Preferring the Bronze Age over the Present Age

Unbelievers often scoff and mock that Christians follow, as these unbelievers say, Bronze or Iron Age beliefs written down by ignorant peasants and superstitious persons thousands of years ago in a no longer relevant book called the Bible, and by using these pejorative and chronologically-snobby labels for the foundational text of Christian belief, the unbelievers are obviously trying to imply that Christians are fools for holding to these antiquated ideas, but, in fact, the truth, in many cases, is the exact opposite of what such unbelievers believe, for the fact of the matter is this: in this present age, where 1) we have modern academics and “thinkers” telling us that men can become women by mere verbal fiat, and where 2) we have modern academics and “thinkers”, such as modern ethicists, endorsing infanticide and bestiality and incestuous marriage, and where 3) we have modern academics and “thinkers” telling us that something can come from nothing, or that language is meaningless, or that morality does not exist, or that consciousness and the self are just illusions, or that there actually is such a thing as equality in the world between people, or any one of the other myriad of absurd and reality-denying claims made in the modern world today, then I tell you that, in many cases, I am more than happy, and I am more than rational, in preferring to believe the common-sense and time-tested wisdom of reality-hardened men from generations long past than I am in trusting some modern gender-studies professor or some “ethicist” who tells me that shagging sheep is A-OK; remember, truth does not respect chronology, and just because it is 2016 does not mean that we do not have many things insanely wrong, and it is for that reason that in many cases, I am more than happy and smart to embrace Bronze Age beliefs rather than wedding myself to the insanities of our present age.

Is 'Jesus Denial' for the Psychologically Weak

It is interesting to note that from a psychological point-of-view, denial is a well-known and rather primitive psychological defensive mechanism, and it is true that all too often, and in a great many people, it is simply easier and even desirable, from a mental perspective, to deny the truth of an uncomfortable and challenging and disconcerting fact than it is to accept that truth but then struggle against it—this is much like an alcoholic who would rather deny his broken condition instead of accepting his problem and dealing with it, for while the latter option is mentally challenging, the former choice is psychologically easy—and so, in light of this psychological fact about denial, it is thus not irrational to wonder, or even to reasonably suspect, that perhaps one of the main reasons why certain unbelievers wish to deny that the man Jesus Christ ever existed, even though they do so in the teeth of all the historical evidence, is because they know that if they do admit to the actual existence of this most influential historical figure, then, at the same time, they cannot but contend with the various historical evidences that also support the inference that this man Jesus resurrected from the dead, and so the sheer denial of Christ’s existence as a historical person suddenly becomes a quite desirable psychological option if one does not wish to contend with the other historical claims that flow out of his existence, and thus it would not be surprising if some unbelievers of mentally weaker stock actually took this option as the way to ease their psychological burden and mental challenge that his existence poses to them; and while my claim concerning such unbelievers is, of course, little more than speculation at this point—although not necessarily an unreasonable speculation—it is an idea that could ostensibly be tested in some type of empirical manner, and it would indeed be fascinating to see just what the results of such empirical tests would be…one can only hope that at some future date, such tests are indeed carried out, for the results might surprise both theists and atheists alike.