d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Christianity Is Obviously Fake
Prev11314151617273Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 46,654
Joined: Jun 6 2015
Gold: 42,073.67
Jan 14 2026 09:56am
Christianity is an absolute joke, full of hypocrisy and nonsense.
Member
Posts: 34,186
Joined: May 25 2007
Gold: 21.00
Warn: 10%
Jan 14 2026 11:44am
God's a squirrel. A big ol' meaty one
Member
Posts: 16,012
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Jan 14 2026 12:51pm
I already told you how genesis 1 and 2 don't contradict one another so how exactly are you still concerned with a contradiction that doesn't exist?

The term rib means side / shared being in Genesis.

Gen 1 is a cosmic summary while gen 2 is a detailed explanation of these events.

Psalms 51:5
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

Psalm 51 as a chapter explains the depth of David's sin, not its origin. Instead of taking one tiny line out of context you should read the chapter in its intended format. It'll answer your confusion on what it means which the translation I wrote above for you easily makes sense.


Btw I like how you pass off the creation of woman from a rib in a casual totally non chalant way as you try to explain away the contradictions in genesis.
Anyway I countered by showing you how even the "detailed explanation" of events are clearly not in the same order. Which you glazed over and kept repeating "you arent interpreting it the right way" like a parrot.

Thats even worse since Ezekiel 18:20 clearly states one cannot inherit sins of the parents in this case David's sin. Are you just intentionally trying to not see the glaring contradiction? This is a major plot hole in your storybook.

Sigh...

The land produced vegetation
Vs
and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth

Either it produced or it didn't produce which is it? It does not explicitly state all plants were created except for agricultural variety. You are choosing to add that part in and interpret it to favour of your argument. I am reading it how it is. Hence why there are soo many versions of the bible because everyone seems to think their interpretation is the right one.


19
Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air.

Notice how you ignored the first part which states that he formed the animals now, not before not later but now. THEN the next sentence he brought them to man


"So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field. But for Adam [10] no suitable helper was found." <-- Which means no woman yet

Adam was made clearly first then the animals and because he didnt have a helper a woman was made out of his rib (lol ok let's just pretend this isnt a typical mythological fairytale thing to do).
This woman out of a rib part would be fine if it was placed straight after Adam and before the animals but it isn't. Hence the chronological inconsistency and directly contradicts Genesis 1.


Maybe you aren't reading it the right way. Have you considered that there is actually a contradiction and you are trying a little too hard to rationalize them.
Remind me how many versions and interpretations of the bible again? Thousands, and guess what they all different from minor semantics to major ideological ones.

Why isn't there just one version and one unified interpretation of the bible? Clearly someone's interpretation is wrong they can't be all right. Everyone thinks theirs is the right way news flash it isn't.
So don't go preaching about how i am not interpreting the story book "as intended" when you people can't even decide on the intended version of the bible amongst yourselves.

Case and point
Member
Posts: 12,292
Joined: Jul 22 2007
Gold: 84.67
Warn: 10%
Jan 14 2026 01:24pm
"For those who believe, no evidence is needed; for those who do not believe, no evidence will suffice."


The only evidence presented: Interpret this book the way we want you to.
Member
Posts: 16,012
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Jan 14 2026 03:05pm
"For those who believe, no evidence is needed; for those who do not believe, no evidence will suffice."


Blind faith doesn't require belief. Belief should carry a proportionate amount of evidence otherwise it's pure trust or blind faith.
The statement implies that once you believe something you cannot change your mind no matter the evidence. Well that clearly isnt true, if you are completely brainwashed it might be true but for most people who are open minded suffient evidence can and often does sway people to believe one way or the other.


For example even the most closed mind people like Christians who used to believe the sun rotated around the earth prior to 1543 Nicolaus Copernicus and later Galileo Galilei who was persecuted by the christian zealots as a heretic. They couldn't be reasoned with even when the evidence was stacked heavily against them. It is only after they began losing members and donations that they started changing their tune but only several hundred years later.
While the Church did not issue a formal apology or pardon in the legal sense, the Pope John Paul II addressed the Galileo case in a 1992 speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, expressed regret for the way the affair was managed, stating that the Church had failed to recognize the validity of Galileo’s scientific work at the time.

Now if that is not a cult like behavior I don't know what is.
Imagine denying basic astronomy for over 449 years just because the bible Passages like Joshua 10:12–13 (where Joshua commands the Sun to stand still) and Ecclesiastes 1:5 (which describes the Sun "rising" and "setting") were interpreted literally, suggesting the Sun moves across the sky.
Member
Posts: 7,156
Joined: Jul 22 2021
Gold: 975.00
Jan 14 2026 03:42pm
Blind faith doesn't require belief. Belief should carry a proportionate amount of evidence otherwise it's pure trust or blind faith.
The statement implies that once you believe something you cannot change your mind no matter the evidence. Well that clearly isnt true, if you are completely brainwashed it might be true but for most people who are open minded suffient evidence can and often does sway people to believe one way or the other.


For example even the most closed mind people like Christians who used to believe the sun rotated around the earth prior to 1543 Nicolaus Copernicus and later Galileo Galilei who was persecuted by the christian zealots as a heretic. They couldn't be reasoned with even when the evidence was stacked heavily against them. It is only after they began losing members and donations that they started changing their tune but only several hundred years later.
While the Church did not issue a formal apology or pardon in the legal sense, the Pope John Paul II addressed the Galileo case in a 1992 speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, expressed regret for the way the affair was managed, stating that the Church had failed to recognize the validity of Galileo’s scientific work at the time.

Now if that is not a cult like behavior I don't know what is.
Imagine denying basic astronomy for over 449 years just because the bible Passages like Joshua 10:12–13 (where Joshua commands the Sun to stand still) and Ecclesiastes 1:5 (which describes the Sun "rising" and "setting") were interpreted literally, suggesting the Sun moves across the sky.


Tl;dr

Science above all.
Member
Posts: 19,151
Joined: Nov 12 2005
Gold: 30.70
Jan 14 2026 04:02pm
Btw I like how you pass off the creation of woman from a rib in a casual totally non chalant way as you try to explain away the contradictions in genesis.
Anyway I countered by showing you how even the "detailed explanation" of events are clearly not in the same order. Which you glazed over and kept repeating "you arent interpreting it the right way" like a parrot.

Thats even worse since Ezekiel 18:20 clearly states one cannot inherit sins of the parents in this case David's sin. Are you just intentionally trying to not see the glaring contradiction? This is a major plot hole in your storybook.



Maybe you aren't reading it the right way. Have you considered that there is actually a contradiction and you are trying a little too hard to rationalize them.
Remind me how many versions and interpretations of the bible again? Thousands, and guess what they all different from minor semantics to major ideological ones.

Why isn't there just one version and one unified interpretation of the bible? Clearly someone's interpretation is wrong they can't be all right. Everyone thinks theirs is the right way news flash it isn't.
So don't go preaching about how i am not interpreting the story book "as intended" when you people can't even decide on the intended version of the bible amongst yourselves.

Case and point


You really need me to tell you why things are written in different languages and/or more simplified manners?

Really?

:blink:

Also the only "right" way is God's truth. I'm not here telling you anything that is "my way". I'm not the one trying to rationalize anything. The truth is when you take modern day terminology and try to apply it to original Hebrew meanings you have misinterpreted scripture. It's that simple. You are not taking the verses and understanding them in the context in which they are written, hence why people think contradictions exist when they don't. You keep bouncing around to different chapters and different perspectives rather than staying focused on the original verses you are posting about as well.

I have explained to you it's not Adam's literal rib, but rather a symbolic use of the word to define that she was created to be a shared being to Adam. To be at his side. That's why this term was used as it's symbolic to what is intended for Man and Woman together.

Psalm 51:5 (sinful nature)

“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

David is confessing his deep moral corruption after his sin with Bathsheba. This is poetic, confessional language, not a legal statement about guilt or punishment.

Ezekiel 18:20 (personal responsibility)

“The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child…”

This passage is a legal and moral principle: God judges individuals for their own actions, not for the sins of others.

The bible uses the word sin in more than one sense.

We inherit a sinful nature (Psalm 51:5)
We do not inherit punishment or guilt for another’s sins (Ezekiel 18:20)

Idk how better to explain it to you, but you can continue to disagree. That's your God given freedom to ignore every response you get and stick to your own modern day opinion that is easily debunked by taking time to think about what's been said to you. You also continue to ignore other posts being given to you. Nothing but a pick and choose troll with no real source or reason behind your belief. The fact you believe you are an accident that just poofed out of thin air and live an accidental life with no soul behind your free will is just a mind blowing thing to believe. You yourself are proof you were designed and created and refuse to think on how that even came to be. You don't have an answer for your life and choose to make the claim you know for sure what is and what isn't.

Absolutely bonkers.

This post was edited by D_urRRR on Jan 14 2026 04:05pm
Member
Posts: 7,956
Joined: Aug 23 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jan 14 2026 04:07pm
Blind faith doesn't require belief. Belief should carry a proportionate amount of evidence otherwise it's pure trust or blind faith.
The statement implies that once you believe something you cannot change your mind no matter the evidence. Well that clearly isnt true, if you are completely brainwashed it might be true but for most people who are open minded suffient evidence can and often does sway people to believe one way or the other.


For example even the most closed mind people like Christians who used to believe the sun rotated around the earth prior to 1543 Nicolaus Copernicus and later Galileo Galilei who was persecuted by the christian zealots as a heretic. They couldn't be reasoned with even when the evidence was stacked heavily against them. It is only after they began losing members and donations that they started changing their tune but only several hundred years later.
While the Church did not issue a formal apology or pardon in the legal sense, the Pope John Paul II addressed the Galileo case in a 1992 speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, expressed regret for the way the affair was managed, stating that the Church had failed to recognize the validity of Galileo’s scientific work at the time.

Now if that is not a cult like behavior I don't know what is.
Imagine denying basic astronomy for over 449 years just because the bible Passages like Joshua 10:12–13 (where Joshua commands the Sun to stand still) and Ecclesiastes 1:5 (which describes the Sun "rising" and "setting") were interpreted literally, suggesting the Sun moves across the sky.


There is a lot to what you are saying, and I am newer to the faith, but I am discussing this both with aLatin Mass Priest and someone who has degrees in biochemistry, evolution studies, theology, physics.

There are differences in certain Christian faiths, as well as even current questionable remarks which say Pope Leo and Francis have said.

What I am told, and this will not go with Protestant per say, is the Bible was more or less written by people influenced by the Holy Spirit.

As far as creation, this is where I talk to the person with the degrees, who is now also Roman Catholic. Having the discussion in the age of earth etc.

Like it being "billions of years old" bs

Since it isn't salvific I don't expect conventionally educated people to even understand why anyone would entertain the possibility....but critical thinking does lead down another path.

I would like to try and discuss most of these questions at hand with utmost respect to anyone asking, however to OP to call something fake, well. I mean, no. It wasn't easy for me to go down this route, I was more or less a pagan, or even atheist at times. There had been a few moments in my life where things had happened that I didn't quite understand, familiarized myself with a few religions, and chosed my own path.

I do not agree with what they call cafeteria Christians, as most of them who support LGBTQ or such which is absolutely against Christian teaching, and remove or bend views where that is acceptable. More ever there has been that kind of behavior in the Catholic Church in the past as well, but I do not let the actions of others define the teachings, nor the faith. I trust in His plan.
Member
Posts: 46,821
Joined: Sep 5 2016
Gold: 100.00
Jan 14 2026 06:29pm
Blind faith doesn't require belief. Belief should carry a proportionate amount ofevidence otherwise it's pure trust or blind faith.
The statement implies that once you believe something you cannot change your mind no matter the evidence. Well that clearly isnt true, if you are completely brainwashed it might be true but for most people who are open minded suffient evidence can and often does sway people to believe one way or the other.


For example even the most closed mind people like Christians who used to believe the sun rotated around the earth prior to 1543 Nicolaus Copernicus and later Galileo Galilei who was persecuted by the christian zealots as a heretic. They couldn't be reasoned with even when the evidence was stacked heavily against them. It is only after they began losing members and donations that they started changing their tune but only several hundred years later.
While the Church did not issue a formal apology or pardon in the legal sense, the Pope John Paul II addressed the Galileo case in a 1992 speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, expressed regret for the way the affair was managed, stating that the Church had failed to recognize the validity of Galileo’s scientific work at the time.

Now if that is not a cult like behavior I don't know what is.
Imagine denying basic astronomy for over 449 years just because the bible Passages like Joshua 10:12–13 (where Joshua commands the Sun to stand still) and Ecclesiastes 1:5 (which describes the Sun "rising" and "setting") were interpreted literally, suggesting the Sun moves across the sky.


i seen enough how you squirm around the evidence

Quote
For example even the most closed mind people like Christians who used to believe the sun rotated around the earth prior to 1543

it was just them christian that doodid that ...........right?

Quote
Nicolaus Copernicus and later Galileo Galilei who was persecuted by the christian zealots as a heretic. They couldn't be reasoned with even when the evidence was stacked heavily against them. It is only after they began losing members and donations that they started changing their tune but only several hundred years later.
While the Church did not issue a formal apology or pardon in the legal sense, the Pope John Paul II addressed the Galileo case in a 1992 speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, expressed regret for the way the affair was managed, stating that the Church had failed to recognize the validity of Galileo’s scientific work at the time

the catholic church who slaughtered untold amounts of christians. you never get anything right and you do that on purpose because your driven by agenda and not a seeker of truth your just another fraud in this world

Quote
Now if that is not a cult like behavior I don't know what is.

strawmanning

Quote
were interpreted literally, suggesting the Sun moves across the sky.

from our perspective it does move across the sky and if you said that in the real world every would under stand what you said and if anyone interjected and started explaining that its the earth revolving that is causing the effect ev1 would would think that person was a dork and avoid him

the place is weird. its probably some kind of simulation because the imaginary idea that its a product of deep time isnt holding up
Joshua 10:12–13 (where Joshua commands the Sun to stand still)
Joshua's Long Day
(thats ok though the hubris in the "atheist" will "declare" all the historical records "false")


i suggest addone is just about strategy. to pile out as much gibberish and hope no one checks up on it. anytime i have checked up on his claims they are shown false. when addone gets cornered on something he just hides his face and brings more lies. addone is not about a reasoned argument he is about wearing people down with hee hawing
good thread to check out.
Atheist/antitheist Chit Science
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=92846851&f=90

This post was edited by TiStuff on Jan 14 2026 06:44pm
Member
Posts: 16,012
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Jan 14 2026 07:14pm
You really need me to tell you why things are written in different languages and/or more simplified manners?

Really?

:blink:

Also the only "right" way is God's truth. I'm not here telling you anything that is "my way". I'm not the one trying to rationalize anything. The truth is when you take modern day terminology and try to apply it to original Hebrew meanings you have misinterpreted scripture. It's that simple. You are not taking the verses and understanding them in the context in which they are written, hence why people think contradictions exist when they don't. You keep bouncing around to different chapters and different perspectives rather than staying focused on the original verses you are posting about as well.

I have explained to you it's not Adam's literal rib, but rather a symbolic use of the word to define that she was created to be a shared being to Adam. To be at his side. That's why this term was used as it's symbolic to what is intended for Man and Woman together.

Psalm 51:5 (sinful nature)

“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

David is confessing his deep moral corruption after his sin with Bathsheba. This is poetic, confessional language, not a legal statement about guilt or punishment.

Ezekiel 18:20 (personal responsibility)

“The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child…”

This passage is a legal and moral principle: God judges individuals for their own actions, not for the sins of others.

The bible uses the word sin in more than one sense.

We inherit a sinful nature (Psalm 51:5)
We do not inherit punishment or guilt for another’s sins (Ezekiel 18:20)

Idk how better to explain it to you, but you can continue to disagree. That's your God given freedom to ignore every response you get and stick to your own modern day opinion that is easily debunked by taking time to think about what's been said to you. You also continue to ignore other posts being given to you. Nothing but a pick and choose troll with no real source or reason behind your belief. The fact you believe you are an accident that just poofed out of thin air and live an accidental life with no soul behind your free will is just a mind blowing thing to believe. You yourself are proof you were designed and created and refuse to think on how that even came to be. You don't have an answer for your life and choose to make the claim you know for sure what is and what isn't.

Absolutely bonkers.


I like how you are drawing your conclusions based on what you think the text means and calling it the "right way".

All of a sudden the rib woman is merely a metaphor how convenient. Well what about jesus couldn't you say that he was also a metaphor like some kind of symbolic avatar that the narrators have devised in order to give a personal connection.
Surely you dont think he magically walked on water, healed physical ailments and resurrected people from the dead.

I've noticed a trend among christian debates when things become difficult to explain they drop the classic "its just a metaphor bro" or "god works in mysterious ways"


I g2g now will read the rest later but it doesn't look good.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev11314151617273Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll