If Jesus really was the Son of God, he would come back to Earth again a long time ago. With our technology we could document him as an indesputable proof he's for real. At the very least he's keeping people guessing instead of spreading the word of God by not showing up (or he just doesn't care anymore). Either way it's clear Christianity is a scam.

All believers are just wasting their time.

You're in for a wild ride, posting this here.

But yeah, funniest part of christianity is:

ZOMG, the messiah will come and everything will change -> Jesus comes, gets nailed to a cross, nothing changes.

"If Jesus really was the Son of God, he would come back to Earth again a long time ago."

O RLY?

Why is that? Because you say so?

As I said, why keep people guessing?

Why let so many smart people become atheists?

So he can punish them in the afterlife?

Does not seem divine at all.

It's only logical we would have undisputable proof by now. But logic is too big of a word for Christians.

"Most importantly, I want to remind you that in the last days scoffers will come, mocking the truth and following their own desires. They will say, 'Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.'” - 2nd Peter 3:2

"In their case the god of this world (Satan) has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."
- 2nd Corinthians 4:4

At that time Jesus declared, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; yes Father, for this was well pleasing in your sight."
- Matthew 11:25

God opposes the proud but manifests himself to those humble enough to become like children and who keep his commandments.

Yes, the Bible has an excuse for everything. We heard 'the Devil did it' one before. The scoffers are actually saying 'this religion is a joke lol'. And as for the kids, well it's a lot easier for them to believe in fairy tales, isn't it? That's why the priests REALLY love them.

It's not about being either proud or humble, it's about using your damn brain.

This debate is pointless in the same way it's been pointless for centuries. Each side comes at the argument from a wildly different set of premises. Until you can agree on the premises, which you never will be able to, then it's just a round-robin of nonsense.

What does this have to do with logic? You accept a premise which is rejected by most Christians. Rejecting a premise isn't a matter of logic. Perhaps you're misusing the word "logic"?

Please guys, every religion is 100% about blind faith. Don't drag poor logic into it.

Just fyi, this is not an accurate quotation. "Satan" is an interpolation by modern commentators, not part of the original text.

Christians can make a lot of weird claims, but claiming that Jesus' death on the cross was a world-changing event seems correct to me.

World changing in which way exactly? The creation of another cult among many others?

What do the Indians think about this? Or the Romans who allegedly nailed jesus to the cross, or the native Americans, or the jews, or the Muslims, or the african tribes, or the Indigenous Australians or the Maori people or the tribes living in the rainforests who hardly ever heard of jesus to this very day? Would they say that the crucifixion of jesus was a world changing event?

"Hardly" seems correct to me.

I'm of the thinking that a complicate scam such as one involving a religion may not be uncovered if the approach taken is strictly from the outside or the inside.

That said, if I found myself tricked into loving people for no particular reason and without circumstantial spite of their fallibility, I would ask why is that a trick?

My favorite bumper sticker is the one that says, "Lord, save me from your followers."

Undoubtedly they would agree it was world-changing. The Roman Empire itself later became a Christian empire, and much of the transmission of Roman cultural influence was through Christian institutions. American Indians were conquered largely by Christians, the Jews have lived in Christian-majority countries for millenia (and suffered much religious persecution directly because of that), and so on.

Jesus is likely the most famous person in history; what more do you want?

Right, so in that case, god will forgive us, right? Because satan was literally blinding the minds of unbelievers , and who can fight against an almost allpowerful angel?

None of these sentences show how the alleged life and the alleged death of jesus would have been world changing. Just a lot of cherry picking and a very telling omission of many tribes I also mentioned (who account for quite a large portion of "The World")

You are aware that Jews do not see anything special in jesus? So why would they view his alleged existence as "world changing" just because they lived in christian countries?

Proof, that the alleged existence of jesus changed anything in the world other than the creation of yet another cult with bold, unprovable promises aka "A big fat scam"

I don't understand your view. Presumably we can all agree that the rise, rule, and fall of the Roman Empire was a world-changing event of history. That story cannot be accurately told without talking about the changes in the Empire due to the increasing popularity of the Christian religion, its eventual adoption as the state religion, and then its impact on what came after the Roman Empire. Jesus' crucifixion is a central part of the Christian religion, functioning as the climax of the story of Jesus told in the gospels. Hence, Jesus' death should be regarded as a world-changing event.

So what is your view? That Christianity isn't actually an important part of history? Or that Jesus' death is not central to Christianity?

I'm pretty sure most Jews would agree with me that Jesus and the rise of Christianity were world-changing events. Jews, who have suffered as much as anyone from Christian persecution and prejudice, are not likely to minimize Jesus' historical significance.

Let me ask you a question. Do you believe that Christianity and/or the Catholic Church caused or extended the Dark Ages? That it contributed to centuries of ignorance and a decline in education, culture, and science from the days of Rome?

It was clearly world-changing. The bigger question is if it changed things for the better. In some ways, it did. In many ways, it didn't. There's no way to quantify either the benefits or the damage done.

Sure, that is fine. I think trying to figure out if Christianity has overall been a negative or plus is really difficult. I attempt an argument for one part of it having been positive here.

Romans 1:20
"For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. "

God has given certain people over to a debased mind because they chose not to love the truth or acknowledge God but instead rejoiced in unrighteousness. It also says that God will "send them strong delusion" in order that they may believe Satans lies. So God is actually allowing Satan to blind them as part of His judgement for their hard hearts.

No one comes to Jesus unless the Father draws them to him (John 6:44)

Most Christians through history have said he will return, many have said in their own lifetime. Asking why didn't it happen in the previous two thousand years saving millions or even billions of souls is fair. I think.

If he was real its one of the many questions i would have for the biblical God on my judgment day...



Also somewhat related asking the hypothetical if you take the magic pill that gives you everlasting life how many years would it take before you changed your view he is returning.

Course the magic pill has some fun stuff in itself with the whole avoiding death and Gods judgement. Don't let that philosopher's stone come about or could be trouble for the judgement religions.

haha, so all that bull**** about being a loving god is just that, bull****. He deliberately gives people over to evil, makes sure that they will believe satans lies, and then goes "AHA!!!! You evil bastard, burn in hell!!!!!"

Sounds really fair and loving to me.

If he is going to pick based on some arbritrary measure, who he saves and who he doesnt, and we have no idea what that arbitrary measure is, then what would be the point of being a christian?

God did not create us to damn us. We damn ourselves by choosing to disobey God.

By the same token, the atheist has not provided, by his power of "logic", indisputable proof that God does not exist.

Logic and truth, as a matter of fact, have very little to do with each other. Logic is concerned merely with the fidelity and accuracy with which a certain process is performed, a process which can be performed with any materials, with any assumption. You can be as logical about griffins and basilisks as about sheep and pigs. On the assumption that a man has two ears, it is good logic that three men have six ears, but on the assumption that a man has four ears, it is equally good logic that three men have twelve. And the power of seeing how many ears the average man, as a fact, possesses, the power of counting a gentleman's ears accurately and without mathematical confusion, is not a logical thing but a primary and direct experience, like a physical sense, like a religious vision. The power of counting ears may be limited by a blow on the head; it may be disturbed and even augmented by two bottles of champagne; but it cannot be affected by argument. Logic has again and again been expended, and expended most brilliantly and effectively, on things that do not exist at all. There is far more logic, more sustained consistency of the mind, in the science of heraldry than in the science of biology. There is more logic in Alice in Wonderland than in the Statute Book or the Blue Books. The relations of logic to truth depend, then, not upon its perfection as logic, but upon certain pre-logical faculties and certain pre-logical discoveries, upon the possession of those faculties, upon the power of making those discoveries. If a man starts with certain assumptions, he may be a good logician and a good citizen, a wise man, a successful figure. If he starts with certain other assumptions, he may be an equally good logician and a bankrupt, a criminal, a raving lunatic. Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding truth; on the contrary, truth is necessarily an instrument for using logic—for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth and for the profit of humanity. Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it.

G. K. Chesterton (Daily News, Feb 25, 1905)

This quote by Loading... in post #5 is false. The phrase "god of this world" refers to false gods of humankind on earth, not to Satan. The word Satan is not in that sentence in any valid version of the Bible. It changes the meaning of the passage. He also misinterprets other quotes which I have no time to correct.

"In their case the god of this world (Satan) has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."
- 2nd Corinthians 4:4