The Case Against Christianity | #19 @JamesFodor


 
1. Empirical evidence and logical reasoning will always strongly objectively favor that no such person ever got up after days of being dead.

2. Having mentally gymnastic arguments + having respected non-believers engage with those arguments in a respectful manner (repeatedly dignifying it; for almost-never-specified reasons)
does not =
'therefore, any random religious-fundamentalist sect's theological claims should be taken seriously as at least plausible and worthy to keep reflecting on for 'however long it takes' to psych ourselves into finding it credible'.

3. The Hebrew "Biblical" religion(s) have been so resoundingly debunked (as literally true) by modern scholarship that they cannot be salvaged as a foundation to build a "one true theology 2.0" on top of.

4. Nor does any version of Christianity accurately understand what those Hebrews actually believed.

5. Nor does any version of Christianity have even a minimally adequate understanding of what Jesus would have believed. They don't even understand what the various Christian writers were saying about him.

6. Biblical stories are just ancient rumors; if taken literally.
Whereas, if we take them non-literally, then they stop being arguably useful as [alleged] biographical data for any "God".

7. Arguing for a deistic "God" does nothing to validate Christianity.

8. People believe in literal magical beings for two reasons:

a.) they were programmed to believe.
See "How Religious Fundamentalism Hijacks the Brain.
Fundamentalist ideologies act like mental parasites."
- Bobby Azarian Ph.D.
Mind In The Machine
Genetics.

and/or
b.) it's a COPE; magical thinking, as a supplement a lack of healthy coping skills.
Dr Robert Sapolsky has a lot to say about this.

9. Really, all the various arguments apologists use as a way to "give it legs" are
a.) to muddy the waters; to make them seem deep,
b.) post-hoc
and
c.) self-medicating.

10. Worse yet, they never seem to catch any flack for the fact that
a.) the offer of "grace" is abusively manipulative,
and that
b.) it's ultimately a Racketeering Scheme.

It's really not possible to dignify that while still being ethical.
So then, why do we keep dignifying it?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Responding To Ryan Pauly (Christian Fundamentalist) About De-Conversion And Secularism

Image
  These statements (made by you (Ryan) and your guest) are building upon a narrative which is incredibly unreasonable and unethical. First, you frame the narrative as: 'rather than allow "Scripture" to tell us who we are...' This one almost slipped under the radar. The fair and honest way of saying that part of your rhetoric would be: "Rather than allowing 1. my subjectively chosen sect's 2. subjective interpretation of 3. our subjectively chosen religious texts tell you who you are ... ". Although, even that wording wouldn't be totally fair. Since HUMANITY does actually NOT instinctively know that your sub-niche religious faction even exists; nor that your over-arching religious umbrella (or "theme") of "Christianity" is anything they should give attention or credence to. In fact, even the people who are leaving your specific religious sub-culture are only ACTUALLY leaving because they REALIZED it doesn't a...
Read more

The War On Christmas. Is that a real thing? And is it really a war against Jesus?

Image
 Today, our journey begins here.   In reply,  someone wrote: "Unfortunately this was true at one point, and would still be if the people with common sense fighting back." --- In reply, I said: There's still no "war on Christmas". Everyone can still say "Merry Christmas". Christian fundamentalists still enjoy pretending to be oppressed." [Note: I made some other observations; offering many points of common ground. However, Kelly didn't really want to talk about any of that. So I've decided not to include it here]  ---- In reply, they said:  "you apparently have forgotten when many companies forbid their employees from saying Merry Christmas, and when companies turned away from Merry Christmas and using the generic Happy Holidays. Apparently you missed our current Vice President and her speech on how terrible it was to say Merry Christmas because it was not inclusive. It is a reality that some folks dismiss. They want Christ erased at e...
Read more

Lumping and Bashing Jesus's Favorite Cookianity?

Image
  Link to Facebook video about the parallels between Christianity and Narcissism. That content creator also has a YouTube channel [ link ]   In reply to her Facebook video,  Logan Clark  wrote:  Which Christians g? You be literally over generalizing It's the same thing as me saying "all women" or "all men" also you probably have a shit experience with zealot Christians smfh Some of them are good people 18h Like Reply Ruth Chalk Logan Clark  ugh omg this. Like we can say it's all men we can say it's all Christians but what if we said it's women or black people or it's the lgbtq.....I love this double standard society has. If youre not bashing men and Christians then you're a  bigot and a hater..... it's so wild to me... I can't understand it. I hate new world feminism and what it's done to people. First, a note to Logan Clark: In that video, she specified which "Christianity" she was talking about. She specified the ...
Read more