cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/68752761 which was cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/64103917

I thought about saying “you know it’s a grift when they collect personal information and leak it.” According to their Bible, you don’t need an app to pray. They say church (or a covenant, I forget, it’s been 30+ years since I read the KJV) is when any two people come together to talk about Jesus (sorry!). So, where does an app fit in? And why does that app need your personally identifiable information (referred to as PII in industry). Wouldn’t an all-knowing God already have it?

But you don’t have to know it’s a grift… I feel like this is proof the Vatican (or whoever made this app on their behalf, and thus speak on their behalf… and the Pope allegedly speaks on God’s behalf) themselves know it’s a grift. Because why would they need your PII?

I know, fools and their money are soon parted… just saw this on /all and figured the Fediverse’s top Atheism comm should have it.

  • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Why are you assuming it was created by someone? There is no evidence to suggest that.

    If god doesn’t need a first cause, why does the universe?

    If the universe needs a first cause, why doesn’t god?

    All you have is special pleading and god of the gaps.

    Those are fallacies, not evidence.

    • root@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Because God and the universe are not equal. They are of different natures entirely. I mean omnipotence IS hard to comprehend for us since we’re human

      • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Because God and the universe are not equal.

        We have evidence for the universe. We have no evidence for god.

        They are of different natures entirely.

        Based on your arbitrary, inconsistent definition of “nature”.

        I mean omnipotence IS hard to comprehend for us since we’re human

        It’s pretty easy: if an omnipotent being existed, they could do anything. They would need nothing. So if an omnipotent being exists, and suffering exists, it is because that omnipotent being wants that suffering to exist.

        It’s not love. It’s a death cult.

        You keep going backwards. You assert things about god and then you pretend there are reasons to believe it. If we go ground-up from what we can sense, no god ever enters the picture. There is no reason to assume his existence.

        How many genes must be different for two beings to have different natures? Or how is it defined, how is it measured? You’re drawing lines arbitrarily and pretending to know things no person can know.

        Why did god write such a shitty book? Why are none of his miracles clearly documented? He must not be trying very hard to convince anyone that he is actually there. All evidence suggests that humans invented god.

          • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            We do

            Stop telling deadly lies. There is absolutely no evidence for god. You have not provided any, you only have fallacies.

            Here is the definition.

            “The essence of a being considered as the principle of activity.” So you and I have different natures.

            “Also the substance of a thing as distinguished from its properties, considered as the source of its operations.” This is nonsense. Do you have an example?

            “In contrast with God, it is the created universe. In contrast to the life and operations of divine grace, it is that to which a human person has claim, as creature, as distinct from a share in God’s own life, which is the supernatural.”

            This makes no sense. Nothing is supernatural. How do you determine what the opposite of a nature is? What is the opposite of human nature, if we pretend that exists for a moment?

            It was written by humans, inspired by God.

            If you are pretending the bible was written by god, then why does it contain mistakes?

            If you are admitting that it was written by humans, why should we believe any of it?

            Show me the evidence.

            Humans wrote the bible. You even admitted that. But then you added the completey unproven and ridiculous claim that it was inspired by god.

            It contains blatant contradictions with itself and our reality. Example: what year was Jesus born?

            Do rabbits chew cud?

            Do you actually believe the world was made in 6-7 days? If so, in what order? Genesis 2 contradicts Genesis 1. Why did god write such an unbelievable book if we’re supposed to believe it? He’s not all powerful, clearly. Your bullshit about “humans can’t understand omnipotence”… Humans can understand language. Humans can understand what we can sense. So why is god unable to communicate with no errors?

            Do you believe that I am going to hell for being honest, for having intellectual integrity? Your god is an abuser.

            You are defending a death cult.

            People are dying for you.

            Please. Think.

            Stop making bullshit excuses and start relying on the reality we share. Anything less makes you a murderer.

            • root@lemmy.wtf
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              He was 33 when he died and rose again, so 0 AD

              No one goes to hell for being honest

              Can I havr the contradictions in Genesis?

              And a day for God isnt a day for us. God is above time itself.

              • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                He was 33 when he died and rose again, so 0 AD

                How do you know he was 33 when he died? How do you know he died in 33 AD?

                The book of Luke suggests that Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. We can use biblical clues to estimate that he started his ministry between 27-29 AD. By calculating historical passover dates and comparing with lunar motion, most scholars estimate that Jesus died in either 30 or 33 AD.

                However, the gospels offer different accounts of his birth year. Matthew associates Jesus’s birth with the reign of Herod, who died in 4 BC. Luke associates Jesus’s birth with the census of Quirinius, which took place ten years later.

                So if Matthew is correct, Jesus could not have been born later than 4 BC. If he died in 30 AD, he may have been 33, if his birthday was after his crucifixion. If he died in 33 AD, he would actually have been 36 or so.

                If Luke is correct, he would have been born no later than 6 AD, making him either 24 or 27 when he died.

                How do we know which is correct, and why did god allow contradictions like this? It casts doubt on the entire bible. All of it could be human error.

                No one goes to hell for being honest

                That’s not what your theology says. According to the bible, god gave me this brain in this world, a brain that honestly concludes “humans invented god” based on everything I can possibly sense. Due to my non-belief, I will be punished in some vague yet terrible manner, depending on which parts of the bible you cherry pick. Maybe I’ll be annihilated. Maybe I’ll burn forever, maybe there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. All because I didn’t want to lie, to pretend I sense a god when I do not.

                Can I havr the contradictions in Genesis?

                Have you glanced at chapters 1 and 2? They are not long. I was specifically referring to the order of creation; were plants created before humans as it says in chapter 1, or were humans created before plants as it says in chapter 2?

                Did god make animals before humans (chapter 1), or did he make animals as companions to Adam (chapter 2)?

                Those are some easy ones from the first two chapters. It gets worse when we consider the rest of the bible. In Genesis, god encourages humans to be fruitful and multiply. He says it to Adam and Eve, he says it to Noah, he says it to Jacob. But in Leviticus, god insists that women who give birth must also provide a sin offering. Does god command us to sin?

                And a day for God isnt a day for us. God is above time itself.

                Where does it say that? Why wouldn’t god include these clarifications in the text at the time? We understand what a “year” is, he could have provided it in human time instead of god time. I would be very impressed if the bible gave a detailed account about natural events that formed our universe and world that modern science can verify. But instead we have a contradictory fairy tale about making existence in “eh whatever amount of time sounds believable to you”.

                The question remains: why would an all-powerful being who loves us do such a poor job of convincing us of his existence?

                You have chosen to pretend that false things are true. I am unwilling to lie. Humans wrote the bible, and god seemingly did nothing to prevent errors from getting through. What sense does that make?

                Please continue to think critically about the contents of the bible and the flimsy excuses that come from outside of the bible.

                • root@lemmy.wtf
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Almost nothing will convince you if you are not willing to be convinced

                  • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Being convinced has nothing to do with what I want to be true.

                    We do not choose our beliefs.

                    I aim to be as honest as possible: I believe what is most likely true given all available evidence.

                    Stop killing kids.

                  • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    I want to be convinced of whatever is true. That is why I rely on evidence and reason. As humans, that is all we have. Divine revelation is, evidently, a dangerous myth.

                    You want to be convinced that god is real because you’ve already bought the lie. You work backwards, distorting evidence of our real world and inventing fiction, treating your assumptions like facts so you can pretend your false beliefs are just as good as real ones.

                    Stop lying. All life is at stake.

                    Fuck you for choosing death.

                  • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    All of chapter 12. I was specifically thinking of verses 6-7:

                    6 “‘When the days of her purification are completed for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the door of the Tent of Meeting, a year old lamb for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon or a turtledove, for a sin offering. 7 He shall offer it before Yahweh, and make atonement for her; then she shall be cleansed from the fountain of her blood.

                    What sin did she commit? The lord told her to bear children, why would he make any part of that process sinful?

                    But it’s also worth noting the blatant sexism of verse 5 compared to verse 1, where bearing a female child makes a woman “unclean” for twice as long.

                • root@lemmy.wtf
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago
                  1. Another approach to estimating the year of birth is based on an attempt to work backwards from the point when Jesus began preaching, using the statement in Luke 3:23 that he was “about 30 years of age” at that time.[24] Jesus began to preach after being baptized by John the Baptist, and based on Luke’s gospel John only began baptizing people in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar” (Luke 3:1–2), which scholars estimate would place the year at about AD 28–29.[24][25][26][27][28] By working backwards from this, it would appear that Jesus was probably born no later than 1 BC.[8][24][27] Another theory is that Herod’s death was as late as after the January eclipse of 1 BC[29] or even AD 1[30] after the eclipse that occurred in 1 December BC.[31]

                  Luke’s date is independently confirmed by John’s reference in John 2:20 to the Temple being in its 46th year of construction when Jesus began his ministry during Passover, which corresponds to around AD 27–29 according to scholarly estimates.[32]

                  from Wikipedia. We dont have a year-for-year 100% accurate account of ancient history.

                  1. Relying only on your physical senses? God gave you free will and your rational soul along with your intellect. God did not make you disbelieve.

                  2. You know you can plan things right? God intended for animals to be companions to us and then created them, then us.

                  3. Maybe the ancient Hebrews used a different way of calculating time than we do? And God performs a lot of miracles when he sees fit.

                  • SnoopSqueak@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    We dont have a year-for-year 100% accurate account of ancient history.

                    Because all-powerful god failed to convey a simple timeline?

                    Relying only on your physical senses?

                    That is our only means of acquiring data, yes.

                    God gave you free will and your rational soul along with your intellect.

                    No, he didn’t. We evolved what we call consciousness over many generations. There is no evidence of god, free will, or souls.

                    God did not make you disbelieve.

                    If you believe he made my brain and this world, yes yes he did.

                    You know you can plan things right? God intended for animals to be companions to us and then created them, then us.

                    That’s not what the bible says. Why is the bible wrong?

                    Maybe the ancient Hebrews used a different way of calculating time than we do? And God performs a lot of miracles when he sees fit.

                    Or maybe it’s all bullshit and you are an intellectual and moral coward. Why couldn’t god make it more clear if he meant what you interpret him to mean? How do you know your interpretation is correct when other common interpretations contradict yours?

                    Kids are dying for your false beliefs. More each day.