Deranged fantasy

Also, you once told me you read J Warner Wallace and other apologetic authors and that they were all garbage. But if you actually remembered his book, you would have remembered that the four disciples weren't the only people who mentioned Jesus in their writing. A historian mentioned Jesus as "one who performed many signs and divided the Israelite crowds" sometime in the 50s AD, a couple of decades after His death. And this historian wasn't just not a disicple of Jesus, but he wasn't even Christian, meaning his work mentioning Jesus's signs implies that He not only just existed, but that He was who He said He was. John is actually an apologetic book trying to prove Jesus is the Christ.
If you study the pieces carefully and with an open mind, they actually can make much sense. The same cannot be said for Muhammad, or even the guy who started mormonism or the prosperity gospel (which i believe is responsible for many people leaving the faith). And with buddhism, Buddha (or Siddhartha) didn't even claim to be a deity and didn't accept worship. Why we worship him is a mystery to me. And stuff like Jainism is just a joke. There's no argument to even support such claims and there's no way you could ever prove something like that is true. There's where blind faith is not only encouraged, but is a necessity for the religion's existence. Christianity is the only religion supported historically and scientifically. But one has to have an open mind to see that, which isn't all that common these days. But if it helps to know this, i haven't always necessarily wanted Christianity to be true (for quite a few reasons), which was why i approached study with an open mind.

I don't think everyone would do that, but i think the number of people doing it would be higher than one would imagine. Heck, if i didn't have morals, i would do that out of pure practicality.

I didn't say all people in the trans community were doing that. I was making fun of the fact that some people do it. My joke was about just one person having one specific identity situation (well more than one identity, in this case). It wasn't meant to generalize the whole community. If it were, any analogy would crumble on any community because humans are diverse. Also, whether or not it's intentional is actually irrelevant to whether or not it should be allowed, and biological men should not be able to dominate women's sports without even having to put in as much effort. If the left really cared for women, they'd consider this. But they don't care about anyone or anything they claim to care for, and i can give you reasons for coming to that conclusion if you want (there are quite a few, and btw, the LGBTQ community is one of the communities that I believe is being played).

Do you remember last year when i presented very solid scientific evidence for religion that had nothing to do with using the Bible for proof? I have always been open to discussion. Look, i get that there are some Christians that operate on blind faith and just think they're supposed to "believe" when the evidence seems like it's on the other side. I believed that when i was a little kid. However, i am nothing like that now, and I've come to realize that the Bible itself does not condone that behavior.

As for the evidence, i'll find that page if i can. It was a lot of information and it took me 4 days to type.

No, i actually have not heard anyone base apologetics off of the garden of Eden. However, we know exactly who wrote the four "anonymous" documents. They were written by their namesakes. And we know Mark was Peter's scribe. Mark's gospel seems to hold Peter in reverence and tends to gloss over his mistakes that the other gospels recorded.
Also, Jesus's disciples all died for His cause. Most "cults" or authoritarians were either aggressive or they abandoned their idea once they were caught. But with Jesus, He got no gain from His ministry, and neither did His students. They all died painful deaths except John, who just kept surviving torture.
Comparing this to Islam, Muhammad had a vision from an angel. This vision had zero eyewitnesses and the religion spread through the sword.

I'll respond to the other stuff tomorrow

"Proving belief wrong" really isn't possible. Granted neither is proving it but that's the whole point of belief. But I'd rather believe in a perfect God than a meaningless existence of myself and all humanity.

You can choose what you believe. That's why people sometimes convert from one religion to another.

Because there's no reason to anything. Why care if life will be ended so soon? Why make an impact that will be forgotten 20 years after you die? Why do "right" things if there's no definitive right or wrong?

You do things because you do them. They may seem to be the best thing to do at the time for yourself, and hopefully beneficial to others as well.

Yet some acts are irrational, destructive even.

Regardless, we do what they do and most won't even be remembered by ourselves the day after, and even less after that.

Some have a goal in the long term, some are more immediate. In time they weave into each other and so disappear as they fold into them. That we are still around is 'reason' enough.
To seek more out of it is vanity, and missing the point.

Right and wrong are a matter of perspective. Like everything else we do, as issues they're pretty irrelevant in ye olde grand scheme of things.

If right and wrong are a matter of perspective then cannibalism is ok if your society includes it in their practices.

If people instinctively knew wrong from right they'd live like animals.
There would be no reason to have the longest childhood of any creature in order to learn it, no reason for laws, morals, commandments, religion, gods.

Besides, remember, according to your source, that gift of that knowledge was given to Eve then Adam by the great Serpent God, much to the dismay of his jealous wrathful buddy who had a big hissy fit and cast them out of the Garden and since then evil has ruled the Earth, by HIS angry hand.

People do know wrong from right. Doesn't mean they always choose to do the right thing. It's a simple concept; I don't know how to put it in simpler terms.
Thus the learning to push the idea to stop doing wrong things.

Your last paragraph is very confused and it's making me the same.

Exactly.
And thus how it, like anything, has been rationalized by practitioners of it.

That doesn't make it right though. A world with no standard is a world of chaos (as we can see in today's world). We already have an inherent knowledge of good and evil.

No, they do not. If they did, they wouldn't need to be told it, learn it, or fear the GodS punishing them for it.

You're not familiar with Eden and the tree[s] of knowledge of/and of right from wrong and the Serpent God offering the fruit to Eve? You don't recall how the bad God got mad and cast them all out and has ruled the world with evil ever since?
Yet you claim these are truths, and instinctive.

"InarenCorp0 ups, 1h
That doesn't make it right though. A world with no standard is a world of chaos (as we can see in today's world). We already have an inherent knowledge of good and evil."

Where did I say anything about it making it right though?

"Modda

Exactly.
And thus how it, like anything, has been rationalized by practitioners of it."

We do NOT already have an inherent knowledge of good and evil, otherwise such would not be an issue nor a topic of debate, nor would your "world of chaos" be a thing.

Even with the spectre of a glowering old man in the sky going to send us to burn in the dump in Gehenna for an eternity and a sweet place in the sky for those who don't go astray can't scare most people to access this supposed "inherent knowledge of good and evil."
In fact, humans are farther from any such inherent knowledge than any creature ever on Earth, and indulge in acts of "evil" with great relish simply for pleasure.

Sure humans do bad things for enjoyment. "Men loved darkness rather than light." Doesn't mean they don't know what is right and wrong. Unless you're talking about babies, then I could concede the point to you.

Does whether the world is "better" or "worse" matter if it will all burn with nothing being left?

Nowhere in the bible does it say homosexuals should and will be executed. So how about you read up before you make such drastic claims. My father is a 7 year minister. I know what your saying is false. In fact, word for word what the bible says is in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. It says "9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God." So if you wanna know melody, all the bible is saying, is that homosexuals cannot ever enter the kingdom of god aka heaven. Why? Because it's a sin to participate in homosexuality or any of the other acts.

You're on fire Octavia, and I must say, well done! While there is obviously a huge political aspect to the issue you've covered, my personal $0.02 is that these issue are predominately cultural. Certainly not entirely, but predominately. If you put this much effort and applied this much common sense to your political posts, I might actually respect your opinions about politics. As it stands, I'll leave it at respecting what you've written on the religious and cultural issues you've discussed here.