It is extremely bizzare that Christians, as a response to the claim that their religion is a human invention, are now making the argument that Christianity is true because it is useful, i.e it is "good" for society or it gives people "meaning" (that is, it makes them feel good to believe it).Whether or not this is true, it is a bad argument. Not only does the utility of a doctrine have no necessary connection to its truth, but if Christianity were a human invention we would expect it to serve some personal or societal utility.
>>18458438The only reason we learn anything at all is for personal benefit. Religion is a way of encoding prosocial behaviors into a set of rules, often taught through legal codes, psalms, wisdom literature, and narratives. The reason why we even pray to the gods is for personal favor, in this case we want to be blessed by Jesus, or the Lord God more specifically. If God created everything, then neither prayer nor knowledge nor anything else is actually necessary for him to accomplish his will. But since the actual laws of God are simply the laws of nature, we are left now with the issue of human existence within civilization and how we can all live well in a political society. Is it true? It could be. It could also not be. So what? Christ might have risen from the dead. So what? Jesus rising from the dead is a demonstration of supernatural power, but it's done to increase faith, which is less about you getting to the afterlife and about how you act in this life. God is awfully concerned with mortal affairs if he's going to destroy the world.
>>18458438literally nobody has ever said this
>>18458446Look up something like "Atheism can't provide meaning" or "Atheism is bad for society" or "Christianity provides meaning" or "Christianiy is good for society" etc.You will find countless people making this "argument".
>>18458446it's an argument brought up all the time. your lame attempt at gaslighting looks a lot like ignorance from here.
