FOUNDER EFFECT - JESUS HAS ADVERSELY LEFT HIS STAMP ON THE CHRISTIAN CULTURE AND PEOPLE AND RELIGION

The Christian faith needs so much fixing that it is wiser to just discard it and start something else.  Fixing it will not do away with the, metaphoric, genetic influence and legacy Jesus has left it with.  It may be eclipsed and its light may grow time but the spark is there and  it will set fire to the forest when you least expect.  You cannot condemn the Church without also looking at the founder.  A bad cruel kingdom needs its king looked at first and foremost.  Never underestimate how influence works.  It can be poisonous even when the person is long gone.  There is a phenomenon here but Jesus and the Church that claims to be his is not the only example but a prime one.  Islam is Muhammad and Mormonism is Joseph Smith.  Its unexplainable it seems.  But it is obvious.  It is real.  It is toxic.  Never underestimate the founder effect.

Jesus supposedly asked for all nations to be offered the Christian faith.  Catholic means inclusive and teacher of all.  As the Bible is considered the word of God, and it is claimed the Holy Spirit is with those who read it with a heart open to God, it is considered suitable for even young children.  But it is not. 

Jesus and Mary were participants in the animal sacrifice culture of their religion.  They went to the Temple.  Jesus was able to quote any scripture text on demand.  So he knew that the rites advocating the capture, torture and bleeding of animals were inherently part of his faith.  Mary took two doves to get them murdered when Jesus was born.  The Old Testament spells out how God says the ritual is to be done.  The pornographic detail given in the rites is sickening.  The time spent detailing the rites is clearly revelling in this sickness.  We know that people who kill animals on religious grounds are abusers and guilty of animal cruelty no matter how humane they claim to be.  The scriptures are clear proof of how somebody who is an abuser of animals soon starts gutting people too.  Moses was bloodthirsty.  Jesus declared him his hero and even alleged that he appeared by his side during the transfiguration.  If a religion will be banned for saying some pornographic magazines are sacred scripture, why does the Christian social construct get away with it?

Jesus if evil had nothing to fear from commanding love of neighbour.  With the religious abuse of animals being validated by him he knew it was only words.

Christians would demonise Jews for venerating those scriptures while it does the same thing itself.

The harsh and deceptive doctrines of Christianity encourage people to molest children if they are inclined that way. For example, in Christianity the marriage bond seeks to create unhealthy relationships in which the husband and wife’s self-esteem depends on one another. It seeks to unite them too much just as Jesus said they have to be one flesh, like one person in mind and feeling and body. In reality relationships should have a healthy level of detachment. To fall apart and hate yourself because somebody cheated on you or rejected you shows great emotional underdevelopment. You should love yourself and only seek a relationship as a means of loving yourself in a different way. You cannot respect others except in so far as you respect yourself. Marriage is intrinsically abusive and based on the lie that the other person is the person you really want for the rest of your life.  This is not true.  There are many people out there who could make you happier or as happy.  Marriage is hardly anything sacred and bringing God into it to bless it and direct it and authorise it is adding insult to injury.  God approving of marriage means he can hardly complain if you abuse a child. The Christian insistence that all wilful enjoyment of anything sexual outside of marriage is gravely sinful encourages people to go after children on the grounds that everybody sins seriously in sexual matters.
 
The Church teaches that if you go to confession and you want to be forgiven your sin just because you are afraid of going to Hell or if that is your main reason that is okay. So in other words, you love the sin but you fear the punishment which is why you reluctantly give up the sin. But you are still attached to it and would gladly commit it if the pesky hell threat could go away.  How could a paedophile priest feel bad about his sin of child molestation with a doctrine like that? It would be an encouragement to the paedophile tendency to feel that he has done nothing wrong.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ said that to look at a woman lustfully was as bad as adultery (Matthew 5:28) and that if your eye makes you sin pluck it out (Matthew 5:29) meaning that this sin should be avoided under all circumstances and no matter what the inconvenience. Jesus then encouraged extreme guilt about sex and sexuality. When guilt is that strong what happens is that people will end up feeling that every sexual feeling they have is a wilful sexual sin. This philosophy is very harmful to children. It increases the natural tendency of child-abuse victims to blame themselves and feel they deserved the abuse. Faith in Jesus Christ facilitates those who want to have sex with children and get away with it. It has been doing it since it started and it is still doing it now. Christianity hurts children and destroys their lives by making them feel worse about the abuse they received than they should. Christianity makes sure the abuser will destroy their lives.
 
Despite being frequently into delivering verbal abuse, Jesus insisted that we must see only the bright side of things and pretend that the evil does not exist. This is proven when he said that we must be kind to enemies for God sends his rain on the just as on the unjust (Matthew 5:44-48) ignoring the fact that nature is more cruel than good.  Its good is not intentional good but just luck. Its not real good though its nice.

Then he said we must repose on his teachings as on a rock (Matthew 7:24). His teachings then are as solid and strong as rock meaning that is how much devotion we must give them, rocklike unshakeable obedience. The gospel says that this was spoken to ordinary people. This shows that the Sermon on the Mount in which these teachings occur is to be taken literally for how else could it be a rock to the ordinary person who needs their morals on a plate salted and ready?
 
The only surprise with religious instruction is that not more damage is done especially to children. The potential for damage is a very bad fruit and indicates that Jesus was not a divine emissary for he was the one that said you can tell the prophets of God who are really fakes by their bad fruits. It is not actual bad fruits that count the most but the potential ones. After all if it were not for the potential there would be no actual. It is weird how Jesus would have believed in Old Testament figures who did evil things like killing while they functioned as prophets and then tried to discredit bad prophets as fakes. Clearly he was insecure and was resorting to the fallacy that the badness of a person means their message is wrong because he had rivals he wanted out of the way.