/lit/ - Literature

>>21717621
There's no convincing reason why the divinity of Jesus Christ can't be pluralistically granted to other people throughout history.
The Word of God did not exist until far after humans began existing, there is no reason why the people before deserve to suffer in hell, nor the people who have never heard of it, nor people like Ghandi, Guru Nanak, or others who by all accounts appear to be extremely moral people despite not being Christian.
The content of the Bible cannot be trusted due to the long and now well documented history of it's editing, despite it's claim that those who do alter it will go to hell.
God can't make an object so heavy that he himself can't lift it.
Choosing when to apply logic to the qualities of God and when applying logic would be illogical makes for a relativistic God.
That the universe is "finely-tuned" is biased by the instruments which determine this quality within it. It's like saying 1 is still equal to 1.
Men are due to suffer since they are in sin but animals suffer horribly at random as well.
Carbon dating and the geologic record prove the Earth is older than 6000 years, or 1000 years, or 3000 years.
"Visions" or "hallucinations" of Jesus speaking to you in your head are active imaginations, and the work in depth psychology done in the 20th century has a bed of evidence through thousands of documented case studies of dream work which identify patterns pointing to a person's perception of their life-narrative. This process can also be applied to seemingly unintelligible schizophrenics.
There is no bottom-up method whatever for evaluating Christian visions within it's own set of beliefs which do not determine one set of beliefs over another due to the phenomenon of the underdetermination of theory by data. There is no empirically adequate standard or data for these beliefs which can't be otherwise interpreted.
Christianity is not argued by an arguable majority of scholars as a "coherentist" belief system but a foundationalist system. Foundationalist systems fail because at their bottom is an axiom they take to be true, which they have no reason to believe but which they are obliged to provide because the onus of proof falls on the statement maker in sentential-logic.
Children are not instinctively drawn to believe in the Christian God until they are told.
Children believing in "spiritualistic" phenomena from a young age have a variety of options to choose from.
Why would God be all-loving if the vast majority of all living things suffer, and the vast majority of humans suffering the worst fate imaginable for all of eternity?
Why is God all-present if he is separate from the universe?
Why is God all-powerful if he has to send prophets in illogical, unconvincing ways to spread his message and combat the devil, yet can't even reveal himself to us in any true way?
Why is God all-knowing if we have free-will to make independent choices?
If we don't have free will why are we held responsible for our actions?