Posted by teleforce 10/28/2025
1. Why do some humans want to "hasten the coming of Christ’s return"?
2. Why do some humans think that an all powerful God needs their help to do what he wants to do?
But then if the first flood came after excessive sin, is the way to hasten the arrival of the end times another time of sin? That explains a lot ig
Perhaps Intel's ex CEO isn't attempting to incite oppression of non-Christians through AI, but his references to bringing about Christian Judgement Day as his main goal suggest exactly that.
After all, why would God need his help through technology (whether swords, ships, or AI) to hasten the second coming?
https://lukeplant.me.uk/blog/posts/should-we-use-llms-for-ch...
He argued, persuasively I thought, that "this is an area where truthfulness is of paramount importance" and consequently would be extremely ill-suited to AI.
> There is no single consensus figure, as results vary by how the question is phrased (e.g., "apocalypse" vs. "second coming").
> Belief in "End Times" (General): 39% of U.S. adults (or 2-in-5) believe that humanity is "living in the end times," according to a 2022 Pew Research Center survey.
> Belief in a Lifetime Apocalypse:
> 29% of U.S. adults think an "apocalyptic disaster" is likely to occur in their lifetime, according to a 2020 YouGov poll.
> 10% of all Americans (and 21% of evangelical Protestants) believe the second coming of Jesus will "definitely or probably occur during their lifetime" (2022 Pew Research).
I'm not an American but there are some statistics about the US that freak me out - because the US has huge global reach and impact, for better or - these days - for worse.
“Your Mark V Computer can carry out any routine
mathematical operation involving up to ten digits.
However, for our work we are interested in letters,
not numbers. As we wish you to modify the output
circuits, the machine will be printing words, not
columns of figures.”Like, stuff like that doesn't matter. It is not the point of the story. I don't think the oral tradition cared about plot holes at all.
Remember, the Gospels weren't written contemporaneously. Only after something like 4-5 generations. And when have we heard of people changing or faking history to suit their own ends?
The Judeo-Christian god is a nacissistic, somewhat sadistic mob boss. Way too human.
For example, agnostic atheist Dr. Bart Ehrman (Masters of Divinity and Ph.D. from Princeton Theological Seminary) states "Critical scholars are widely agreed that the earliest Gospel was Mark, written around 70 c.e.; that Matthew and Luke were written some years later, say, around 80–85 c.e.; and that John was the last Gospel, written around 90–95 c.e."
The historical record also has the disciples (St. Clement, St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius) of the apostles quoting the Gospels or referring to the letters of the apostles shortly after those dates ~90-108 AD depending on who you ask.
Regarding "faking history to suit their own ends", it is hard to imagine what gain the early Christians got by faking history. Some of these people were tortured, crucified, and fed to wild beasts by members of the Roman government because they were making these claims. Not exactly a racket.
The fact that many details of his actions are shared with other legends/traditions sure makes it look like he existed as a person and had lots of stories attributed to him.
The Councils of Nicea and Trent could not have been free of politics.
Those who were told falsehoods and believed them might well hold firm. Let's be real, evidence for the theology around the stories is lacking. This god does not show any influence of existence for a very long time. It's just people doing what people do.
I agree, no Church council was free of politics. Not an issue for me though: the Church's stated mission is to teach the nations to obey all that God commanded. (Mat 28:19) That sort of mission is going to get political one way or another.
I don't find the evidence for the theology to be lacking at all: the eucharistic miracles in Tixla, Mexico and Legnica, Poland happened this century. There was also the miracle of the sun at Fatima. Daniel 2 was written hundred of years before Christianity and predicts that the Roman Empire would be absorbed by the kingdom of God. That same kingdom which would start small and slowly cover the earth: this fits basically exactly with the transformation of the Roman Empire into a Christian state and now Christianity covers the globe. That's just one of many fulfilled prophecies. I don't see how a naturalistic explanation is adequate for repeated knowledge of the future over the course of hundreds of years or the repeated eyewitness testimony of people seeing these miracles.
Miracle in Poland: let's see the peer-reviewed results. Same for Mexico. Not surprising that the reported Mexican blood type would be the same as found on the shroud of Turin, which is clearly a fake from the image.
[https://www.richardhanania.com/p/fatima-and-the-sample-size-...]
Jesus said he would return before his disciples died. Did that prophecy come true?
If the book is full of verifiable falsehoods, how do you decide which things aren't false?
It doesn't matter to them, but it should.