When did you realize that religions are only a silly human invention only for compensating the fear of death?

when did you realize that religions are only a silly human invention only for compensating the fear of death?

Death only came after Adam and eve ate the forbidden fruit.

>babby's first anti-religion phase
adorable

m'italy

Imaginary people eating imaginary fruit.

Just some weird fantasy.

so you belive in god only basing on a book written two thousand years ago, ok

>DumbDumbDumbDumbDumb

no.
i believe in God because i find arguments for theism compelling, and arguments for atheism to fall short.

but more specifically, i believe in Christianity because of the historical evidence we have of the existence of Christ, and his death burial and resurrection.

More like 1600 years ago considering the New Testament was written like 400 years or something after Jesus was around.

exactly, that would fall under the "private angelic encounter about God"
same with islam

so post here your historical evidence

You can't really just say the "new testament", considering it's 4 Gospel accounts, and then a gazillion letters written by a bunch of different people. It might have been codified then, but the writings we have are believed to have originated before 70 A.D.

>the New Testament was written like 400 years or something after Jesus was around.
even godless wikipedia will tell you that's bullshit

>tfw that isn't why I am religious

Nice try.

*tips fedora*

you got it buddy:

1: Christ is a historical figure. he died via Roman crucifixion. This is a historical fact. (see 1 in pic related)
no one walks away from roman crucifixion, it's a 3 step process.
if you survive the scourging and crucifixion, the third step is the deathblow.
they need to pry someone off a cross, so they would smash their head in or stab them through the heart with a sword or spear, or set them on fire, or let wild animals rip them apart.

2: We have firsthand and secondhand eyewitness testimony claiming he visited them in person after his death.
it's written in Paul's epistle to the corinthians.
>inb4 USING THE BIBLE TO PROVE THE BIBLE TRUE? UGHHH CHRIST-TARD
hold on, it's written in this epistle, but it originated much earlier, secular scholarship corroborates this (see 2 in pic related)
>3 For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received—that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures,
>4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures,
>5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
>6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
>7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.
>8 Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also. (1 Corinthians 15:3-8)
notice that He's appearing to groups, that rules out the 'hallucination hypothesis,' because hallucinations are subjective to the individual.
this creed is also dated to around the month year of Christ's crucifixion by secular scholarship as well, so that rules out the 'legend hypothesis.'

3: These people suffered severe persecution, torture, and death for holding this view.
which is not something someone who is unsure or knows that what they are professing is a lie is going to do.

Back when I was a revolting teen.

Now I found solace in the idea of life after death.

so,
options ruled out as irrational:
A) the eyewitnesses were all lying
B) the eyewitnesses were all hallucinating the same thing at each occurence
C) the myth of this event evolved over time (legend hypothesis)
D) Christ survived the crucifixion

options left:
E) the event actually occured
F) ? ? ?

the only reason to deny option E in light of the evidence we have is a dogmatic adherence to naturalism, this circular reasoning:
>this is not evidence of a supernatural event having taken place
>because supernatural events do not take place
>because we have no evidence of supernatural events taking place
>therefore, [repeat]

Haha, I find it hysterical when people who believe in the copy-cat theory disregard scriptures, or studies done in said scriptures, to be irrelevant and not serve as proof for the existence of Jesus. People will claim he didn't exist, and if you try to show studies that use the bible as a source, people will just claim that is made up, they'll refuse to look into the studies, proceed to ignore you for being "stupid," etc. Apparently historical analysis on religious text is also invalid to some people, along with ignoring artifact discoveries, linguistics (relayed to scripture), etc.

no counterarguments to this? refutations?
no references to jewish sky fairy daddies on sticks?

How did you trick yourself out of thinking rationally?

I'm not religious but Sikhism seems pretty based tbqh senpai, they also assimilate well

I realized that atheist say this until their death draws near and become religious.

Like the lead singer from Type O negative

Sikhs are based, but their religious restrictions wouldn't suit me.

Anyways there's no reason not to sin/restrict yourself except for the direct consequences.
I'm not afraid of hell because pain doesn't exist outside of your brain, you can even switch it off in this world if you work on it.

r.i.p. peter
i don't think he knew he was dying when he came back to Christ though.

Then why don't you kill yourself.

Because that's not an argument you fedora faggot. You're just grasping at straws.

...