The Failure of Christianity was Caused by the Negligence & Corruption of the Church

[ResidentHell]

There are two reasons why Christianity is a failed religion. Both reasons have to do with the conduct of the members of the Church

There is one common factor in both reasons for why Christianity failed: Negligence / Corruption


Reason 1. The Hypocrisy / Corruption of the Church and its Members

Personally I believe the Church was corrupted on the same day that it was first established

The Church was never “good”. The Church was crooked and its leaders were incompetent from the very beginning

Priests are often being exposed for sexual abuse of underage boys and sexual exploitation of other members of the Church, and other priests are sometimes exposed for their attempts to cover up for the malpractices of priests in the Church

This is a prime example of corruption in the Church, as priests are usually the most important members of the Church when it comes to status and influence

But the whistleblowing of priests and other ministers in the Church happens so often now, that I’m starting to believe this was common practice among the high-status members of the Church throughout the ages. Except that it was less noticeable in previous eras, because people were less likely to report the Church leaders for malpractice, or were forcefully silenced or dismissed when they attempted to disclose their findings to other people

Many apostates have stated that the hypocrisy of the Church is the reason they transitioned from Christian to apostate. Based on what I've researched, this might actually be the most common reason that Christians turn apostate



Reason 2. The Internal Inconsistency of the Scriptures as Canonized by the Leaders of the Roman Catholic Church

As society became more advanced, more people became literate. Consequentially, more people became able to read the Scriptures independently. The priest or leader of the local Church no longer had to read it out loud to them

Inevitably, more people were exposed to the internal inconsistency of the Scriptures

Remember that the Roman Catholic Church (previously the Orthodox Church) were responsible for creating the canon that is used not only by Catholics, but also by Protestants. Also the vast majority of Christians in the world are identified with Catholic or Protestant denominations

The only difference between Catholic canon and Protestant canon, is that the Protestant canon excludes the Apocrypha (which is about 10 to 20 books). Besides that, most of the Catholic canon incorporates the entirety of the Protestant canon (i.e. the Protestant canon is a subset of the Catholic canon)

Either way, both Catholic and Protestant canons have internal inconsistencies that cannot be reconciled

If the details of a text or literature has an internal inconsistency, this is a very significant indicator that either:

​

a) There was negligence in the process of constructing the literature, or​

​

b) There was a deliberate (and successful) attempt to add false or deceptive information to the literature​

I do not want to provide examples of internal inconsistency in the Catholic and Protestant canons. The reader can search for these examples themselves



The real question is this:

Why did Irenaeus of Lyon, Origen of Alexandria and other major figures of the Early Orthodox Church, allow their canon (which would eventually become the mainstream canon for most Christians) to include manuscripts with details that contradict each other?

Answer:

There was negligence in the process of constructing the canon, or there was a deliberate attempt to include false or deceptive information in the canon

At least some of the people responsible for constructing the mainstream canon were negligent with the process, or purposely tried to add conflicting manuscripts to the mainstream canon, with dishonest or deceptive intentions



This leads to the next question:

If “God, the Father” exists, such that He never lies, never deceives, and is careful and precise in everything that He does, then how did He allow the mainstream canon to include contradictory information, considering that the human authors of the Scriptures in the mainstream canon were supposed to be divinely inspired by Him?

Answer:

He didn’t

If it’s true that “God, the Father” has a factual AND intelligible existence (although I think he does not), such that He does not lie, does not deceive, and is precise in everything that He does, then it is not possible for Him to have divinely inspired all of the human authors of the Scriptures

At least some, if not all human authors of the Scriptures, were not divinely inspired by Him to write the manuscripts that would eventually feature in the canon used by most Christians worldwide

The end.

 

[The Babylonian]

Hey brother, I love that you gave a detailed explaination on why you claim christianity is a failure. I personally love intellegent arguments. So as fellow intellectuals I would give my responses and counter arguments.

The modern church acts like the Pharesses of the time of Jesus. They demand rules and force many believers to believe in lies as traditon. To give you comparisons the Catholic church is similar to the Pharesses. The Pharesses in the first century were divided within thier group and even joined the christian community (John 3:1-12 Nicodemus)(Acts 15:1)(Philippians 3:5 Paul). And the Orthodox church acts like the Saducces. Pharesses were considered the religion of the people. The Saducces were the religion of the state and they were known to play with Rome as they were elitist.

The early christians were highly communial. They acted as a anarchic system as they were extremly decentralised. The modern church has been corrupted during the time of Constantine the "Great". If you have notice the christian church grows when its prosecuted so in order for it to fufill its purpose it has to be pressured to not make mistakes. And if you say that after it became legal, christanity is declared dead. Take in notice of the Nestorians who were presecuted by "Churchanity" for the issue of the heretics of Alexandria.

If you know about the conflict of Antioch vs Alexandria , you would know that Antioch was where christians were first called "Christians" or also known as little christs. They valued scripture true in heart and where Nestorius has studied in. Through out history christains were in conflict with the Roman church and yet they manage to spread from Ireland to China and with the Goths. Despite making doctornal errors in a world where reading without a clercial "licence" was illegal. (Many call this "The Trail of Blood" by J.M. Carroll)

In Alexandria you would know of most cringe worthy events in "the church" such as reports of the romans that "christians cuting off thier dicks and balls for the cause of "virginity"". If im not wrong ,Clement of Alexandria did this. And The school of Alexandria they tended to intermix greek philosophy with scripture. They were know to change scripture to sell thier ideas. Very similar to the Talmund. Also in Alexandria , the gnostics were created there and other shitty ideas.

In your first and second reason I can say this .Long answer is the conflict between the schools of Antioch and Alexandria. Short answer is organized religion is blasphemy. Ill give you a idea who is doing thier best on following christianity the best they can. -- The Anabaptists also known as the Amish,Hutterites,Bruderhoffs and more. ---The "Jesus christians"---- and a interesting case, the chinese underground church who might of given China the blessing of God for unoffically given them the biggest christian population in the world probably.

Now on your last question, here is a easy answer .--------- Try reading it in the Hebrew and Greek originals.---------------- GO ON AND READ IT ,ALSO PLEASE GIVE ME A TRANSLATION TO UNDERSTAND IT IF WE CHRISTIANS ARE ALL IDOITS. Sorry for my rudeness . Translating a Bronze and Iron age book with differnt eras ,grammer types ,tones,contexts and other parts that somehow the translaters dont know how to read or appreciate literature on how its meant to be read. Here one translation error that not many notice.

Eve was created by a rib of Adam. This is a mistake in hebrew ,the word for rib is "Ala" where in the book of Daniel in chapter 7:5 where there is a bear with three ribs. While the original word is "tsela" where its is translated into half or side.(Exodus37) So by knowing this I can break the illusions of Chads that they can have as much ribs as they can. And demand women to stick with monogamy.

Yes I understand there can be weird contents in the bible so this is left for the scholars and by faith to fix this issue. To show you I know this problems . Go and watch this youtube channels (Darkmatter2525 and SATANSGUIDE) . They make it funny
I believe we are in Satan's little season and still I can be wrong.

I await your response or others response hopefully it can be reasonable. I do not know if yall notice , we are living like in the movie Idoicracy. I actually expect you to respond in a resonable matter. So if you have questions don´t be afraid to ask. God bless

 

[ResidentHell]

Now on your last question, here is a easy answer .--------- Try reading it in the Hebrew and Greek originals.---------------- GO ON AND READ IT ,ALSO PLEASE GIVE ME A TRANSLATION TO UNDERSTAND IT IF WE CHRISTIANS ARE ALL IDOITS.

I'm aware that translations from the Hebrew Bible and Greek New Testament to Latin were not accurate. Some Hebrew words were misconstrued or mistranslated in Greek and Latin versions of the Bible (e.g., words like Nephilim, Seraphim, pesach, Yahweh, Yeshua)

Most Christians worldwide read from the King James Version or the New International Version, made by William Tynedale. It’s said the King James Version was one of the earliest complete translations of the Bible in English, and this version is very popular in Protestant Church

But there was another English translation of the Bible that predated KJV and Tynedale's BIble – Wycliffe’s Bible

This version was less popular cause it was associated with the Lollards, a Christian sect who were thought to have had heretical beliefs (they believed that sacramental rites of passage, like baptism, confession, fasting, and the Eucharist, were unnecessary)

Nevertheless, Wycliffe’s Bible became the foundation for future English translations of the Bible, including Tyndale's Bible, KJV and NIV


The problem is not really about the translation of biblical words from Hebrew to Greek / Latin. It’s more to do with the internal inconsistency of the New Testament. Basically some passages in the New Testament conflict with each other in ways that I do not believe can be reconciled. For instance, Paul the Apostle strangely contradicts himself in the Books of Corinthians I and II:

Though I don’t remember exactly which verses from the Books of Corinthians I and II, there's one passage from the Corinthians where Paul says that women are unallowed to speak in church, for it is shameful for a woman to speak in church, and if she wants to learn something, she should ask her husband at home. But in another passage from the Corinthians, Paul also says that a woman is allowed to prophesy in church as long as she’s wearing a veil on her head while prophesying, or something along those lines

There are other examples of internal discrepancies in the New Testament; personally I think not all of them are reconcilable

Yes I understand there can be weird contents in the bible so this is left for the scholars and by faith to fix this issue

Faith alone cannot reconcile internal inconsistencies in the contents of a book

The Law of Non-Contradiction says, “A statement and the negation of the same statement, cannot be jointly true”

No amonut of faith will change the fact that if a statement is true, the negation of that same statement cannot also be true

Logical impossibility overrides faith. The issue of internal inconsistency is unfixable for the Orthodox canon

This is why I've reached the ultimate conclusion that the Orthodox canon was either: (a) not carefully assembled by the people of the Early Church who constructed it, or (b) there was clandestine motives behind assembling the Orthodox canon

So by knowing this I can break the illusions of Chads that they can have as much ribs as they can. And demand women to stick with monogamy.

Maybe you should go outside and try this IRL, and see how well this works out. Prevent Chad from having as much "ribs" as he can, and demand women to be long-term monogamous instead of being hypergamous

 

[The Babylonian]

On preventing Chads and foids for long term monogamy is litterally impossible and when I tried it I almost got the cops on me. So you beat me in this issue. At least I shamed the suppossed catholics. But they act like cattle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On the "faith" thing , I meant for it to be fixed in the future. Such as the discovery of the dead sea scrolls leaving us with a interesting old testament cannon that includes the book of Enoch and somehow is missing the book of Ester. Technology improves over time and by how many christians are not willing to give up on the faith. It can be only time can say that you might be alive to see a manuscript that proves and denies the inconsistencies that you claim there are. And maybe time travel might help.

On the Orthodox cannon, quit counting books like its a collection. Jesus came on earth to give a message. Not to enforce Sharia law. In the early days of christianity, people had to memorize scripture and rarely hold manuscripts for fearing persucution and losing a valueble reasource that would be papyrus.

Want me to tell you who were adding and taking books. The Pharassies.(Matthew 23:1-25) They focused on the outer apperance never the moral integerty. And woried over little details and put a heavier burden on the common folk ,yet still missing the point of the law. From what I see from this is like I'am telling you "enlighten yourself" and you setting yourself on fire just so you can say "did you meant like on fire or by getting electrocuted?". This means the bible is meant to be thought out properly not just as a rule book. Unless you are brain dead. So you are capable of critical thought?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Paul's teaching over women speaking. This I can solve by understanding the context. The Corinthian church had the social issues of the local community. They were divided over leadership,sexual immorality, social status such as bragging over wisedom and lack of submission and many other issues that many didnt fully embraced the teachings of Jesus.

So you can expect a handfull of women boasting in the church.In( 1 Corinthians 14:34-35,) Paul states that women should remain silent in churches and not speak. What is a church? Its like a assembly or congregation. Not a building but can still be in a building. So here is one of the shitty translations that could get you confused. In simple terms its a meeting where a apostle or prophet has something to say. Thats why in the next verse he tells them they are not the authors of the Gospel.(gospel means message)

Now for the orginal greek word for talking laleo expresses the act of talking and lego refers to what is said. So he was silencing the ones who talk in the middle of a message. Or for the modern equavalent would be a person having a phone call in the middle of a movie. So here is why translations matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On women prophecing with viel. In ancient times women were in under threat by everyone since they are the weaker gender. So the viel was to protect thier identity from the public and making sure that she wouldnt get raped or stoned by snitches.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsSKYtF68lg


Here is a video that explain this misconception well.
Quick summary:
-Full face viel is a ancient practice before islam.
--other cultures did this before modernity ruin it(china,japan,rome and so on)
---modern christianity is whorish
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On women asking questions to their husbands. Its the same reason on interrupting a meeting. Like I explained before. If you expect it to be a small meeting you are wrong since a important figure would be there such as a apostle. Do you think they would have the time to answer every question. That why teachers say to us "pay attention" . If you need help on understanding you can ask a friend ,who for a women would be their husbands.

So expect a bunch of dumbass whores in our time. LOL

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On the english translations ----- Cool , I only care if they give out a translation I can understand from its original meaning. Rome in the time of Jesus was very similar to our time. If you can tell even femboys existed in Roman times. That how eirrely close we are to them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can go on to defend the scriptures all day, I find this fun. So go on and find me more LOL. Jokes aside I say its mostly translation errors and the focus on rules instead of the message of Jesus as the problem.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I liked that you responded to my arguments that I gave to you. Hope you can respond back. I like that you mention the most controverial part of the letters of Paul as your reason for your beliefs many should know about this yet they are ignorant or lukework. Keep up the good work bud even if I am wrong I will accept defeat,but it doesn't mean I would go down without a fight.

 

[The_word_made_flesh]

I think clearly that once a following of Jesus began that satan needed to make a fool of the organized church and used the Roman Catholic Church to blend true Christian teachings with paganism.
Satan will always work harder to deceive the true Church than fake religion.
Keep your eyes on God and not on men for men will disappoint you but God will never disappoint.

Remember Jesus is the only savior and the only way to the Father !


Act 4 10-12
10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11 Jesus is

“‘the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the cornerstone.
12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”

 

[ResidentHell]

The Pharassies.(Matthew 23:1-25) They focused on the outer apperance never the moral integerty. And woried over little details and put a heavier burden on the common folk ,yet still missing the point of the law. From what I see from this is like I'am telling you "enlighten yourself" and you setting yourself on fire just so you can say "did you meant like on fire or by getting electrocuted?"

I haven't really studied the Pharisees, but I think they're supposed to be the Levantine Jews who adhered to the Book of the Law. They had the idea of following the law because it's God's commandment, rather than follow the law because of its inherent righteousness

The issue with the Pharisses and Jesus Christ seems to be an issue of Law vs. Morality. The question can be posed like this: If a person does God's commandment, does the person's actions itself honour God, or does the person's intentions behind the act honour God?

I think the Pharisees would say the act itself is enough to honour God, while Jesus Christ would say its the intentions behind the act

So you can expect a handfull of women boasting in the church.In( 1 Corinthians 14:34-35,) Paul states that women should remain silent in churches and not speak. What is a church? Its like a assembly or congregation. Not a building but can still be in a building. So here is one of the shitty translations that could get you confused. In simple terms its a meeting where a apostle or prophet has something to say. Thats why in the next verse he tells them they are not the authors of the Gospel.(gospel means message)

Now for the orginal greek word for talking laleo expresses the act of talking and lego refers to what is said. So he was silencing the ones who talk in the middle of a message. Or for the modern equavalent would be a person having a phone call in the middle of a movie. So here is why translations matter.

On women asking questions to their husbands. Its the same reason on interrupting a meeting. Like I explained before. If you expect it to be a small meeting you are wrong since a important figure would be there such as a apostle. Do you think they would have the time to answer every question. That why teachers say to us "pay attention" . If you need help on understanding you can ask a friend ,who for a women would be their husbands.

Fair enough, I see this as an acceptable reconcilement for what Paul says about women in the Book of Corinthians. I think it's probable that some of Paul the Apostle's words were mistranslated or misinterpreted from Greek to English in those letters

 

[sk.feelsdevil]

DR, the christian church was never that great. They were just a little less savage than the alternatives at the time. Still the volume of assumptions needed to make sense of the Bible invalidates it compared to much more relationally coherent works of fiction, like Harry Potter.

 

[The Babylonian]

I think clearly that once a following of Jesus began that satan needed to make a fool of the organized church and used the Roman Catholic Church to blend true Christian teachings with paganism.
Satan will always work harder to deceive the true Church than fake religion.
Keep your eyes on God and not on men for men will disappoint you but God will never disappoint.

Remember Jesus is the only savior and the only way to the Father !


Act 4 10-12
10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11 Jesus is

“‘the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the cornerstone.
12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.”

I agree with you. The catholic church has done only evil just as its sister churches in the orthodox world. We christians should put them to the test to prove themselves if they are only catholic "because my mommy took me to church so that means im a believer".

So we christians should be able to defend ourselfs.

 

[The_word_made_flesh]

I agree with you. The catholic church has done only evil just as its sister churches in the orthodox world. We christians should put them to the test to prove themselves if they are only catholic "because my mommy took me to church so that means im a believer".

So we christians should be able to defend ourselfs.

Thank you ,well said

 

[The Babylonian]

I haven't really studied the Pharisees, but I think they're supposed to be the Levantine Jews who adhered to the Book of the Law. They had the idea of following the law because it's God's commandment, rather than follow the law because of its inherent righteousness

The issue with the Pharisses and Jesus Christ seems to be an issue of Law vs. Morality. The question can be posed like this: If a person does God's commandment, does the person's actions itself honour God, or does the person's intentions behind the act honour God?

I think the Pharisees would say the act itself is enough to honour God, while Jesus Christ would say its the intentions behind the act




Fair enough, I see this as an acceptable reconcilement for what Paul says about women in the Book of Corinthians. I think it's probable that some of Paul the Apostle's words were mistranslated or misinterpreted from Greek to English in those letters

You got a good point of view on Jesus vs the Pharisees. So I have no comment on this.
I say its the person's intentions. On legalism vs good intentions. I believe on good intentions. Jesus says the two most important commandments are to Love God and Love your Neighbor.

Legalism is burdensome. Just look on why modern people hate christainity for.

Good intentions in the old testament has many proves why free will exists. Just look on figures like David and the prophets.
Example: Micah 6:8 states, "He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God". Jesus usually took his base of arguments from the prophets.

I see this as a guide to be strong against evil and be reasonable. Also called to be righteous.

I grown to respect you. No matter what decision you take on christianity. I like that you have good points of view and good arguments. I hope others who are watching us and our fellow brothers come to be like you on your reasoning.

 

[The Babylonian]

Thank you ,well said

Yes

 

[The Babylonian]

DR, the christian church was never that great. They were just a little less savage than the alternatives at the time. Still the volume of assumptions needed to make sense of the Bible invalidates it compared to much more relationally coherent works of fiction, like Harry Potter.

Sure buddy, can you explain why?

 

[sk.feelsdevil]

Sure buddy, can you explain why?

Segan's Standard (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence). The Bible makes claims of miracles which are per definition extraordinary, however said miracles per definition do not leave any lasting physical traces. So there is no proof for any of the highly "creative" (to put it lightly) claims in the Bible. One of the few things that is true about the Bible, is the fact that Jesus did exist and that there was a cult surrounding him. That however does not prove the existence of any of his supernatural acts.

Now to the second part of my claim regarding the presuppositions needed to make sense of the christian Bible being far more numerous than those of Harry Potter. The beloved Children's series does not make easily debunkable claims, like the flood or the fact that the Jews were never slaves of Egypt. Harry Potter however makes claims of magic, which the Bible also does. And yeah a guy rises from the grave in both texts, both feature mythological creatures, however the one makes broad claims about existence, history and out origins, whilst the other just enumerates a short series of events. In that respect the one necessitates less assumptions to be proven correct than the other.

 

[The Babylonian]

Segan's Standard (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence). The Bible makes claims of miracles which are per definition extraordinary, however said miracles per definition do not leave any lasting physical traces. So there is no proof for any of the highly "creative" (to put it lightly) claims in the Bible. One of the few things that is true about the Bible, is the fact that Jesus did exist and that there was a cult surrounding him. That however does not prove the existence of any of his supernatural acts.

Now to the second part of my claim regarding the presuppositions needed to make sense of the christian Bible being far more numerous than those of Harry Potter. The beloved Children's series does not make easily debunkable claims, like the flood or the fact that the Jews were never slaves of Egypt. Harry Potter however makes claims of magic, which the Bible also does. And yeah a guy rises from the grave in both texts, both feature mythological creatures, however the one makes broad claims about existence, history and out origins, whilst the other just enumerates a short series of events. In that respect the one necessitates less assumptions to be proven correct than the other.

DO YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS ONLY ABOUT MAGIC?

This book is mostly about morality. Throughtout the bible its shows human nature from its flaws and wins. Its seems you missed to point of the gospel. Its not about magic. Many of this special events can be explained with science and corrections in the translations.

Here is a easy example: how do you explain blood rivers?- Iron contamated water-

Jesus was called a physician or doctor ( Luke 5:31-32)
All of his miracles can be done with modern technology and there are proofs of ancient methods as well.

Yet on rising from the dead sounds something we can not explain yet. But I could try to guess this goes with quantum physics and other dimensions since he is the biological son of God.

Go on ask me questions about his miracles and I can find scientific proof for them.

So would you call a doctor a miracle worker or as others used to called them wizards.

Such as the greek word pharmakeia meaning sorcery, drug or spell given potion.

Your believes on christianity probably come from social justice warriors who never pick up a book in thier life. If you dont understand how would you describe it to someone else? (MAGIC)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of your claims are about mistranlations and supposed myth

I know I might be provactive on the seed of Noah, but they were located near the Black sea. And the supposed world flood happened nearby the Black sea. "The black sea deluge"
https://shop.minimuseum.com/blogs/cool-things/revisiting-the-black-sea-deluge-hypothesis

View: https://medium.com/@Nelsonalfonso/the-black-sea-deluge-hypothesis-an-exploration-into-earths-history-1dc296fc66ef


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rhinos = Unicorns

Behomoth =

Sauroposeidon proteles​

Levianth =

Plesiosauria​

There is that easy.

On carbon dating:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5774753/
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/doesnt-carbon-14-dating-disprove-the-bible/
https://www.siliconrepublic.com/innovation/carbon-dating-accuracy-major-flaw
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...ur-pollution-heres-easy-way-fix-it-180961345/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the Israelite slaves
https://biblearchaeology.org/resear...he-name-yahweh-in-egyptian-hieroglyphic-texts

The Hyksos event
https://www.worldhistory.org/Hyksos/
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/news/the-expulsion-of-the-hyksos/

Red sea chariots
https://www.discovery.global/chariot-wheels-discovered-in-the-red-sea
https://apologiaway1.wordpress.com/2025/01/22/chariot-wheels-found-at-bottom-of-red-sea/

View: https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/scientists-finally-found-evidence-for-mosess-red-sea-crossing-6ea440178d42


Adam's bridge( a similar case in India - Sri Lanka)
https://interestingengineering.com/culture/ram-setu-adams-bridge
https://scitechdaily.com/uncovering-adams-bridge-the-lost-land-link-between-india-and-sri-lanka/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Lazuras

Premature burial​

https://nmfh.org/buried-alive-boetticher/
https://unherd.com/2023/10/people-are-still-being-buried-alive/
https://lethbridgenewsnow.com/2023/...rue-stories-of-people-that-were-buried-alive/

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now on history, I made a post already about this . If you want me to trigger you more .(My race theory) Here ago Gen 6 humans were here before Adam. As they were called people from the land of Nod. Noah´s haplogroups are I,J,K and are indo europeans.

I am not against any race. This is how history present itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What else you got to say . I am willing to continue finding scientific proof. So most of claims are mistranslations and magical assumptions.

So what you think of this .I can be still wrong. So I am willing to here your thoughts of this.

stalkerKiller​

 

[sk.feelsdevil]

DO YOU BELIEVE THE BIBLE IS ONLY ABOUT MAGIC?

Never made that claim, read my statement again. Both texts do feature magic, that is all I said.

Here is a easy example: how do you explain blood rivers?- Iron contamated water-

It is a possible explanation not a definitive proof of it happening. What you are doing is apologetics, you start from the assumption that it did happen and you try to find a plausible explanation. Well what I am putting into question is the event itself happening.

All of his miracles can be done with modern technology and there are proofs of ancient methods as well.

Possibility does not imply likelihood. You have a poor understanding of the definitions of these words. Anything is possible , however most things are not likely to have happened. To add to this the ever so famous Occam's razor indicates that the more presuppositions an explanation needs, the less likely it is to be correct compared to another explanation that requires fewer such presuppositions.

Yet on rising from the dead sounds something we can not explain yet. But I could try to guess this goes with quantum physics and other dimensions since he is the biological son of God.

Of course you can not do so, because you just assume (not even presume given your lack of evidence for the event ever happening) that somehow through quantum mechanics (which as the name implies only applies to subatomic particles) Jesus simply materialized anew or regenerated himself. That is pure speculation and not compatible with science.

Go on ask me questions about his miracles and I can find scientific proof for them.

I will not do that since you have not provided proof for any of the peculiar claims of the Bible actually happening. We are in two realms you and I. I doubt that most of the claims in the bible even happened whilst you just assume that they did and try to find a possible explanation. Until we have straightened that out there is little for us to debate.

"The black sea deluge"

"Such a flood cannot be reconciled with scientific reality, but it has been suggested by researchers that a smaller event inspired the initial legends that then radiated out across the world through different storytelling traditions."
As your source correctly claims the world ending flood is a bunch of poppycock (bullshit in American English). So we have the first non truth in the Bible that you have agreed to based on your source. Namely that the world did not get flooded and that only the black sea region got flooded at some point.

Rhinos = Unicorns

No they are not, they can not be confused with horses they also do not have on horn as the name claims. Uni (one) - corn (horn). Unless you somehow what to claim that the Europeans found out about indian rhinos quicker than about black ones.

Behomoth =

Sauroposeidon proteles​

They never lived alongside humans as per the fossil records.

Levianth =

Plesiosauria​

" and persisted until the K-T extinction event at the end of the Cretaceous , inhabiting all seas" so they died out 66 million years ago. For comparison modern humans only began 300K years ago.

Radiocarbon dating uncertainty and the reliability of the PEWMA method of time-series analysis for research on long-term human-environment interaction - PMC

Statistical time-series analysis has the potential to improve our understanding of human-environment interaction in deep time. However, radiocarbon dating—the most common chronometric technique in archaeological and palaeoenvironmental ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"Our simulations suggest that the PEWMA method can often correctly identify relationships between time-series despite chronological uncertainty. When two time-series are correlated with a coefficient of 0.25, the method is able to identify that relationship correctly 20–30% of the time, providing the time-series contain low noise levels. With correlations of around 0.5, it is capable of correctly identifying correlations despite chronological uncertainty more than 90% of the time." - as you can see this source states that one can accurately compare the age of two objects with a high degree of likelihood, however it can not place said objects in a precise date that is sufficiently accurate. However this article only mentions carbon 14 radiological dating, though there are many other types of radiological dating that is used to determine the age of a certain item. I will get back to this later.

Doesn’t Carbon-14 Dating Disprove the Bible?

Unaware of the many fallacious assumptions used in the dating process, many people believe Carbon-14 dating disproves the biblical timeline. Mike Riddle demonstrates otherwise.

answersingenesis.org

"A critical assumption used in carbon-14 dating has to do with this ratio. It is assumed that the ratio of 14C to 12C in the atmosphere has always been the same as it is today (1 to 1 trillion)." First off the author of this site does not understand the difference between a presumption (something you believe given a reasonable degree of evidence) and an assumption (something you believe with no evidence, so just a guess).

So how do scientists know that the ratio of 14C and 12C has remained the same? Tree rings, they all (in most species let us not get into specifics) correspond to a year and that is a tool that scientists use to calibrate their carbon dating equipment. Given the current findings there have not been too many major events that have produced too large of a change in this ratio aside of this. And yes scinetists are well aware of it and it was caused by a change in solar activity. Furthermore scientists do have access to what the atmosphere was in the form of ice that contains air bubbles from a long long time ago, based on that they can further confirm the theory that 14 and 12 C concentrations have remained stable thru time on earth. It is not even an assumption, it is a THEORY. One for which there is excellent proof. So this little piece of writing is irrelevant.

Carbon dating accuracy called into question after major flaw discovery

One of the most essential tools for determining an ancient object’s age, carbon dating, might not be as accurate as we once thought.

www.siliconrepublic.com

I do not know if you read this one in full but it is about a difference of 20 years which is irrelevant on an archeological scale.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scie...ur-pollution-heres-easy-way-fix-it-180961345/

This article is irrelevant as we are aware of rates of 14 and 12C in the atmosphere long before industrialization. It also mentions that we can just opt to track 13C as an alternative and yes this is a future larger point I am willing to make, but I'll get to it later.

https://biblearchaeology.org/resear...he-name-yahweh-in-egyptian-hieroglyphic-texts

This article does not mention slavery even once, you can check for yourself. Secondly the only claim of this article is that a tribe associated with the Israelis moved through some egyptian fortresses: "Note here that the Shasu tribes are linked with the Edomites, a tribal people with a well-known relationship to the Israelites."
I do not mean to be rude, however you need to have less irrelevant sources and work with facts from those sources, rather than spamming them. What you are doing is a shotgun argument and it would get you disqualified from any formal debate, it also denotes of interest in your interlocutors (the person you are talking to) time. I am not criticizing you, just making sure that you understand this social norm.

The Hyksos event
https://www.worldhistory.org/Hyksos/

Again this source is irrelevant to your thesis since it clearly states that Hyksos were not to be confused with enslaved hebrews: "Contrary to many claims throughout the years, there is no reason to identify the Hyksos with the Hurrians nor with the Hebrew slaves from the biblical Book of Exodus." In fact this sources like others denies your hypothesis.

The Expulsion of the Hyksos

Expulsion of the Hyksos: Near end of the Middle Bronze Age, Ahmose I overthrew the Hyksos and initiated the New Kingdom of Egypt.

www.biblicalarchaeology.org

And for a third time your source contradicts your thesis blatantly. In this instance it blatantly recognizes that the historical narrative differs from the biblical one: "In addition, the basic premise of the Hyksos and Exodus histories differ: the Hyksos were expelled rulers of Egypt, not slaves, and they were forced out, not pursued."

www.Discovery.Global

Enter the exciting world of Discoveries! You will discover articles and videos of Bible Prophecy, Dinosaurs, Biblical Discoveries, Geology, Evolution and much more!

www.discovery.global

Your article is false and as much of a reddit move it is to use fact checkers, I will:
Fact check #1
Fact check #2
To make a long story short your "source" which I may add is not a journal, scientific or otherwise, claims that a certain professor participated in the dive which the university does not know existed.
I have checked the fact checkers and the current article you have provided does not make any mention of a professor or excavation. And that implies that the fact checkers are either wrong or that the article was changed. I am too lazy to use the way back machine given that the source does not mention any authority that took over the dig, so based on the lack of transparency I will have to infer that your text is most likely wrong. Same applies to the second text, that you have cited as proof. Both texts do not mention the archeologists involved nor where the supposed findings are, other websites deny these claims too, but I have not included them here.

View: https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/scientists-finally-found-evidence-for-mosess-red-sea-crossing-6ea440178d42

I am not a member of Medium so I am not able to read this article. If you would be so kind as to send me some screenshots then I would greatly appreciate that.

Adam’s Bridge or Ram Setu: A 30-mile stone bridge between India and Sri Lanka

Adam's Bridge, or Ram Setu as it's also known, stands as a intriguing fusion of geological forces and historical significance.

interestingengineering.com

"Whether formed by natural processes or divine intervention, Adam’s Bridge continues to capture the imagination, linking not only distant lands but also generations of myth, faith, and inquiry.
In addition to its significance in Hindu tradition, Adam’s Bridge also appears in Abrahamic traditions. It is said to be Adam’s path after his expulsion from Paradise, crossing from Adam’s Peak in Sri Lanka to India."
I think that you were trying to refer to this part of that article, it does not imply that said land bridge was made through supernatural means, just that some people think that it could be the bridge Adam used. No source is cited for that, no proof it given. We have a source that does not confirm your hypothesis but merely mention it.
Whilst traditionally in Indian folklore it is considered to have been created by an army of ape men I have hound no reputable source saying that it was anything other than a natural limestone shoals.

Uncovering Adam’s Bridge: The Lost Land Link Between India and Sri Lanka

Adam's Bridge connects India and Sri Lanka through a series of limestone shoals extending from Rameswaram Island to Mannar Island. Once a solid land bridge, it has eroded over time but still supports rich biodiversity and provides critical habitat for marine and bird species. This Copernicus Sent

scitechdaily.com

This source does not mention Christianity or anything similar, just Hindu tradition.

If you want me to trigger you more

Do not worry I am not in the least triggered. Your arguments are not present and your sources do not confirm your claims, they actually in most cases debunk said claims. Again no criticism to you, however it seems to me that you either do not have a clear understanding of the English language or that you did not read the articles and texts that you sent me too carefully. That is not a bad thing, though next time please make more concise points before spamming this large amount of weak and nonexistent arguments. I have invested more time than it was worth (from my subjective perception) in giving you coherent rebuttals.



Less I forget your criticism of 14C - 12C dating. So here is my source for all of the different types of dating that do not rely on what we call carbon dating, but as you are well aware it only refers to two types of carbon atoms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

"Uranium–lead radiometric dating involves using uranium-235 or uranium-238 to date a substance's absolute age. This scheme has been refined to the point that the error margin in dates of rocks can be as low as less than two million years in two-and-a-half billion years.[22][23] An error margin of 2–5% has been achieved on younger Mesozoic rocks.[24]" - method used for telling the age of earth rocks

"This is based on the beta decay of rubidium-87 to strontium-87, with a half-life of 50 billion years. This scheme is used to date old igneous and metamorphic rocks, and has also been used to date lunar samples. Closure temperatures are so high that they are not a concern. Rubidium-strontium dating is not as precise as the uranium–lead method, with errors of 30 to 50 million years for a 3-billion-year-old sample." - method used for dating space and earth rocks

"This involves inspection of a polished slice of a material to determine the density of "track" markings left in it by the spontaneous fission of uranium-238 impurities. The uranium content of the sample has to be known, but that can be determined by placing a plastic film over the polished slice of the material, and bombarding it with slow neutrons." - this method is used for volcanic glass and relies on the fissions that uranium particles make in the material.

"Luminescence dating methods are not radiometric dating methods in that they do not rely on abundances of isotopes to calculate age. Instead, they are a consequence of background radiation on certain minerals. Over time, ionizing radiation is absorbed by mineral grains in sediments and archaeological materials such as quartz and potassium feldspar. The radiation causes charge to remain within the grains in structurally unstable "electron traps". Exposure to sunlight or heat releases these charges, effectively "bleaching" the sample and resetting the clock to zero" - method for reliably dating pottery back to when it was last affected by severe heat in the realm of hundreds of degrees Celsius.

Anyhow these are just SOME of the many many radiometric types of dating certain objects that are used to disprove the young earth hypothesis (you can not really call it a theory, sorry) and may I remind you that you did not debunk carbon dating (which is not used as much nowadays in the context of human settlements) you merely hinted at its drawbacks, which are undeniable. That being said I hope that I have satisfied the level of argumentation needed to convince you personally. I may be wrong, so please feel free to tell me where that is. However as I stated please be a little more concise because it took like 2 hours to read and respond to all of your points. Thank you for making it through this and I hope that you can forgive my disorganized nature. In terms of aspect (the way you structured your points with pretty colors and all of that) you have me beat, I was never much of the artistic type so please have patience with me.

 

[The Babylonian]

Never made that claim, read my statement again. Both texts do feature magic, that is all I said.

It is a possible explanation not a definitive proof of it happening. What you are doing is apologetics, you start from the assumption that it did happen and you try to find a plausible explanation. Well what I am putting into question is the event itself happening.

Possibility does not imply likelihood. You have a poor understanding of the definitions of these words. Anything is possible , however most things are not likely to have happened. To add to this the ever so famous Occam's razor indicates that the more presuppositions an explanation needs, the less likely it is to be correct compared to another explanation that requires fewer such presuppositions.

Of course you can not do so, because you just assume (not even presume given your lack of evidence for the event ever happening) that somehow through quantum mechanics (which as the name implies only applies to subatomic particles) Jesus simply materialized anew or regenerated himself. That is pure speculation and not compatible with science.

I will not do that since you have not provided proof for any of the peculiar claims of the Bible actually happening. We are in two realms you and I. I doubt that most of the claims in the bible even happened whilst you just assume that they did and try to find a possible explanation. Until we have straightened that out there is little for us to debate.


"Such a flood cannot be reconciled with scientific reality, but it has been suggested by researchers that a smaller event inspired the initial legends that then radiated out across the world through different storytelling traditions."
As your source correctly claims the world ending flood is a bunch of poppycock (bullshit in American English). So we have the first non truth in the Bible that you have agreed to based on your source. Namely that the world did not get flooded and that only the black sea region got flooded at some point.


No they are not, they can not be confused with horses they also do not have on horn as the name claims. Uni (one) - corn (horn). Unless you somehow what to claim that the Europeans found out about indian rhinos quicker than about black ones.

They never lived alongside humans as per the fossil records.

" and persisted until the K-T extinction event at the end of the Cretaceous , inhabiting all seas" so they died out 66 million years ago. For comparison modern humans only began 300K years ago.

"Our simulations suggest that the PEWMA method can often correctly identify relationships between time-series despite chronological uncertainty. When two time-series are correlated with a coefficient of 0.25, the method is able to identify that relationship correctly 20–30% of the time, providing the time-series contain low noise levels. With correlations of around 0.5, it is capable of correctly identifying correlations despite chronological uncertainty more than 90% of the time." - as you can see this source states that one can accurately compare the age of two objects with a high degree of likelihood, however it can not place said objects in a precise date that is sufficiently accurate. However this article only mentions carbon 14 radiological dating, though there are many other types of radiological dating that is used to determine the age of a certain item. I will get back to this later.

"A critical assumption used in carbon-14 dating has to do with this ratio. It is assumed that the ratio of 14C to 12C in the atmosphere has always been the same as it is today (1 to 1 trillion)." First off the author of this site does not understand the difference between a presumption (something you believe given a reasonable degree of evidence) and an assumption (something you believe with no evidence, so just a guess).

So how do scientists know that the ratio of 14C and 12C has remained the same? Tree rings, they all (in most species let us not get into specifics) correspond to a year and that is a tool that scientists use to calibrate their carbon dating equipment. Given the current findings there have not been too many major events that have produced too large of a change in this ratio aside of this. And yes scinetists are well aware of it and it was caused by a change in solar activity. Furthermore scientists do have access to what the atmosphere was in the form of ice that contains air bubbles from a long long time ago, based on that they can further confirm the theory that 14 and 12 C concentrations have remained stable thru time on earth. It is not even an assumption, it is a THEORY. One for which there is excellent proof. So this little piece of writing is irrelevant.


I do not know if you read this one in full but it is about a difference of 20 years which is irrelevant on an archeological scale.


This article is irrelevant as we are aware of rates of 14 and 12C in the atmosphere long before industrialization. It also mentions that we can just opt to track 13C as an alternative and yes this is a future larger point I am willing to make, but I'll get to it later.


This article does not mention slavery even once, you can check for yourself. Secondly the only claim of this article is that a tribe associated with the Israelis moved through some egyptian fortresses: "Note here that the Shasu tribes are linked with the Edomites, a tribal people with a well-known relationship to the Israelites."
I do not mean to be rude, however you need to have less irrelevant sources and work with facts from those sources, rather than spamming them. What you are doing is a shotgun argument and it would get you disqualified from any formal debate, it also denotes of interest in your interlocutors (the person you are talking to) time. I am not criticizing you, just making sure that you understand this social norm.


Again this source is irrelevant to your thesis since it clearly states that Hyksos were not to be confused with enslaved hebrews: "Contrary to many claims throughout the years, there is no reason to identify the Hyksos with the Hurrians nor with the Hebrew slaves from the biblical Book of Exodus." In fact this sources like others denies your hypothesis.


And for a third time your source contradicts your thesis blatantly. In this instance it blatantly recognizes that the historical narrative differs from the biblical one: "In addition, the basic premise of the Hyksos and Exodus histories differ: the Hyksos were expelled rulers of Egypt, not slaves, and they were forced out, not pursued."


Your article is false and as much of a reddit move it is to use fact checkers, I will:
Fact check #1
Fact check #2
To make a long story short your "source" which I may add is not a journal, scientific or otherwise, claims that a certain professor participated in the dive which the university does not know existed.
I have checked the fact checkers and the current article you have provided does not make any mention of a professor or excavation. And that implies that the fact checkers are either wrong or that the article was changed. I am too lazy to use the way back machine given that the source does not mention any authority that took over the dig, so based on the lack of transparency I will have to infer that your text is most likely wrong. Same applies to the second text, that you have cited as proof. Both texts do not mention the archeologists involved nor where the supposed findings are, other websites deny these claims too, but I have not included them here.


I am not a member of Medium so I am not able to read this article. If you would be so kind as to send me some screenshots then I would greatly appreciate that.

"Whether formed by natural processes or divine intervention, Adam’s Bridge continues to capture the imagination, linking not only distant lands but also generations of myth, faith, and inquiry.
In addition to its significance in Hindu tradition, Adam’s Bridge also appears in Abrahamic traditions. It is said to be Adam’s path after his expulsion from Paradise, crossing from Adam’s Peak in Sri Lanka to India."
I think that you were trying to refer to this part of that article, it does not imply that said land bridge was made through supernatural means, just that some people think that it could be the bridge Adam used. No source is cited for that, no proof it given. We have a source that does not confirm your hypothesis but merely mention it.
Whilst traditionally in Indian folklore it is considered to have been created by an army of ape men I have hound no reputable source saying that it was anything other than a natural limestone shoals.


This source does not mention Christianity or anything similar, just Hindu tradition.


Do not worry I am not in the least triggered. Your arguments are not present and your sources do not confirm your claims, they actually in most cases debunk said claims. Again no criticism to you, however it seems to me that you either do not have a clear understanding of the English language or that you did not read the articles and texts that you sent me too carefully. That is not a bad thing, though next time please make more concise points before spamming this large amount of weak and nonexistent arguments. I have invested more time than it was worth (from my subjective perception) in giving you coherent rebuttals.



Less I forget your criticism of 14C - 12C dating. So here is my source for all of the different types of dating that do not rely on what we call carbon dating, but as you are well aware it only refers to two types of carbon atoms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

"Uranium–lead radiometric dating involves using uranium-235 or uranium-238 to date a substance's absolute age. This scheme has been refined to the point that the error margin in dates of rocks can be as low as less than two million years in two-and-a-half billion years.[22][23] An error margin of 2–5% has been achieved on younger Mesozoic rocks.[24]" - method used for telling the age of earth rocks

"This is based on the beta decay of rubidium-87 to strontium-87, with a half-life of 50 billion years. This scheme is used to date old igneous and metamorphic rocks, and has also been used to date lunar samples. Closure temperatures are so high that they are not a concern. Rubidium-strontium dating is not as precise as the uranium–lead method, with errors of 30 to 50 million years for a 3-billion-year-old sample." - method used for dating space and earth rocks

"This involves inspection of a polished slice of a material to determine the density of "track" markings left in it by the spontaneous fission of uranium-238 impurities. The uranium content of the sample has to be known, but that can be determined by placing a plastic film over the polished slice of the material, and bombarding it with slow neutrons." - this method is used for volcanic glass and relies on the fissions that uranium particles make in the material.

"Luminescence dating methods are not radiometric dating methods in that they do not rely on abundances of isotopes to calculate age. Instead, they are a consequence of background radiation on certain minerals. Over time, ionizing radiation is absorbed by mineral grains in sediments and archaeological materials such as quartz and potassium feldspar. The radiation causes charge to remain within the grains in structurally unstable "electron traps". Exposure to sunlight or heat releases these charges, effectively "bleaching" the sample and resetting the clock to zero" - method for reliably dating pottery back to when it was last affected by severe heat in the realm of hundreds of degrees Celsius.

Anyhow these are just SOME of the many many radiometric types of dating certain objects that are used to disprove the young earth hypothesis (you can not really call it a theory, sorry) and may I remind you that you did not debunk carbon dating (which is not used as much nowadays in the context of human settlements) you merely hinted at its drawbacks, which are undeniable. That being said I hope that I have satisfied the level of argumentation needed to convince you personally. I may be wrong, so please feel free to tell me where that is. However as I stated please be a little more concise because it took like 2 hours to read and respond to all of your points. Thank you for making it through this and I hope that you can forgive my disorganized nature. In terms of aspect (the way you structured your points with pretty colors and all of that) you have me beat, I was never much of the artistic type so please have patience with me.

Ill make this quick for you.
On the sources that I need to apologies for.

The meduim- Sorry my fault.
Discovery global- No comment, this wasnt my best one

Clarifications:
----On Adams bridge in India - I said this was like a example and I did not say this is a part of the bible.

----I am doing as a christian apologetics would do.

----I guess you know more about quantum physics then me . I think you should work as a quantum scientist.

----I will give you the benefit of the doubt. I guess I will have to do in person research myself. This sources are within the realm of debunking and fact.

Remember this book guided civilizations in their time of trouble and acted primarly as a book of guidance. Take in notice the world you live in was built by christian men despite thier ignorance. It only came in decline when they decided they can do whatever they want.

With much respects, thank you for your time.

stalkerKiller​

 

[Emba]

It was always just a tool to control the population bro.

 

[sk.feelsdevil]

Remember this book guided civilizations in their time of trouble and acted primarly as a book of guidance

That is an undeniable fact. It most certainly did guide society (and still does to large extents), though this is a classical appeal to tradition.

It only came in decline when they decided they can do whatever they want.

Not at all, after european men decided to let christianity go a golden age of knowledge and industry set in that culminated in what we have today. Survival of everyone is guaranteed, jobs are plentiful and most medical ailments have a cure. I do not understand what you mean by decline as we are today in the best possible position compared to our recent and far off past.
Yes we still have some presuppositions to work through, like our obsession with equality (for women but not for men) or the inherit value we attribute to living beings, however all in all I am fairly certain that between the Dark Ages and today most people would chose to live in our current age.

 

[The Babylonian]

That is an undeniable fact. It most certainly did guide society (and still does to large extents), though this is a classical appeal to tradition.

Not at all, after european men decided to let christianity go a golden age of knowledge and industry set in that culminated in what we have today. Survival of everyone is guaranteed, jobs are plentiful and most medical ailments have a cure. I do not understand what you mean by decline as we are today in the best possible position compared to our recent and far off past.
Yes we still have some presuppositions to work through, like our obsession with equality (for women but not for men) or the inherit value we attribute to living beings, however all in all I am fairly certain that between the Dark Ages and today most people would chose to live in our current age.

I guess we have a agreement. Accept for the women shit. Feminism has only been disastrous for humanity. Hoeflation is a side affect of this. And yes I do believe women should go to war if they want equality so much. I do not know if you believe in nuclear war. But thats all I got in my mind. Including inflation and other issues. Most of the westeren world lives in confort and are ironically atheist. Also the older generations sold off the future of thier children. We deserve the ability to grow our own food. But the hive mind demands idiocracy. I never said to be against men. I only spite the Chads who rule over the world. I still want to spread my genes but women are nothing but sheep and we should cull the heard.

I put in colors so you can stop misinterpreting me. I lack comunication skills. Nothing against you, but its seems you are fillled with sadness and hide it with a fake hatefull personality.

How do you cope?

 

[sk.feelsdevil]

Accept for the women shit. Feminism has only been disastrous for humanity. Hoeflation is a side affect of this. And yes I do believe women should go to war if they want equality so much. I do not know if you believe in nuclear war. But thats all I got in my mind. Including inflation and other issues. Most of the westeren world lives in confort and are ironically atheist. Also the older generations sold off the future of thier children. We deserve the ability to grow our own food. But the hive mind demands idiocracy. I never said to be against men. I only spite the Chads who rule over the world. I still want to spread my genes but women are nothing but sheep and we should cull the heard.

I am against feminism. I openly stated that, you just misinterpreted it.

Nothing against you, but its seems you are fillled with sadness and hide it with a fake hatefull personality. Though to be perfectly frank with you I look down upon people with too many assumptions.

I am depressed, it is literally defined as not feeling anything. I highly doubt that I am sad or that I have a "fake hateful personality".

How do you cope?

I do not need to cope for much. But generally I go out in nature and smell the moist air, watch movies and run.

 

[The Babylonian]

I am against feminism. I openly stated that, you just misinterpreted it.

I am depressed, it is literally defined as not feeling anything. I highly doubt that I am sad or that I have a "fake hateful personality".

I do not need to cope for much. But generally I go out in nature and smell the moist air, watch movies and run.

Oops, kill me. I still pretty retarded lol. Nice you are simple and not a degenerate. I like that. Take care, I only made a assumption. So glad you are your own person.

 

[The Babylonian]

It was always just a tool to control the population bro.

Yes?, we are social creatures after all.

 

[Chingaquedito]

i wonder if there is a person or institution in the world that really has a commitment to the truth over their political interests

it sounds really difficult, the church should have a commitment to truth above any other, because of the values it preaches and the teachings of its prophets

but it is not so, the church has been historically omissive and in the worst cases, complicit in human misery.
today they continue to be omissive despite the decadence of christianity

 

[Old Ironsides]

The Church was always bound to corruption because of sin. The most good and innocent things are target number one for corruption.

 

[Krad]

I am against feminism. I openly stated that, you just misinterpreted it.

I am depressed, it is literally defined as not feeling anything. I highly doubt that I am sad or that I have a "fake hateful personality".

I do not need to cope for much. But generally I go out in nature and smell the moist air, watch movies and run.

May God heal you from this pain one day In The Name And Glory Of Christ.