Christianity is a religion that makes little sense.

We are to believe Jesus goes to all the trouble of virgin birth, walking on water, raising people from the dead, feeding thousands from next to nothing, knows in advance even plans and allows himself to be killed but forgets or thinks it unimportant to write one word or ask anyone to do it for him for this new Christian faith he is claimed to be dying for? And we are to believe that nonsense, really? How is that not seen as a self-revealing lie or a non-rationalization needing no more proof its ridiculous logic?

Do you want the truth or just truth devoid beliefs?

Before we get started on you I will address a common christian challenge to atheism, how did it come into existence?

There is only naturalism, so we have no reason to jump to there must be magic or some intelligent supernatural powers being(s). We don’t have to guess that hard to conclude only natural things are possible, as we know it’s only natural at every turn in every way that we can know. Therefore, the most likely to assume that what is currently unavailable for review would most likely be only nature to think it’s magic it’s ridiculous and baseless. To say we don’t yet understand is not mean magic is real. And not understanding nature, doesn’t make it not nature and just because nature can seem amazing doesn’t make it magic. I assume you are a strong theist not a weak somethingism god (an unspecified belief in some higher force something, maybe a deistic or pantheistic god) believer and most likely some well defined version of Christianity right? You are most likely not believing in a unknown magic possibility before the big bang god somethingism, no, you believe in a god only defined in myths in some holy book right? We arose from evolution not creationism wishful thinking: Creationism (pseudoscience). When you ask how did it come into existence you mostly mean what came before the big bang I am guessing? If so we do know naturalism and have scientific evidence to support it, religion has nothing of the sort for its creationistic myths. We don’t have an ability to see past the big bang yet and we may never be able to. As far as what I mean by natural is that the causation is definable with the components interaction with them selves in the real world e do and can know and is not something magical, intelligent, or external to reality. Science knows the big bang from background radiation, Cosmic Microwave Background, or CMB, which is radiation that fills the universe and can be detected in every direction. Microwaves are invisible to the naked eye so they cannot be seen without instruments. Created shortly after the universe came into being in the Big Bang, the CMB represents the earliest radiation that can be detected. Astronomers have likened the CMB to seeing sunlight penetrating an overcast sky. Looking out into deep space, and therefore back into deep time, astronomers see the CMB radiation saturating space beginning at about 378,000 years after the Big Bang. Before the creation of the CMB, the universe was a hot, dense and opaque plasma containing both matter and energy. Photons could not travel freely, so no light escaped from those earlier times. For more on cosmic microwave background and the big bang:

Quit Trying to Invent Your God From the Scraps of Science.

Now on to you bible believer, the god of the bible you believe in is a terrible monster myth not worthy of worship even if it was real. They can’t as of yet if ever be able to see before that. Axiological Atheism Morality Critique: of the bible god:

“Even the best thinking, beliefs, or ideas if not connected to action are but wasted words. Any claimed god or supreme power that threatens extreme suffering to those who are vulnerable and of lesser power is abusive. This is especially so, with the human horror of injustice that would be hell. Which once created means its creator cannot also be called or connected to something all loving or all just. Any reasonable person can know killing the entire planet in a flood if real which it is not would be the greatest act of mass murder, than that done by any other madman ever know in history.  Evil bible god? Bible believers like say the bible guides there morality but which morality offered in the bible are they using the good cop or the bad cop pseudo morality game. Christians love saying there god of the bible is all good and gives free will so any harm that humans endure is said to be their moral falling alone but is this biblically accurate? No, not at all. Because we have verses that say god harden the Egyptian Pharaoh’s heart against his will (removed his free will). Saying in the bible verse I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. -Exodus 4:21. And let’s address Exodus 7:3 and the reconfirmation of this hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was claimed to be good as then god can kill all the firstborn braking the faro who was such an afflicted prenatal victim of a child murdering god, who could have done anything with his unlimited power and…”

Again bible believer, the bible you believe if discredited by archeological sites, Archaeology Disproves the Bible:

“Archaeology disproves the all the beginning of the bible thus discredits all Abrahamic religions are based on it, so this includes Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Mormon, etc. The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, involves leading scholars Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman who draw on recent archaeological research to present a dramatically revised portrait of ancient Israel and its neighbors. They argue that crucial evidence (or a telling lack of evidence) at digs in Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon suggests that many of the most famous stories in the Bible—the wanderings of the patriarchs, the Exodus from Egypt, Joshua’s conquest of Canaan, and David and Solomon’s vast empire—reflect the world of the later authors rather than actual historical facts. What they argue, in chapter after chapter, is that these books of the Bible make the most sense as coming out of a seventh-century (BC) context. A lot of the Bible is royal and elite propaganda to justify empire expanding through conquest. Overall the differing archaeology evidence and the complete lack of any confirming archaeology evidence is devastating to all the Abrahamic religions. Historians mostly agree that only the Kingdom of Israel and life in Jerusalem (roughly from King David onward) represents any actual possibility for history. Some stories in the Bible were meant to be history, others fiction. But modernity has obscured the original distinction between the two kinds of biblical writing, depriving readers of the depth of the text. Perhaps surprisingly, this confusion lies at the heart of the History Channel’s miniseries “The Bible,” which continues the pattern of…”

Moreover, bible believer, the jesus you worship even if real was not worthy of respect either, Debunking Jesus?:

“In this article I am going to just assume for the sake of argument such a man as jesus existed. This does not mean I am sure even some human person now thought of as jesus ever existed. Matthew 15:21-28  21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is demon-possessed and suffering terribly.” 23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” 25 The woman came and knelt before him. “Lord, help me!” she said. 26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” 27 “Yes it is, Lord,” she said. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” 28 Then Jesus said to her, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed at that moment. My Commentary Matthew 15:21-28 Jesus all good? Some try to say this is a bad example. Read the next few passages. She pleads more and he then heals the girl. Wrong, this is a great example he does not heal the child out of love or because its ethical and demonstrates a lack of willingness because of different race of the child and does not do it when asked even gives a hate speech response its only after the woman’s continued begging after the hate response that he agrees to heal the child…”

In addition, bible believer, god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Contradictions and god cannot logically co-exist.:

“Can thoughts about the direction of a creator force with purpose be anymore perceptible or ascertainably different from our notions of purposeless non direction? For example, deities exhibits natural characteristics, the wind as science knows is a purposeless natural force, whereas gods are often attributed as being the force of purpose in wind such as seen in in the phrases, bhagavad-gita 10.21 commentary by Sri Sridhara Swami “Krishna is a lead wind”, bible: Exodus 10:13, “god brought wind”, and quran: Surat Al-Jāthiyah 45:5-6 mentions, “allah changing winds.” Likewise, deities exhibits human characteristics such as seen in in the phrase, “Krishna is  jealous” Holi festival Hinduism, “god is jealous” Exodus 20:5, and  “allah is jealous” Jami` at-Tirmidhi – Book 12, Hadith 1201. This fact of an undeniable anthropomorphic connection found in all creator deities, even in their most ethereal forms, can be easily addressed. For instance, if you say the “unknown/unknowable” origins of the universe involves an “it,” something with a beingness and humanness, can, in some form, then reasonably be seen as denoting some amount of anthropomorphism. The problem with this beingness god concept is with anthropomorphic reasoning that entails humans’ styled thinking, behavior, and beingness, which evokes a limited realm of personality, which is fixed in time, space, and place. So it can be assume from these references as well as many more that a reasonable conception of “deities” are ultimately an indirect beingness reference to anthropomorphism and an argument from analogy. Argument from analogy involves perceived similarities; such as an all-powerful designer being, a power attributed as infinite thing with somethingness as well as to unlimited possibilities (wind: nonbeingness; and thing with human…”

Again, bible believer, you believe in a nothingness god, The Empty God Box:

“The Empty God Box In scientific terms a “LACK OF EVIDENCE” is/can be proof of non-existence. As with all things as new evidence is discovered views can change. I can prove something does not exist by its lack of existence, the box is empty? Is a box empty? I can prove god is not in the box, but some say I can never prove the box is empty. But is it right to say the god Box is never empty even if we remove its needed contents. It’s an exercise in rhetoric with what we do know to say the god Box is not empty of all evidence and reason thus all it can be is empty of validity. And still today people say empty god boxes are possibly not empty? The god Box is was and will always “LACK OF EVIDENCE” thus empty proving the god concepts non-existence. Think I am wrong then you go and keep looking or trying to empty that already empty box labeled god devoid of all facts or reason.”

And again, bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is the only thing one could even hope to believe from nature or what could have come from all this. So, you and others and you create myths about this believed nature derived somthinginsm god, Mr. Potato Head god:

“The term god is an empty meaningless term outside of manmade myth unless one falls back to the circus of fallacies in the magic big top of fideism and the faith fallacy that you do not need anything but faith to validate, justify or prove any mystical belief you so desire. The god claim is like a clown car rolling in from out of nowhere and it seems like it is only one or possibly a few bad ideas, but no. No they, the proponents for the god claim, will act like the web of lies the god claim it tied to, can then somehow be woven into something real, if only they try hard enough. Therefore, they, the proponents for the god claim, will act as a person drowning, reaching out to anything they can grab, saying it is or could stick to their Velcro conception of god. Maybe it’s more like a Mr. Potato Head god concept, simply add or remove to suit the believer. For as we all know gods often think like the people who invent them. So everything not fast enough to get away will be claimed as god and the crazy clowns will just keep piling up even if the logical attachment to reason is nowhere to be found and the joke on reason stops being funny real quick. Therefore, we can say the term god is an unnecessary redundancy not an accurate explanation for anything.”

And yet again, again, bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is full of unreason, The God Fallacy:

“The God Fallacy is that there is no epistemically warranted or justifiably reliable evidence for god(s) existence; most ideas offered are stretches of unreason promoting seemingly implausible knowledge or reality claims. Moreover, beyond this is the self-evident realization that there is no reliable and /or verifiable evidence that could be used to define what god term actually is or could be assured to involve. Because it is never good to just randomly conceptualize or fabricate from bias trying to force connections into existence. epistemically warranted or justifiably reliable evidence or even a preset of proofs that do not hold gaps a believer want to fill with an arbitrary beliefs things need a god explanation and yet again what does god even mean. One his furthered nothing with god talk until they offer clear links to understand what could rightly make up the empty term g. o. d. (Group Originated Delusion). Any reasonable thinker should conclude that clear links to any knowledge are required to comprehend what to ask, where to look, or what to state is involved. This would seem especially important since what is on the line is the actual truth or falsehood of the great believed “IT” of somethingism. Do you wish to just assemble or make up your god thinking as you go, greedily forcing anything that seems slow enough to not get away or is the actual truth in reality you seek even if godless as finding the true is the main pursuit, as your aim is what true right, taken with the deepest integrity? One should desire such intellectual rigor in order to even…”

And to restate it again and especially loving god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Evidence Against a Caring God?:

“Evidence against a caring god? I will provides burden of proof. The following are some evidence against a caring god working in the world. A recent study of the current living conditions throughout Africa shows that more than one billion people do not have enough clean water to provide for their basic human needs. As a result, more than 2,500 children are dying each day. I guess it is that god gives us free will by keeping children from clean water in an unproportioned amount to the civilized science filled world. I ask you, does your god not hear their prayers? According to Missionaries of Africa (2008), there is a water crisis and diseases that are living in dirty water are wiping out entire villages and communities. Does god exist? Does the magic chanting of prayer seem to work? Suppose for a minute with the understanding of religious believe, if there was a loving god and it answered even some prayers, would not the most deserving be the non-sinning? Moreover, what living human could be said to be less sinning than a baby and thus the most deserving. In addition, babies or children are likely the ones religionists/fideists pray most often, for when they are in trouble. Belief changes nothing. Whatever circumstances you are in or not, has nothing to do with belief. If you are poor, belief does not make you not poor. If you are rich, you do not stay rich because of belief. You would think that poor people would have the benefit of the heavenly means and have god on their side, if anyone would,…”

And to even further restate again god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, It’s Not the Deity You See as Possible But How Many You Reject:

“If you are a believer or agnostic, it is not the one deity you see as possible but to notice how many gods or goddesses you reject. There are literally thousands of religions being practiced today and many others once were once thought true in history just to be reworked or rejected. Here are 20 of the most popular, along with an estimate of the number of followers: Christianity: 2.1 billion, Islam: 1.3 billion, Hinduism: 900 million, Chinese traditional religion: 394 million, Buddhism: 376 million, African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million, Sikhism: 23 million, Juche (a.k.a. Chuch’e and Kimilsungism): 19 million, Spiritism: 15 million, Judaism: 14 million, Baha’i: 7 million, Jainism: 4.2 million, Shinto: 4 million, Cao Dai: 4 million, Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million, Tenrikyo: 2 million, Neo-Paganism: 1 million, Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand, Rastafarianism: 600 thousand, Scientology: 500 thousand, [Source: Encyclopedia Britannica] If you can believe only in a possible God of Christianity, you have chosen to reject Allah, Vishnu, Lord Buddha, Waheguru, Ngame, Isis, Kali, Brigid, Kuan Yin, Europa, Aphrodite, Amaterasu, Aurora, Chicomecoatl, Ishtar, Antares, and all of the thousands of other gods or goddess that other people worship today or once held faith in. It is quite likely that you rejected these other gods or goddesses without ever looking into their history, religions, reading or even learning about them. You may not even know some of the names listed or have heard much about them or the thousands of other deities and mythical beings people now or through time have put faith in. Most people believer or agnostic are singly indoctrinated all their life and simply have absorbed…”

And to yet again even further restate god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Humans are Prone to Thinking Errors, and Yes This Includes Theism.:

“Humans are prone to thinking errors, especially when they are uninformed and when they are limited to themselves and only a simple amount of knowledge about the world without science.  For instance if you are sitting or standing or lying down and not in motion you would say you are in a fixed place in time and space even common sense would seem to support thins thinking however, you are on a planet that is spinning on an axis and it is likewise hurling through space in a revolving pattern around the sun. so without science understanding one may be fooled into thinking things that in reality are just not true. Some people think I tell about the flaw in thinking theism is true as some ploy to convert people to atheism. But this thinking is in error I only want people to believe what is true it just so happens that truth of the real proven world is in line with atheism. Atheism is not looking for followers, it is a conclusion that the god claims are devoid of supporting evidence and are left with supported wishful thinking hopes of finite beings fearful of death and wanting to have control and hope in an often grubby often painful as much as pleasurable dangerous short life. You think looking honestly at the evidence available and not making things up needs to be promoted in some better way so people like it that sounds odd but how about the joy of intellectual honesty without myths devoid of reality for one. What I think is bizarre it to expect any intelligent…”

And finally to even further restate god beliefs are wishful thinking at best, Doubt god(s)? No, I stopped believing Fairytales.:

“Religion is the thing you do when playing at really is more important than understanding or being in reality. And belief in god(s) is the thing you believe in when the truth of reality is not really a big concern, but the lies about it are: No Magic No gODs or “No gODs, No Masters” If anyone wants to say you are stupid because you are Atheist and not agnostic at all on the god question tell them about me. I am far from stupid and I actually think it’s the other way around as in one has to be very smart, well enough to construct a sturdy enough argument to reject all gods intellectually as it requires not just a powerful Hypothesis it requires it is rich with evidence as well which I have done as others like me have. It’s not an easy way to defend but don’t worry it is quite defendable: The God Fallacy I am a Realist in Many ways, 1) I have a positive epistemic attitude (belief) towards or in philosophical realism that there is a real external world and that is can be know or substantially approximated by humans objectively. 2) I have a positive epistemic attitude towards or in scientific realism that the content of the best scientific theories, models, and aspects of the world described by the sciences can be know or substantially approximated by humans objectively. 3) I have a positive epistemic attitude towards or in logical realism such as that logic is the means of discovering the structure of facts and its projection in the language such as the Law of Non-Contradiction or…”

Bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks needs a father god, Single God Religions (Monotheism) = Man-o-theism:

“Single God Religions (Monotheism) “could almost be called Man-o-theism” Why I say Monotheism could almost be called Manotheism is because almost all Monotheistic religions happen to have a male god and almost as often are also male centric. Probably the three oldest Monotheism commonly known are probably are ancient Egypt Atenism, Northeast Iran or Southwest Afghanistan Zoroastrianism and Israelite Judaism all having male gods. Then Hinduism’s version found in the Bhagavad Gita also having male god. Then Christianity monotheism the god is also a male god. Then Islam monotheism the god is also a male god. Then Sikhism monotheism the god is described as neither male nor female however the Guru Granth consistently refers to God as He, even in English. He is also predominantly referred to as Father. Then Bahá’í Faith monotheism the god is also a male god. The classic religions of Greece and Rome were in the main purely polytheistic, but in later times tendencies arose, partly stimulated by philosophy and later also by Judaism and Christianity, toward inclusive monotheism. The hymn to Zeus (male god) by the Stoic philosopher Cleanthes (c. 330–c. 230 bce) is the best-known document of this process. It praises Zeus as the essence of divinity in all gods, creator and ruler of the cosmos, omnipotent, the giver of every gift, and the father of humanity…”

And again bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks needs a father god, God the unethical father?:

“The ethics violations start before the eating of the so called tree of knowledge. Remember before eating it they DID NOT understand good and evil thus they did not commit a crime anymore then a baby who lacks understanding. But it’s worse god the father put this dangerous tree there to begin with not good parenting then allows a bad being influence them good parents don’t put defenseless children with harmful individuals and dangerous objects. So truly its god who a court of law would find negligence not the children. But it is even worse for god set it up to fail. Just think even if Adam and eve never ate nor did anyone for a thousand years it would only take one failure eating and all of humanity is doomed. Thus, it’s god’s booby trap forcing sin not man’s fall. So if the story was true which it is not god would be the one lacking any ethics and be a terrible father. It is easier to give without wanting to love then it is to love without wanting to give. To love moves us past self and enhances the desire to share and give both of things and of oneself. If one is without the desire to give likely they are not wanting to love.”

And yet again bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks needs a father god, Yes, Your Male God is Ridiculous:

“The question should not just be is there a god, but which gods we are to contemplate, the new ones or old ones. Not that it really matters much in the end, as they all eventually cease to exist or replaced for something new. If there were a true god deity, would he not make himself known as soon as hominoids could think or at least by around 100,000 years ago when the first confirmed human burial took place or at least, by around 50,000 years ago when it is thought we fully achieved modern behavioral and cognitive traits? However, this is not the case at all, instead the male god myths do not seem to exist for tens of thousands of years or must have held less status until around 6,000 or so years ago. What was prominent before the male god myths seems to be female goddesses and animals or aspects of nature, which were held as spirits or something like deities. Female goddesses and not male gods seemingly starting after 12,000 years ago for sure, but maybe go back to 40,000 years ago or even longer, who knows hypothetically in some fashion to possibly over 200,000 years ago, but maybe not. So not much credibility can be given prehistorically for the male gods, thus why add any credence to them now. Therefore, male gods prominent in the current religions of the world today have a self-life of only around 6,000 or so years ago, not much of a showing if it is a male god who supposedly created everything. Why wait through 95% of human existence…”

Bible believer, you believe in a somthinginsm god which is more a confusion of reality then any believed awareness of it one thinks demonstrates any god, Bigfoots, Unicorns, and Gods?:

“Bigfoots, Unicorns, and Gods the rational conclusion using axiology So how do we form rational conclusions? More importantly how do we differentiate between the levels involved to establish a conclusions rational viability. It takes axiology or the value judgment the worthiness or lack thereof in relation to the available reason and evidence. So let’s start with the axiological viability of Bigfoots There is no available evidence for Bigfoots. But is their proposition outside of reason? Always start in reality from the evidence we do know, such as a primate/nonhuman hominid close to that of both humans and other nonhuman primates is not entirely outside all possibility of reason even though lacking all evidence. Therefore, belief is not warrant and the axiological worthiness of possibility is low enough to motivate disbelief. The axiological viability of Unicorns (ie. a horse with a single horn on its head) There is no evidence for Unicorns. But is their proposition outside of reason? As always start in reality from the evidence we do know, such as by looking at the evolution of the horse not once was there a horn on any of the several stages of animals to the horse we know today. So it is relatively outside of possibility though as it is still only claiming non fantastic attributes it is only somewhat ridiculous. Therefore, belief is not in any way warranted and the axiological worthiness is so low to highly support disbelief. Now the axiological validity of Gods There is no evidence for Gods. But is their proposition outside of reason? As always start in reality from the evidence we do…”

I was, Christian 36 years, read the bible twice, and took two religious classes before the conclusion of atheism.

We don’t know everything but we do know a lot, like we know that the god myth is man-made nonsense as we can know about what time male gods myths came along and a hypothesis for why. It’s around 5,500 to 6,000 years ago, with the birth of state cities (birth of masculinity worship). But female goddesses go back at least 12,000 years ago close to around the time of animal domestication and the cultivation of seed baring plants (fertility goddesses) or maybe to 40,000 years ago as fertility (female figurines) and hunting magic/protection (female items) of the peoples labels Aurignacian culture and the birth of developed art an it seams shamanism, totemism, and animism. It is the earliest modern human culture which like modern humans (like us) which started accruing around 50,000 years ago. But, we do know that the first worship and it was not likely a god or goddess just a reflection of nature worship by means of a stone shake around 70,000 years ago around the time of a supervolcano in Indonesia and humanity almost going extinct. This time was an ice age and smoke may have lingered in or on clouds possibly looking similar to snakes. And, at 100,000 language development begins around the time human burial begins, do language and magical thinking help each other? Yes, they sure do today and it is not so strange to think myth needs language too. So, it’s safe to say we worshiped nature long before the gods we thought created it, thus we know all gods and goddesses are made up lies.





And this is not even mentioning all the other science and philosophy that can be used to accumulatively finish the answer with we know that there is no gods as much as we relatively can claim to know anything.

What are the philosophical views of 1,972 contemporary professional philosophers?

“No God: atheism 72.8% and theism 14.6%”

Unlike untrustworthy religion, science is worth believing and one doesn’t have to believe in it upon empty assertion myths that have been discredited as unhistorical and inaccurate along with lies an full of pseudoscience. Science even if wrong will exchange old ideas for new and religion wishes to suppress new ideas for old. The bible proves nothing of substance, nor does it prove anything of worth but I guess other than more blind inaccurate beliefs continuing.

Please dont let more blind inaccurate beliefs continuing.

Religion is a Form of Malignant Inflated Egotistical Narcissism