>>50
2/3 of humanity are soulless hylics who follow the archon script

>>50
We as a species have a general vanity about ourselves, that we surely are something not just special but divine and magical compared to the meek creatures of the earth.

Couple this with promises of afterlife, immortality, favors, fortune and divine intervention with our actual lives and people who still secretly want Santa Claus to be real choose god.

We are the most advanced things on Earth’s surface for sure but we are creatures of Mother Nature like anything else alive. We won’t truly be extraordinary beings until we colonize the galaxy IMO. We’ll have to make reality the way we want it, make ourselves immortal biologically and/or digitally. We think we are so much better than other life but we still get sick with lowly viruses and parasites, we still choke on little gummy candies, slip and hit our heads on tables, what we want to be is not what these frail bodies are. Before science and tech the best we could do was literally pray and hope that there was something more to life than this, that a god would give us purpose and protection and endless life. People don’t wanna contemplate that we basically have to become the gods we want to be but have do it through technology rather than prayer. Technology is not a religion or god, it is humanity making what was naturally utterly impossible now possible

You only want the beer and the alcohol and the sports and the tattoos and the 4th of July barbeque and the videogames and the makeup and the porn and the beach.

Nothing in your life.

No values. No ethics.

No conscience.

No thinking about who you are or where you are headed.

No time outs to evaluate what you've done right or wrong, nothing.

EMPTY HEADS. Many of you people have empty heads. That's why you always lose. And even the gentile who tries to teach you, you call him incel, racist, conspiracist. You take bribes,and say "being smart has no place in our modern democracy". You are a lost cause.

>>53
Hey, atleast were not jews

>>53
This nigga needs to wake up and realise asheknazi jews are the enemy Not the goyim
Same with matan
Asheknazim are the fake demon jews created by satan
They started the war in palestine and now they try to larp as le good jews
They are a souless demons
They want to backstab mizrahim and etopian jew like they did to Germany in ww1
A nation of snakes

>>50
>>why Amerimutts believe in god?

>"People don't die for a lie"

1) They do. Unless you want to apply that same argument to, say, the Baha'i or their teacher, or to Joseph Smith, or countless others. History is full of it. The complexities of the human psyche (pride, valuing honor above life, wanting to protect one's family from further dishonor, wanting to be martyred, believing the lie is a pious one or a metaphorical truth worth dying for) absolutely allow for it, so that it's not even necessary arguing for it having actually ever happened (it has, though) as it is still infinitely more likely than a resurrection.

2) The (propagandistic and wildly unreliable) texts that yahwists accept cites two people dying and does not make it clear why they were killed. In the story, Stephen apparently dies for defending orthodox judaism and claims to have a vision of the "son of man" (a name for a supreme angel or agent of creation in late second temple judaism, often a synonym for the cosmic embodiment of the jewish people, the messiah, or the logos of greek thought). In that same work of fiction, a James is said to have been killed, without further details. To clarify: none of the gruesome killings of direct eyewitnesses who refused to recant exist in any source that the yahwist accept. For instance, the quo vadis domine thing that yahwists basedjak over is from the apocryphal acts of Peter, a book that contains talking dogs, the resurrection of a smoked fish, and a flying wizard battle.

Just nutted

>>56
My turn
"Muh criterion
of embarassment"

1) Embarassing elements surely haven't deterred non-eyewitnesses for converting any more than they deter people today from converting.

2) People use these embarassing passages as proof that the story must be true. Why assume that the person who invented the story didn't place them there for that reason?

3) Some of them serve an obvious purpose: Peter's denial of Jesus reassures people before the possibility of faltering. Thomas' doubt is meant as a self-insert device (even the doubters ended up believing) and an obvious prelude to the gaslight-tier "response" to the obvious counter argument: "ok well Thomas was given some proof, but it's actually better to believe without proof". And so on and so forth.

4) Texts that the yahwist admits are fabricated contain obviously embarassing passages (Infancy Gospel of Thomas is one). Yet they are made up. Whether all embarassing passages are devices, or simply boil down to the author not being very smart, everyone can have their opinion I guess.