>>96416678>>96475903 (me)>Yes, pointing out that you are baselessly assuming things about god(s) if they exist is a valid counterargument to Pascal's Wager fallacy ("Can't prove that, can you? Better safe than sorry, innit").You are misrepresenting or misunderstanding my position. I replied with that to you(or someone else) calling the book of revelation "just a bunch of nonsense dreamed up by some dude on a bad psychogenic trip", "like literally incoherent ramblings". Then you claimed that there is no reason to believe that the "Christian narrative" is more real than "a god who has been put here to make fun of us, and who particularly enjoys torturing the naive idiots who have fallen for Christianity", to which I then told you that it wasn't the case and later expanded on it, which lead us to this Exodus back and forth.
>This is an example of a failed prophecy. Jesus didn't get to rule Israel, he just died pathetically.It's not a failed prophecy, but only a yet-to-be-fulfilled one because the same Jesus talked about in the verse claims that He will come to the earth to rule the earth after He was to die(Daniel 7:13-14, Matthew 17:22-23, Matthew 24:30-31)
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristicsnowhere in there does that back up your ridiculous claim
>The books chosen to create the Bible itself. The book, which supposedly tells the truth, tells many things that are demonstrably false, many of which are crucial to the story it is trying to tell.Again... such as???
>There's a reason that it was forbidden for most people to read the Bible for over 1000 years; it turned out that they overestimated people's intelligence in thinking that plebeians and other people who didn't personally benefit from being part high-ranking members of the church would destroy religion and the church if they actually read the book.No, it was forbidden for most people to read it for themselves because of multiple reasons, but most importantly, most of them simply could not read at all. Beyond this, however, writing just one bible alone took a lot of effort because there was no printing process available beyond copying it by hand, which also took incredibly long. Then comes the issue of preserving the already existent Bibles, which is why they would keep them "locked away" and not let people read them, they were afraid of damaging the holy scriptures; the bible itself was read out loud in church by people who were taught on the lessons and meanings of bible stories and verses, if not then there was the possibility of people unlearned in the matter teaching others things that they deemed to be wrong, which happens today a lot due to people coming up with their interpretations of the bible, shaping the Word of God to their liking instead of being shaped by the Word.
>what matters is what was supposed to happen when the Temple fell, which didn't happen.The destruction of the Temple wasn’t just some random event, it marked the end of the Old Covenant, exactly as Jesus said. If it was so obvious, why were His disciples shocked(Mark 13:1-2)? Also, Matthew 24:36 says not even Jesus knew when the final events would happen, so then, logically, He couldn’t have meant they’d happen right after the Temple fell, which He as God knew about, given He prophesied about it.
Jesus was, like I said already, talking about 2 different events.