Christianity is probably the one true religion.

i have refuted your claim that you can prove the resurrection happened through the skeptics data. your premise was that if the resurrection is possible it happened which is ridiculous. if the bible is not inspired and is not reliable the resurrection didnt happen as if it happened the bible would be inspired and reliable. so your logic is very faulty. i also said many things you have not refuted. gods morality is subjective and unfair clearly. it has caused Christians to oppose almos every moral progress still to this day. they have opposed the mitigation of slavery and every step towards the better treatment of colored races, the diminution of war, many improvements to criminal law, gay rights, animal rights, and more and there is no possible way a person like me could choose to believe in it being that a perfect god would want moral progress and a fair morality and christianity brings about neither. you have not defended the moral issues i have arose. you have not defended your claim that if the bible is not reliable or inspired this somehow means the Resurrection had to have happened. all you have presented is conjectures that are no different than the conjectures of other religions. you cannot prove or have no evidence for there being a god or at least for the christian god being the real god. if you do mention it now! if that isnt true then the whole religion is worthless and being that is slows and opposes moral progress id say its detrimental. it has caused people to treat each other unfairly and completely unjustly. men selling their daughters to be sex slaves or giving their sons sex slaves gives some innocent children a huge advantage over other innocent children. an adult should not take advantage of a child. this is unfair therefor unjust. the religion is supposed to be perfect and it was used to "justify" screwing kids, owning people and animals as property taking all of their freedoms, killing certain people for their beliefs and moralities when christianity is far from perfect itself which has in part caused moral controversy conflict and calamity. the interpretations of todays christians are nothing like those of earlier christians. christians today either say they were all wrong or OBJECTIVE moraity CHANGED. what is objectively good and fair has not changed as circumstances have not changed. but christian morality has. so they are learning right from wrong and their knowledge often contradicts their religion meaning it isnt perfect and cant be god. christianity is supposed to be the source of gods perfect morals christians today reject rules of the bible today to go along with the reason of men. the bible morality is subjective and without premise. eye for an eye judges results instead of intent and punishes bad results while they are sometimes an accident. turn the other cheek ignores both the results and the intent and punishes nothing. god is often punishing people for disobeying an entity they dont know without judging or even mentioning the intent and often ignoring the intent, the results, and evil altogether to allow murderers, rapists, and every other bad person like slave owners to get eternal happiness while people who dont hurt anyone and treat others justly unlike christians burn alive forever because they couldnt believe in something with such little evidence and so many similarities to mens ideas. all you have is the fact that a lot of people believe it. but if you lived in another country there is about an 80 percent chance you would believe that countries religion and it would not be your fault. if we were given an equal chance to believe the christian religion then the same amount of Arabians would believe christianity as americans. why would god be so unfair to give some of us good social parents and some wicked unsocial parents and some made ugly and some beautiful, and some influenced to believe the true religion and some influenced to believe another with some existing long before the religion. if they (those who lived before Christianity) didnt have to believe to go to heaven and we do then god is unfair and punishes us by different standards or doesnt punish some at all. if they did have to believe to go to heaven then god is unfair and gave some a good chance to go to heaven and made it impossible for some. either way god is extremely unfair and not just or perfect. far from it. you cannot refute that! all these things make the christian god unlikely STATISTICS prove that what you believe in is usually determined by where you were born and has nothing to do with evidence which is almost non existent. every single thing about life is unfair because whatever caused life is unfair. from how we are born to how we are treated its all unfair. life gives us all different contradictory evidence and im supposed to believe that god expects us all to draw the same conclusions? its probably random as everything that is possible happens eventually. what matters when it comes to deciding whether or not a religion is probably true and important for us to know you have to look at its impact on the world which with Christianity is no different than other religions, the amount of people its given to because if its not important for some its not important for you, and is there any evidence for the claims making them probable which there isnt any with christianity as there is only evidence of a man named jesus and no evidence that he is the son of god. infact there is evidence against him being that the son of god is only talked about in christianity and christianity is not credible at it says we come from two people meaning we would all be inbred people and extinct by now and same with animals when there would have to be seven females and seven males of a species to populate the world with that species. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. you are lacking that making the claim unlikely the identities of the authors of the bible are unknown. the religion could have easily been faked as all the evidence we have for it is historical which could have easily been exaggerate or faked. how easy would it have been for the leaders of the people who wrote it to have paid them? all you have done is say that people who wrote the religion heard of jesus, people who believe in the bible agree that jesus was crucified, one man had a source that told him jesus rose from the dead while the source is unmentioned, admit that nothing was written untill about 4 decades after jesus died while you havent explained why such an amazing story wasnt written down by one person who saw it until at about 40 years later. thats not plausible at all. if something amazing happened people would have spoken about it and someone would have written something down about jesus much sooner. so why didnt they write anything about jesus until 35 years after he died and rose from the dead? all of your historians are hearing third hand accounts and worse. jesus is the one who knows god, the apostle is one who believes jesus when he says the christian god exists, and the historian believes the accounts of god through the apostles though jesus. these stories could have been fakes and im shocked to see how few people and historians are mentioned. what twelve people and a few followers of these people, no more credible than a cult as there wasnt more people than a cult who witnessed jesus's miracles which could have had a logical explanation and after all jesus showed so few people and his religion is only known by so few people of all who existed. bible was believed literally then it was believed many ways when dis-proven literally and now there are 35000 opposing interpretations of it. it isnt even enlightening. it just "justifies" what a hand full of people want to keep you from basing morality on the priority to prevent things we all think bad promoting things we think good and equality and fairness for all so they keep advantage