How will religioncels cope with this one

[lemonnz]

 

[goober55]

not all religioncels are baptistcucks

 

[CopiumX]

he should have let that foid die

 

[lemonnz]

not all religioncels are baptistcucks

Point is your retarded religion doesn’t protect you from anything, another example being newborns dying from their “oral circumcision” by Jewish pedos

Baby Dies of Herpes in Ritual Circumcision By Orthodox Jews

Practitioner or "mohel" removes the foreskin then sucks the wound clean in a 5,000-year-old ritual that has alarmed city health officials.

abcnews.go.com

 

[goober55]

Point is your retarded religion doesn’t protect you from anything, another example being newborns dying from their “oral circumcision” by Jewish pedos

Baby Dies of Herpes in Ritual Circumcision By Orthodox Jews

Practitioner or "mohel" removes the foreskin then sucks the wound clean in a 5,000-year-old ritual that has alarmed city health officials.

abcnews.go.com

>religion needs to protect people
the problem with atheists is that they make arbitrary constraints on God's existence so they can justify being gay.

 

[goober55]

>religion needs to protect people
the problem with atheists is that they make arbitrary constraints on God's existence so they can justify being gay.

You believe in religion because its objectively true and obvious, not because you're a lil faggy boy who needs daddy to protect him

 

[lemonnz]

>religion needs to protect people
the problem with atheists is that they make arbitrary constraints on God's existence so they can justify being gay.

I’m not gay you retarded nigger, the point of your religions are for protection, this is shown with your futile prayers. Whenever the 1% of these prayers go as planned you’ll hear endless stories about God’s grace/miracle or whatever bs but when shit goes south apparently it’s all apart of some elaborate plan.

 

[goober55]

I’m not gay you retarded nigger, the point of your religions are for protection, this is shown with your futile prayers. Whenever the 1% of these prayers go as planned you’ll hear endless stories about God’s grace/miracle or whatever bs but when shit goes south apparently it’s all apart of some elaborate plan.

>things go as hoped
praise God
>things go south
praise God
tfw atheists can't accept always winning

 

[cannotbeasked]

Point is your retarded religion doesn’t protect you from anything, another example being newborns dying from their “oral circumcision” by Jewish pedos

Baby Dies of Herpes in Ritual Circumcision By Orthodox Jews

Practitioner or "mohel" removes the foreskin then sucks the wound clean in a 5,000-year-old ritual that has alarmed city health officials.

abcnews.go.com

JFL at you thinking god is a vending machine where you put a little something in and get a little something out

 

[lemonnz]

JFL at you thinking god is a vending machine where you put a little something in and get a little something out

Hmm weird how the scriptures you read (which are the only “evidence” towards your gods) always describe them as exactly that.

Ephesians 2:8-9 “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”

 

[vanillaicecream]

JFL at you thinking god is a vending machine where you put a little something in and get a little something out

Jfl at thinking god is anything at all

 

[iblamechico]

You believe in religion because its objectively true and obvious

Jfl. Religioncels are a bunch of fucking retards I swear

 

[cannotbeasked]

Hmm weird how the scriptures you read (which are the only “evidence” towards your gods) always describe them as exactly that.

Ephesians 2:8-9 “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.”

It’s pretty obvious what the Bible means by salvation, literally in the quote itself as well it is said it’s not through “works” like baptism or prayer but rather faith

 

[lemonnz]

Jfl at thinking god is anything at all

 

[maxxerlord]

What happened bruh
Water looks so shallow how did he drown,

 

[lemonnz]

It’s pretty obvious what the Bible means by salvation, literally in the quote itself as well it is said it’s not through “works” like baptism or prayer but rather faith

Speak english nigga. Maybe I’m blind but I don’t see the mention of “salvation” in the quote. There is the mention of “grace” which is exactly what I’m trying to get at here.

What happened bruh
Water looks so shallow how did he drown,

God’s will

 

[cannotbeasked]

Speak english nigga. Maybe I’m blind but I don’t see the mention of “salvation” in the quote. There is the mention of “grace” which is exactly what I’m trying to get at here.

God’s will

Read it? Don’t know what to tell you, the verse is talking about how human works cannot grant you entry to heaven, it’s through gods grace you are “saved”, i.e, heaven.

 

[lemonnz]

Read it? Don’t know what to tell you, the verse is talking about how human works cannot grant you entry to heaven, it’s through gods grace you are “saved”, i.e, heaven.

You’re Christian?

 

[thegiganigga]

Cope Jesus is king

 

[cannotbeasked]

You’re Christian?

Yeah, not a great one but I do believe in the Christian god

 

[lemonnz]

Yeah, not a great one but I do believe in the Christian god

What’s the justification towards God (Jesus) providing physical benefits (not salvation) to his supporters at that time, like healing them and feeding them? Why doesn’t everyone else get to have those gifts?

Also, they were lucky enough to have visual undeniable proof of your God’s power according to your scripture. Why don’t we have the same access? Why are we forced to believe in one of the many unprovable books/scriptures as opposed to being allowed to see visual proof?

Lastly, there are other instances in Judaism and Islam where a prophet comes down and provides visual undeniable “proof” of their God’s power through miracles and gifts, this also happens in many pagan religions. Shouldn’t this deter the validity of those miracles? Since they cannot be proved in today’s time and there are many instances of them occurring, naturally, we can draw a conclusion that they’re just tales for the sake of obtaining more followers.

@goober55 @thegiganigga

 

[thegiganigga]

What’s the justification towards God (Jesus) providing physical benefits (not salvation) to his supporters at that time, like healing them and feeding them? Why doesn’t everyone else get to have those gifts?

Also, they were lucky enough to have visual undeniable proof of your God’s power according to your scripture. Why don’t we have the same access? Why are we forced to believe in one of the many unprovable books/scriptures as opposed to being allowed to see visual proof?

Lastly, there are other instances in Judaism and Islam where a prophet comes down and provides visual undeniable “proof” of their God’s power through miracles and gifts, this also happens in many pagan religions. Shouldn’t this deter the validity of those miracles? Since they cannot be proved in today’s time and there are many instances of them occurring, naturally, we can draw a conclusion that they’re just tales for the sake of obtaining more followers.

@goober55 @thegiganigga

my brother in christ, you aren’t forced to believe in God and/or to follow him, because he limited his power by giving us free will thus letting us think and believe what’s right and wrong and to see for ourselves if he’s the ultimate truth

 

[Kudagaisme]

“If Christianity is real, why aren’t Christians immortal?”


Nigger at least make a non retarded argument.

 

[goober55]

What’s the justification towards God (Jesus) providing physical benefits (not salvation) to his supporters at that time, like healing them and feeding them? Why doesn’t everyone else get to have those gifts?

Also, they were lucky enough to have visual undeniable proof of your God’s power according to your scripture. Why don’t we have the same access? Why are we forced to believe in one of the many unprovable books/scriptures as opposed to being allowed to see visual proof?

Lastly, there are other instances in Judaism and Islam where a prophet comes down and provides visual undeniable “proof” of their God’s power through miracles and gifts, this also happens in many pagan religions. Shouldn’t this deter the validity of those miracles? Since they cannot be proved in today’s time and there are many instances of them occurring, naturally, we can draw a conclusion that they’re just tales for the sake of obtaining more followers.

@goober55 @thegiganigga

who cares whether or not those miracles can be proved irl today, the point is that miracles are all around us and infront of us we are just too blind to see it. life, existence, the immaculate beauty of the cosmos, the intricate nature of everything, is enough reason to know that there is a God. Also you're putting the cart before the horse, people believe in religion because the miracles of the scripture itself are enough to believe its from God, ergo the miracles in the past must be true. Its not like people today worship jesus solely because they believe a rumor about him turning water into wine JFLLL they do it because they believe in the power of the message of the crucifixion and so on. though im not a christian lel.

 

[Surfsup]

Dnrd Islam is the truth

 

[Averagecel]

Dnrd Islam is the truth

The religion made by a bully (god) for bullies?

Abu Lahab - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Averagecel]

Dnrd Islam is the truth

>Cause Andrew Tate

 

[cannotbeasked]

What’s the justification towards God (Jesus) providing physical benefits (not salvation) to his supporters at that time, like healing them and feeding them? Why doesn’t everyone else get to have those gifts?

To prove Jesus was the messiah and fulfill the prophecies of signs of such a messiah. God chose to be revealed 2000 years ago, and chose to become one of us. But Jesus couldn’t just come around saying he’s the messiah, he’s god, Jesus would have to prove it, and he did so by inspiring people to write about his arrival, before his arrival, and perform the aforementioned miracles. Even then with this undeniable proof people refused to believe in him. People today still receive these gifts, whether you attribute them to god or chance is up you.

Also, they were lucky enough to have visual undeniable proof of your God’s power according to your scripture. Why don’t we have the same access? Why are we forced to believe in one of the many unprovable books/scriptures as opposed to being allowed to see visual proof?

Because god wants to build a connection with us, he doesn’t want followers just to have followers. God chose to be presented this way because god decided this would be the best way to do so, to lead the most people into salvation. We also do have evidence, you’re just rejecting history and historical evidence, it isn’t “nothing” just simply because you didn’t see it happening, there’s more evidence to prove Jesus rose from the tomb than not. Why should god have to come down every century or so for this purpose? And like I said earlier, even with this visual proof there was still many that refused to believe, not refused it happened, but outright refused to believe.

Lastly, there are other instances in Judaism and Islam where a prophet comes down and provides visual undeniable “proof” of their God’s power through miracles and gifts, this also happens in many pagan religions. Shouldn’t this deter the validity of those miracles? Since they cannot be proved in today’s time and there are many instances of them occurring, naturally, we can draw a conclusion that they’re just tales for the sake of obtaining more followers.

I’m not familiar with what proofs you’re talking about, but it doesn’t make sense to write off Christianity because other religions use similar methodologies to prove the existence of their respective gods. Miracles also aren’t the only proof of gods existence.

 

[lemonnz]

my brother in christ, you aren’t forced to believe in God and/or to follow him, because he limited his power by giving us free will thus letting us think and believe what’s right and wrong and to see for ourselves if he’s the ultimate truth

You completely dodged my questions. If being in God’s salvation is the ideal state, you pretty much are forced or the alternative is you’ll end up in hell. But more so, I am asking why should I believe in him in the first place when there are many contradictions and inconsistencies within the logic of religion.

the immaculate beauty of the cosmos, the intricate nature of everything, is enough reason to know that there is a God

I understand this but this does not proof the existence of jackshit. Hypothetically, let’s say you have modern knowledge and are in a debate against an ancient Greek, the topic is about lightning, the Greek says that this relatively rare and powerful phenomenon must prove the existence of a god of thunder (Zues), you with your modern knowledge understand his theory but know that it is inherently flawed as not everything needs some sort of god bringing order from behind the scenes, you know that lightning is just the result of a massively charged atmosphere and the logic behind this harmonically matches what we know about electrons. This hypothetical argument between one misguided side and the other being logical and comprehensive could be compared to our current dilemma.

Jesus would have to prove it, and he did so by inspiring people to write about his arrival, before his arrival, and perform the aforementioned miracles. Even then with this undeniable proof people refused to believe in him. People today still receive these gifts, whether you attribute them to god or chance is up you.

It doesn’t inherently matter if they chose to believe in him or not. The point is were dealing with 2 vastly different levels of proof, yet we’re expected to choose the same outcome. You’re failing to see the big picture if you can’t recognize the flaw in that.

Because god wants to build a connection with us, he doesn’t want followers just to have followers. God chose to be presented this way because god decided this would be the best way to do so, to lead the most people into salvation.

His method of leading the most people into salvation is a 2000 year old book? Also, every baby is allowed to heaven, that is generally accepted within Christianity; Logically this would mean the ideal age of death should be as soon as possible to prevent the expulsion of salvation. If so, then what’s the point free will? According to Christianity free will is supposed to allow true connection with God but if all babies are immediately allowed to go to heaven this makes a sort of contradiction. One of the many.

We also do have evidence, you’re just rejecting history and historical evidence, it isn’t “nothing” just simply because you didn’t see it happening, there’s more evidence to prove Jesus rose from the tomb than not.

Historical evidence isn’t fact. If you asked the Greeks whether Alexander the Great was a demi-god they will say, “Why yes, just look at his body, it had taken 6 days to begin decomposing!”, if history was evidence this wouldn’t allow for a rebuttal, and although it is to an extent, empirical evidence from science would say otherwise, today it is generally accepted that Alexander wasn’t truly dead at the time of his burial, rather he was paralyzed.

I’m not familiar with what proofs you’re talking about, but it doesn’t make sense to write off Christianity because other religions use similar methodologies to prove the existence of their respective gods. Miracles also aren’t the only proof of gods existence.

The point is if every religion claims to have a powerful God(s) behind it then it is contradictory. I don’t think I really need to explain why unless you’re that out of touch.

Although I do commend you for being the only person willing to engage in a lengthy discussion thus far.

 

[cannotbeasked]

It doesn’t inherently matter if they chose to believe in him or not. The point is were dealing with 2 vastly different levels of proof, yet we’re expected to choose the same outcome. You’re failing to see the big picture if you can’t recognize the flaw in that.

I understand what you mean but that’s the justification as to why, how would god spread the word without proving to his followers and the apostles that he (Jesus) is indeed the messiah? This is just how god chose to be revealed, you can’t argue ways of god being revealed would’ve been better, specially since some conflict with free will.

His method of leading the most people into salvation is a 2000 year old book? Also, every baby is allowed to heaven, that is generally accepted within Christianity; Logically this would mean the ideal age of death should be as soon as possible to prevent the expulsion of salvation. If so, then what’s the point free will? According to Christianity free will is supposed to allow true connection with God but if all babies are immediately allowed to go to heaven this makes a sort of contradiction. One of the many.

Yes, and it’s not just a “book”, it’s the word of god, and clearly it has had a profound impact on humanity as a whole that’s undeniable, but specially religiously now that we still discuss Christianity and it has billions of followers worldwide. Again you can’t really argue other ways would be better.

The point of free will is that you have the power to chose whether or not to believe in god. God judges us on what we know, not necessarily what we do. Babies and the like that are not capable of understanding right from wrong are exempt from judgement because of this. However if you become aware of god and your evil ways yet actively keep refusing god and to change your ways, then you go to hell. I don’t see the contradiction unless you’re saying that babies don’t have a choice into whether or not they go into heaven? If so babies are not capable of rebelling because they’re not capable of understanding right from wrong. It’s even a question really if they have free will at that point in development.

I understand your point though, why not just send a disease that kills us all at birth? Why let us become cognizant and run the risk of being distanced from god? I think it’s because god wants to allow us to choose whether or not to be with him, and exceptions are only made for those who can’t choose.

Historical evidence isn’t fact. If you asked the Greeks whether Alexander the Great was a demi-god they will say, “Why yes, just look at his body, it had taken 6 days to begin decomposing!”, if history was evidence this wouldn’t allow for a rebuttal, and although it is to an extent, empirical evidence from science would say otherwise, today it is generally accepted that Alexander wasn’t truly dead at the time of his burial, rather he was paralyzed.

But there’s more nuance than this when it comes to the resurrection from Jesus, there’s eyewitnesses who witnessed both the death and resurrection, who died terrible deaths when they could’ve recanted what they were saying to be spared. The tomb was empty, even though it was guarded by Roman soldiers, no body was ever found, no one ever claimed to have stolen the body, and grave clothes were left behind. Paul’s letters about 500 people who witnessed the resurrection, and were alive to testify what they saw. People who knew Jesus afterwards were testifying they had encountered Jesus again. The whole thing was prophesied beforehand. This was at a time where religious persecution was rampant as well, a deterrent to just lie about all this.

I understand there’s been many cases where others have also died for what they believe even though it may conflict with Christian beliefs, meaning both can’t be true and as such it’s not strong evidence, however it just can’t be written off when it’s eyewitness events and not simply something you can delude yourself into believing, like a spacefaring civilization will come to earth and we need to kill ourselves at this day, or we need to sacrifice someone otherwise there won’t be rain for the next 30 moons. It’s something you’re claiming you saw clear as day which if you were simply making up you would likely recant it when faced with torture and death. Even more so when there was no real reason to not simply tell the truth if you’re indeed lying and label Jesus as a fake and not the messiah, as soon as he had not risen from the tomb on the third day. I think it also extremely unlikely all these people hallucinated the same exact thing, that would probably be a bigger miracle than the resurrection itself..

 

[shia.jihadist]

> just post picture of random truecel
> religion defeated

what exactly is this thread showing

 

[thegiganigga]

You completely dodged my questions. If being in God’s salvation is the ideal state, you pretty much are forced or the alternative is you’ll end up in hell. But more so, I am asking why should I believe in him in the first place when there are many contradictions and inconsistencies within the logic of religion.

I understand this but this does not proof the existence of jackshit. Hypothetically, let’s say you have modern knowledge and are in a debate against an ancient Greek, the topic is about lightning, the Greek says that this relatively rare and powerful phenomenon must prove the existence of a god of thunder (Zues), you with your modern knowledge understand his theory but know that it is inherently flawed as not everything needs some sort of god bringing order from behind the scenes, you know that lightning is just the result of a massively charged atmosphere and the logic behind this harmonically matches what we know about electrons. This hypothetical argument between one misguided side and the other being logical and comprehensive could be compared to our current dilemma.

It doesn’t inherently matter if they chose to believe in him or not. The point is were dealing with 2 vastly different levels of proof, yet we’re expected to choose the same outcome. You’re failing to see the big picture if you can’t recognize the flaw in that.

His method of leading the most people into salvation is a 2000 year old book? Also, every baby is allowed to heaven, that is generally accepted within Christianity; Logically this would mean the ideal age of death should be as soon as possible to prevent the expulsion of salvation. If so, then what’s the point free will? According to Christianity free will is supposed to allow true connection with God but if all babies are immediately allowed to go to heaven this makes a sort of contradiction. One of the many.

Historical evidence isn’t fact. If you asked the Greeks whether Alexander the Great was a demi-god they will say, “Why yes, just look at his body, it had taken 6 days to begin decomposing!”, if history was evidence this wouldn’t allow for a rebuttal, and although it is to an extent, empirical evidence from science would say otherwise, today it is generally accepted that Alexander wasn’t truly dead at the time of his burial, rather he was paralyzed.

The point is if every religion claims to have a powerful God(s) behind it then it is contradictory. I don’t think I really need to explain why unless you’re that out of touch.

Although I do commend you for being the only person willing to engage in a lengthy discussion thus far.

I understand but hell isn’t a place where you burn in agony for eternity. Hell is just separation from God, that’s it. There will be many times in the Bible where metaphors will be used to express different views and understand it from a deeper level, but people are generally too shallow and jump to conclusions too fast. Another thing, the Bible doesn’t have any contradictions and inconsistencies you just lack understanding and comprehension which is understandable. Reading few sentences and verses taken out of context and associating it within your own point of view and beliefs would be unfair and somewhat ignorant. Babies goes to heaven because they aren’t even conscious of their own existence and we are all made in the very image of God, which makes them automatically saved and of course at their purest form. Not only babies but very young kids (0-6) or until you are aware of your very own existence.

Anyway God is loving and merciful he understands that certain people need more time, explanation and overall comprehension to even try to become open-minded to the idea of Jesus. But ultimately, you are not forced but rather free, if you don’t want to believe him, don’t believe him, but rather understand and respect oneself beliefs whilst being open-minded.

Personally, I wouldn’t consider myself as a religious person but rather a follower of Christ or at least i’m trying. He’s the perfect man and I look up to him as a role model and the ultimate leader by example, hence many of his teachings and actions could be applied in my daily life thus making me a better man for myself and the people around me and that’s what matters most to me

Stay blessed !

 

[lonelycurry]

They're just two beaners that don't know how to swim what does that have to do with god

 

[aryan mogger]

high iq

 

[lemonnz]

Babies goes to heaven because they aren’t even conscious of their own existence and we are all made in the very image of God, which makes them automatically saved and of course at their purest form.

My point was how if salvation is the result of one using free will to get close to God then technically babies which have no clue what God even is would not be allowed in heaven. I feel that people (Christians) noticed this being a bit gloomy so they all synchronically agreed that babies should be allowed in heaven thus creating a contradiction because babies never had the chance to use their free will.

> just post picture of random truecel
> religion defeated

what exactly is this thread showing

They're just two beaners that don't know how to swim what does that have to do with god

It was mostly ragebait so I could see what arguments theists would come up with but it just seems comedic how an all-knowing God allowed tragedy to struck the victims as they performed their baptism.

 

[shia.jihadist]

how an all-knowing God allowed tragedy to struck the victims as they performed their baptism.

then say baptistcels nigga what do other religions have to do with that

 

[CD34]

Dnr jesus is king

 

[goober55]

My point was how if salvation is the result of one using free will to get close to God then technically babies which have no clue what God even is would not be allowed in heaven. I feel that people (Christians) noticed this being a bit gloomy so they all synchronically agreed that babies should be allowed in heaven thus creating a contradiction because babies never had the chance to use their free will.


It was mostly ragebait so I could see what arguments theists would come up with but it just seems comedic how an all-knowing God allowed tragedy to struck the victims as they performed their baptism.

"in order for God to exist all beaners must float"

JFLLLLLL

 

[liberiangrimreaper]

What level on the retard scale are you on?

 

[greycel]

Good fucking guy
I'm hella proud of this dude

Wish him the best wherever he is
RIP

 

[lemonnz]

What level on the retard scale are you on?

I would say I’m double your IQ but I’m afraid that would leave me with an average intelligence

 

[iblamechico]

I understand but hell isn’t a place where you burn in agony for eternity. Hell is just separation from God, that’s it

Heretic. Try telling this to the church.

 

[lemonnz]

Heretic. Try telling this to the church.

Yeah the bible describes it as a lake of fire

Revelation 20:10: “And 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.”

Revelation 20:14-15: “Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.”

Ultimately, still under God’s rule

Psalm 139:7-8: “Where 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.”

Matthew 10:28:“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”

One = God

 

[iblamechico]

Yeah the bible describes it as a lake of fire

Revelation 20:10: “And 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.”

Revelation 20:14-15: “Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.”

Ultimately, still under God’s rule

Psalm 139:7-8: “Where 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.”

Matthew 10:28:“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”

One = God

Exactly.

What he's doing is just another case of what you said here:

. I feel that people (Christians) noticed this being a bit gloomy so they all synchronically agreed that babies should be allowed in heaven

They twist and turn and do all type of mental gymnastics to make god align with their personal moral dilemmas.

I have more respect for the ones who go full retard and say "yes I'd sacrifice my children and family and burn them on stakes for god, he is the creator afterall" instead of "ummm but god wouldn't do that???" like he didn't tell the Israelites to straight up genocide the Canaanites, every single one of them, old or young, men or women.

 

[vanillaicecream]

But there’s more nuance than this when it comes to the resurrection from Jesus, there’s eyewitnesses who witnessed both the death and resurrection, who died terrible deaths when they could’ve recanted what they were saying to be spared. The tomb was empty, even though it was guarded by Roman soldiers, no body was ever found, no one ever claimed to have stolen the body, and grave clothes were left behind. Paul’s letters about 500 people who witnessed the resurrection, and were alive to testify what they saw. People who knew Jesus afterwards were testifying they had encountered Jesus again. The whole thing was prophesied beforehand. This was at a time where religious persecution was rampant as well, a deterrent to just lie about all this.

I understand there’s been many cases where others have also died for what they believe even though it may conflict with Christian beliefs, meaning both can’t be true and as such it’s not strong evidence, however it just can’t be written off when it’s eyewitness events and not simply something you can delude yourself into believing, like a spacefaring civilization will come to earth and we need to kill ourselves at this day, or we need to sacrifice someone otherwise there won’t be rain for the next 30 moons. It’s something you’re claiming you saw clear as day which if you were simply making up you would likely recant it when faced with torture and death. Even more so when there was no real reason to not simply tell the truth if you’re indeed lying and label Jesus as a fake and not the messiah, as soon as he had not risen from the tomb on the third day. I think it also extremely unlikely all these people hallucinated the same exact thing, that would probably be a bigger miracle than the resurrection itself..

Hahha what a load of crap about the "ressurection", you havent established and demonstrated you have eyewitnesses for shit my guy, don't pretend that having claims of claims of eyewitnesses is the same as actually having eyewitnesses for any event that you can actually verify, what you have is a book making claims of claims of witnesses to an avent that allegedly happened decades before, witnesses you or anyone that accepts these claims never even talked to in order to actually assess their reliability or potential motives, establish that they're actually sane people, have no history of lying or deception, you're just reading words on a paper and establishing that all the known laws of physics and biology were broken in this own instance of history 2000 years ago without having even the possibility of assessing the reliability of the people that purportedly made the claims. What a fucking joke that someone would set the bar this low for an event event this magnitude.

You dont have an empty tomb either, it's consensus among historians that Jesus probably did not get a proper burial because the Romans didn't allow that when it came to people that were crucified for crimes against the state, learn about actual history.

 

[cannotbeasked]

Hahha what a load of crap about the "ressurection", you havent established and demonstrated you have eyewitnesses for shit my guy, don't pretend that having claims of claims of eyewitnesses is the same as actually having eyewitnesses for any event that you can actually verify, what you have is a book making claims of claims of witnesses to an avent that allegedly happened decades before, witnesses you or anyone that accepts these claims never even talked to in order to actually assess their reliability or potential motives, establish that they're actually sane people, have no history of lying or deception, you're just reading words on a paper and establishing that all the known laws of physics and biology were broken in this own instance of history 2000 years ago without having even the possibility of assessing the reliability of the people that purportedly made the claims. What a fucking joke that someone would set the bar this low for an event event this magnitude.

I’m not your guy, and what the 500 people? Never tried to frame it that way, if you actually opened your fucking eyes I explicitly say the letters are of Paul stating that 500 people had witnessed the event, it’s one (1) piece of evidence, and what do you mean you can’t rely on eyewitnesses? Thats the most valid source for all of recorded history before the 20th century dipshit. What else is there to rely on other than first hand accounts? Can the bar go any higher? You’re just choosing to write off everything said.

You dont have an empty tomb either, it's consensus among historians that Jesus probably did not get a proper burial because the Romans didn't allow that when it came to people that were crucified for crimes against the state, learn about actual history.

That’s not what is recounted in the Bible which is why the empty tomb is used as a piece of evidence, you say it yourself “probably”, no idea what your point is here, you’re trying to support an absolute with chance, if you want to go full retard and discredit anything said in the Bible then there’s nothing to argue here.

 

[vanillaicecream]

I’m not your guy, and what the 500 people? Never tried to frame it that way, if you actually opened your fucking eyes I explicitly say the letters are of Paul stating that 500 people had witnessed the event, it’s one (1) piece of evidence, and what do you mean you can’t rely on eyewitnesses? Thats the most valid source for all of recorded history before the 20th century dipshit. What else is there to rely on other than first hand accounts? Can the bar go any higher? You’re just choosing to write off everything said.

That’s not what is recounted in the Bible which is why the empty tomb is used as a piece of evidence, you say it yourself “probably”, no idea what your point is here, you’re trying to support an absolute with chance, if you want to go full retard and discredit anything said in the Bible then there’s nothing to argue here.

What 500 people you absolute moron? Do you have 500 different testimonies from 500 people? 1 person claiming there were 500 people witnessing an event is not the fucking same as having 500 people attesting to witnessing an event, it's insane that I would even have to state this, this is how fried your brain is from wanting to believe impossible nonsense. Why on fucking earth would you believe a single claim from a single person from 2000 years ago that he saw an unprecedented supernatural event witnessed by 500 people, just why would you willingly be so fucking gullible and stupid??? This was not attested by anyone other than Paul, where the fuck are the testimonies from the people that saw this, why doesn't something like this have independent attestation by multiple sources?

And no, written accounts are not the best you can have at any point in history when you have a fucking omniscient god that can provide the absolute best possible evidence for the single most important thing is history upon which the fate of your soul depends, it's not the best evidence for an event that breaks natural laws of physics and biology, the idea that a god would depend on carrier pigeons in the first place is in itself beyond laughable, and that he would use a fucking BOOK on top of that only adds to how much of a joke your whole tale is and how retarded and gullible you are. It's not like humans have written books with stories and made up characters throughout all history. There are millions of claims of events like this from this time and all throughout history and they all rely upon the same methodology of evidence, why would you make an exception for this one claim? There is absolutely nothing that actually distinguishes the claims of Christianity from all the other claims in terms of how compelling the evidence is, it's not fucking special, you just think it is like the idiot you are because the roman empire adopted it and it went on to take over the world because it's the most easily accessible religion and the earliest Christians made an effort to convert people and push it down everyone's throats which pagans never did. Keep saying stupid shit, I will dismantle your stupidity like it's nothing, I know this subject and why your stupid tale doesn't hold up to scrutiny like the back of my hand.

 

[vanillaicecream]

That’s not what is recounted in the Bible which is why the empty tomb is used as a piece of evidence, you say it yourself “probably”, no idea what your point is here, you’re trying to support an absolute with chance, if you want to go full retard and discredit anything said in the Bible then there’s nothing to argue here.

The Bible is not a source for history in its entirety, you gullible, historically illiterate moron, theology isn't history, people writing about events passed down from a huge chain of "he said, she said" decades after with a shit ton of embellishments based on their own theological agenda is not history, these are people that never even fucking talked to the people that allegedly saw all the miraculous events and didn't even speak their language, anonymous authors that no one knows anything about and can't assess their reliability. Not only are the alledged eyewitnesses anonymous and can't be assessed, it's also true for the authors, you basically have zero access to the all the people involved in these claims, you're just reading words and determining it's enough to conclude that an unprecedented thing happened. Try arguing to a new testament academic that the gospel of John is accepted as history, it's the most theologically loaded gospel with claims that were never seen in the first three gospels, they will all tell you these were claims that were added later as the story and understanding of Jesus changed. That's why your whole tale is a joke, people changed their views and made up shit to fit what they believe happened after the fact, it's fucking post hoc, it's indistinguishable from people witnessing any given event and ascribing any explanation to it that they want, even if you have claims of people saying they witnessed someone rising from the dead and ascending to heaven it says jack about Jesus being the god that created the world, that's just the explanation that sheep herders and peasants came up with post-fact and you swallowed it all like the gullible idiot you are.

 

[notsocommonthumb]

The Bible is not a source for history in its entirety, you gullible, historically illiterate moron, theology isn't history, people writing about events passed down from a huge chain of "he said, she said" decades after with a shit ton of embellishments based on their own theological agenda is not history, these are people that never even fucking talked to the people that allegedly saw all the miraculous events and didn't even speak their language, anonymous authors that no one knows anything about and can't assess their reliability. Not only are the alledged eyewitnesses anonymous and can't be assessed, it's also true for the authors, you basically have zero access to the all the people involved in these claims, you're just reading words and determining it's enough to conclude that an unprecedented thing happened. Try arguing to a new testament academic that the gospel of John is accepted as history, it's the most theologically loaded gospel with claims that were never seen in the first three gospels, they will all tell you these were claims that were added later as the story and understanding of Jesus changed. That's why your whole tale is a joke, people changed their views and made up shit to fit what they believe happened after the fact, it's fucking post hoc, it's indistinguishable from people witnessing any given event and ascribing any explanation to it that they want, even if you have claims of people saying they witnessed someone rising from the dead and ascending to heaven it says jack about Jesus being the god that created the world, that's just the explanation that sheep herders and peasants came up with post-fact and you swallowed it all like the gullible idiot you are.

dnr all this text to not even get a single react

 

[Razeb]

there's just something OFF about asians being christians, dunno what it is.