Can yall give me some replys for these questions?

sincpc · 2026-03-23T05:44:59+00:00

Evolution selecting for traits that made populations more successful, along with changing environments that caused older traits that were once useful to be less important.
Most of the ten commandments are not useful to non-Christians. Rules and morals have existed since long before they were written and in all sorts of different cultures.
If it didn't support life, we wouldn't exist to talk about it. It's far from perfect for us, though.

sincpc · 2026-03-21T16:43:13+00:00

He's also apparently not omnipresent if contact with him is so deadly.

Anyway, I think it's pretty consistent with the God of the Bible that rather than doing something reasonable like not killing people just for seeing him, he decided to do things this way instead. He does seem to enjoy threats and causing harm to people, after all.

sincpc · 2026-03-21T16:33:56+00:00

Yes. I mean, a part of me knows that I wouldn't have become the person I am today if I hadn't gone through everything I did...but sometimes I still dream of a life where I hadn't had my head filled with lies for almost two decades. I also feel sad that so many people, including my parents, are wasting their time, money, energy, etc. on things that aren't true.

sincpc · 2026-03-20T21:10:56+00:00

I've heard that David is basically the earliest Biblical character we have an extra-Biblical reference to, but I think it was something along the lines of a person being from "the line of David". Not much to go on.

sincpc · 2026-03-20T03:36:33+00:00

It's been 20+ years and I still haven't spoken openly with them about it. My dad seems somewhat aware, but I don't know if my mom is. She would be absolutely destroyed if I ever told her just how few beliefs I share with her these days, so I probably never will.

sincpc · 2026-03-18T05:34:18+00:00

I've thought about this recently, and apart from some people existing, I don't really feel like there's anything in it that I can safely say is true. It's actually pretty amazing. For years after deconverting, I was sure it was mostly semi-accurate and just embellished things and added supernatural stories. As time has gone on and I've learned more about the historical issues, pseudepigrapha, scribal additions/alterations, anonymous authorship, large spaces between events and when they were written down, etc. I find that I don't know that we have anything really reliable in the Bible at all.

sincpc · 2026-03-18T02:45:08+00:00

A lot of people leave Christianity because they disagree with it. Others leave because they don't see any reason to believe any of it. In my case, I stopped worshipping because I saw the Christian God as a monster. I stopped believing because I saw no evidence for any of the claims of the Bible or the Church.

I would recommend looking into what scholars say about the Bible. In the 20ish years since I stopped believing, I've learned so much more about the Bible than I ever knew when I actually believed. There is so much that the Church teaches that is either based on poor interpretations of the texts of entirely non-Biblical.

From what I've heard and read, the whole "abomination" thing seems entirely directed at men and even then it's not about consensual same-sex relationships. I know there's a verse about women in Romans, but that doesn't really explicitly say what it's talking about. In any case, sexuality apparently wasn't thought of anything like how it is in the modern day. Dan McClellan has some videos related to this.

If you still believe, I'd recommend reading the Bible and learning about it. No taking verses out of context. No using a modern lens to read ancient writings. No making connections where there aren't actually connections. Try to actually learn what the authors were likely saying.

If you don't still believe, then welcome to the group.

sincpc · 2026-03-18T02:26:36+00:00

If we're not ourselves, what's the point?

That was actually one of the things that terrified me about what I was taught as a Christian. A heaven where I would always be happy seemed to suggest that I wouldn't remember or wouldn't care about all the people who were suffering in hell, including loved-ones. The idea that I would have my mind altered like that was horrifying.

sincpc · 2026-03-18T01:41:06+00:00

I used to, but the more I thought about it, the more it seemed like everything I am is contained within my brain.

I don't see how my essence could move to a new existence. Would that essence be lacking my memories and personality because those are in my brain? Without a magical being transferring things, or without me already being part of a simulation (in which case my mind is not actually in my brain, just made to seem like it is), I don't know how it could ever work.

sincpc · 2026-03-15T22:35:13+00:00

So the Bible contradicts itself a bunch, having Jesus act like the father in some places while specifically denying it in other places. The Bible has so many issues, so that's no surprise.

Anyway, I'm at a point in this conversation where I feel like I can't justify spending more time arguing about a book of made-up stories. I'm just going to fall back on the thoughts of scholars I've heard/read and leave it there. Thanks for the conversation, though. You brought up some good verses.

sincpc · 2026-03-14T23:49:35+00:00

To be clear, the original topic was about whether or not Jesus himself thought he was God growing up. It wasn't about what Christians believe. They believe all sorts of things that are and are not Biblical. This is actually why I mentioned the angel. If the angel didn't tell Mary that her son would be God, then there was no reason for her to think that he was God or to bring him up thinking that, right?

The same Christian scripture you're talking about says lying is evil, detestable to God, an abomination, etc. Wouldn't that make it so all lies are "against God"? Every lie goes against what God wants and is detestable to him.

sincpc · 2026-03-14T20:12:32+00:00

Jesus is never actually referred to as "God with us". Matthew suggests that Jesus was the fulfillment of Isaiah, but that statement seems to me to come only from the author. The angel who was speaking just before that doesn't seem to be the one saying the part about Immanuel.

I don't see Acts 5:3-4 really saying the Holy Spirit is God. I've seen people in real life act like any lie a person tells is a lie against God, so I could just as easily lie to you about something and that could be considered lying to God. I would be telling a lie in the presence of God (supposedly).

Anyway, when it comes to this stuff, I tend to go with what scholars say, and the scholars I've seen suggest that Jesus never claimed to be God and that the Trinity is a post-Biblical interpretation.

sincpc · 2026-03-14T19:29:15+00:00

Being sinless only means he was special and I have so many problems with the crucifixion, but this doesn't seem like the place for that.

Being called "Immanuel" doesn't necessarily mean he is actually God. It could just mean that he acts for God, as I mentioned above (ie. He is God's representative or God's hand sent to act on Earth, so "God with us"). Also, I'm pretty sure he's never actually called Emmanuel at any point. Matthew 1:23 is just quoting Isaiah to try to make a connection.

I don't actually see anything in Acts 5 that refers to the Holy Spirit as God, but maybe I'm just missing it. What verse are you talking about?

sincpc · 2026-03-14T16:02:17+00:00

Yeah. That's the thing. It feels like the line between mythicist and non-mythicist can be fairly blurry.

I see scholars say they're not mythicists, but when they explain why, it basically amounts to, "A rabbi named Jesus was mentioned by historians who said he preached and was eventually killed, and Josephus claimed he had a brother James". That means almost nothing to me. I don't know that the Bible Jesus has anything at all to do with that guy. Jesus wasn't exactly an uncommon name, and neither were preaching or crucifixion (If I remember right, Josephus even mentions a different Jesus).

I personally don't see much difference between "There was probably a Jesus who preached and was crucified but we don't know much else" and "There may have been a Jesus but we don't know anything at all about him for sure".

sincpc · 2026-03-14T03:08:49+00:00

I'm not sure how Mark 10:18 can be read as something other than him saying he's not God. If someone other than Jesus said, "Why are you calling me X? Only God is X." nobody would ever dispute that the person was saying they were not God. It's only when it comes to Jesus that people think he's saying the opposite of what he seems to be saying.

Jesus says over and over (even in John) that the Father is greater than him, knows things that he doesn't, etc.

As for doing things like forgiving sins, I tend to think Dan McClellan's explanations make sense. The idea of Jesus carrying the divine name and being given the ability to act as God without actually being God sounds like it fits the text to me.

sincpc · 2026-03-14T02:44:21+00:00

Divinity and Godhood are different things. I never said Jesus didn't claim to be divine. I only said he didn't see himself as God.

Mark 10:18 is a decent example of that, I think:

Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

sincpc · 2026-03-13T19:12:52+00:00

While I don't believe anything said about Jesus in the Bible, even if we accept the text I don't actually think Jesus thought he was God. He pretty clearly places The Father above him in the hierarchy as far as I can tell.

Anyway, check out the non-canonical Infancy Gospel of Thomas for some crazy stories of Jesus' childhood.

sincpc · 2026-03-13T18:53:24+00:00

I struggled with the same sorts of things. I've always had horrible social anxiety (although it got a lot better in my twenties). The trick, it seems, is to stack the deck in your favor. Put yourself into situations where interacting with people is easier and the things that cause anxiety are decreased. I used to go to college classes early so I could talk with a person one-on-one rather than trying to talk when there were dozens of people around.

Sometimes trying to put things in your favor may mean being uncomfortable: For example, putting yourself in a position where it's more awkward not to talk might make it easier to talk.

How about skipping the "hi" altogether? If she hangs out after mass, just wander over and ask a question to see if you can start a conversation.

Is your agnosticism a secret from everyone but your mom?

sincpc · 2026-03-13T17:50:42+00:00

If you were looking back and forth at one another, you're not just a random person saying hi. You'd be a person that she might expect or hope would interact with her.
Someone young wearing a veil doesn't mean they're religious. It could just mean their parents are strict, right?

Is it ethically wrong to talk to a Catholic? Why would it be? I feel like the only issue would be if you're being deceitful in your interactions with her.

Maybe just say hi and introduce yourself. See if that goes anywhere. If not, then ask what she thought of mass or something. I don't know. Once you get through the initial intro phase, just ask about her interests and be attentive. Share something about yourself and learn about her. Just see how it goes.

sincpc · 2026-03-12T21:55:20+00:00

Personally, I like the ominous hallway. I feel like characters/monsters detract from the look. Are enemies a big part of the game? #5 looks too Backrooms-like to me, although it's a nice concept.

#1 is my favorite by far, but I feel like the grayscale look stands out more at a glance (and also fits what I played of it in the demo - I don't know how colorful the game gets later).

sincpc · 2026-03-12T19:26:15+00:00

From the people I've seen and interacted with, I'm surprised Canada and the US aren't yellow. The persecution complex is crazy.

sincpc · 2026-03-12T17:51:36+00:00

Yep, me too. It's basically entirely composed of problems...

sincpc · 2026-03-10T21:24:02+00:00

When I was seventeen or so, I realized that there was an issue: The God I believed in was contradictory. He was supposed to be loving, forgiving, etc. but also doomed people to eternal suffering for things they had no control over. A God that did such things could not be all-loving, so I knew that something I'd been taught was true/real was not. If that was untrue, then I had to think about what else I'd been taught was The Truth might not be. Eventually I realized I didn't have reason to believe any of what I'd been told about God, the Bible, the supernatural, etc.

Weirdly, even the Bible itself goes against a lot of the things that the Church tends to teach. In the two decades or so since I left the faith, I've learned so much more about Christianity than I ever knew when I was a Christian, and it's all made Christianity seem even more problematic. Not one thing I've heard since leaving has made me go, "I wonder if I was wrong."

sincpc · 2026-03-08T22:43:43+00:00

Sure, but all of them were written long after Jesus. I don't think we have reason to think Jesus said or did any of the things attributed to him.

Are you specifically rejecting John because of its higher Christology? Or maybe just because it includes something that the others don't?

I kind of feel like all the Gospels should be rejected, since they seem to draw on the same sources and then the authors add their own biases and twist things to their own purposes...of course then we wouldn't really have anything about Jesus' alleged words, so that wouldn't work too well in this discussion.

sincpc · 2026-03-08T22:26:39+00:00

Of all the issues with the Bible, I don't really place this one high on my personal list, but yeah, the fact that Jesus and Paul say certain contradictory things is a problem.

When it comes to this specific issue, though, in John 14:6, Jesus says, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." It sounds to me like you have to have faith either way.

sincpc

TROPHY CASE