Ok, so first of all, I should probably start off by saying that my worldview doesn't always overlap with Christian belief (I have been reading the Bible, but with an open mind), which would disqualify me from being a Christian (as you could have already guessed based on my posts) despite the fact that I agree with a lot of stuff that Jesus said. Nevertheless, I strongly believe that there is a Creator.
For example, I don't believe that God told the Israelites to kill all those tribes (sometimes including women and children), I simply refuse that God would command such a thing. But still, if someone reaches enlightenment through Christianity or if it helps him become a better person, I respect it (but I would also respect it for other religions as well).

Now, regarding Jesus. Obviously, we don't have a video of someone from 2000 years ago. What we do have is written accounts from people who saw him. You might say that it isn't enough, but that is pretty much how we know about any historical person who lived a long time ago. I also don't believe that a whole religion that most people today follow would come out of text made by a person who decided to make up a character named Jesus that never existed. Note that in reality, it wasn't even just one writing, but there were dozens of gospels about Jesus (but only 4 were included in the Bible).

Regarding many miracles in the bible - I believe human thought and its power to create images has great potential - especially (and this is important) when it taps into some divine energy which multiplies it many times. However, that knowledge today has been lost. Think of how if you told a caveman from 20000 years ago that one day there would be modern technology, AI, rockets, spaceships, etc., he would probably just mock you, as all they currently have are spears, bows, and javelins. People today are very much like 'cavemen' when it comes to the power of what we can do in that aspect.

edit: forgot to address this:

This one is the easiest, the world itself is the creation - it must have the Creator. I find it absurd to think that the universe, as complex as it is, would just form on its own.

This post was edited by kin198989 on Jan 18 2026 02:02am

your issue is the killing of canaanites, the ones sacrificing their children to molech, regularly committing bestiality, incest and other evil acts? they were patiently given hundreds of years to change, yet refused to. should we not have a righteous judgement on debauchery, crime, and immorality or continue to act this way forever?

not the flood that killed way more, did that not have a bigger impact on you?

is your issue that He used a particular group of people at a particular time to enact His judgement rather than an act of nature? this was to enact the correct way of being to humanity, to teach the israelites the correct moral way and ultimately to have His Son incarnate and teach the world the gospel, giving way to restore the human nature ontologically back to its true nature via theosis.

if He allowed the complete debauchery to exist, the Israelites would be corrupted (as they were later, because they actually didn't follow his commands). The point was "so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the Lord your God".

you find it absurd that a complex universe could form without a creator, yet you find it 'unreasonable' that this same creator would act to protect the moral complexity and sanctity of human nature from a culture that was literally burning its own children. If He is the creator of the body and the soul, He has the authority to judge both.

That was just one example.
I think that the Creator made a law which when extremely simplified comes down to 'do good things and good will come back to you, do bad things and bad will come back to you' (But obviously it's a lot more complex than that). That law can act on its own without God needing to interfere for every single case. Yes, I think the law can involve other people to enforce the judgement. But I don't think that God Himself commanded it - I believe that He is much above that. I believe that He suffered watching his children slaughter each other. God portrayed in Old Testament seems vengeful, and I don't think he is. In New Testament however, Jesus talks about God much differently (Loving and caring).

Regarding that certain example, I think that it was a bit too far to kill the children as well.

You are describing some God that is separate from His own creation, if He is 'above' commanding judgment, then He is also 'above' being the source of the law you're describing. The laws aren't some arbitrary "do good, so good things happen to you" but the entire purpose is God is the very source of Good, and He made His creation Good. We decided with our free will to stray away from the source of Life that sustains us, and in that act we bring decay, death, and destruction by not being in communion with God. The purpose of the law and morality is theosis, so we can have an ontological change in our very nature to be healed and restored to how we were in the garden, that is the entire purpose of Christ restoring humanity by living a perfect life in obedience and uniting the human nature to God's nature by the Person of the Logos becoming the perfect God-Man. It's through synergistic theosis that humanity is restored, not some "do good so good happens" law, it's not about "doing good" but "becoming good" or "Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." by participating in the divine energies of God. This is what communion (the eucharist) is, this is the point of the sacraments, the prayer life, fasting, to ontologically change your nature by participating with His will. To be clear, you always remain human, but your nature is "healed" through willingly participating with God's gift of Grace.

Christ speaks entirely of the Wrath of God and will deliver it in His 2nd coming, this isn't two separate Gods. One God with one identical will, you simply don't like how He acted based off your own feelings in the OT.

To save His beloved creation (humanity), sometimes God must amputate a rotting limb(a complete degenerate culture he had patience for hundreds of years) and throw it into the fire. Christ himself speaks this way, this is not inconsistent.

The death of the children is not final, if His will is an act of Mercy on the innocent it is His will. Death is the separation of soul from body, not some type of complete annihilation. The innocent are in His presence, a much better fate than being tortured and sacrificed by their parents, or the ones that live continuing the evil debauchery of that culture and that culture spreading to all of humanity.

This post was edited by majorblood on Jan 18 2026 03:27am

So written accounts of people meeting jesus were only in the bible many of the authors whom are also unknown. Meaning anyone could of written them. Any independent sources like Flavius and Tacitus letters are written by people who never seen or met jesus often +100 years or more. And most of them simply state there were christians nothing about witnessing jesus performing miracles at all. Since bible is the only source of these claims you have to take it at its word. Seems highly suspicious that no independant material was ever written about such an important and highly influential person. You would think at least one of the many thousands of the people he supposedly healed and even resurrected could of at least write in their diary about him . Zip, nada
If jesus was alive today his face would be plastered on tv and every newspaper. Social media will be talking about him non stop. Yet we dont even have one single footnote about him being real by an independent source the guy is supposed to be a living son of god? How the fuck does that even makes sense?

Secondly the logic behind this universe is complex there must be a creator is a reasonable one to have, but why assume it was christian version and not the Jewish or Muslim version, why not the Haree Krishna spin or the norse viking mythology of Odin?
Why couldn't a more advanced race of humans or aliens have created us. Imagine there is a super advanced civilization that has spaceships to go from different star to star that have a very highly developed cloning technology that starts life from few animals and drop some humanoids in the mix and watch them grow like bacteria on a petri dish? We can almost do that kind of thing ourselves so why couldn't our creator be another advanced versions of us? This forgoes relying on making up bullshit stories about creating man out of dust, woman out of a rib in a magic garden with a talking snake.. like why would you fall for something like that when there are so many other way more plausible explanations that exist?

I dont understand did you have religious parents and thats the belief system you inherited? Because many religious people just so happen to believe what their parents tell them to believe. Born in India likely to be hindu, grow up in a muslim household you highly likely to become a muslim. So please tell me you weren't born into this and you have selected to believe in jesus after considering all other religions and possibilities.

Because it sounds to me like all it took for you to believe in magic was a word of an old book and some peer pressure from your parents. Would that be an accurate summary of your belief process?

This post was edited by addone on Jan 18 2026 03:57am

you are again presupposing a worldview on faith, which worldview most coherently explains the world? In your view, with this alien race creating humans, what is the origin of this space race? What is the origin of the created universe, does morality exist? Does the mind exist, the immaterial? you just made up a story without any explanatory power or coherency, you made up a religion that is incoherent. It's the same for rabbinic judaism and islam, they are incoherent while Christianity is perfectly coherent. I know you didn't ask me this, but I did not grow up religious at all except that I grew up in the west, so religion is inescapable in some form or another, but it's through pure reason that I came to the conclusion that the Christian worldview is the only coherent one that can explain the world. It doesn't matter if I have a personal revelation, a personal 'feeling' or whatever, what matters is what is true. I don't attempt to argue or understand through feeling, which is why I pressed you earlier on the metaphysics and metalogical understanding of your worldview. The truth is what matters, and the truth isn't some arbitrary concept but the Truth is a person.

In terms of the history, Josephus was about 60 years after Christ's death and resurrection, which in that era is a blink of an eye for historical writing. If you apply that same standard historically, you would have to say most people in history did not exist. This is if you are attempting to doubt Christ's existence as a historical person. Tacitus explicitly mentions "Christus" being executed by Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius

This post was edited by majorblood on Jan 18 2026 03:48am

written accounts is the only way we know about history. If you doubt Jesus existed, you might as well doubt many other historical facts, because many of them are only supported by written accounts. If you simply choose to doubt about his 'powers', then it's fine, and it's up to you.

I literally said that my current worldview would disqualify me from being a Christian. I know it doesn't always overlap with Christian doctrine, so it would be dishonest of me to call myself a Christian. So idk how you decided, I only believe in Christian version of God? I try to have my own personal relationship with God.

I wish I could write more, but I start working in 4 minutes, so unfortunately, this is all I can write now.

I dont automatically believe everyone is historically accurate. The guy is claiming to resurrecting people from the dead and creating the entire universe better have some overwhelming and rock solid evidence

If its some Joe Shmo I dont really care if they existed or not they aren't claiming magic. Besides many of the historical figures have multiple independent witnesses that corroborate the story from different perspectives, we have paintings and statues made of them. Some of the physical artifacts that they wore et c Like for example we know Napoleon was real because of all the battles he fought, many of his letters he has written, records of him being in prison, paintings, crown he wore, there is his tomb with his corpse in it. His direct descendants that we can verify through dna, many many things that provide proof of his existence. Jesus only had a dusty old book written by authors we cant even fully identify. Thats it purely based on " trust me bro"

Also reread my previous post ive updated it.

Sounds to me like you have incredibly low standards for accepting such a monumental figure. We are talking about the creator of the universe here not some random Dick and Harry. Whats the matter with you? You have to apply most strictest background check on this jesus guy than anything in your life. Don't want to be a guillable npc and just fall for any old story about an invisible wizard.

Here are some diagrams showing the Genealogy of Jesus and the Double Levirate Marriage.

Did the Big Bang happen?