I'm not rehashing "biblical stories", I'm reciting historical facts. Look it up if you want, the disciples were real people, and died how they did.
I also don't really care if you convert to Christianity. I already tried to tell you I had no intent of proselytizing you. We're talking about something that I view as objectively good, so I'm gonna speak about it as if it's objectively good, because that's my opinion, so naturally it'll give off a connotation of persuasion. I could argue just as well that you're trying to proselytize me into becoming an Atheist. Which isn't true.
Also, OP literally said that the main problem he viewed was sin, and "that's not to deny that mental illnesses exists". You're thinking that sin is the same thing as karma, which it's explicitly not. Sin is neither necessary nor sufficient for why someone experiences pain. God is aware of our suffering, he's aware of the opportunities of empathy and spiritual growth which can arise from it, but he's also aware that he's already won the war against suffering. The battle against good and evil on this world is a temporary one. God will "repay [us] for what we have done] ; and when Jesus returns, "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Rev. 21:4)
Sure, dude. Because simple shit like "do not murder" is just some deep ass social priority. Because who needs center human emotions and morality, right? (there's a difference between human morals, and society-based ethics, by the way). You're just hiding behind a shroud of nihilism, and I can tell nothing I say will make you stop your gist of virtue-signaling demonization of others' beliefs. And also just maybe, OP, sharing his recovery experience through Christianity, just wanted to talk about it with others who had the same experience. But you love demonizing it makes you feel righteous. Would you reply to OP with 5 paragraphs if his recovery method was a therapist, and you had a bad experience with therapy? If you don't care for it, then just keep scrolling. The world doesn't revolve around you and your beliefs, get your head out of your ass.
Yes you are rehashing biblical stories, and no, the bible is not a history document. If your standard of the events of a book being real is "the people were real!" you would be rightfully laughed out of any history or anthropology course. Furthermore, you would have to believe literally every other religion where "the people were real!", regardless of how contradictory they are between each other, if that was the standard. The first thing you learn is that so much history is often a pinch of truth in a sea of lies. You unfortunately have decided to take the profoundly naive, unscientific, and frankly historically ignorant approach that if 'one' element of an ancient story is true, then all other elements are true. that doesn't make sense.
The simple fact of the matter is that the bible is filled with tons of entirely false "history". Joshua's genocidal conquest weren't real for example. The hebrews are an offshoot of the canaanities, and much of the canaanite religion was in fact used to create their singular god of 'yahweh', creating the yahwehist cult as a funky monotheistic offshoot of the canaanite religion. They weren't some other group of people that 'went into' the land of canaan and genocidally slaughtered the canaanites for the "promised land", according to gods command as it claims in the bible.
there are many 'magical stories' in the bible are simple impossible. There are major stories that simple could not have happened the way the bible claims, and that can be much better explained by evolutionary processes based on the evidence.
1. the "creation" story is impossible as described. Rocks on earth have been dated to be as old as 4 billion years. the earth has been shaped by billions of years of tectonic shifts and geological evolution. If the earth was created in "7 days", there would be no evidence of geological evolution.
2. Plants, Animals and Humans did not simply 'poof' into existence as the bible claims. life evolves due to generations of gradual genetic pressures, epigenetics and mutation building up, and being selected out of the gene pool for. This is seen in the genetic record, the fossil record, and even through controlled selection. most of our edible plants are radically different in taste and appearance from their natural counterparts due to controlled selection. most of the domesticated animals are radically different from their wild counterparts due to controlled selection. Dogs are not wolves, but there are wildly different breeds of dogs due to genetic changes. The fact is, genes can change through processes of selection. Life can come from non-living matter, and scientist managed to do just that 4 years ago. The bible claims life "spawned" into existence into their present forms, but this makes absolutely no sense. why make predators when you can have all life be non-predatory? Why does that make sense from the supposed infinite wisdom of a 'benign creator', why not create all species to be mutual cohabitants to begin with? The only explanation for the behavior of predator and prey species is through the evolution. finally, and this should be obvious, but humanity could not propagate from only two direct ancestors due to a far too small genetic pool.
3. Noahs Ark story is yet scientifically impossible. For one, the ark itself could never be sea worthy, by itself with no cargo even it would have succumbed to the sea. But that's not even the most absurd part. the sheer absurdity of not only somehow preserving and feeding every last species on earth for "40 days" and then somehow distributing them all in the right parts of the earth destroys the whole story. The Ark would have sunk just from the huge amount of live stock alone. but add to that the feed, and the quickly accumulating waste, and the assumption that no animal deaths occur on the ark due to 'perfectly well behaved animals', destroys this weird fantasy of a story by itself. But then add to that the consideration of where the fuck all the water comes from and all the water is going. Water doesn't just magically spawn to flood a whole planet and then magically disappear, but if such a thing did happen there should be evidence all over earth for it. Nigh, the only area where there is evidence of 'rapid flooding', is in the Scablands of Washington state, which was due to glacial melt water breaching an ice wall after the last ice age.
These are just a few examples out of countless examples to show that your book is not a "historical" document, and certainly no great document on how reality works. it is fundamentally ahistorical and scientifically impossible. If you have to use biblical magic to patch any holes in a story or to ignore scientifically impossible elements, then we don't have any reason to accept the biblical stories that certain people are deeply brainwashed to believe in.
I also don't really care if you convert to Christianity. I already tried to tell you I had no intent of proselytizing you. We're talking about something that I view as objectively good, so I'm gonna speak about it as if it's objectively good, because that's my opinion, so naturally it'll give off a connotation of persuasion. I could argue just as well that you're trying to proselytize me into becoming an Atheist. Which isn't true.
if you had "no interest" you would have read my post and not tried so hard to get me to believe your biblical BS.
I can list some easy examples of this
Count 1:
People say there's no evidence to prove god's existence, but i tell them i disagree. did you know that Jesus was a real person, historically proven, to live when he did and be killed the way he was. did you also know that after Jesus's death, all but 2 of the 12 disciples were brutally chased after and killed?
Count 2:
yes, God knows everything. he knew how people would use his name to put down their neighbors. he knew my dad, a Christian, was going to die of cancer, he knew i was going to attempt suicide. and he knew he was going to send down his only son, just for him to be sacrificed for the sins of the human race. and he still wept.
Count 3:
this world sucks dude. god never made anything bad. he made trees, the ocean, the sky, the stars, and humans, to be his companion. but we choose sin.
You don't make these sorts of claims unless you are trying to get someone else to believe it. At this point you are just lying your ass off about not proselytizing when you already exposed your hand during your original comment. these arguments and many more of your statements are written in a
persuasive manner, using common christian apologetics, This IS proselytization no matter how much you deny it. Who are you trying to convince if not me or other people, yourself maybe? Stop denying that you were proselytizing, because that's what your original post directly shows you to be doing.
And don't even think about arguing the notion "Well what are you doing by arguing AGAINST ME!?", the fact is that you are proselytizing by treating your religion as an "objective truth" when interacting with others, which is fundamentally different from simply expressing your personal experiences. you make loads of false statements about history, and reality itself and treat them as an "objective truth" even when they are easily proven to be false, This gives anyone plenty of room to criticize your ridiculous arguments into the dirt with the exhaustive use of any tools at our disposal, such as using little known tools like
Science, empirical data and logical rigor, being used in full force to counter your incorrect and/or nonsensical claims and also show how deeply self-contradictory your theology is.
Don't expect to be chauvinistic with extreme hubris towards others in your own faith and treating it as some "objective truth", and conveniently avoid all consequences.
A "connotation of persuasion". you outright made a bunch of arguments that were irrelevant to what i said, that are only relevant if you want to try to get me to believe christian BS.
Also, OP literally said that the main problem he viewed was sin, and "that's not to deny that mental illnesses exists". You're thinking that sin is the same thing as karma, which it's explicitly not. Sin is neither necessary nor sufficient for why someone experiences pain. God is aware of our suffering, he's aware of the opportunities of empathy and spiritual growth which can arise from it, but he's also aware that he's already won the war against suffering. The battle against good and evil on this world is a temporary one. God will "repay [us] for what we have done] ; and when Jesus returns, "He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Rev. 21:4)
It's stunning the extent you are failing to grasp some basic points of logic here. Associating Sin as being a "cause of mental illness" is not contingent on denying mental illness, it's contingent on blaming mentally ill people for their own mental illness. it's a deeply disgusting mentality in and of itself, You want to disassociate yourself from it, but in your arguments following, you incidentally play right into it.
Saying "god is aware of our suffering" and "won the war against suffering" is a contradictory proposition. you are using contradictions to justify your theology. Suffering cannot exist if it's been "won against". But what's more, an "infinitely wise" god could have made a "perfectly logical" reality where suffering is an impossibility to begin with, where people can live fulfilling lives without the need for suffering. The existence of suffering only makes sense in a reality of material circumstance, where life evolves, competes for resources and evolves pain receptors in the brain to indicate various threats to their life.
The God you claim exist is supposedly "all powerful", so there is no good excuse for there to be a "war against suffering" to "win" in the first place. It's simply a nonsensical proposition when it could have been prevented.
"God will repay us for what we have done" is an argument that immediately exposes your hand. you reveal right away that you treat this god figure, the supposed creator of all suffering, as being totally 'innocent', and then people simply being subjects to his divine plan and working within the conditions this god figure creates are "inherently guilty and must repay god". you have effectively suggested humanity is "innately guilty", which it a deeply abhorrent theology, and directly implies that people should be to blame for their own mental illnesses, whether you realize it or not.
You uphold a double standard where humanity should be blamed for everything that this god figure set into motion, and yet want to think that this is somehow perfectly fair and acceptable, when it's repugnant and abhorrent.
Meanwhile, this god who has supposedly "won the war against suffering" sends people to ETERNAL SUFFERING" for simply not believing in them or being gay? get the fuck out of here.
Sure, dude. Because simple shit like "do not murder" is just some deep ass social priority. Because who needs center human emotions and morality, right? (there's a difference between human morals, and society-based ethics, by the way). You're just hiding behind a shroud of nihilism, and I can tell nothing I say will make you stop your gist of virtue-signaling demonization of others' beliefs. And also just maybe, OP, sharing his recovery experience through Christianity, just wanted to talk about it with others who had the same experience. But you love demonizing it makes you feel righteous. Would you reply to OP with 5 paragraphs if his recovery method was a therapist, and you had a bad experience with therapy? If you don't care for it, then just keep scrolling. The world doesn't revolve around you and your beliefs, get your head out of your ass.
the "morality" of your entire theology rest on "commandments from god". which is baseless, and certainly much more so than societies using evidence of their actual conditions to develop social priorities. And yet you want to critique the foundation by which all human ethical and legal systems have evolved? Social Priorities have usually been derived from collective human emotions in most parts of history to begin with, which is why not murdering innocent people is a basic law that has developed in most cultures
without biblical commandments, You can't just claim that the bible has a monopoly on basic legal concepts that most cultures of antiquity developed throughout history long before the bible was even a thing. The anthropologic evolution of Social Priorities can be seen throughout the history of every single culture that has existed, you can't just pretend they don't exist because it's inconvenient for your theology.
"shroud of nihilism", what the fuck does this even mean? I openly state that while I don't believe life has any inherent meaning, people can interpret their life experiences to develop their own meaning. and if you are going to claim that life has meaning "because god says so", why the fuck is that the case? why does this gods existence matter to begin with? It's silly to assume that anything has an inherent meaning, because there is not some physical law that 'dictates' meaning, and it's self-contradictory for a god to claim themselves to have "inherent meaning", when it was themselves that assigned meaning to themselves. That is simply the closest we can get to making "meaning" out of life, is to develop it at our own accord.
It's deeply strange to me how you suggest that 'emotion' is a supreme element by which ethical systems should be developed, when the very concept of religious morality detaches human emotion from the equation entirely, by making it purely about 'gods commandments. This is why in the bible so many groups of people can be dehumanized against and treated as though they are "against god" simply because they don't conform to "gods commandments, such as gay people and atheist for example. The bible suggest that they should be sent to a place of eternal suffering. I guess that's what counts as "ethics" in your book.
