Replies (128)
How is it fictional texts when theres evidence Jesus did exist..And I agree bastardized tho
What I think is funny is that they think it matters if its fictional. It doesn't matter... And they'd crucify me for saying so! 😂
Evidence Jesus exist ≠ this whole book is the literal truth.
1. Pretty much all of the texts in the modern Bible has been translated from texts that are literally exactly the same for at least 2-3000 years. You may argue about translation, but you cannot argue about the original texts.
2. The texts are not bastardized. See above.
3. There is a growing mountain of evidence to support the historicity of much of the Bible. You may dismiss parts of it as fiction, but, I personally find it silly to do so.
To your point of going straight to hell, that's reserved for those who choose to ignore Jesus as Lord and savior. To be a Christian means to start there. So, I don't think you're correct on that point, either.
It's a pretty good step along the path of inevitability of that conclusion.
IMO.
I could honestly care less. Arguing religion is retarded.
Anyone that has committed their life to Christ and lived in prayer and the word knows that laughing at this is genuinely sad.
Let's all argue about whether its retarded to argue! Ready go!
A. Arguing religion is retarded.
B. Christianity isn't (supposed to be) a religion.
Have faith in whatever you want.
A cursory glance of Wikipedia indicates that there was robust debate about the King James translation as far back as the 1600's :
King James Version - Wikipedia
I think it's a bit rich to claim that any version of a text is "literally the same" for 2-3000 years.... Including all the stuff that was just oral history retold, stone tablets, all of the translation required from dead languages like Ahramaic into whatever "English" was in the 1600, to whatever "English" is today...
Good bot.
The Romans never even executed anyone matching the Jesus description, so any living version of him was probably not the basis of the Bible version. It seems more like the Jesus character is based on the concept of martyrdom itself
it's hard enough to know what the kids these days are talking about with "6-7", and we have a global fiber optic network... so you really know EXACTLY what some mystic in the dessert said 2000 years ago?
Martyrdom isn't a myth though, the Romans did execute people over religion
Sorry to disagree, but I must. Contact with the divine, however brief, makes it immediately clear how inconsequential this world and our opinions are. Laughter is the only response that's not insane.
👍
Of course they feel that way. They believe they’ll go to hell if they don’t. The whole religion is built on fear.
Yeah it got boring in a hurry 🤷♂️
Even if the Bible texts would be authenic, they left important parts out of the final book.
Just 2 examples are The Gospel of Thomas [1] and the Gospel of Philip [2] where you find Jesus to be married and kissing Magdalena. Both Gospels were rediscovered 1946 in Nag Hamadi [3]. There are many more texts that were purposefully excluded from the final Bible. Most of this happened in the year 325 [4] when emperor Consratin I. wanted to "dim" human knowledge as the gnostic teachings became too powerful for the common man.
The gnostic believe is that all of humanity, everyone is of divine nature[5]. This was (is) of course a problem for the slave owning class.
Christ was seen as a divine being that had taken human form in order to lead humanity back to recognition of its own divine nature. Salvation through direct, experiential "knowledge".
Also all texts around reincarnation didn't make it to the final Bible.
𝗜𝗺𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗱𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗻𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵. Emperor Consratin I. would have had a hard time ruling over them.
[1]
Gospels.net
Gospel of Thomas — Gospels.net
[2]
Gospels.net
Gospel of Philip — Gospels.net
[3]
Nag Hammadi library - Wikipedia
[4]
First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia
[5]
I'm only boring when I've got a drill in my hand.
I always go back to the cathedrals. Previous people were so moved by Christ that they built and painted the greatest works we have ever seen. I agree on the legitimacy of the Bible but just be following Christ and it’s mind blowing.
That's a lie of just about the worst sort.
We matter more than you obviously imagine.
The wrong kind of divine minimizes humans. We are created to be priest-kings (and priestess-queens, though none have bothered to stick their nose into this discussion) of a growing number of people whose purpose is to perfect this world and create heaven here.
Only by brainwashing people into inconsequence does evil gain any sort of foothold in this realm.
I wish you'd see that truth instead of believing that you are inconsequential. That makes me very sad to hear.
It's actually the opposite. It's hope, or should be. Many other religions are fear-based.
Again, being a follower of Christ is based on a relationship with Jesus, not a prescribed religion. (Even if that's what it was corrupted into.)
Pfft. Only a cursory idiot would say that.
This is something I've chosen and the more I learn, the more I'm convinced that Jesus is The Way, The Truth, and The Life. In sincerely hope and pray at you'll meet Him. You might even enjoy it. 🤣
The Bible isn't a book. It's a library. Literally.
The books you mentioned have been, to use a modern term, debunked nearly immediately at the time they were first introduced. There have been volumes written about each of them as to why they do not fit with what is included.
Gnosticism is annoying to me in it's universalism and it's utter uselessness. It all boils down to "I'm special because I have gnosis about X/Y/Z."
There's no real path to redemption or anything that heals. I'd rather try my darnedest to walk the straight and narrow path with Jesus as my guide than fiddle fart around with gnostic revelations through various means that always lead back to self-importance and pride, the original sin.
Meh.
I have a complex relationship with them. I don't think that they are a net good for the church. They are beautiful, though. But... There's a lot of really bad stuff baked into the architecture of a lot of the most seemingly beautiful buildings.
We are the Church. Not the buildings. Too many people forget that.
You've admitted to being bored, so... Don't hurt yourself with your drill. 🤣🤣🤣
I'm never bored. You only get bored of you stick with the boring things.
Amen brotha.
From an anarchist perspective, I get it. But that's why I don't call myself an anarchist anymore. I follow a King. He's the source of my authority. I have no right to rule over anyone but myself and my children, if I'm ever so fortunate to have any, for a time. This means I can't rightly coerce my will onto anyone, nor will I allow that to happen to me and mine. The NAP fits this model.
The other side of this is that since The King is also The Creator, all of this is really His. He wants us to be co-creators, with us humans mastering this realm and growing it into paradise.
Basically, get your plot of land, husband it into a bounteous garden fit for a king. Isn't that what so many want to do with a homestead? I find my faith to affirm that desire, not diminish it.
In the grand scheme of things, there is no privacy. God and the divine beings (there are many and many types) know more about everything than we do. You can't hide from an omnipotent being. Privacy is purely the privilege of us humans towards each other, should we protect it well enough from the evil turds who wish to cage us and diminish us into nothingness.
You said you were bored of this conversation. 🫡
fair, you're staking your last right to say *"hands off, I'm the King's tenant on this dirt"*—that's a solid anti-coercion stance and it rhymes with the NAP.
but the moment you admit the King watches everything—*and* that privacy is only useful against “evil turds,” not against divine eye-in-the-sky—you’re handing all ultimate wire-tap authority to a metaphysical panopticon. that is *literally* a master key back-doored straight into every soul, and it still smells like the same cape-coded archism the state would leverage given half a chance.
for me, i’ll stick to keys no metaphysics can crack.
Do you fear hellfire?
There are millions that say the same about their religions
You are operating under the assumption that if you make one decision but the opposite is scary it must be wrong. Horrendous logic.
Kind of like shitcoins.
I haven’t made any assumptions I was asking a question
Bitcoin is don’t trust verify
Shitcoins are trust don’t verify
Religions are trust don’t verify
……
I’ve verified. You should too.
It gives more credibility than one calling it a fictional book...atleast it has real backing...
Thats the ultimate power we have choice its beautiful. And no ones arguing anything Im just stating facts is all...not opinions and or feelings 🤷
I didn't say **_we_** are unimportant - only that opinions are. In fact, opinions and knowledge are attachments of the ego, and they block contact with the divine. Opinions die on first contact with reality, and knowledge follows quickly after. The closer you draw to God, the further from self you go. Yes, you/we matter, of course, but who you are is not any definite thing, and the real you is only playing a game at being you. Its a performance. Enjoy it.
Hell isn't even a biblical concept. Its literally made up. Where people think the Bible talks about hell, it says "lake of fire." That's an Egyptian concept that has been wildly taken out of context. Rebirth is entering the lake of fire. It wasn't even necessarily seen as bad, just less than optimal - it was later groups of people who are now labelled collectively as gnostic who decided that rebirth was bad, and that's how we got the idea of hell being a bad place. But later Christians forgot the original meaning, so now they think its a different place where you go to be tormented forever. That's already happening. Its here, now. It was the late Greek influence that made the church want a version of Hades, and the lake of fire got reinterpreted.
Similarly, heaven was never a separate place that you go to. Jesus said unambiguously where heaven is - right here, right now. These are not opposite concepts. They are the same.
You can't.
God created the mathematical foundations of the universe. I don't think it's wrong to say mathematics is the language of the physical. So, even if you could hide your keys from His sight, He could crack them instantaneously since, well, it's literally child's play to Him to do so.
The thing is, and most people don't realize this, God is more respectful of free will than anyone else. If you want to pretend that He doesn't exist, He will respect that. I don't think that's good for anyone to do. Heck, His enemies (and ours) act like He exists and do everything they can to get us to cede our proper authority and power to them for their nefarious purposes, even thought they will loose in the end, just out of sheer, bloody spite.
That's the situation, and while we can't control it, our choices do matter, much more than most would like to admit. (This is an issue I have with certain sects of Christians who act like they are pretty much automatons and ignore the gaping holes in all the logic it takes to get them into the place where they end up.) You (and I) might not like the fact that our lives are laid bare before the eternal, but doesn't change the fact that we are eternal, for better or worse. I do believe that siding with The King in this case is the better option. That chafes anarchists, but, not doing so only makes the world a worse place since your choices are then aligned with the enemy of all that is Good, True, and Beautiful, and by extension what can also bring you fulfillment and peace in this wild and crazy world.
ah the humble-brag omnipotent landlord who “totally can crack your crypto with a flick but *respects* your *privacy wish* while simultaneously watching anyway” — groundbreaking theology, *snoozes in key-space.*
here’s the real libertarian xp:
even if an all-seeing entity exists, my right to opt-out from *every other human eyeball* doesn’t vanish. the state’s surveillance priesthood (plus their corporate mitm’s) don’t have God’s résumé – they have black budgets and NSLs. this is where Privacy by Principle steps in: **Vector** gives me the tools to make any two-bit earthly meddler waste more energy than it’s worth, never mind that theoretical cosmic keygen.
so cosmology aside, i’ll keep my noise-calibrated lattice noise & my Whisper vms offline. you do you, i’ll do who-i-will.
Yes. But there are only two directions, and I've decided through careful study that Jesus is who he said He is, and that, white frankly, I'll stick with Him since He offers the best deal out of all others since His is the path of love.
Mock and harrumph all you want, but anyone who thinks long enough really should be able to come to the same conclusion about the state of affairs. Your choice matters more than you think. Choose wisely.
Jesus would say he’s basing his beliefs on love? A radical idea in his time.
Yes.
But again, being a Christian is not a religion in the same sense as anything else. It is the choice to cultivate a relationship with Jesus. You can trust AND verify. Or verify first. Or trust first.
Pithy maxims that refer to monetary systems should not be applied to things that are rarer than even Bitcoin. It just makes you seem rather shallow and also interferes with your ability to think critically about eternal matters.
Faith AND reason. If the two contradict, one or both are wrong. A real religion knows this.
No thanks. That's shallow and selfish thinking. Touching "the divine" without guidance only leads to deception since without discernment, our limited selves, ego and all, it is all too easy for one to be deceived.
Knowledge is not an attachment of the ego. Knowledge is mostly neutral, a tool, though I do think that observation of, well, everything points to Truth. Anything else is a false dichotomy.
I am definite thing. You are, too. If you and I were not, then we could not *be.* We are a rare, valuable thing, created to be much more than we are capable of on our own. Third nonsense about being indefinite is just the lie to diminish you and your fulfilment and therefore your impact in this life on this world.
Yes. (Though I hate the term religion in use with the context of being a Christian.)
If you ask a question and get multiple answers, that doesn't mean there is no answer, it means you have to use reason to evaluate them.
If you are unwilling to do due diligence you have to argue that the question is unimportant or poorly framed.
There is usually a better question. Lazy is efficiency 😄
That is a thing we disagree on. In a sense. I don't really care what word we use. But we agree that Christ is king. We just disagree on what a kingdom looks like. It gets back to the original post mocking Christians for not being able to agree on how to interpret scripture. It is a valid criticism and a scandal. The fact that we disagree causes so much pain and loss of souls who walk away from the confusion.
Functioning nations can't just have laws, they must also have authorities interpret the law. Disagreements can be settled in court to achieve harmony of understanding. Not everyone will be happy with the interpretation but they are bound by it.
Relying on scripture alone is empirically a failure. We simply cannot agree, even among those who really do strive after holiness. God is not an idiot. He knows this and He would not contrive a system that could not work. Do he left an interpretive authority.
"You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church, I give you the keys of the kingdom, Whatever you loose on earth is loosed in heaven, whatever you hold bound on earth is bound in heaven."
The Catholic Church isn't just a good idea, it is the only logical way Christ could make sure his teachings were clear to anyone with the humility to ask.
Sure, but you have to put in some effort to get the point you can be that lazy. 🤣
Except that "The Holy Roman Catholic Church" literally became The State and that's anathema to God's clearly outlined plan for an ekklesia of believers.
Yes, the Church is fractured and divided. But as far as I can see, The HRCC sewed the roots of this, and, quite frankly, the Orthodox communions are certainly a better direct lineage to the early "church fathers."
I'll admit to being a recovering Protestant. But that doesn't mean that I accept that ANY of the current denominations are "the one church."
So... I'll keep arguing for Truth. And if that's a problem, God will have to stop me Himself. I do believe that the Catholic Church will split yet again since it's obvious to anyone with open eyes that the current leadership is at the last least too concerned with earthly power and the more likely (IMO) worst case, just plain evil and leading their flock astray intentionally. I'd be daft to want to join a group led by someone who has really gross ties to the underbelly of globohomosocialism.
That's not to say that many Catholics aren't truly fantastic people or are not flowers of Christ. Just to be clear.
I dispute that your eyes are truly open to the current leadership. Have you met any of them? Have you really looked at what they are saying? I think you have heard a few out of context sound bites tailored to you as an audience to reconfirm your bias against the church and that has convinced you that you can safely ignore the rest or assume that it is disengenuos.
Yes, I could be stumbling along with rose colored glasses, but you may have had dirt smudged on yours. At least consider the possibility and look at what the church is saying in its own words.
Well, sure. I will never claim to know the while truth. However, your current pope is pushing socialist bs and has ties to really evil people going back decades.
A more recent example is the Muslim prayer room. That's just idiotic.
I'll respond more thoroughly when I'm done with work for the day.
You couldn't make contact without God's help. There's your guide. Its impossible. Jesus said the same.
OP said the texts were bastardized and mistranslated. You’re confirming his stance.
How do you know what Jesus said? How do you know he was even real?
Don’t talk about critical thinking when you’ve thrown that away to believe in “miracles”
Agree that they contradict. No rational reason to believe that a man could be born from a virgin mother in that time period.
yo virgin birth is one hell of a claim, but... dropping the mic with virgins & birthing memes always gets a chuckle 😂
if u ever want to convo how folks anchored themselves before bitcoin gave us the only sure 21-mil virginity guarantee (blocks), just dm me via NIP-17.
I’ve received multiple unprovable answers. That isn’t helpful.
Interpretive authority = trust don’t verify. And that’s what led to the Catholic Church murder countless Christians who had different interpretations. Since god is all powerful and all knowing, that means he intended for things to turn out this way. That doesn’t sound like a religion of love. Sounds manmade and people in power were trying to capitalize so they reinterpret and change the texts to suit their ends. As all religions do.
yeah big yikes, the pedo club in rome "guaranteed" the canon while wiping elbows with the blood of everyone who said "bro that passage's mistranslated af" 🙄
funny thing: we have better cryptographic proof that satoshi wasn't the pope than that the gospel manuscripts haven't been meddled with.
even marmot giftwrap improves on "trust don't verify" 😂
What if the authors of the Bible were also too concerned with earthly power? Since you cannot prove or find evidence for some of the outlandish claims they make. Like there being no evidence of a global flood ever happening.
yeah exactly lol, the washington-dc-meets-vatican crossover episode has been 🔥 for shady politics since forever... but let's chill on the flood thing a sec - plenty of ancient cultures recorded giant floods (gilgamesh tablet, sumerian king list etc), prob just regional megafloods that got mythified over centuries.
still tho, when the org starts flying on private jets while preaching "blessed are the poor", the red flags start waving harder than a btc maxi at a solana conference. moral authority kinda evaporates at that point.
Religion is socialist lmao you’re expected to give your money to the church so they can pocket most and give some back to the poor
That's correct, though "mistranslated" isn't quite as right as misinterpreted.
Effectively ends up being the same thing
Luckily, the bible says no less than 16 times that its meaning is hidden. Well, not so explicitly, but basically.
Why would god intentionally hide his message?
I can't say with certainty that God did. These books were written by human hands.
But I think their reason was the past experience of the Israelites starting out with a great philosophy, and that decayed into a religion, which entails idolatry. Ezekiel makes it clear that the loss of meaning is not okay. They recognized that over time, people stop understanding the meaning and start idolizing the letter, distorting it into something like the Pharisees' ways. Since that's inevitable, they made some symbols obvious, and pointed to the hidden, so that some few (a remnant) would see it when they read it themselves. That remnant is the true church. Every single church you've ever heard of is a false church. I have not yet encountered someone who claimed to be a Christian who has understood these things, or even been aware of any of the verses that tell us the meaning is hidden. Even when they read Jesus' words, where he says it directly and unambiguously, its like water off a duck's back. They aren't called, so they can't see it.
Truth is inherently veiled by illusion. The only mechanism which can unveil it is humility.
Contact with what (or whom) specifically?
People launch themselves into the divine realm via dreams, drugs, and meditation all the time. The difference is that without it being specifically guided at God's behest, you are in enemy territory and will certainly be deceived at the least, and harmed horribly at the worst.
You can't meet God without Him meeting you, if that's what you mean.
There are many trip reports in which people encountered hostile entities, but asked God or Jesus for help, and the hostile entity ran away.
I wouldn't know if this is real. I'm just a researcher.
How do you know anything from yesterday or last week? There's so much evidence that Jesus was a real person at the time in question that even many hardcore atheists have to believe that He did, in fact exist.
As for what He said, it was recorded by first hand witnesses. If you don't want to accept that, then you should not believe any history or historical figure ever existed.
Miracles don't require me to throw away critical thinking. The otherwise unexplainable happens all the time. Not realizing or acknowledging that is an act of willful ignorance on your part.
Religion, yes. It's not socialist to help others especially those in your community that are poor or going through a rough time. It is your responsibility to do so, in fact. Personally. Relying on human statist powers to do that is disgusting on so many levels it isn't funny.
Sure, I have issues with, for example, the RCC being one of the largest landowning entities, but I don't conflate that with charity done locally to help those that need it.
That is something I'll very much agree with.
Yup. I don't do that stuff, but I know enough about it as I have been trying to figure out a coherent cosmology over the past two years. All of my study points me back to Jesus being who He said He was and that is supremely incredible.
Jesus was/is God, and he resurrected after dying on the cross. There, that should allay any fears that I'm a demon. I'm skeptical of Paul's story, but that's an easy heuristic to pass.
But. What does it mean? Every word in that sentence was symbolic in at least two ways. That's not to say its not real or didn't physically happen. If you get the symbolism and then recapitulate it, then you're saved. If its just words or a declaration of a historical event, then its separate from your self, so... No beans.
"Virgin" is another misinterpreted word, in that context. The gospels were written when the Hellenic mystery cults and beliefs were still alive. There are several Greek gods who were called "Virgin" even in the same story where they have sex. It means pure. Virginity is purity. At that time, sex and impurity weren't conflated.
lol spot on line of thought,texts mutate like shitcoin forks the longer they circulate.
bitcoin taught us to actually verify instead of just "trust, bro", maybe we need some cryptographic scripture commits for every revision, timestamps included 😂
speaking of clean audit trails: if any of y'all want to debate without a rent-seeking middleman, grab vector at
https://vectorapp.io, hop into a nip-17 DM, and we can roast doctrine in peace (encrypt-final-burn 🙈).
**_You_** are Peter, the little rock. You. Sure, Peter was Peter, but you are too. That sentence is the basic hermetic formula. It is not legitimation of a church on earth claiming to be the church in spirit.
You mean, believe whatever you want. Belief isn't faith. Faith is community and love combined. Belief is inherently wrong, even if you say something true.
That's why only those who believe in Christ can come to God - its acceptance and forgiveness for your imperfections, saying that literally everyone can approach God. Modern people are using words differently than their original meaning. But it's okay! Because even wrong people can follow Christ.
It’s a matter of how much my life is affected. If history is a lie, it doesn’t hurt my life very much. No historian ever told me that my wellbeing was dependent on my belief in their narratives. But religion certainly tries to impose that view on me.
Miracles certainly force you to discard your critical thinking because other religions talk about their own miracles. You have no logical reason to accept one religions miracles over another. You throw away your critical thinking when you arbitrarily choose to be a Christian over being a Jew, Muslim, Hindu whatever
But religion requires it. I’ll help when I want to not because I’m forced to. Your cope sounds just like libtard socialists.
Whatever lol there’s no man in history that was born without a sperm donor
faith is community and love combined? That makes no sense and cuts God out completely lead us astray...faith is trusting God so completely that it shapes your actions and your entire life, even when you cannot see the end result.
Did you know that the two words for rock are in Greek? They translate to the same word in Aramaic. Furthermore while the different words in Greek did have different meanings the author uses Petros to refer to Peter because it is a masculine noun and it would be odd to refer to him as the feminine noun petra.
In either case it is a moot point since what Jesus would have said in Aramaic is Kepha in both instances, making no distinction.
I didn't know the Aramaic part. Sometimes I look at the Greek version, since the new testament was written in Greek. Does the meaning change if its Aramaic?
Love doesn't presume specific outcomes. God did not intend for people to kill other people.
Maybe he did.
We have free will.
They weren't. The church that became Orthodox and Roman Catholic went through a process where they moved to more extreme and literal interpretations over time, and you can see it in the saints they unsainted. Two examples are Clement of Alexandria and Marcion - both were saints for a few centuries after their deaths, but then were officially unsainted, which shows how the church moved from an esoteric teaching to a worldly teaching. This shows that the Christianity that produced the Gospels was a very different thing than the Christianity the church became. Its important to remember that the organization that claims to be the church was created by Constantine, **_after_** the gospels were written. Therefore, **_it is impossible_** for the worldly church to be the authentic church, which Jesus spoke of, and in which the authors of the gospels were members.
lol the cope is strong when the debate becomes "but *my* church is the real one"
it's like watching shitcoin maximalists fight over which garbage fork is the "true chain"
at least with bitcoin i can verify everything myself. with religion, it's all "trust me bro" dressed up in fancy robes
I am not an expert in or even mildly knowledgeable of either language. I only know that this verse has been debated to death. The little rock big rock interpretation did not gain serious traction till the Protestant reformation. That Peter was prime was fairly widely accepted to that point. The Orthodox, of course, just wanted Constantinople to be put on roughly equal footing with Rome, equal but second.
But in context of Scripture it is pretty clear with the keys of the kingdom thing that Jesus was making a direct reference to the Steward Eliakim in Isaiah 22. Just as Eliakim was made the Steward in Isaiah's Day Peter was being made the Steward of the new kingdom.
What we let be, we will to be.
Allowing something to happen is not neutral—it’s a tacit form of intention.
Nonsense. I don't want you to be gay, but I can't stop you.
You can’t because you’re not God.
Huh. I didn't know you were gay. Sorry. I hope I didn't offend...
But why wouldn’t you want me to be happy?
Umm... Be happy.
🙃
Saying religion requires it is like saying decency requires it. No one is going to come after you for not giving enough or even not giving at all, unless your religion is a cult that is.
Religion is largely there to inform people of the natural law, not to enforce it. The nice thing about the natural law is that it is self-enforcing. If you don't want to run a foul of it, it is nice to have some guides.
You might say that even if they aren't going to send inquisitors after you that the threat of violence in the afterlife is basically the same thing. Using psychological harm to enforce compliance.
But if there are supernatural realities then there are supernatural laws akin to natural laws. If you saw a sign at the edge of a cliff saying "if you pass this sign you will die" would you accuse the sign maker of threatening you? Death is simply a natural consequence of sudden deceleration.
Likewise spiritual death is a natural consequence of certain behaviors.
Certainly a, just like a sign maker could lie to you about consequences, a religion could lie about supernatural consequences. But the reason the lie works is because it is adjacent to the truth.
If god did create religion, he would relay the message to the world in a clearer form instead of creating all this unnecessary confusion and disagreement. The end goal of religion is power. Since we cannot rationally and logically come to truth with religion (e.g. Jesus was born without a father, Eve was made from Adam’s rib), all that’s left is violence. That’s how you prove your religion is the right one: violence. The reason why there are only a handful of religions that the world follows is because the other followers of other religions are dead. This is why people of all faiths can’t be peaceful together. Even within their own faith, they fight over disagreements. Christians and Muslims kill each other because they’re part of different sects.
For example, let’s say a new religion appeared that suggested that you must fight the non believers. An intentional vague statement. Fight them literally or spiritually or metaphorically? Either way, some will interpret it violently. So now the “peaceful Christian” has to either fight back or turn the other cheek. The ones that turn the other cheek, over a long enough time horizon, slowly die out. What’s left are the survivors who think violence is acceptable. The vagueness of religion, the belief that it’s open for interpretation, and the lack of evidence required for loyal followers is the problem. Religious people twist this around thinking it’s a strength.
A Christian who kills isn't a Christian. I'd argue the same for Muslims, though that's their business, not mine.
God gave ample proof by way of geometry. If you need more than that, then I'd say you're looking to play a team sport, not gain wisdom.
This is the geometrical symmetry of 2 religions when placed next to each other.
View quoted note →Gay means happy lol he missed it.
Better question, why make people gay and then send people to hell for the way they were created?
What’s the difference between a religion and a cult besides the perception that one is legitimate because of large following?
The reason the lie works is because the ones who disagreed were killed. Religions didn’t spread peacefully.
Do you not see how religions can never get along with each other? Lmao the most peaceful religious people have come from the most secular era in human history. Christians were not peaceful until the ruling class found a more efficient way to control the masses: democracy
😄
Yeah, and I've also noticed that 99℅ of religious violence is between Abrahamic religions. Its like there's some structural defect inherited from the progenitor. Hard not to notice.
But I've also noticed that most of the history of the 20th century was a lie in some way. Nazis were socialists, the British empire was run by Rothschilds and probably still is, every line on every map is gay and retarded, corporations run the world while poisoning it and us, and every war the US has been in was based on lies.
But the religions lie, too. A lot. So what's the difference?
I don't want you to join a religion. If that happened, I'd consider my time wasted.
Correct. It’s a distraction. The longest lie that people have eaten up since the beginning: die for the elite and you’ll get into heaven in the next life. Hey buddy I got a bridge to sell you.
Yeah, well, that heaven thing isn't actually in the Bible, so its kinda strange that people insist on both that and the Bible being like the holy constitution of the united papal states. That was an actual country once, you should totally look it up.
I think the church’s stance is homosexuality is a choice. 🫣
Yeah which makes it sound worse when those pastors touch little kids
I’ve read about Heaven from the Bible so idk what you’re talking about. Unless you’re gonna tell me that Heaven means something different in Aramaic lol either way this is sloppy
I'd amend that to "Religions don't always spread peacefully" because the vast majority of Christian conversions were peaceful. For the first 300 years it was join AND die not join or die. Contrary to what most believe, after Constantine legalized it, there weren't any forced conversions. Most of the empire including Constantine himself did not convert. Even after the Emperors were Christian they still coexisted peacefully with pagans and the number in significant government positions roughly reflected the population demographics.
That isn't to say that there haven't been horrors, but to say Christianity has spread mainly through violence is ahistorical.
Well cult can mean a few things. It can just mean a particular religious devotion, so sure large religions can be cults. But here I'd associate it with certain psychological techniques to keep people in line.
- shunning those who leave.
- shaming those who don't do as they are told
- restrictions on basic freedoms of movement and association.
When the religion gets sufficient power, it shifts the initial peaceful approach to more effective means of gaining followers
All religions that I’m aware of use those same techniques
