was wrong among his people.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">This example is at odds with original sin because Adam ate from the tree which corrupted mankind, but Ezekiel says the children\u2019s teeth will not be sat on edge because of the parents eating sour grapes and the one who will sin is the one who will die. The example of the son who sees the actions of his evil father and doing the opposite is meant to show that you have the chance to be righteous although your predecessor was wicked and did evil.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Verse 19 quotes the Israelites questioning why the son doesn\u2019t share the guilt of his father. This could honestly be replaced with a Christian questioning why we don\u2019t share the guilt of Adam.<br \/>\nGod answers them in 20: \u201cSince the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Again contradicting Christian theology. Paul explains in Romans that we were made sinners because of Adam: Romans 5:19 &#8211; \u201cFor just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ezekiel 18:21 But if a wicked person turns away from all the sins they have committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, that person will surely live; they will not die<br \/>\nThis doesn\u2019t align with Christian theology, because ones redemption isn\u2019t repentance and righteousness as Ezekiel says, ones redemption is Jesus dying on the cross: Romans 3:23-24: For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Romans 6:23: &#8211; For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The rest of the chapter is a reaffirmation of what has already been said with this being the closing: Ezekiel 18:30-32: \u201cTherefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The only possible way to get around this is by appealing to the new covenant, meaning that repentance and righteousness was a part of the old covenant but vicarious atonement is a part of the new covenant. Not only does this contradict Hebrews 9:22-23, but it would also render Jesus sacrifice as useless because if god can forgive sins through righteousness, then what was the point of god sacrificing his own son?<\/p>\n<p>Christian theologians, at least those who acknowledge this contradiction, will typically concede that God \u2018changed the rules\u2019 of redemption when he sent his son to be sacrificed. However, as Paul noted in his letters, the original sin occurred with Adam. If so, it would seem that original sin would also affect the author of Ezekiel, meaning that what he wrote was not accurate. Anyway you look at it, there is a problem for Christian salvation <a name=\"5143\"><\/a>theology.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5143) Ten problems with Christian hell<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christian hell was likely a valuable recruitment tool for the early church, but in modern times it has become a lodestone around its neck- as society has moved well beyond the immoral idea of painful punishment, much less any version of such infliction that is never-ending. The following lists what might be considered the top ten problems with the hell of Christianity:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1) It serves a punishment that exceeds the horror of any human-created punishment scheme.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2) It provides no means of escape, or of limiting the sentence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3) There is no feasible place where hell (or heaven for that matter) could be located.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4) It assigns otherwise good people to suffer there just because they couldn\u2019t accept Jesus on the flimsiest shred of evidence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">5) It causes unending agony for anyone in heaven who must live for eternity knowing that their husband\/wife\/children\/relatives\/friends are being tortured in hell.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">6) It creates the unmitigated idiocy of God re-animating dead persons for no purpose other than to subject them to unending pain, instead of just letting them \u2018sleep.\u2019 (such a loving god!)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">7) It raises a question why God did not inform his chosen people, the Jews, of the existence of hell, but waited a thousand years until he sent Jesus. Or did he just invent hell at that time?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">8) The scriptures, which should provide exceptionally clear information about this allegedly most important and critical aspect of human existence, instead dribble out confusing and contradictory information.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">9) It separates the application of punishment from the usual consequential goal of improving future behavior.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">10) Because of evolution, there exists no rational point at which humans first became subject to an afterlife. The parents of the first person to go to either hell or heaven would necessarily have just died for all eternity and ceased to exist. For example, would anyone in heaven be happy if their parents were permanently liquidated from existence?<\/p>\n<p>If Christianity was playing football, hell would be fumble, if baseball, a strike-out, and if golf, a shot out of bounds. The \u2018invention\u2019 of hell by Christianity was the biggest self-own, self-inflicted wound of any philosophical movement in the history of <a name=\"5144\"><\/a>humankind.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5144) Poetic analysis of religion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following delivers an apt, poetic analysis of religion:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1juyb20\/here_are_my_problems_with_religion\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1juyb20\/here_are_my_problems_with_religion\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Here are my problems with religion.<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1juyb20-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\" style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\n<p>Religion wasn\u2019t built to save people.<br \/>\nIt was built to manage them.<\/p>\n<p>Humans hate not knowing.<br \/>\nHate death.<br \/>\nHate randomness.<br \/>\nReligion showed up like: relax, we\u2019ve got answers.<\/p>\n<p>But answers come with rules.<br \/>\nRules come with obedience.<br \/>\nObedience comes with power.<br \/>\nFor somebody.<\/p>\n<p>Be good, you get a reward later.<br \/>\nBe bad, you get a punishment forever.<br \/>\nAsk too many questions? Now you\u2019re the problem.<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s not mystical.<br \/>\nIt\u2019s scalable behavior control.<\/p>\n<p>Religion was the first real social tech.<br \/>\nAnd every tech gets upgrades.<\/p>\n<p>Old gods were replaced like old kings.<br \/>\nNot because they stopped being true.<br \/>\nBut because they stopped being useful.<\/p>\n<p>Useful to power.<br \/>\nTo empire.<br \/>\nTo people writing laws.<\/p>\n<p>Convert or die wasn\u2019t spiritual.<br \/>\nIt was market expansion.<\/p>\n<p>Faith was currency.<br \/>\nSin was debt.<br \/>\nGuilt was revenue.<\/p>\n<p>Control the afterlife.<br \/>\nControl the present.<\/p>\n<p>This wasn\u2019t about souls.<br \/>\nIt was about systems.<\/p>\n<p>Then atheism rolls up like it killed god.<br \/>\nNah.<br \/>\nIt just gave the system a facelift.<\/p>\n<p>Now people worship nations.<br \/>\nBrands.<br \/>\nAlgorithms.<br \/>\nIdentity.<br \/>\nInfluencers.<br \/>\nMoney.<br \/>\nMovements.<\/p>\n<p>The behavior didn\u2019t change.<br \/>\nJust the labels.<\/p>\n<p>Humans didn\u2019t delete the god code.<br \/>\nThey just installed new gods.<\/p>\n<p>The darkest part?<\/p>\n<p>We were never really searching for truth.<br \/>\nWe were searching for comfort.<br \/>\nCertainty.<br \/>\nSafety.<\/p>\n<p>Systems \u2014 religious or not \u2014 thrive on that hunger.<\/p>\n<p>No gods?<br \/>\nYou just get different chains.<\/p>\n<p>Rules you can\u2019t question.<br \/>\nLeaders you can\u2019t criticize.<br \/>\nBeliefs you can\u2019t touch.<\/p>\n<p>Old churches fall.<br \/>\nNew temples rise.<\/p>\n<p>Same engine underneath.<br \/>\nFear.<br \/>\nControl.<br \/>\nBelonging.<br \/>\nObedience.<br \/>\nProfit.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Religion is running out of steam&#8230;and the world moves <a name=\"5145\"><\/a>on.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5145) Suicide by cops<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>It is well known that some people trapped in a dystopian life situation act out in felonious ways so that they can be shot and killed by police. Essentially, this is what Jesus did, if the gospels have a kernel of truth. Instead of waving a gun to attract the authorities, he turned over the tables in the temple courtyard and proclaimed his kingship to gain the same attention.<\/p>\n<p>The problem with this scenario is that it is indistinguishable from someone who was not fully in control of his fate. A much better ending from a theological standpoint would have been a self-directed suicide.<\/p>\n<p>But it goes beyond that point. As has often been pointed out, the \u2018sacrifice\u2019 that Jesus made for the sins of humankind was rather mild compared to what hell allegedly has in store for non-Christians. If the penalty for these sins were to be transferred from the sinners to Jesus, then there should have been an equivalence in terms of time- that is, eternity.<\/p>\n<p>Combining these two themes, we can say that Jesus should have directed and been in control of his death, and he should have surrendered himself to the penalty of eternal pain in hell. He should have self-died in view of his disciples, saying that he was traveling to hell to take the penalty for everyone who accepts him as their savior.<br \/>\nJesus should be in hell, eternally, the sacrificial goat, taking upon himself the same fate of those that he is <a name=\"5146\"><\/a>saving.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5146) Observational atheism<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>One of the best ways to assess whether Christianity (or other similar religions) is true is to simply observe our current reality and see if it seems consistent with the specific theology. The following are some observations culled from a prompt on reddit.com that influenced people to reject religion and embrace atheism:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Uncertainty. If there was a god who intended to send you to heaven or hell, it surely would have made the ground rules for determining your eternal fate exceptionally clear.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Uh\u2026I think an omnipotent god could have left us a much better book- full of unknown (at the time) science, in a consistent voice, with ethics and morality that could have advanced our world into a more peaceful, more fair, and more loving existence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">\u2018Chosen people\u2019? No, no god who created the entire universe would chose one set of people over others. This is the golden clue that Judeo-Christianity is false.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When I realized my prayers had no statistical efficacy.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When I saw all of the craters on the moon- why wouldn\u2019t a god who created the universe make it so that it all fit together without so much chaos and violent collisions- seems much more like something that happened without any design.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Evolution- realized that if humans were God\u2019s ultimate design, he would have done it more efficiently, not needing to nuke the dinosaurs 66 million years ago with an asteroid to make it happen.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When my priest who told me that I should remain a virgin until my wedding day was caught having an affair with the wife of a deacon.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When I was working as a sound engineer at a church once, the pastor&#8217;s mic kept not working, cutting him off throughout his sermon. That&#8217;s how I knew there was no god.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Because it came from the mouth and pen of a priest. Grifters and con artists, the lot of them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I don\u2019t need to discover there is no God, since I never suffered from the delusion there was.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Only people who were LIED to by priests and had it REINFORCED by parents and family need evidence of the non-existence of divinity.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Normal is not believing in magic.<br \/>\nWeird is believing in magic.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">To paraphrase Dara O&#8217;Brien, it&#8217;s because I own a mirror. You mean to tell me that I was created by the same guy who made sunsets, waterfalls and mountain tops? Just what kind of an off day did he have when he threw me together?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I know there\u2019s no god because I was born with a sweet-tooth, terrible enamel, and shark-tooth-regrowth gene therapy is exactly one generation away.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I&#8217;ve woken up 4+ times every night to have bloody shits for over year straight because my defective immune system thinks my colon is the enemy.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Atomic weapons. There&#8217;s no way that God would allow humans to destroy HIS creation. He supposedly floods the entire planet wiping out humanity over petty sinful behavior, but ghosted us during the atrocities of World War 2, lol. Makes no sense.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The laws of physics have no exceptions for when God has to take supernatural action to rig a sports event or respond to some other prayer &#8230; because that doesn&#8217;t happen. &#8212; That&#8217;s how I know there are no gods of any kind.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Every time a drink goes down the wrong pipe and I cough for 10 minutes, I&#8217;m reminded that there is no God. Who would intentionally make such a shitty design?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The fact that good people suffer from misery and disease deeply discourages me from believing in the existence of any deity. And if there is one, it is not worthy of worship.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The cancer ward at the Children&#8217;s\u2019 Hospital.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The countless medical problems in humans, the fact that we need glasses, dentures, insulin injections, cancer treatments, that we get sunburns when it&#8217;s too hot, hypothermia when it&#8217;s too cold, etc..<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Everything about our existence screams &#8220;random occurrence&#8221; to me.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When I drop something. It always goes down, not once I have seen the miracle of it going up. That&#8217;s because gravity makes it go down and there is no God to make it go up.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Not once has my cup of tea turned into a pint of beer. Both mainly water but science says there is nothing to make it change so it doesn&#8217;t change.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Belief in deities doesn&#8217;t begin with proof. It starts with a fantasy, based on nothing. That fantasy takes root because it provides a rudimentary explanation of life, death, why we are here, natural phenomena. It becomes a belief. Creates entire cultures and texts and what have you. That belief spreads unchecked. But it relies entirely on faith. Sometimes they even tell you not to think about it critically. You have to feel it. That&#8217;s not the way we map our world today. We found a better solution: science. And science found no evidence for the supernatural yet.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Unanswered prayers. All of them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I\u2019m still waiting for \u201cgod\u201d to answer my childhood prayers to cure me of my disability.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I know that there is no god because there are staving people around the world. Many of these people are devout Christians. Any all powerful god that would stand by and watch such suffering is no god of mine.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">I know there&#8217;s no God because kidney stones.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Seriously, pain is bad. Why the fuck would an intelligent designer create our bodies this way?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Nobody has ever regrown a missing limb. For all of the \u201cmiracles\u201d god supposedly enacts on people every single day according to believers, never once has he found time to give someone a missing limb.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Because the universe functions <em>exactly<\/em> as it would if there is no god.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Even if there are &#8220;hidden&#8221; laws or whatever, nothing of what is observable can reveal a personal, living, active, direct, or opinionated god.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Thousands of religions and gods.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">If there really was a god, it would be obvious, and there&#8217;d only be one religion.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Any of the really weird diseases! Prions &#8211; viruses that once you have them in your brain, they change brain tissue and basically turn your brain into Swiss Cheese. And modern medicine can&#8217;t do anything about it. (And if anyone dissects your brain we have to throw the tools out because you can&#8217;t even steam autoclave the tools to clean them.)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Prader Willis Syndrome &#8211; genetic defect that causes low IQ and unending hunger. I volunteered at a nursing home where one patient had it and we had to make sure we even the garbage cans didn&#8217;t have food in them.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Fatal Familial Insomnia &#8211; genetic defect that causes you to lose the ability to sleep and you gradually go insane. No cure and medicines don&#8217;t help.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva &#8211; disease that causes soft tissue to be replaced with bone. It sounds like some Resident Evil shit because your own body gradually loses the ability to move and it&#8217;s painful as fuck (imagine any of your joints being replaced with bone and then you needing to deal with the pain and stiffness).<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome &#8211; genetic disorders that affect skin and joints and soft tissue leading to weakness\/hypermobility.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Endometriosis &#8211; disease of the uterus where either the uterine lining grows out of control and can mess with other organs and causes crippling pain and can be life threatening.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">When cancer is the least of the problems that &#8220;God&#8221; created&#8230;.you can see there isn&#8217;t a &#8220;God&#8221; when a simple blip in your genetics can give you any horrible issues. Not to mention diseases like MS or cerebral palsy that aren&#8217;t life threatening but can be managed with modern medicine.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God supposedly created nutritious bananas with a perfect tab for humans to open &#8230; but he only lets them grow in tropical climates, not where most humans live &#8230; and he put a lot of sugar in it and constipating stuff and left out a bunch of nutrients that humans need just as much &#8230; and he didn&#8217;t even create bananas as we know them today, but nasty little pods full of seeds that humans had to micro-evolve (by artificial selection) into an edible form first. That doesn&#8217;t seem like something a perfect, all-powerful, or even mildly intelligent designer would come up with.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Hmmmm well as a nurse, the things that I see everyday, like how fragile the human body is, and whatever is happening to my patients will happen to me one day makes me think that there&#8217;s no god. If there is, then he&#8217;s terrible.<\/p>\n<p>The world would look much different if Christianity was true, or if there was any god of any sort who was taking an active interest in human life. It is crystal clear that we live in a universe indifferent to our existence, and that our lives will end permanently upon our <a name=\"5147\"><\/a>death.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5147) Ten problems with Christian theology<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>In the following the author lists ten aspects of Christianity that when combined should compel anyone to depart from the faith:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1juikne\/heres_my_10_biggest_reasons_why_i_left\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/atheism\/comments\/1juikne\/heres_my_10_biggest_reasons_why_i_left\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>1. <\/b><b>The Bible Not Only Permits Slavery but Also Provides Rules for How to Treat Slaves<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Exodus 21:20-21 20\u00a0Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21\u00a0but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Leviticus 25:44-46 \u2013 \u201cYour male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them, you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Ephesians 6:5-9 \u2013 \u201cSlaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free. And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>2. God commands Genocide \u2013 He Commands the Israelites to Kill Every Man, Woman, and Child in Certain Cities<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Deuteronomy 20:16-17 \u2013 \u201cHowever, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them\u2014the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites\u2014as the Lord your God has commanded you.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1 Samuel 15:3 \u2013 \u201cNow go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them; but kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>3. How Is God Always There but Doesn&#8217;t Help? (Rape, murder,\u00a0self harm, suicidal thoughts etc)<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Proverbs 15:3 \u201cThe eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Psalm 139:7-10 \u201cWhere can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. If I rise on the wings of the dawn, if I settle on the far side of the sea, even there your hand will guide me, your right hand will hold me fast.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Matthew 28:20 \u2013 \u201cAnd surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Hebrews 13:5 \u2013 \u201cGod has said, \u2018Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>4. God Knows the Future Yet Doesn&#8217;t Intervene (Holocaust, Plagues, Children&#8217;s Deaths, etc.)<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Isaiah 46:10 \u2013 \u201cI make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, \u2018My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Isaiah 46:9-10 \u2013 &#8220;I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, \u2018My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose.\u2019&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Isaiah 42:9 \u2013 &#8220;Behold, the former things have come to pass, and new things I now declare; before they spring forth I tell you of them.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Psalm 139:4 \u2013 &#8220;Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O Lord, you know it altogether.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>5. Treatment of Women \u2013 Sexism in the Bible<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1 Timothy 2:11-12 \u2013 \u201cA woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1 Corinthians 14:34-35 \u201cWomen should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Deuteronomy 22:28-29 \u2013 \u201cIf a man finds a virgin who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman\u2019s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he may not divorce her all his days.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>6. Eternal Hell &#8211; Infinite Punishment for Finite Sins<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The Bible teaches that nonbelievers or sinners are condemned to eternal torment in Hell, even for finite actions committed during a short human life. How is infinite punishment just or loving? Especially from a God who claims to be merciful?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Matthew 25:46 \u2013 \u201cThen they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Mark 9:43 \u2013 \u201cIf your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Revelation 20:10 \u2013 \u201cAnd the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>7. The problem of evil<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Why is there so much evil? Why doesn&#8217;t he stop natural disasters like earthquakes, tsunamis? Why just watch while disease kills millions? I didn&#8217;t include human evil because of the free will argument.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>8. The suffering of animals<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Why did God make animals suffer so much? Why&#8217;d he have to make animals eat each other, living in constant fear and suffering awful deaths. Why not make all the animals herbivores?<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>9. The Problem of Divine Hiddenness<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">God wants to be worshiped, why does he hide from us then? If a loving God exists and wants a relationship with us, why isn\u2019t God more obvious? A loving God would want everyone to know Him. Some people are genuinely open to believing but don\u2019t experience God or see convincing evidence. So, God&#8217;s hiddenness seems inconsistent with the idea of a loving, all-powerful God.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><b>10. The Bible is God&#8217;s Word<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2 Timothy 3:16-17 \u2013 \u201cAll Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2 Peter 1:20-21 \u2013 \u201cAbove all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet\u2019s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Psalm 12:6 \u2013 \u201cThe words of the Lord are flawless, like silver purified in a crucible, like gold refined seven times.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>These are problems that are irreconcilable with an assumed omnipotent, benevolent, and caring deity. If Christianity was true, none of these sticklers would exist. And because they do, it is a safe assumption to conclude that Yahweh is a fictional god and Jesus was a regular human <a name=\"5148\"><\/a>being.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5148) Bible authors erred trying to portray a perfect deity<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The concept was to paint a picture of a perfect god, but this effort was thwarted by the fact that the biblical authors themselves were deeply flawed and were living in a world that accepted many things that today are considered unethical. As a result, we have god who is deeply flawed, violent, and uncaring. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jyzl0q\/the_inconsistencies_ethical_ambiguities_and\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jyzl0q\/the_inconsistencies_ethical_ambiguities_and\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><a name=\"post-title-t3_1jyzl0q\"><\/a>The inconsistencies, ethical ambiguities and indefensible atrocities attributed to the Abrahamic God reflect the flawed values and limitations of the ancient human authors, strongly suggesting that this anthropomorphic deity is a product of human creation.<\/p>\n<div id=\"t3_1jyzl0q-post-rtjson-content\" dir=\"ltr\">\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Many find it difficult to reconcile the seemingly indefensible atrocities attributed to God and the numerous character flaws ascribed to him, a supposedly perfect being. I believe this is the case due to the fact that the original scribes who wrote the scriptures were all ignorant ancient humans who were from a socially primitive era of antiquity. It is highly probable that these scribes were well acquainted with the prevalent religious traditions preceding Judaism, and integrated similar tenets and narratives into their new faith. However, the monotheistic element is what most clearly distinguished Judaism from its predecessors. So these scribes tried their best to imagine what they perceived an all powerful, infallible, omniscient entity might be like and inevitably failed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">First and foremost they failed due to their imperfect nature as human beings which made it impossible for them to even understand what a perfect being even is. I believe this is still true today and will always be true for humans. A being with a truly perfect nature is beyond our understanding. However the most glaring and problematic contradictions were due to the many social and moral blind spots that people from that ancient era possessed. They saw nothing wrong with slavery, sexual slavery, patriarchal dominant gender roles, genocide, etc so they unwittingly attributed these things to their perfect God. This deep rooted and ubiquitous ignorance prevented them from even recognizing the problematic dynamic this created.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The end result was an anthropomorphic deity with the same imperfect nature, morals, and social standards of the authors who created the scriptures that eventually became the Bible. I believe this strongly supports the notion that the Bible and the Abrahamic God it describes are a human construct created by ancients who were incapable of separating him from the antiquated social norms that we now understand to be objectively wrong and abhorrent. Furthermore, it renders the concepts of scriptural inerrancy and the true existence of this God highly improbable and extremely illogical.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>If people today were to write a new Bible, it is certain that they would make their god out to be very different- it would exhibit no tendencies toward genocide, sexism, racism, etc. The problem for Christianity is that it has to live permanently with Yahweh as he is portrayed, and therefore, as civilization moves on, its apologetic defense strategies become less effective with each passing <a name=\"5149\"><\/a>day.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5149) Luke omits Matthew seven times<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Most biblical scholars believe that the Gospel of Mark was written first, followed by Matthew, and then Luke. Matthew had Mark in hand and Luke had Mark and Matthew in hand. What is pointed out in the following is that Luke omitted much of Matthew\u2019s material, evidently because he believed that Matthew was mistaken:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2025\/04\/lukes-gospel-rejects-matthews-previous.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.debunking-christianity.com\/2025\/04\/lukes-gospel-rejects-matthews-previous.html<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Luke&#8217;s Gospel begins with this preface:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">1 Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us, 3 I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may realize the certainty of the teachings you have received. [NABRE &#8211; New American Bible (Revised Ed.)]<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Luke&#8217;s Gospel rejects significant stories told in Matthew&#8217;s previous Gospel!!<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Biblical scholarship shows us that Luke&#8217;s Gospel follows after Matthew&#8217;s Gospel, which followed after Mark&#8217;s first Gospel. This is very significant. Luke says he has investigated what has been written before him, and is putting it down in chronological order. For anyone interested in biblical inspiration you have a huge problem. Anything Luke omits from Matthew means Luke probably didn&#8217;t think it happened. When we look at it all, it&#8217;s as if Luke was rejecting and correcting the Gospel of Matthew on some important issues. Here are seven of them:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">1) Joseph&#8217;s dream (Matthew 1). As evidence that Mary was telling the truth about her pregnancy dreams offer us nothing. Dreams cannot provide any evidence as to the truth of a divine virgin birthed child.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">2) Matthew&#8217;s genealogy (Matthew 1). It traces the Messianic lineage of Jesus to Joseph. But Joseph was not the father of Jesus. To correct this, Luke&#8217;s Gospel (Luke 3) invents a different genealogy to show the messianic lineage ends with Mary, the mother of Jesus. But this still leaves the problem of the male monochrome required to produce a human baby. In addition, any baby cloned from female DNA would only produce another female.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">3)\u00a0Matthew&#8217;s Bethlehem Star\u00a0(Matthew 2), which makes no sense because no one had seen such a star pointing down to a specific location.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">4)\u00a0The massacre of the innocents\u00a0(Matthew 2:16-18), which no one had seen taken place nor heard about. It\u2019s clear that the first-century Jewish historian Josephus hated Herod. He chronicled in detail his crimes, many of which were lesser in kind than this alleged wholesale massacre of children. Yet nowhere does Josephus\u2019 mention this slaughter, even though he would have been in a position to know of one had one happened, and even though he would have every reason to mention it.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">5)\u00a0The faked &#8220;prophesies&#8221; from Isaiah (Matthew 1:22) and Hosea (Matthew 1:14-15)\u00a0which had no basis in the original Old Testament texts.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">6)\u00a0Matthew&#8217;s unbelievable story of the soldiers who were told to guard the tomb so no one would steal the body of Jesus (Matthew 27:62-66; 28:11-15).\u00a0Is Pilate really expected to believe these soldiers, that the body of Jesus is missing because he arose the grave? Pilate would conclude no such thing. He would sentence them to death for dereliction of duty.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">7) Luke&#8217;s gospel also eliminated the unbelievable story (in Matthew 27:51-53) that Old Testament saints were resurrected with Jesus and walked around Jerusalem,\u00a0which no one had ever seen, nor attended their funerals upon dying a second time.<\/p>\n<p>If Luke didn\u2019t believe these stories, even though he was likely able to interview witnesses of them, or else able to access reliable second-hand accounts, why should anyone today accept them as being factual? The biblical inclusion of multiple gospel accounts was a big mistake, or at least it was in this instance, as all of the gospels have major disagreements among <a name=\"5150\"><\/a>them.<\/p>\n<p><strong>(5150) The flaw of divine bloodshed<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Christian theology treats everyone as if they are a child, incapable of self-correcting their character, and needing \u2018third-party action\u2019 to achieve salvation. It seems that a real god would treat humans as adults. The following was taken from:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jykl0u\/salvation_ideologiy_is_the_ultimate_insult_to\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jykl0u\/salvation_ideologiy_is_the_ultimate_insult_to\/<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">My thesis is based on having excrutinized the salvationism framework, and I&#8217;d like to share it briefly.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">The whole idea that we need divine bloodshed to be &#8220;fixed&#8221; is downright insulting. It tells us we\u2019re so worthless, so broken, that the only solution is for god to torture himself on our behalf, as if our own choices, growth, and accountability mean nothing. Christians call this &#8216;grace&#8217;. But it is actually dis-grace when you really recognize that it is treating us like eternal children who can\u2019t be trusted to learn or change by ourselves.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">That notion after all makes moral responsibility pointless. Why own your mistakes when god\u2019s already paid your tab? Think about this simple math for a sec: infinite punishment for finite screw-ups, &#8220;solved&#8221; by an even more infinite.. sacrifice? How does that compute? I&#8217;m seriously doubtful this is about divine love.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">Real dignity would be letting us face our flaws and grow, at our own pace, by facing our own shadow and owning it, not holding us hostage to someone else\u2019s bloody receipt.<\/p>\n<p>Whatever theology that might have worked 2000 years ago no longer works today, or at least it shouldn\u2019t. Personal responsibility is baked into every institution of our society, and substitutional punishment is seen to be valid only in Christianity- not even in any other religion. It was a major mistake for Christianity to embrace the concept of being \u2018saved by the cross.\u2019 If there is a god, it surely would judge us based <i><b>solely <\/b><\/i>on our personal conduct.<\/p>\n<p>Follow this <a href=\"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=23699\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">link<\/a> to #5151<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>(5101) Judaeo-Christianity makes no sense Just using casual thinking renders Christianity obscenely ridiculous when you consider the implications of how it developed. The following was taken from: https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1j0ygov\/the_universe_is_too_big_for_any_religion_to_make\/ The Universe is Too Big for Any Religion to Make Sense You&#8217;re telling me the creator of this universe that is so ridiculously massive that we can\u2019t &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/?page_id=23443\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">5101-5150<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":"","iawp_total_views":1209},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/23443"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=23443"}],"version-history":[{"count":66,"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/23443\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":23701,"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/23443\/revisions\/23701"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.kyroot.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=23443"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}