The only way we can make sense of this world and all its whys and confidently process our lives without existential dread is to believe in God. There is no other way. Atheism is a sickness. It hinders your happiness.
>>18264219Where can I learn more about your God?
>>18264234Bible
>>18264251bible was written by humans and therefore inherently cannot contain actual answers to anything God-related.
ITT>Where can I learn more about your God?>do this>no
>>18264219>The only way we can make sense of this world and all its whys and confidently process our lives without existential dread is to believe in God.It's not the only way, but it is a good cope
>>18264219>AtheismAtheism is a privation, like anarchy.It is a resistance to a moral framework, under the guise of strawman arguments about ghosts.If you tell them that you just want to do the right thing, be truthfull, and live, they will tell you that such things don't exist.
>>18264437>You're wrong. I'm right. No reason. It's all so tiresome.
>>18264444Tragic strawman quads
>>18264447Why would i deny you your cope? You clearly can't make it without it like many if us
>>18264219This is a utilitarian argument for pretending to believe in something for mental health purposes or whatever. It is not convincing for the actual claims of your religion. This is the main issue with e-missionary efforts. Even if I got free blowjobs for converting to Christianity, it would not make Christianity any more true and I would be no closer to believing it. I have too much self-respect to LARP to that degree as well.
>>18264452>Even if I got free blowjobs for converting to Christianity, it would not make Christianity any more true and I would be no closer to believing it.Speak for yourself.
>>18264409Who did you wanted to have written the bible, squirrels? Who else was gonna write it?
>>18264469Yahweh could have willed it into existence. For comparison Hinduism claims the Vedas came about that way.
the redpill is that it was always trueShroud of Turin proves the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKMQY49py4w
>>18264219No, when you worship a demon, you aren't actually making yourself happy, you are just making the hollow character you are playing appear happy to appease the demon.
>>18264444>strawman arguments about ghosts.>t. holy spirit shill
>>18264469A sandstorm could have just etched it into a cave that experiences regular mudslides which harden on the walls and fall off in a way that constantly creates paper thin rock copies of the text.
>>18264864Shroud of Turin was a hoax perpetrated by Da Vinci to convince the church to stop persecuting alchemists/scientists because their skills could be used to bring more people to the church fold.
>>18264926Not a hoax. It's the most studied artifact in the world and all experts agree that it is genuine, even atheist and jewish scientists who conducted studies on it have had to admit it.The shroud cannot be reproduced with modern technology today. And supposing somehow a medieval hoaxer did it with medieval technology, he would have had to have predicted the invention of modern photography centuries before, because only when we got the photographic negatives was the image revealed.The image is not paint, ink, or burns. It's a molecular alteration only 2-4 microns thick. It also encodes 3D information which was recently used by AI to produce a rendering of what Christ actually looked like.And besides, the shroud has been in private collection since the time of Jesus, it was not on public display and only donated to the Catholic church in the 1980s. So it's not even a Catholic relic.
>>18264976>all experts agree that it is genuine, even atheist and jewish scientists who conducted studies on it have had to admit it.No, not true at all, I got the Da Vinci narrative from experts on religious hoaxes of antiquity, if what you were saying was true, that narrative wouldn't even exist.>he would have had to have predicted the invention of modern photography centuries beforeNo, it was crafted in the 14th century AD while the first mention of camera obscura technology was in the 4th century BC text Mozi.>of what Christ actually looked like.Except that its what a young Da Vinci looked like and you can see his other self portaits to see the resemblance.>The image is not paint, ink, or burns. Because he blasted light at it so that it stained, but didn't didn't burn.>And besides, the shroud has been in private collection since the time of JesusNo, the first verifiable account of its mention isn't until 1390AD.>So it's not even a Catholic relic.The Savoy family who are the first documented owners of the shroud were definitely connected to the catholic church and used the shroud as a marketing gimmick to build a new church.
>forcing yourself to believe in jewish fairytales written by literal ancient grifters from the bronze age who fooled people for power, bread and pussy that they spoke in the name of god.Get the fuck out of here.
>>18264976>Not a hoaxNeither are the holy foreskins, nobody would ever successfully hoax for religious purposes, God wouldn't let them since it would be a violation of free will to allow someone to get fooled by a hoax.
>>18265002>experts on religious hoaxes of antiquitythe "experts" who make a living by calling artifacts hoaxes also called the shroud a hoax, and made money doing it, surprise!>camera obscura technologythat described basic optics, not modern photography technology. Grasping at straws.>Because he blasted light at it so that it stainedSo a medieval forger just blasted 34 trillion watts of UV laser in a few nanoseconds, something that cannot even be done today.The shroud is covered in real human blood and marks on the image showing a man who was whipped, crowned with thorns, and crucified, matching the descriptions of the crucifixion from the bible.>Enea scientists warn, "it should be noted that the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion watts makes it impractical today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single laser excimer, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market come to several billion watts )”.>The Savoy family who are the first documented owners of the shroudNo. It's documented that it was held in France in the possession of a French crusader then later transferred to the Savoy family.>connected to the catholic churchThat's not how it works. The Catholic church has official relics. The Shroud of Turin is not a Catholic relic.So your claim is that a medieval hoaxer literally tortured and crucified somebody, wrapped them in a shroud once they were dead, then using an unknown advanced medieval light blasting technology that we don't have today somehow forged a molecular image a few microns thick on the surface of the shroud for an audience 800 years in the future when his purpose was actually to convince Catholics of his time period to stop persecuting alchemists. Got it.
>>18265146>surpriseYes, it would be "surprising" to someone who just claimed that literally nobody disagrees that it is genuine.>that described basic optics, not modern photography technology.He didn't use semiconductors like modern photography, he used basic optics and lenses, maybe a bit of chemistry to sundye the pigments a bit easier.>So a medieval forger just blasted 34 trillion watts of UV laser in a few nanosecondsNo, you don't need nearly that much energy to sunstain a piece of cloth.>instantlyThere is your bad assumption, it didn't have to happen in a few nanoseconds, that is just some magical thinking bullshit to justify some other magical thinking bullshit.>No. It's documented that it was held in France in the possession of a French crusader then later transferred to the Savoy family.Then why can't you name this person, do you just not understand what documentation means?>The Shroud of Turin is not a Catholic relic.Its pretty sad that your originally claimed that all experts agree on its authenticity of the shroud only to admit that none of the catholic church experts actually endorses its authenticity.>So your claim is that a medieval hoaxer literally tortured and crucified somebodyNo, you are hallucinating, nobody said that.>for an audience 800 years in the future Nope another hallucination.>medieval light blasting technology that we don't have today We still have magnifying lenses today, though.You just keep making up absolute bullshit to make any counter argument seem more extreme than saying a magician did it with magic.
>>18264976>>18265002>>18265146>>18265169>reddit spacing
>>18264452It’s not about being true, it’s about you having faith in its truth. It being true is completely irrelevant because it’s not an epistemic object for you to study, it’s a mode of being. No evidence whatsoever would convince you of God’s existence if you don’t already have faith.
>>18265255There are three modes of being.DependentIndependentInterdependentEveryone starts out dependent. Then, as they become more capable, they become independent, and are challenged with hubris. If they choose to remain independent, they must learn to manipulate others to achieve the same rewards as the superior interdependent mode, which seeks symbiosis, not manipulation. Hubris eventually leads to nemesis, as the interdependent symbiotic egregore will locate the rebellious Gamma particle, and either incorporate it, or destroy it. Also, because the Gamma is finite and mortal, and the interdependent egregore is infinite and immortal, the gamma will eventually dissipate, even if ignored, due to the entropy that all independent organisms face.
>>18265580I didn’t understand
>>18265604>>18265580This is not a good parable, because gamma waves are not particles, and they are not subject to entropy. Also, if Jesus is the light of the world, then he would be some kind of independent gamma wave here.
>>18265642You’re too schizo for me.
>>18265668You might be autistic. Researchers like Bernard Crespi and Christopher Badcock, claim that schizophrenia and autism are opposites on a spectrum.
>>18265255Not caring whether your beliefs are really true is really a big part of the zeitgeist among intellectual theists. And also surprisingly common among normies, who when pressed about God etc. will say things like "it's my truth but may not be true for everyone." It's utilitarian to them, whatever works. But to most atheists this is a very strange and even repulsive way of thinking.
>>18266120It’s not repulsive at all. I prefer surviving than dying the brutal snowstorm outside. Also I’m convinced.
>>18264219>>18264251>>18264434>>18264469>>18265642Please go back to Mexico.
>>18266201I’m not mexican
