Help me Christians of /his/, I think I lost my faith
>converted to Christianity at 23 after being a militant retard atheist (the kind that was like "if God real why bad thing happen" or "where Jesus?") because I read the Bible to prove how evil it was and I found everything to be true
>researched cults a lot to make sure Christianity wasn't one, looked into the history of the church somewhat but not really
>headcanon was that everything up to the Nicene Creed and canonization of the Bible was God's will, after that with the crusades and everything was just twisting God's Word
>doing my daily Bible reading, look up Mark 16. The ending was added in later. In fact, many things were added and changed from the original manuscripts to suit political agendas of the time like integrating paganism into it and Trinitarianism
>what the fuck
>Jesus wasn't even crucified on a lowercase t (Latin Cross), and it's tattooed on my chest. It was a pagan symbol
>OH FUCK
>Constantine wasn't even a true Christian and was baptized on his deathbed probably because he was scared of the mortal sins he committed after his conversion like killing his family members
What the fuck? I've been browsing /his/ for years and nobody brought up these arguments against modern Christianity. Don't even tell me Jesus wasn't a real person or I'll lose my fucking mind. How could I be so fucking stupid?

Yes you are stupid falling for a judeoroman slave psyop

>>17757498
Yes I am, and I'm fine admitting it. But what the fuck do I do now? I don't know what to believe anymore. My worldview is shattered. 7 years down the drain

>>17757478 (OP)
I'm not a Christian OP but some of what you said is incorrect
>Jesus wasn't even crucified on a lowercase t (Latin Cross), and it's tattooed on my chest. It was a pagan symbol
Roman crucifixes were genuinely used for execution and could be a t shape or a T shape, it could have been either for Jesus. It doesn't really affect the historicity of his crucifixion. It also wasn't a pagan symbol, if you mean the crucifix specifically. If you mean just a plain cross, that's such a simple geometric design it would be like saying a circle or a square is a 'pagan symbol'. If you mean the Egyptian ankh, that doesn't even look the same.

>Constantine wasn't even a true Christian and was baptized on his deathbed probably because he was scared of the mortal sins he committed after his conversion like killing his family members
It's debateable if he was really a Christian, he did indeed use it for political purposes and apparently still worshipped the pagan gods on occasion. As you said, he was baptised on his deathbead to try and cleanse the huge amount of sins he committed. Constantine is the least of it though, you should read what his Christian successors did. They were so bad that emperor Julian reverted to paganism partly because he was so disgusted by Christian brutality and moral hypocrasy.

In any case, there are much bigger problems with Christianity than what you stated. The Old Testament (and Jesus in Matthew 5) say that the jewish law is everlasting and will never pass away, but Paul (or forgers pretending to be Paul) say the old law has passed away and has been replaced by a new one. It's no different to Mormons saying "Oh there's actually this new revelation, and you can't dismiss it for contradicting the previous revelations because this new revelation is the more correct one, just trust us."

>>17757478 (OP)
Why you are even going to fucking /his/ of all places for answers on these matters, you retarded nigger? Also not a single thing you said was correct, talk to some actual experts, retarded faggot.

>>17757529
>nigger faggot
Nice refutation

>>17757524
>The Old Testament (and Jesus in Matthew 5) say that the jewish law is everlasting and will never pass away, but Paul (or forgers pretending to be Paul) say the old law has passed away and has been replaced by a new one.
Lol no. Jeremiah 31:31-34 says God will make a new covenant with Israel, and Jesus says in Matthew 11:13 and Luke 16:16 that the Prophets and the Law only prophesied until John the Baptist; he also relativized the Law in Matthew 19:8-9 by saying that its prescriptions on divorce were but a concession to the immorality of the Hebrews, as well as in Matthew 15:16-18 when He argues the dietary laws are not truly binding. As St Paul says, the fulfillment of the Law is love (Romans 13:10) and that Christian do not abolish the Law but strengthen and fortify it (Romans 3:31). 1 John 2:7-8 speaks of a new commandment that is also an old commandment because in telling His disciple "Love each other as I have loved you" (John 15:12, 15:17), He has completed the Law and fulfilled its true purpose. As St Paul says, the Law was but a tutor to bring us to Christ (Galatians 3:24), for it was but a shadow of the good things to come and does not make perfect those approaching the sanctuary (Hebrews 10:1), whereas Christ with His sacrifice make perfect forever those who are being sanctified (Hebrews 10:14). All of the Gospels are literally just Jesus criticizing the Jews for legalistically interpreting the Law.

>>17757539
There's nothing to refute in the first place, nor /his/ any kind of place for a truly edifying discussion, especially on existential questions. You're clearly just fishing for replies and are being dishonest, blatant falseflag. Dilate and speak to some actual experts.

>>17757478 (OP)
>Christians of /his/
I dont think a bunch of jidf and mexican teenagers are going to try to persuade you. They'll just call you a retarded nigger faggot

>>17757539
See what I mean

Concern trolling

>>17757478 (OP)
>look up Mark 16. The ending was added in later. In fact, many things were added and changed from the original manuscripts to suit political agendas of the time like integrating paganism into it and Trinitarianism
No the ending of Mark was not added in later, it is original. The same people who say there's no difference between men and women are the ones saying that.

>>17757478 (OP)
>integrating paganism into it and Trinitarianism
Nice giveaway, decent concern troll but flawed 6.4/10

>>17758639
>180 AD
uhh that >100 years after Mark was written, you fucking retard

>>17757735
>samefagging in your own thread this hard

>>17757566
Haha I knew you'd cite Jeremiah 31. Where does Jeremiah say that the Aaronic priesthood will dissappear, or that the law won't apply anymore, or it's fine to eat non-kosher food, or that gentiles are grafted into Israel?

Nowhere? Exactly, everything else you cite is the New Testament. My very point is that the New Testament directly contradicts the Old Testament. It's the equivalent of the book of Mormon.

>>17758707
The only two manuscripts that are missing the ending are from the 400s AD.

>>17758697
>180 AD
>uhh that >100 years after Mark was written,
The only two manuscripts that are missing the ending are from the 400s AD. You just checkmated yourself.

>>17758709
The Old Testament predicts many times that all the nations shall come to worship God.

I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed. (Genesis 12:3)
In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice. (Genesis 22:18)
All nations whom You have made Shall come and worship before You, O Lord, And shall glorify Your name. (Psalm 86:9)
Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles! Laud Him, all you peoples! (Psalm 117:1)

And no, Jeremiah 31 does not have to specify all of that since it says the Law shall be written on the hearts of men. It's pretty apparent what is meant, especially since the eternal covenant with Abraham is established in Genesis 17, centuries before the establishment of the Mosaic Law.

>>17758709
>Where does Jeremiah say that the Aaronic priesthood will dissappear
What exactly does this mean to you.
>or it's fine to eat non-kosher food,
The law is something that stood to be fulfilled, and it WAS fulfilled by Christ.
>or that gentiles are grafted into Israel?
There are numerous references to the people of God that are realized in the New Testament. See these:

"This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the LORD.
For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the LORD behold the earth;
To hear the groaning of the prisoner; to loose those that are appointed to death;
To declare the name of the LORD in Zion, and his praise in Jerusalem;
When the people are gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the LORD."
- Psalm 102:18-22

"A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation.
They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he hath done this."
- Psalm 22:30-31

"I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."
- Daniel 7:13-14

Another example is one that the apostle Peter brings up. He wrote: "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy." This quote contains references to two places in the Old Testament: Exodus 19:6 and Hosea 2:23. Paul gives us even more.

>>17758707
not OP retard nigger faggot