CarlZunker.com

Responses

1. 

   clubschadenfreude

   July 23, 2025

   Curius how nothign shows that christains are any better off than anyone else. and it’s rather amusing to see a christian lie about atheists when they claim to worshp a god that hates lies and liars.”By their own beliefs, atheists must base all their beliefs on human knowledge. This is a system that’s still fumbling through questions we barely understand. We don’t know how consciousness works. We haven’t cracked the origin of life. We constantly publish articles declaring that we’re “close” to some breakthrough, that we’ve “unlocked” the next great truth, that we’re the “masters of our creation.” This is the same source of knowledge (from man) that believed lobotomies were a good solution for mental illnesses.”No evidence for your god, so how is this different? You christians can’t even agree on which version of your god is the right one. And strange how your bible says that bird blood is a “good solution” for skin diseases. and your bible hasno problem with slavery and genocide, so it does seem that someone who lives is a glass house is throwing stones.”We keep trying to decode the universe, only to discover again and again that we don’t understand it. And worse, we don’t understand ourselves. Our eyes do not see. Our ears do not hear.”

   again, a nice lie. Unsurprisngly, we discover again and again new things about it and why it is why it is. We also understand humans quite well too, with anthropology, psychology, etc.

   “I do not understand the passion of atheists. If they are right, there is nothing in which to hope. There is no meaning. No purpose. Nothing after this life.”Yep, more complete nonsense. If atheists are right, there is still hope, there is still meaning and there is still purpose. An afterlife isn’t required at all. None of these things requires your god. We don’t need rescued. Christians invent lies that they claim we must be rescued from, trying to sell their “cure” for our maladies.

   “It could be rebellion disguised as logic, a desire for personal autonomy, a desire for moral autonomy, pain masquerading as philosophy, the problem of evil and suffering, a deep desire for sin, not wanting to change, faith in science as a savior, or 1,000 other reasons.”Curious how it is generally not a single one of these things. It is because there is no evidence for your claims. We don’t believe you for the same reasons you reject other religions: no evidence.and I’m sorry you can’t show that you 100% love your wife. I can do that with the love I have for my spouse. And if 50% of people get divorced, that says nothing about everyone not loving their spouse. Only 50% would. “There is an idea (Pascal’s Wager) that many atheists dislike and dismiss as manipulative or lazy.  I believe they dislike it and dismiss it because it’s a devastating argument.  It goes something like this: If Christianity is true, then it is the most important truth in human history. Eternity is real. Salvation is real. Your soul is eternal.If Christianity is false, and I still choose to follow Jesus, I’ve lived a life shaped by love, discipline, forgiveness, purpose, and hope. I’ve lost nothing.”

   not a “devasting argument” at all, only a very silly lazy one. There is no one version of christianity, so you christians can’t even agree on that and know you have the right one. You have no truth at all. even if your god was real, I’d still not worship it, so pascal’s wager has no impact on me. And considering how many people live a life shaped by love, discipline, forgiveness, purpose and hope, and aren’t christians, you still have nothing special. Waht you do have is wasting your time and resources on what you can’t show exists. It also amuses me that pascal’s wager simply has people believing “just in case” and no true worship or love is there at all, just fear.

   “If atheism is true, and there is nothing after this life, then none of this matters. Not your love. Not your pain. Not your legacy. You simply disappear.And if atheism is false, and God is real, then you’ve gambled your entire existence and lost everything for eternity.”

   Yep, more false claims. If atheism is true, then everything matters since there is nothing but this life. My love and pain still matter. And it is always amusing how desperate christains are to have a “legacy”, aka people remember them. People will remember me. My existence has effected all of existence. I don’t need some false promises to make that happen. Your cult requires you to lie and try to scare people into it. Happily, your sadistic fantasies will never come true.

   “I’ll take the side that offers meaning now and hope forever.The side that doesn’t shift every time human knowledge “updates.”The side that holds up, even in suffering.The side that costs me nothing but gives me everything.”curious how it doesn’t offer hope at all since agian, you can’t your claims to be true.

   Christainity has repeatedly changed so all you have are “updates” on what your god “really” meant. Curious how christains don’t hold up in suffering any better than anyone else, still suffering, still starving, still dyign while their god’s promises fail. and it does cost you since you waste time on what you can’t show as true.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   1. 

      carlzunker

      July 24, 2025

      Clubschadenfreude,
      Thank you for taking the time to engage with my post. I took a moment to look through some of your other comments and content, and it gave me a clearer sense of where you’re coming from. Your username (Schadenfreude) is the German word for taking pleasure in others’ misfortune. That feels, unfortunately, consistent with the tone of your comments. There’s a deep unhappiness that comes through in your writing.
      So first and foremost, I want to say this: if you’re dealing with hurt or anger, especially from past experiences with Christians or the church, I’m truly sorry. Your pain shows, and I have, and will continue to pray for you. That said, your response wasn’t written to encourage discussion. It was rude, dismissive, and read more like a declaration of moral superiority than a meaningful challenge.
      Worse, your arguments are not very good. It’s clear you haven’t seriously engaged with Christian thought, history, or theology. Instead, it seems you’ve elevated your personal experiences and assumptions to the level of gospel truth (for yourself, at least).
      Instead of trying to initiate any type of back and forth (because, again, it’s clear you have not done the mental work up front), I am just going to address your claims. Even if there was merit in any of them, you managed to rub off the sharp edges by trying to be overly aggressive, so thank you for that.
      “Curius how nothign shows that christains are any better off than anyone else” (sorry, I copied the spelling errors over for you).
      There’s no claim in this post that Christians are “better off” in some comparative sense of personal merit (while I do have posts that reference meta-analysis research that shows religious people are happier and more satisfied with their lives, super easy google search). My point here is that Christianity offers a coherent framework for meaning, morality, and hope. That doesn’t mean Christians are always better behaved. In fact, Scripture makes clear that we are not saved by merit. As for lying, disagreement is not lying, and is honestly just a cowardly way of saying you don’t agree. I didn’t fabricate atheist positions; I engaged with the philosophical implications of a worldview that denies objective purpose or eternal significance. If you think I’ve misunderstood something, I’m open to correction, but not to being called a liar for stating what I (and many others) believe to be logically consistent.
      “No evidence for your god, so how is this different? You christians can’t even agree on which version of your god is the right one.”
      The existence of disagreement among Christians doesn’t disprove God’s existence. It proves human fallibility. And most Christian-based religions agree on a very large amount of topics. There are, of course, disagreements on baptism, confession, young vs. old earth, and things like that. I like to say that they are interesting, but not compelling. Jesus is compelling. But there is a lot of inconsistency in science with disagreement about theories and ideas. Those inconsistencies don’t invalidate the pursuit of truth for science or theology. As for “no evidence,” that’s not a statement of fact, it’s a claim based on your own epistemology. Many of us see abundant evidence for God in design, conscience, moral law, Scripture, and personal experience. You may reject that evidence, but to pretend it doesn’t exist at all is intellectually dishonest.
      “Your bible says that bird blood is a ‘good solution’ for skin diseases. and your bible has no problem with slavery and genocide…”
      Out-of-context shots at ancient texts are easy. Understanding ancient law in its historical, philosophical, and theological setting is harder. The laws in Leviticus were ceremonial and symbolic, not modern dermatology. They reflected spiritual truths about cleanliness and separation from sin, not best medical practices. Try reading The Drama of Scripture by Bartholomew and Goheen to get an understanding of how the Bible is a complete story, not just a collection of tales. It really helps to understand how to frame our understanding of Scripture.
      Regarding slavery and judgment, Scripture does not celebrate slavery; it regulates it in ancient contexts, and the trajectory of Scripture undermines slavery’s moral foundation over time. Also, biblical slavery was more akin to indentured servitude or a work contract than what we think of today as chattel slavery. It was economic servitude, very much like we practice today for a paycheck every week or two instead of food, shelter, and debt relief then. It was not about ownership, it was about survival, and the Bible gave guidance on how to treat slaves (spoiler alert: they were supposed to be treated well and dealt with fairly).
      As for divine judgment (which you’re calling genocide), it’s only a moral problem if you assume there’s a moral law. But regarding atheism, where does that standard come from? Regardless, yes, God is our ultimate judge. And with those judgments, not one righteous person was destroyed. Look at Genesis 18:22–23. Abraham intercedes with God on behalf of Sodom. He appeals to God’s justice and asks God to spare the city for the sake of the righteous within it. I do not get the impression that you are very familiar with the Bible, so I’ll give you the TLDR: Abraham started at 50, but then haggled down to 10 righteous men. Turns out there were zero. God judges, but he does so justly.
      “again, a nice lie. Unsurprisngly, we discover again and again new things about it and why it is why it is. We also understand humans quite well too, with anthropology, psychology, etc.”
      If it’s a “lie,” you’ll need to do more than just declare it. Saying “we discover new things” is a deflection, not a rebuttal. Yes, science and human knowledge evolve. That’s not in dispute. But changing explanations don’t equal ultimate truth. You’re pointing to the fact that we keep revising our understanding as if that proves something. It doesn’t. In fact, it supports my point: human knowledge is limited, fragmented, and constantly in flux. That’s exactly why I don’t place my ultimate hope in it. And as for understanding humans “quite well”—we’re the most self-deceptive species on the planet. We still can’t agree on what a man or a woman is. So forgive me if I don’t find anthropology and psychology to be the high ground you think they are.
      “Yep, more complete nonsense. If atheists are right, there is still hope, there is still meaning and there is still purpose. An afterlife isn’t required at all. None of these things requires your god. We don’t need rescued. Christians invent lies that they claim we must be rescued from, trying to sell their ‘cure’ for our maladies.”
      Sure, you can feel hope, meaning, and purpose. But in atheism, these are subjective constructs. You might enjoy the illusion, but if life ends in nonexistence, and the universe itself is headed for heat death, then “purpose” is temporary, local, and ultimately indifferent. That’s not an insult. It’s a philosophical conclusion: no external source of meaning = no ultimate meaning. That’s not saying your life is worthless, it’s saying your framework can’t ground what your heart longs for.

      “Curious how it is generally not a single one of these things. It is because there is no evidence for your claims. We don’t believe you for the same reasons you reject other religions: no evidence.and I’m sorry you can’t show that you 100% love your wife. I can do that with the love I have for my spouse. And if 50% of people get divorced, that says nothing about everyone not loving their spouse. Only 50% would. “

      Curious how you use the word curious a LOT, when you don’t seem curious at all. Regardless, you’re confusing subjective certainty with objective proof. Love, like faith, can be deeply known without being reducible to data. I don’t need to “prove” I love my wife to you, and you don’t need to prove your love to me. But I wouldn’t say your love isn’t real just because I can’t measure it (although I am so curious (myself) about how you can “do that” yourself). That’s the inconsistency in your critique. You demand scientific proof for God while making metaphysical claims about love, legacy, meaning, and purpose that can’t be scientifically verified either.

      “not a “devasting argument” at all, only a very silly lazy one. There is no one version of christianity, so you christians can’t even agree on that and know you have the right one. You have no truth at all. even if your god was real, I’d still not worship it, so pascal’s wager has no impact on me. And considering how many people live a life shaped by love, discipline, forgiveness, purpose and hope, and aren’t christians, you still have nothing special. Waht you do have is wasting your time and resources on what you can’t show exists. It also amuses me that pascal’s wager simply has people believing “just in case” and no true worship or love is there at all, just fear.”

      The argument of Pascal’s Wager isn’t designed to manipulate, it’s meant to expose the risk of dismissing eternity without full consideration. If you say you wouldn’t worship God even if He were real, then you’ve confirmed the very premise I laid out in the article: your rejection isn’t intellectual, it’s moral and personal. That’s your right, but don’t pretend it’s just about logic. Also, many people outside Christianity may reflect admirable virtues, but that’s not the point. The gospel isn’t a prize for good behavior. It’s a rescue for everyone, including the self-assured.

      “Yep, more false claims. If atheism is true, then everything matters since there is nothing but this life. My love and pain still matter. And it is always amusing how desperate Christians are to have a ‘legacy,’ aka people remember them. People will remember me. My existence has affected all of existence. I don’t need some false promises to make that happen. Your cult requires you to lie and try to scare people into it. Happily, your sadistic fantasies will never come true.”

      If atheism were true, then yes, this life is all you would have. But “mattering” is still limited by time, memory, and entropy. You can believe your life affects everything, but only within a closed system that’s dying. That’s not bitterness. That’s just physics. And as for legacy, I’m not interested in being remembered. I’m interested in truth. I believe the gospel not because it benefits me socially, emotionally, or historically. Simply because I believe it’s true. If I’m wrong, I lose nothing. If you’re wrong, you lose everything. But just like you “know” you love your wife, I know God is real. There is proof, but you don’t have eyes to see or ears to hear. I am truly sorry for that.

      “Christainity has repeatedly changed so all you have are “updates” on what your god “really” meant. Curious how christains don’t hold up in suffering any better than anyone else, still suffering, still starving, still dyign while their god’s promises fail. and it does cost you since you waste time on what you can’t show as true.”

      You’re conflating the evolution of church culture with the changelessness of God’s nature. Christian traditions may have shifted in application or emphasis, but Scripture itself has been remarkably consistent. As for suffering, Christianity never promised an escape from it, but meaning in it. That’s why we follow a crucified Savior. The fact that Christians still suffer is not evidence against God. It’s evidence that the Bible was honest about the cost of faith from the beginning.

      This, I think, may be longer than my original post, but I think it is important. If I was an atheist, and I wanted to really challenge religion (or my own personal beliefs), I would read everything I could. It seems like you have cherry picked some very worn out tropes, and use them to “bash” the “enemy” instead of trying to see things from the perspective of others. I am open to any book, any blog, any discussion that helps me understand atheism, agnosticism, or mysticism, because those are the people that need the Word. I am not going to save you. You seem to have hardened your heart. Try to appreciate the journey of this life by giving people grace, open your ears and heart to their position. I try to do that as much as I can, but its hard to do when someone comports themselves like you. With that said, I have no ill will towards you, in fact I hope Jesus pours his blessings upon you in a mighty and undeniable way. Not because I get “points” for getting you on “my side”, but because I genuinely think heaven will be better with you there.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      1. 

         clubschadenfreude

         July 24, 2025

         You can call me Vel.

         I’m glad you took the time to look at other things I’ve written. So many fail to do that.

         Yep, schadenfreude does mean that, and if you read my “boss’s office” post you know how I interpret it. Unsurprisingly, no “deep unhappiness”, just the attempts by a Christian to gaslight
         me. It shouldn’t surprise me that so many Christians choose to lie, but it occastionally does.

         No hurt, no anger. Those are typical false claims by Christians who need to pretend that no one can leave the religion unless it is for emotional reasons. So your attemps to claim that my “pain shows” is no more than you making up a false claim.

         Do pray for me, Carl, since that underlines just how Christianity fails. Per the bible, a true follower of jesus will get any prayer answered with what is asked for and quickly. I’ve had literally hundreds of Christians of all versions praying for me to agree with them over the last 30+ years and not one has succeeded.

         If you think I’m wrong, then explain why. That I have shown your religion’s failings isn’t rude or dismissive. Again, unsurprisingly, I wrote nothing about moral superiority, just how your religion isn’t what is claimed.

         If you cannot show how I’m wrong, it does seem that my arguments are indeed very good. I was a christain and am very familiar with the many versions of it, the history and theology. It’s hilarious how you can’t show that any of your religion’s claims is “truth” at all.

         Again, if I’m wrong, then show it. That’s what a back and forth is.

         You say you haven’t claimed that christains are better off, but here you do:

         “n Christ, you can be both. You can be anchored in truth and filled with joy. Not a fragile happiness that depends on circumstances, but a deep, rooted peace that holds even when nothing else does.
         That’s something atheism can’t offer.”
         The research that shows religious people are happier show that it isn’t the religion but the community, so Christianity does not make anyone any happier.

         Every religion provides a “coherent framework for meaning, morality, and hope” so do most if not all worldviews, like stoicism, epicureanism, etc. So saying that one religion does what all do shows that your religion isn’t anything special.

         Christians can’t agree how they are saved, so you do have a problem there when it comes to having any “truth”.

         You are right, disagreement isn’t lying. Lying is when you make false claims for your benefit, and you have. Atheism isn’t nihilism, no matter how many times a christain tries to make that claim. You engaged with nothing more than the typical false claims of a theist. No need for any objective purpose or eternal significance. Us atheists have plenty of purpose, meaning, etc. Appeals to popularity fallacies also don’t make your claims true.

         Again, that christains can’t agree shows that they each worship a different god, and no, they can’t show that any of them exist. Christians religions don’t agree on “a very large amount of topics”. They disagree on: who is saved, how is someone saved, how to interpret the bible, free will vs predestination, what morals their god wants, what their god considers to be a sin, what baptism does and how to do it, what heaven and hell are, etc etc.

         These are all major doctrinal differences. Christians consider them that too since I can walk past a dozen churches to work and not one agrees with the next and the attendees would never think of attending a different church. You have no one jesus since each of you claims it wants something different.

         Yep, there is a lot of inconsistency in the sciences, and scientists aren’t telling people that only they are correct and they’ll kill you if you don’t agree. Showing inconsistency is what science does. Nothing invalidates the search for truth, but plenty of things invalidate false claims.

         There is no evidence for your claims is indeed a statement of fact. Christains can’t even agree on what they consider to be evidence. Many theists see “abundant evidence” for their particular god in reality, conscience, moral law, their holy books, and personal experience. And not onen can show that their god exists, just like you.

         You reject the personal experience of other theists. You reject their gods and I suspect it is because of the same reason: no evidence.

         No evidence for “design”. If your god did “design” things, it was either incompetent or malicious since it managed to “choose” a constant to make the sun give us and animals cancer. You will likely claim that the “fall” is responsible, but that would mean you have literally no idea what your god actually intended, and claims of “design” fail.

         No universal conscience or objective morality either. Christians themselves can’t agree on what morals their god wants.

         The reference to bird’s blood isn’t out of context at all, so it’s great to see you lie about that. Your bible was written by ignorant human beings, who reflected their culture, not some god. The laws in Leviticus are not “ceremonial” or symbolic, and your jesus says all of his/his fathers laws are to be followed, no exceptions. Christians do hate that, and do thir best to avoid having to follow the ignorant and inconvenient laws in the OT.

         The laws in Leviticus were the “best medical practices” of an ignorant culture who believed in magic. The bible has nothing about the germ theory, though that would have saved millions. It talks about religoius purity, not cleanliness.

         The bible isn’t a complete story, but a set of books that were largely never meant to be together. It is just a collection of stories and that’s why there are so many contradictions in them.

         Unfortunately, for you, I’ve read the bible and I know you are lying about it. This god had no problem in saying no shrimp and kill adulterers but just couldn’t get it up to say no slavery.

         Scripture does not undermine slavery at all. In 1 Peter 2, it says that slaves should never seek their freedom. Curious how it took the abolitionists to ignore their bible to resist slavery.

         And you also lie about slavery not being chattel slavery. The only non chattel slavery is for Israelites. Your god is quite clear in that:

         “39 If any who are dependent on you become so impoverished that they sell themselves to you, you shall not make them serve as slaves. 40 They shall remain with you as hired or bound labourers. They shall serve with you until the year of the jubilee. 41 Then they and their children with them shall be free from your authority; they shall go back to their own family and return to their ancestral property. 42 For they are my servants, whom I brought out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as slaves are sold. 43 You shall not rule over them with harshness, but shall fear your God.
         44 As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. 45 You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. 46 You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property. These you may treat as slaves, but as for your fellow Israelites, no one shall rule over the other with harshness.” Leviticus 25

         Genocide is genocide, by your god or not. It’s a moral problem since I have morals, even if they are subjective. Morality is from humans, and nope, there is no standard. Since christains can’t agree on what morals their god wants, you have no standard either. You each make up what you want, and then claim your god agrees with you and only you. Sadly, not one of you can support that claim.

         Your god murders children, dear. No way to get around that, and if there is objective morality, then your god breaks it. You will likely claim that your god doesn’t have to follow the morals it supposedly gave us, which means they aren’t objective. BTW, your god never gave morality to humans, even per the bible. Eve took it.

         The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is great. First we Abraham who raped his servant to have a child. Then we have Lot who offers his daughters up to a crowd to rape. God kills Lot’s wife for no reason. And when the cities are destroyed, Lot’s daughters rape him to have children sicne their god didn’t make it clear that the entire world wasn’t being destroyed.

         That your god can be “haggled” with shows that your god isn’t omnipotent or omniscient. It’s just another ignorant bronze/iron age god invented by humans.

         Killing someone for the actions of another isn’t just, and your god shows just how unjust it is when it kills people who didn’t do anything wrong or had any control over the situation.

         It’s a lie since it is a false claim that you tell for your own benefit. We do know things about humans, despite your lie: “We keep trying to decode the universe, only to discover again and again that we don’t understand it. And worse, we don’t understand ourselves. Our eyes do not see. Our ears do not hear.””

         You keep claiming we don’t understand the universe, but surprise we do, and you even admit it “Yes, science and human knowledge evolve.” That’s the opposite of “We keep trying to decode the universe, only to discover again and again that we don’t understand it. “

         It’s typical for a Christian to try to retcon his failures. You didn’t say this initially “In fact, it supports my point: human knowledge is limited, fragmented, and constantly in flux.” You said ““We keep trying to decode the universe, only to discover again and again that we don’t understand it. “”

         It’s always nice to see just how hypocritical Christians can be. You have no problem with human progress when it makes you comfy, but you certainly hate it when it shows your religion to be false. There is hope in reality, none with a god you can’t produce.

         Yep, humans can be self-deceptive, and that’s why we invented things to help us not be that. A man and a woman are determined by who they want to be. A male and a female are determined by sex chromosomes. You are typically ignorant of both psychology and anthropology so what you think about them is of no interest.

         You have failed with pascal’s wager. It’s always great when christains try to claim atheists have no hope, meaning, etc, and when their lies are pointed out, they have to recant. Yep, things are subjective, and you have yet to show your lies are objective. Purpose is indeed temporary and local. It is not “ultimately indifferent”, that’s just the christain lie told to scare people appealing to the human need for attention. How childish.

         No need for “ultimate meaning” and surprise, you can’t show it even exists. I have what my “heart longs for” without your cult. I don’t need any “grounding”. That is again just a false claim meant to scare people in to the cult.

         Yep, I do use the word curious a lot. So? I find it interesting, e.g curious how Christians fail. As always, you can’t show your god exists at all so no objective proof of anything. Your claims are based on a presupposition that has nothing to support it. Faith exists, your god doesn’t.

         Love is demonstrable and real. Your god isn’t. I don’t make “metaphysical claims”, so again you fail.
         ROFL. Pascal’s wager is designed to try to scare people into the cult. There is no evidence for any “eternity” only the impotent threats of a religion. It’s also great how you try to lie about my rejection of your god. It is indeed intellectual since again, you have no evidence for it. I don’t believe in things with no evidence and thus I “reject” them. If your god existed, then I would indeed be rejecting it for personal reasons. So you are trying to conflate two different things. It is about logic since your god, no matter what it is, doesn’t exist.

         It’s great when christains fail like this “Also, many people outside Christianity may reflect admirable virtues, but that’s not the point. The gospel isn’t a prize for good behavior. It’s a rescue for everyone, including the self-assured.”

         Curiosu how it is the point since you claim that Christianity gives you this: “If Christianity is false, and I still choose to follow Jesus, I’ve lived a life shaped by love, discipline, forgiveness, purpose, and hope. I’ve lost nothing.””

         Your claim was shown wrong and now you must try to pretend you didn’t make it.
         Yep, mattering is limited by time,memory, etc. Again, it is notable how desperate christains are to be “remembered”. Why? And no, you aren’t interestedin the truth. If you were, then you would not lie repeatedly. You indeed believe your version of the “gospel” is true, like every theist. That doesn’t make it true. You try pascal’s wager yet again and it still fails hilariously.

         AS for the whole “eyes to see” thing, curious how jesus says that, and it’s when he is saying his god has already chosen who it will allow to accept it, and then it damns the rest for no action of their own. Poof goes free will.
         No, I’m not conflating the evolution of church culture with changes in christainity. Christianity, and all of its many, many versions, has changed insisting that this god didn’t really mean “x” when they want “y”. Scripture may be consistent but the interpretations of it aren’t. Jesus promises that he/his father will provide all that is needed: “22 He said to his disciples, ‘Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat, or about your body, what you will wear. 23 For life is more than food, and the body more than clothing. 24 Consider the ravens: they neither sow nor reap, they have neither storehouse nor barn, and yet God feeds them. Of how much more value are you than the birds! 25 And can any of you by worrying add a single hour to your span of life? 26 If then you are not able to do so small a thing as that, why do you worry about the rest? 27 Consider the lilies, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin;[e] yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not clothed like one of these. 28 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more will he clothe you—you of little faith! 29 And do not keep striving for what you are to eat and what you are to drink, and do not keep worrying. 30 For it is the nations of the world that strive after all these things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31 Instead, strive for his[f] kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well.” Luke 12

         “You who live in the shelter of the Most High,
         who abide in the shadow of the Almighty,[a]
         2 will say to the Lord, ‘My refuge and my fortress;
         my God, in whom I trust.’
         3 For he will deliver you from the snare of the fowler
         and from the deadly pestilence;
         4 he will cover you with his pinions,
         and under his wings you will find refuge;
         his faithfulness is a shield and buckler.
         5 You will not fear the terror of the night,
         or the arrow that flies by day,
         6 or the pestilence that stalks in darkness,
         or the destruction that wastes at noonday.” Psalm 91

         curious how Christians starve to death. Curious how christains are beheaded. So much for the bible being “honest about the cause of faith”.
         Being an atheist, I have read everything I could, and surprise, the claims of christinaity and its apologists fail at every turn. As usual, you cannot support your accusations. I can see from the perspective of others and I can see how their claims are false.

         I’m curious, just how many counterapologetics have you read? You make repeated false claims about atheism so it seems you have not read anything about it.

         As for hardening hearts, your bible has that your god does this. I do have to wonder if you’ve read your bible at all. I don’t need to give people “grace” for their baseless lies that cause real harm. I certainly don’t need your “grace”.

         When you lie to me and about me, you certainly show “ill will”. And since Christians don’t get any blessings, why would I believe I would get any? As for heaven, Christians can’t even agree on what that is. From most descriptions, with the tacky city of gold by a god that craves worldly things, I have no interest in “heaven” at all. Valhalla sounds like it would be much more fun.

         LikeLike