Jesus is real and we live in a satanic world but I struggle so hard to change my life for him

[psychomandible]

Way too much words if you actually want to learn about it u can add me on discord i guess cause its too much work typing ts

It literally doesn't matter where you type it dude

 

[takethewhitepill]

You Christians can’t even be bothered to check your own sources, Tacitus isn’t contemporary, he wasn’t even alive when Jesus supposedly existed considering he was born decades after.

Your lack if understanding evidence is showing. He was a historian who talked to people who saw Jesus and wrote an accurate account summarising many people. You understand that he isnt writing a testimony, but a historical fact about a person he would benefit from saying didnt exist and yet he cant do that? Show me evidence he didnt exist, his existence is falsifiable and you have the burden of proof to begin with. If he didnt, surely a jew would have said he never was real to begin with?

 

[psychomandible]

, I ask you grant me that on the precondition it is true then that thing becomes moral and you or I would be wrong.

Are you asking me to give the pre condition that Christianity is true if I disagree on moral grounds ? I'm a bit confused with this.

 

[EmperorVon]

Your lack if understanding evidence is showing. He was a historian who talked to people who saw Jesus and wrote an accurate account summarising many people. You understand that he isnt writing a testimony, but a historical fact about a person he would benefit from saying didnt exist and yet he cant do that? Show me evidence he didnt exist, his existence is falsifiable and you have the burden of proof to begin with. If he didnt, surely a jew would have said he never was real to begin with?

Not contemporary, he talked to people after people like Saul etc went around talking about their fictional character. JFL if you take that shit seriously.

 

[takethewhitepill]

Are you asking me to give the pre condition that Christianity is true if I disagree on moral grounds ? I'm a bit confused with this.

Im asking if you disagree because of an internal or an external critique

 

[EmperorVon]

Are you asking me to give the pre condition that Christianity is true if I disagree on moral grounds ? I'm a bit confused with this.

They always do this they’re weirdos

 

[takethewhitepill]

Not contemporary, he talked to people after people like Saul etc went around talking about their fictional character. JFL if you take that shit seriously.

Provide a contemporary source that says He didnt exist. If a bunch of dudes start talking about a guy who was the messiah and He wasnt real at all today, someone would have said that he isnt even a real dude

 

[Deleted member 269704]

Jesus isn’t real, pay attention in science class nigga

 

[Banana ★ 🍌]

Anyone else relating to this?

Yes I’m here with you

 

[EmperorVon]

Provide a contemporary source that says He didnt exist. If a bunch of dudes start talking about a guy who was the messiah and He wasnt real at all today, someone would have said that he isnt even a real dude

JFL why would people talk about a dude who doesn’t exist before the myth was made popular? Dude today and 2000 years ago are different people didn’t record as much plus it became popular after 30 ad around the 40-60s ad.

 

[Swarthy Knight]

Virgin Christcuck who can't control his lust

Vs Chang Buddhists

 

[psychomandible]

Im asking if you disagree because of an internal or an external critique

Give examples of what would be internal or external critique

 

[takethewhitepill]

Give examples of what would be internal or external critique

Thats what I was trying to do. An external critique is saying there is insufficient evidence of x generally, but it can be anything. An internal critique grants that on the condition it is true then you find it to be false. So the first is in essence if I was to say no even numbers are prime and you say 2 is, but in this case we arent under an objective framework so instead you establish with me beforehand what your standard is for evidence. An internal critique is a proof by contradiction, so say p is true. You assume p' is true and see whether this adheres to the standards. So when I say the square root of 2 is irration you assume rational and show that it cannot be expressed a/b.

 

[psychomandible]

Thats what I was trying to do. An external critique is saying there is insufficient evidence of x generally, but it can be anything. An internal critique grants that on the condition it is true then you find it to be false. So the first is in essence if I was to say no even numbers are prime and you say 2 is, but in this case we arent under an objective framework so instead you establish with me beforehand what your standard is for evidence. An internal critique is a proof by contradiction, so say p is true. You assume p' is true and see whether this adheres to the standards. So when I say the square root of 2 is irration you assume rational and show that it cannot be expressed a/b.

Ok wordsalad but my critique is that it's weak and effeminate religion, anti white and used to enslave people. I obviously disagree with its morality and its a corrupting force in the aryan world.

 

[Deleted member 43557]

I'm gnostic Christian but dude read gospel of John or Romans you believe once,you go to heaven as long as it's trusting Christ to be sufficient for you and not your works.

 

[takethewhitepill]

Ok wordsalad but my critique is that it's weak and effeminate religion, anti white and used to enslave people. I obviously disagree with its morality and its a corrupting force in the aryan world.

Wordsalad? Are you serious dude? You asked and I provided the technical and simple definitions and an example of each. Learn how to read. And go get a job or something you stupid sfcel, if you had any reading comprehension you would have realised that if it is true then your moral ideas are wrong and there is no argument. You need to use your brain and decide if its true evidentially

 

[psychomandible]

Wordsalad? Are you serious dude? You asked and I provided the technical and simple definitions and an example of each. Learn how to read. And go get a job or something you stupid sfcel, if you had any reading comprehension you would have realised that if it is true then your moral ideas are wrong and there is no argument. You need to use your brain and decide if its true evidentially

I have 2 jobs and I'm not a national socialist lmao