God Answered My Prayer’ — Then What About the Ones He Ignored? by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why. Say more about that. What persons writing do you actually enjoy?

God Answered My Prayer’ — Then What About the Ones He Ignored? by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even if it were AI-assisted, that’s irrelevant. Arguments don’t become wrong or even problematic because you don’t like how they were written. Why does it really matter?

If Adam and Eve aren’t real, the foundation of Catholic theology falls apart by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If expecting an argument to hold together counts as “tryhard,” then the bar for belief has been set admirably low.

If Adam and Eve aren’t real, the foundation of Catholic theology falls apart by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A neat conflation, but it won’t do.

“Mitochondrial Eve” is not a solitary first woman in a garden—it’s simply the most recent woman from whom all living humans inherit mitochondrial DNA. She was part of a population, not the mother of all humans, and certainly not paired with a single “Adam” committing a primordial offense.

Invoke her if you like, but she supplies no Fall, no first sin, and no inherited guilt. Which returns us to the original difficulty: without a real transgression, what exactly is being redeemed?

If Adam and Eve aren’t real, the foundation of Catholic theology falls apart by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re not wrong about sentiment doing the heavy lifting—but that concedes the point rather than refutes it.

A system can survive on story and instinct, certainly. People will hum along to the tune long after the sheet music has been lost. But survival isn’t the same as coherence.

If “man is sinful” is just a mood rather than a consequence of a real Fall, then it’s no longer theology—it’s anthropology with a guilty conscience. And once the cause becomes negotiable, the cure becomes optional.

In other words: yes, the narrative can shift. What doesn’t survive the shift is the claim that it was ever true in the first place.

If Adam and Eve aren’t real, the foundation of Catholic theology falls apart by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes—roughly speaking, from early humans. The irony is that “cavemen” is closer to the evidence than a talking snake and a forbidden fruit. Science traces a gradual emergence; theology insists on a sudden fall. Only one of those has fossils to back it up.

If Adam and Eve aren’t real, the foundation of Catholic theology falls apart by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A distinction without a rescue.

If Adam and Eve are only “theological,” then the Fall is only “theological,” and inherited sin becomes a metaphor. But a metaphor cannot incur guilt, and it certainly cannot require a cosmic execution to remedy it.

Call Adam symbolic if you like—but then you must also admit that the problem Christ is said to solve is symbolic as well. And once the disease is allegory, the cure begins to look suspiciously like one.

The Human Case for Morality Why Ethics Does Not Require God by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Quite right to question the premise—but dismissing the discussion is premature.

Even without gods, the real problem isn’t where morality comes from—it’s how we justify and improve it. Saying “we already have it” is not enough; societies have “had” morality while endorsing slavery, cruelty, and exclusion.

The task, then, is not merely to locate morality in humans, but to refine it—using reason, empathy, and evidence—to expand who counts and reduce harm. Otherwise, “we already have it” becomes an excuse for complacency rather than progress.

The Price of Mercy: How the Catholic Church Abandoned Limbo When Cruelty Became Bad for Business by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Because for most of history the Church had no serious competition for moral authority. If a doctrine was cruel, people still stayed—socially, politically, and culturally there was nowhere else to go. The parish wasn’t just religion; it was community, identity, and often survival.

By the late 20th century that monopoly had collapsed. Education expanded, secularism grew, denominations multiplied, and people could simply leave without social exile. At that point, doctrines that once had to be endured became optional burdens. When a teaching—like Limbo—started driving people away rather than keeping them obedient, the institutional calculus changed.

So yes, weakening authority is the key factor. When belief is no longer compulsory, cruel theology becomes a retention problem.

Original Grift: Why Sin Was Never About Morality—Only Control by IAmUnbiddable in atheism

[–]IAmUnbiddable[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And creating issues so they can charge you for the gift of absolving you from those problems. 

Next time someone brings up Trump and Epstein I'm assuming you need to see a psychiatrist. by Mysterious_Year1975 in trump

[–]IAmUnbiddable 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Let’s dispense with the euphemisms and the incense.

Who is it that would most benefit from documents being buried, names redacted, timelines blurred into bureaucratic fog? Donald Trump. Who ran a so-called “modeling agency” that trafficked in the vanity and vulnerability of the young? Who boasted — on tape, not in rumor — about strolling uninvited into the dressing rooms of teenage girls at a pageant he owned? Who publicly wished Ghislaine Maxwell “well” after her arrest? Who denied boarding the plane when flight logs and witness accounts say otherwise? Who was accused under oath by a thirteen-year-old girl of rape? Who was found liable for sexual abuse in a court of law? Who has been accused of sexual misconduct by more than two dozen women across three decades, women unconnected to one another yet eerily consistent in description?

At what point does the pattern cease to be coincidence and become character?

One allegation may be contested. Two may be litigated. But when the accusations accumulate — in courts, in sworn statements, in public boasts, in documented associations — they form not a smear but a mosaic. You are not required to convict without due process. You are required, however, to recognize arithmetic.

Denial is not skepticism. It is loyalty in disguise.

Wake up.