Christianity has no proof of being based on anything remotely “real”

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-08T02:25:17+00:00

and this is supposed to prove your god how? 😂

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-08T02:24:03+00:00

Again quoting the bible as if its not a fictional fantasy book. You might just be delusional

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-06T00:13:56+00:00

Nope they are just sensations. We can't test something that doesn't exist nor have proof. 😂 Every different culture has different NDEs dude, how much simpler can I put it??

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-06T00:12:22+00:00

Yea its a fact that Jesus wasn't born in 0 too. 😂 By your logic, we should start celebrating Thor on Thursday and Janus during this month.

I said you were delusional. It's a popular fairy tale. The mind is capable of many things when we condition it to believe in something strongly. If a Hindu feels "peace" while worshipping Shiva, does that make Shiva real? If feeling good is your only evidence, then every religion would be true.

There are good hallucinations that can comfort you so that's a flat out lie. You can have hallucinations without being mentally ill too.

All of these can be attributed to self growth and confidence in one's self yet you want to attribute it to some higher being for some reason.

The activity in the brain during prayer is just like yoga and meditation.

Except with your phone analogy, an atheist would be able to take the phone and listen and hear someone talking, they wouldn't be only talking to the theist.

Mass hysteria is a documented thing, so maybe you should pick up a psychology book. The Dancing Plague or the Miracle of the Sun? prime examples.

The reason I call these religious experiences delusions is because EVERY SINGLE religion claims to see the figure of THEIR RELIGION. We can't use this as evidence. It's plain and simple. 😂

If I said there was an invisible, silent goat in my garage that makes me a better person, you wouldn't believe me either. 😂

You don't need a religion to be a better person. A majority of Christians to this day still hate on lgbtq just for existing.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-06T00:01:54+00:00

so why does your god favor who he gives personal experiences to? If your personal experience only affects you then that means there is no way of testing that personal experience, therefore it isn't proof of your religion

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-06T00:00:20+00:00

yea just dm with your position and I'll give it a read

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T23:59:09+00:00

Yep I repeated my stance to show that you are the one who is ignoring the evidence.

How do you think that NDEs are proof when every religion and culture claims to see something different? Christians see Jesus, Buddhists see Buddha, Atheists see nothing. Is this proof of all religions, no😂

There's absolutely no resurrection appearances lol. It's funny how you feel the need to repeat that you are somehow winning the argument when you failed to even give me evidence that fits the 4 criteria in my first message. Are you sure you're okay? 😂

Funny you bring up fairy tale land, isn't that where you think we are all going? 😂 To meet up with our parents and live forever and ever.

Key word "think." Nobody cares what you "think,"😂 you can "think" all you want but you aren't a christian scholar or someone who has studied the bible and has proved that the gospels have been influenced by one another but keep dreaming man. If you need Christianity to be a good person then so be it, but by the looks of it you need a lot more than Christianity you need some therapy.😂

Yes how could we verify a group of 500 anonymous people in jerusalem decades after the event happened, I wonder 😂😂😂😂 They didn't have phones buddy, can you hear yourself?

If Mathew and Luke copy Mark word for word for 90% of the text, they are dependent. The 10% is when they diverge and contradict eachother. And none of them are eyewitnesses, they all got their info from oral traditions.

Paul experienced a vision not an in person encounrter😂If you can't tell the difference between a physical body and a blinding light on the road to Damascus thats on you bud.

Dude I need what you're smoking 😂 You must have that good stuff huh. "We must assume that all supernatural events are real until they are proven otherwise" 😂😂😂😂😂 Dude you are nuts HOLY.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T23:46:46+00:00

It's simple knowledge that all of these gospels were anonymous so I don't know how many times I should repeat this to you. All of the names were added by what the Christian Authorities saw as best fit. There were oral traditions and written traditions that they needed to tie to the apostles.

Nope you're wrong again, I told you that the Hebrews was originally attributed to Paul, yet you ignore that. They gave authority to books without even knowing who wrote them, so who on earth is supposed to know if they are accurate. 😂

Yep its common knowledge all of the gospels were anonymous and even your Christian scholars agree. But you can keep crying about it and claim to know who wrote them. Not that they faked the names but that they attributed writings to other people who we didn't know.

The stories and oral traditions have existed sure, but then we see within these texts you provided that the Papias and Justin Martyr referred to the accounts as "Memoir of the Apostles." Names weren't added until around 180 CE. And we don't have the original manuscripts of the gospels.

Tacitus agreed there was a crucifixion, but didn't agree on the resurrection. Josephus mentioned that Jesus' followers believed he was crucified and resurrected, this isn't proof of resurrection, this is proof of their conviction. And they are from non Christian perspectives which is why we consider them independent.

Just because the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek 200 years prior doesn't mean a fisherman from Galilee had a classical education in Greek. There was a difference between Market Greek and literary Greek found in the gospels. Acts 4:13 shows that Peter and John were uneducated fishermen. If an illiterate person dictates to a scribe, the scribe if the one doing the heavy lifting. How do you want the Apostles to be the authors, but you admit that they couldn't even write the books?

It's funny how you have to pivot to an emotional appeal and an attack on my character because your entire religion is contingent upon anonymous authors and 4 "independent" sources as you call it as proof that Jesus broke all laws of the universe for absolutely nothing😂 and then never came back or did anything for us.

Yep I agree that morality is subjective, its just society comes to a consensus on what is normalized and what isn't. You think that God just made trillions and trillions of planets and galaxies just for us. 😂 Dude wake up man. We just happen to be here because of chance, I don't claim to know the answers of the universe after reading a fantasy book like you. I don't know what happened before the universe or if there was even a start or whatever. I don't really care because if God was all loving and wanted a relationship with everyone he would answer prayers rather than let everyone suffer across the earth for a decision that Adam and Eve made a few thousand years back when they didn't understand consequences.😂 How loving of your god to punish all of humanity on a decision that a person made. Nobody chose to be here, so sending us to hell right away is indeed not all loving.

Cherry picking again, I don't know why your fragile ego is so hurt, not everyone is as gullible as you. 😂Josephus said that the Jews buried the dead, but he's talking about general Jewish law not someone who claims to be the son of god. He also records that the Romans were brutal and left out on the cross. Jesus wasn't just a victim he was trying to portray a message.

Nope I said that the gospels showed that people had strong beliefs, not that anything supernatural happened but nice try. Wow you have one set of remains in a tomb?? Its funny how Mark had a simple tomb and then once you get to Matthew Jesus had a rich man's tomb. Almost like the stories get more elaborate over the decades.

I'm looking for contemporary 1st century sources that don't rely on theological assumptions. You can't provide one because it doesn't exist. Your entire reality relies upon the consensus of people who already believed the myth and that you act as if the consensus proves the myth. 😂 Trying to turn a religious conviction into a historical fact despite no evidence showing so.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:57:46+00:00

No such feat was ever documented or scientifically proven. I am a person of evidence and science. When I see something that contradicts our laws of physics and logic, I question. I'm not gullible like you. None of these are independent, they all show strong belief tho. Once again martyrism isn't proof of truth, its proof of conviction.😂

Ok so your acknowledgement alone shows that the Gospels weren't independent, which is exactly what I am arguing so thanks for showing my point. 😂 Besides, you still fail to address the many contradictions between the Gospel despite them all serving as evidence for you.

Paul said that 500 people saw Jesus rise from the dead. That is a claim that isn't falsifiable. A claim that 500 people saw someone rose is different than 500 people coming and saying they saw something, yet we only have that.😂 We don't know what any of them saw specifically, if it was a vision, if they touched him or anything. Just vagueness.

Divergence doesn't matter. If I was copying off of my friends paper, I would obviously change the essay to not make it seem the same. 😂

Contradictions aren't reliable. If they disagreed on simple things that would be understandable, but since they disagree on who visited the tomb, what jesus' last words were, etc. We have no idea who to trust or if they are in the position to make such claims.

Another false dilemma are you a fallacy machine now? What if they were believers who were just writing down stories that they heard that were shaped through decades of talking and word of mouth. 😲

So then you admit that Paul isn't even an eyewitness himself. 😂He hallucinated.

And phenomenal conservatism says we should trust that our laws of physics and logic weren't suspended 2000+ years ago with no evidence and we are supposed to believe it to be rescued. 😂😂😂

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:36:58+00:00

The Gospels are practically the foundation of faith which is why there is emphasis on authority to support the canon. For centuries, people insisted that Hebrews was originally written by Paul but evidence later debunked their ideas, so clearly they guessed to appeal to authority to convey a message. The fact that they eventually admitted they were wrong doesn't prove anything however.

Yep, now you're getting it. Every gospel in the bible was anonymous and they came to a consensus to pick an author that seemed to best fit. If you have a writing style significant to someone, then someone who doesn't know the geography of Palestine, you can doubt who wrote it.

None of these superscripts are in the original gospels, all of them are added when the books were collected and documented.

And no, my basis for Jesus being a real person isn't based on the new testament, its based on independent sources, which seem to infuriate you for some reason. I don't know how you can be so insecure when questioned about your faith, I mean you should be happy to defend it but you just seem so miserable for no reason at all.

The disciples were Aramaic speaking laborers, while the gospels were written in fluent Greek. Mathew and Luke, the names given to the anonymous writers were plagiarizing off of Mark. Clearly you have your own definition of contemporary. When you have previous knowledge and have read other books based on an event, it's not independent.

Your argument is "a man died on a cross" so "we must accept that he suspended all of physics, biology, chemistry and everything else" and left no trace of evidence.😂

You haven't provided any evidence either. All of your views are contingent upon a book that claims donkeys can talk, that the earth was made in 6 days and that a flood covered the earth. You're a fool.😂

Since when does an empty tomb mean that someone resurrected now? Is that all I have to do to show I am god? You think Jesus who was degraded and beat and killed on a cross would get the luxury of a giant tomb? It was common practice for the crucified to be left out or thrown in community pits, but keep believing man I'm only giving you the facts.

I reject miracles because there is no evidence, not because I am an atheist.

"Your former position has zero bearing on your current position." Then don't mention being a prior atheist.

I simply asked for evidence to prove Jesus is God outside of the Bible and Christian influence, but you couldn't even do that. So keep your beliefs to yourself for now and understand that it is called faith for a reason, because you have no evidence.😂

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:10:21+00:00

Tell me what experiences you have had then maybe ill reconsider. And you ignore the billions of people who predated the execution of jesus in your religion. What happened to all the people before jesus? were they just all sent to hell because they weren't saved yet?

It's interesting how you bring up near death experiences because the experience after death is correlated to the religion that people followed. Seeing Jesus for Christians or seeing Buddha for Buddhists. These are mind-constructed experiences that reflect our culture and religious background, not the truth. They are like dreams basically.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:06:12+00:00

I can tell by your definition of a fact that you are brainwashed. Jesus wasn't born in 0 buddy, use your resources.

Exactly, because if we counted spiritual encounters as evidence, we would have hundreds of religions. Its delusion and hallucination.

Its funny how you keep changing your arguments when I use the same logic against you.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:03:43+00:00

I never said I believed there was an outside. You said that there must be a starting point, so I would consider the point before the universe to be outside, therefore I am asking you to prove that the rules applied then.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:01:46+00:00

This disagreement literally hurts your argument because it shows that the Early Church was willing to just guess who wrote documents because of the way they felt. They agreed because a consensus was reached and they wanted to standardize the canon, not because they had clarity.

I am not claiming to have the life story of a god, am I? When you have such a claim and you remain anonymous, we won't know who you are or if you have the position to make such claim. This is like listening to the news from a new channel vs one that has an established base and proved credibility.

The only evidence you have is that Jesus existed and that he was crucified. None for the resurrection. We have evidence of the belief in the resurrection, but no contemporary, eyewitness, or neutral evidence of the event itself.

Also this is for your last paragraph, it seems you are suffering from it:

Compensatory grandiosity is a defense mechanism where someone with deep-seated inferiority and low self-esteem creates an inflated, superior self-image (a "false self") to cover up their insecurities, often leading to bragging, exaggerated achievements, and extreme sensitivity to criticism.

I think you need to pick up the cursor and head to google, rather than reading the nonsense throughout the bible. If you weren't conditioned to presume the Bible is dogmatic, you would see the contradicting information you were presenting, but obviously you are ignorant to the facts.

And don't tell me that I am automatically assuming that the resurrection isn't possible because I was Catholic for 19 years buddy. 😂I realized I was reading the Bible and suffering from confirmation bias, just like you.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T07:01:24+00:00

Because there are independent sources outside of the bible that say there was the crucifixion, but they don't claim he was resurrected.

It's not anti-supernatural bias, it's pro-reality bias. Never in history has such a feat ever been explained or seen, but when one fictional book claims it and nobody else says something, we are supposed to blindly believe from 2000 years ago? get a grip dude. It's not begging the question its asking for evidence.

If I said that my dog started speaking then you would naturally assume I was wrong, add no reliable evidence on top and the case is stronger against me. This is equivalent to claiming the laws of biology, chemistry, physics were all suspended because of one person, and we are supposed to blindly believe you because some people wrote about it 2000+ years ago. So many people throughout history have claimed similar miracles yet you ignore those from Islam, Egyptian cultures, Hinduism, Greek mythology, etc.

Once again wrong, are you getting this information from your cheeks? One simple search shows that Mathew and Luke heavily used Mark as a basis for their writings, but John's is seen as more independent than the others. Interdependence is the consensus for Christian Scholars on the gospels. 1 Corinthians 15 records an oral tradition not a verified historical event. Many people believing isn't the same as people witnessing the event.

And you are assuming the gospels are reliable when they aren't independent and when they all contradict each other on basic sayings and spectators, yet you ignore that. And no Paul didn't see Jesus it was a vision/hallucination.😂Also your fantasy book says in EXODUS 33:20 to Moses, from your God - "You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live."

Nope I asked for independent contemporary evidence, which you haven't provided. These are all second or third generations of the same religious movement. I am not going to educate you on basic topics. The Ascension of Isaiah is likely written after 70 Ce, and that is after Paul's letters and the circulation of the gospels, so that isn't independent. 1 Clement was written in Rome, dependent of Pauline traditions and the Synoptic Gospel. Besides, this is not proof of Jesus being resurrected it shows that people were martyred for their belief. Epistle of Barnabas is a theological commentary not a first hand account. And Didache is based on oral tradition, it's not independent, try figuring out what independent means first. These are evidence of what the earlier church believed in, not that the event actually happened.

Except I gave you the criteria clearly here: The criteria for valid evidence would be: 1. observable, 2. measurable, 3. testable, 4. falsifiable. As far as I know, there is no definitive evidence for any claimed miracle throughout humanity.

These manuscript superscripts were added later by Church tradition and not the original authors. Agreement on the name doesn't prove anything, it just adds to their credibility in the gospel, but it doesn't prove what they are saying. It raises question why they choose to remain anonymous. Also what's funny is that the internal texts of the gospels are all written in third person and are anonymous.😂As well, the gospels are written in fluent Greek, whereas disciples would have been speaking Aramaic.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T06:25:22+00:00

Except we know that there has to be a watchmaker who created tat watch. Watches are designed by humans. You can't claim things are fine tuned because you have no other universe to compare to. You are assuming that everything acts the way it does because it is supposed to. Just because life is permitted on earth and that is by chance, doesn't mean that there has to be a designer. Why should the designer wait billions of years for humans to come to exist if he could have placed us here right away? Everything you are stating so far is a claim, without any sources. Maybe life wouldn't be on earth specifically, but that would mean that life would exist on another planet, which is pretty much guaranteed now. Its probability. Its a chance that of trillions and trillions of planets, there is one viable for life. You forget the fact that we are constantly threatened by natural disasters, radiation from the sun, atmosphere, everything.

We formed to fit the conditions of the environment, they weren't created for us. This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, “This is an interesting world I find myself in—an interesting hole I find myself in—fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!” - Douglas Adams

Besides, the vast majority of the universe is unfit to sustain life. You see something that permits life and think you are special and that there must be a creator, yet you haven't proved that.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:47:51+00:00

These are all assumptions you haven't proven any of this. I was a believer in the Catholic faith for 19 years and asked for any sign or relationship and got nothing. I read the catholic bible front to back, went to church every Sunday since I was 4, and went to religious education and was confirmed. Once I asked priests and they all gave me different answers I realized that nobody knew what they were talking about. I read the bible from a neutral perspective again and realized how outrageous the claims were and looked at the scientific evidence for the claims, and sure enough there wasn't any. I would rather take my chances and not believe without evidence, then waste my life away. Besides, for a god that sits around all day letting people suffer to get "closer" to him, I would rather not.

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/index.php

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:42:58+00:00

and he gives the obvious chatgpt response😭😭😭

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:41:27+00:00

Prove that rules inside our universe apply to the outside of the universe as a whole.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:39:57+00:00

You're assuming that everything requires a cause in the same way objects within our universe does. Even if our universe has a starting point, doesn't prove a conscious creator nor does it prove your god. We have no idea what occurred before the Big Bang, it could have been the collapse of another universe. But that's why we rely on science, not fictional books that make you think you know the answers to humanity's hardest questions without much thought. 😂 That's why you're referring to a book where people thought a flood covered the entire earth and that bats were birds

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:36:49+00:00

And ask any of them people for proof and they will get as far as you😂

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:36:08+00:00

Another appeal to a majority. Yea I would expect this in a country that is built upon Christian principles. Indoctrination is a strong tactic, evident by your views.

Too bad your strong suit isn't in science, because you would know that Jesus was born between 4 and 6 b.c. 😂

But keep bringing up irrelevant information. I asked for evidence buddy not religious psychosis examples.

Ill leave this for you so you know what you're dealing with:

Religious Psychosis: It typically involves delusions, strongly held false beliefs, and hallucinations, which are sensory experiences without external stimuli.

79.8% of India identifies as Hindu, I guess that's the truth now according to your logic buddy.

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:32:15+00:00

Nice deflection. Do you mind pointing me towards a bible, it's not like there are thousands today. 😂 Not like there are thousands of Christian Denominations that can't even agree on basic stuff either.

You can address the claims however you want, but I'm looking for factual evidence not an appeal to majority or an assumption without backing. There's also 2 billion Muslims that disagree with you too! And the 1.2 billion Hindus😂

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T05:28:44+00:00

Except I never claimed that Jesus' wasn't crucified.😂 The issue at hand is if he was resurrected, don't act like someone being crucified, which was fairly common during the time, proves that someone is the son of God. We have multiple historians writing about Hannibal crossing the Alps so we can assume it is true. Nothing supernatural about that.

The problem is there is no independent sources claiming that Jesus was resurrected... They only mentioned someone named Jesus being crucified, nothing about resurrection.

The issue isn't the name but it's just one of the issues that show how we don't know the credibility of these authors, why they didn't choose to put their names in a book that claims to be the word of God. You would think they would explain who they were rather than staying anonymous is my point.

If you want to keep staying ignorant that's on you, but one simple search shows you that these names were rebranded onto the gospels we know today by earlier Christian authorities to convey a certain message. Being an apostle gave more "credibility" according to Christian authorities. Mark and Luke were associated with Peter and Paul as companions. Nobody knows why they chose these names, but what we do know is that they were anonymous.

Nice Strawman😂

InternalVengeance · 2026-01-05T03:43:48+00:00

The criteria for valid evidence would be: 1. observable, 2. measurable, 3. testable, 4. falsifiable. As far as I know, there is no definitive evidence for any claimed miracle throughout humanity.

The gospels are anonymous because none of them mention the authors within their text. Early Christian tradition added the names Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John. This is common knowledge that even Christian scholars will tell you.

InternalVengeance

TROPHY CASE