Why Christianity is Likely Ficticious

[Rational Atheist]

When evaluating whether the claims of Christianity are true or fictional, it's important to take a step back and think about what is typically seen with regard to true beliefs and false beliefs. And, one of the most important characteristics of true beliefs is the fact that they are often independently discovered by multiple people. For instance, pulmonary circulation was discovered/theorized independently in Egypt by Ibn al Nafis and later in Europe by Michael Servetus and later still William Harvey. Calculus was independently discovered by both Isacc Newton and Gottfried Leibniz, evolution was discovered independently by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace. There are countless other examples of "multiple discoveries" of facts that can be found here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m ... iscoveries

The point is that rational people, who objectively search for truth, will often independently discover facts about the universe. So if Christianity and the existence of the Christian god is a fact about the universe (and we could apply this argument to any other religion/god as well), then we would expect that sincere theologians around the world dedicated to the search for God would independently discover Jesus Christ/Yahweh/Holy Spirit, and thus become Christians. As a result, we would not expect it to take 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America, for instance. If Christianity is true, then it is an objective fact and should thus be discoverable by anyone searching hard enough for the truth about the universe. So, why don't we see Christianity emerge in North or South America, Africa, or China, prior to the arrival of Christians into these parts of the world? One would expect that if Christianity were an objectively true fact, it would be independently discovered in multiple regions of the world. But, it wasn't. Quite the opposite. Prior to the invention of technologies that allowed world travel and communication, every culture had its own version of God, and its own religion. While some of these gods and religions had slight similarities, none of the matched exactly. This is strong evidence that all of these gods and religions are manmade constructs that only exist in the imaginations of humans.

So, my question for Christians is, if your religion is a fact, why was it never independently discovered by anyone? Bear in mind that not only is Christianity supposed to be an objective fact, the god is supposed to want people to know and worship him, meaning that it should be even MORE LIKELY for Christianity to be independently discovered if it is a fact than scientific and mathematical facts are to be independently discovered.

[We_Are_VENOM]

Well first of all, I think everyone on the planet has at least "heard" of Christianity before...now, whether or not they will accept it is another thing, but the majority of the planet has heard of Christianity.

<bolding mine>

Which is it? Everyone, or the majority?

Ever heard of a hyperbole?

This thread’s debating whether Christianity is fictitious or not. Since the Bible is the ‘book of Christianity’, you can’t use it to support a position about whether Christianity is fictitious: to do so commits the logical fallacy of circular reasoning

Same deal. The support for your claim comes from the bible. You’re presupposing the bible to be not fiction in order to make the point that Christianity is not fiction. Can you see how this makes the claim worthless from a debating perspective?

Slow down. I thought I made it clear that the OP's illogical argumentation made his whole "case" invalid....so therefore, I stick with my original stance of "Christianity is likely true"....which reflected my quoting of the scripture.

My aim was not to prove that I am right, but that the OP is wrong. Of course, I can prove that I am right, but that isn't what I was attempting to do.

I’ve only glanced at some of the exchanges relating to what I think this is referring to. But I’m reasonably sure it’s repeating a well-known argument that doesn’t really have much bearing on the debate topic in this thread.

The point is; faith is being used on both sides.

[We_Are_VENOM]

That's kind of 'rude' for him to say. Why would anyone want to give more to someone who doesn't see them, when humans are creates that depend heavily on their eyes?

People "depend heavily on their eyes"....yet, people saw him, and still didn't believe in him.

I get the whole 'believing and not seeing' concept, but why would one want to benefit someone for believing instead of knowing?

It goes counter to how humanity operates and opens the gates for doubt and second guessing, which, is to say, not benefiting in 'knowing'. It isn't something that one would want to promote if you want people to know you.

I don't follow your point.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to We_Are_VENOM in post #43]

People "depend heavily on their eyes"....yet, people saw him, and still didn't believe in him.

That may be. But why would this cause God to change? Doesn't seem like God would do such a thing if, as the bible says, God's 'forever' or whatever the terminology is (it's been a while since I've read the bible so fortunately I don't recall everyword).

I don't follow your point.

Forgive me, the post is older and I don't recall the exact conversation. But from what I can remember, I was referring to why would someone expect one to believe more in them by not seeing them than they would if they actually saw them?

[JehovahsWitness]

... the universe was set up in such a way so that 90+ percent of all sentient beings live lives full of incredible misery and suffering.

What do you mean by "the universe was set up" so that by far the majority live in "incredible misery and suffering"? What do you see in the mechanics of the "universe" which favors this?


JW

[We_Are_VENOM]

That may be. But why would this cause God to change? Doesn't seem like God would do such a thing if, as the bible says, God's 'forever' or whatever the terminology is (it's been a while since I've read the bible so fortunately I don't recall everyword).

Again, I don't see your point. Please clarify.

Forgive me, the post is older and I don't recall the exact conversation.

To be honest, my "response" notifications have been poor, to say the least. I would have responded wayyy earlier had I known you holla'd at me.

But from what I can remember, I was referring to why would someone expect one to believe more in them by not seeing them than they would if they actually saw them?

I see your point. But Jesus' sentiments makes a lot of sense....because even as you are implying, it is easier to believe what you see, rather than what you hear about, correct?

Well, shouldn't you gain more reward by accomplishing the more difficult task?

In other words, Jesus is saying "of course you believe, because you see"....but to believe without having seen, that is taking "faith" to a whole nother' dimension...which harmonizes perfectly with Heb 11:6

Without faith, it is impossible to please God

[nobspeople]

That may be. But why would this cause God to change? Doesn't seem like God would do such a thing if, as the bible says, God's 'forever' or whatever the terminology is (it's been a while since I've read the bible so fortunately I don't recall everyword).

Again, I don't see your point. Please clarify.

Forgive me, the post is older and I don't recall the exact conversation.

To be honest, my "response" notifications have been poor, to say the least. I would have responded wayyy earlier had I known you holla'd at me.

But from what I can remember, I was referring to why would someone expect one to believe more in them by not seeing them than they would if they actually saw them?

I see your point. But Jesus' sentiments makes a lot of sense....because even as you are implying, it is easier to believe what you see, rather than what you hear about, correct?

Well, shouldn't you gain more reward by accomplishing the more difficult task?

In other words, Jesus is saying "of course you believe, because you see"....but to believe without having seen, that is taking "faith" to a whole nother' dimension...which harmonizes perfectly with Heb 11:6

Without faith, it is impossible to please God

Thanks for your response. TBH, I have gotten lost in this thread so I'm not sure where we're even at currently so I'm not sure I can clarify without causing more confusion - apologies.

I get your point about faith, but to me, faith isn't something someone has 'automatically' and, as being people who rely heavily on our sight, "seeing is believing" as they say. I would suspect God would use that to his advantage. Surely, there are those that physically see that don't believe but, speaking for me, I'm not one of them. And I'm sure there are hundreds or millions the same way - then and now.

But again, this is an older thread and comment from me, so I'm not sure I've done it justice. No harm if you want to abandon it due to this reason. Or we can continue - totally your call

[Clownboat]

Without faith, it is impossible to please God
[/quote]

Without faith, it is impossible to believe in any god concept, or big foot, nessy and alien abductions. Faith is a mechanism required to believe in something false.

Knowledge informs us as to why the sun will 'rise' tomorrow. Faith does not enter the equation. Not having knowledge about the rotation of the earth led humans to conclude that the sun was a god, via faith.

Don't you find it odd that all god concepts (not just your preferred one by the way) require a mechanism to believe in falsehoods as part of believing in the said god concept?

[Miles]

Without faith, it is impossible to please God


Without faith, it is impossible to believe in any god concept, or big foot, nessy and alien abductions. Faith is a mechanism required to believe in something false.

Knowledge informs us as to why the sun will 'rise' tomorrow. Faith does not enter the equation. Not having knowledge about the rotation of the earth led humans to conclude that the sun was a god, via faith.

Don't you find it odd that all god concepts (not just your preferred one by the way) require a mechanism to believe in falsehoods as part of believing in the said god concept?

What's the big deal with faith? Faith is no more than the excuse people give for believing something when they don't have evidence. If you have evidence then you don't need faith. But more importently, there's nothing one can't accept on faith, be it true or not. One can have faith that flying unicorns exist, and what credibility does this bring to bear on the actual existence of flying unicorns? Absolutely none. All of which leaves faith, other than a comforting illusion, a worthless concept.



.

[We_Are_VENOM]

Thanks for your response. TBH, I have gotten lost in this thread so I'm not sure where we're even at currently so I'm not sure I can clarify without causing more confusion - apologies.

Its all gravy, baby.

I get your point about faith, but to me, faith isn't something someone has 'automatically'

I agree, and that is evident by so many faithless people on this very forum.

and, as being people who rely heavily on our sight, "seeing is believing" as they say.

Can you see gravity?

I would suspect God would use that to his advantage. Surely, there are those that physically see that don't believe but, speaking for me, I'm not one of them. And I'm sure there are hundreds or millions the same way - then and now.

Sure there are, but there are also hundreds of people who still wouldn't believe...thus, why God was so angry at the Israelites, who "saw" all they needed to see, but still wind up losing faith.

So seeing isn't necessarily believing, now is it?

And the Bible is clear that the mere existence of the world (nature) is evident enough that God exists, so that man is without excuse (Rom 1:20).

But again, this is an older thread and comment from me, so I'm not sure I've done it justice. No harm if you want to abandon it due to this reason. Or we can continue - totally your call

Lets go for it.

[We_Are_VENOM]

Without faith, it is impossible to believe in any god concept, or big foot, nessy and alien abductions. Faith is a mechanism required to believe in something false.

Hmm. That is interesting. So, do you know it is false, or do you accept by faith that it is false.

If you know it is false, then by all means please enlighten me as to how you know this...and if you accept by faith that it is false, then you are admitting that you live in a faith-based system...a system that you seem to be advocating against.

Either way, I wouldn't want to be you right now in this case.

Knowledge informs us as to why the sun will 'rise' tomorrow. Faith does not enter the equation.

Does knowledge inform us as to how/why the universe began to exist?

Not having knowledge about the rotation of the earth led humans to conclude that the sun was a god, via faith.

They were maybe wrong about the sun being a god...but they weren't wrong if they thought the sun was created by God. So they were in the ballpark, and certainly a lot closer to the game than those who thought like....you.

Don't you find it odd that all god concepts (not just your preferred one by the way) require a mechanism to believe in falsehoods as part of believing in the said god concept?

I don't understand the question. Please clarify.