True. The most obvious conclusion is that there is no supreme being or higher power and it is all projections of human psychology. There is little to no evidence of the existence of the main figures of the religions from Krishna to Moses to Jesus to even the Buddha (and even Mohammed is getting a little sketchy as historians look into the evidence). On top of that, the depictions of these characters in the stories of the bible are obviously fictional and legendary. Even the deaths of the martyred saints are obvious fables. There is nothing historic about Saint Peter giving a sermon while crucified upside down and showing no signs of suffering.
The Sermon on the Mount was obviously not something anyone would have preached to a crowd of people. It was composed and written and probably read in services in various forms long after Christianity had been established as a mystery cult. It was not all that different from the cult of Osiris, Mithras, Innana, Isis and others from the same period in Roman History that had very similar rituals like baptisms and ritual feasts and also claimed that their savior figures had been historic living people. In truth, most began as agricultural deities whose death and resurrection represented the planting and harvesting of crops and then, in cosmopolitan Rome, they became resurrected saviors gaining power over death that they could share with their followers.
Deductively, we are left with no demonstrable evidence for the existence of god or gods. Inductively, if a being possibly existed that was omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent and created and governed all of existence exactly like it intended, it could not be any of the various gods that are worshipped or any that have been worshipped throughout history. Those gods all have problems.
The main one, that three of the largest religions in the world all claim to worship, spends his time skulking around a desert or hiding up on mountaintops and only speaking with certain individuals and telling them to do things that it should be able to do without them. A real God would not need anyone to do anything on its behalf, nor would it care about what we do or do not eat or who we sleep with and how we have sex. It would not need a blood sacrifice to fix the world, and it would be very obvious that it existed.
I mean, what makes more sense –
A. The almighty, all-knowing creator and ruler of the entire cosmos picked a few people wandering in the desert and gave them all these rules about how to live and what to do and will punish them with eternal damnation if they don’t do it?
or
B. A few uptight and ambitious men wanted to be in power and claimed that God gave them these rules and put them in charge?
