Christian Ethics are BAD Because of THIS?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PPfDh4SrwU

Channel
Answering Atheists
@answering_atheist
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
74subscribers
+31 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1004415336900 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @answering_atheist |
| Created | Between 1 June 2026 and 26 July 2026 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 10 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 16 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 16 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/answering_atheist |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 16 Sept 2026, 15:40 | 74 | +9 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 18:58 | 65 | +8 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 00:14 | 57 | +5 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 16:18 | 52 | +3 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 10:09 | 49 | +6 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 16:31 | 43 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 03:46 | 43 | first reading |
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 26 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 1 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Recent posts
“The anti-Christian view of man is quite different. Instead of being the pinnacle of the creative act of a perfect God, man is the by-product of an unguided process of evolution. Man is of no significance in the grand scheme of things; the universe is utterly indifferent to his existence. On this view, man is not created in the image of God. Man is not viewed as a creature but rather as a completely autonomous being.…
Why Doesn't Everyone Believe in God? Free PDF Guide https://thethink.institute/store/p/why-doesnt-everyone-believe-in-god-pdf-guide
“In any theory of knowledge there are two important points: the subject of knowledge, and the object of knowledge. The subject is basically the knower—in most cases, us humans. The object is what is known or knowable by the subject. Every theory of knowledge must include these two concepts. The Christian theory of knowledge introduces a third point: God. Although there are ways in which God can be thought of as both …
“The unbeliever rejects the Creator-creature distinction and proposes a metaphysical picture with only one level of existence. If there is a god that exists, he too would be subject to the same conditions and constraints as man. There is just one reality and both man and God share it. The unbeliever posits the correlativity of God and man. An anti-Christian metaphysic is monistic. It is predicated upon blurring the d…
#beatitudes@ChristianInfographics Originally published in the previous channel on 2026-07-25 11:55:19. ↳ Originally forwarded from: Christian Infographics
Started a new channel, join @ChristianInfographics if you are interested Originally published in the previous channel on 2026-07-25 11:55:19.
A Friend Asks If There’s Evidence for God. What Do You Say? https://www.logos.com/grow/a-friend-asks-if-theres-evidence-for-god-what-do-you-say/ Originally published in the previous channel on 2026-07-24 16:11:34.
What's BETTER for Society? Secularism or Christianity? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMhKb_SkThc Originally published in the previous channel on 2026-07-24 15:25:55.
“The Christian worldview also posits a God that is fully transcendent. That is, God exists over and above His creation. He transcends creation is every way—He is not limited or constrained by anything created. Because of this transcendence, God is also incomprehensible. That is to say, we as creatures can never fully grasp Him because He is above ah beyond our conceptual schemes. None of our creaturely categories do …
“In order to cogently demonstrate the folly of unbelief, we must attack the basic presuppositions of unbelieving thought. Since Scripture tells us that unbelief ultimately ends in futility and foolishness, our method must reflect this. We must assume the presuppositions of unbelief and take them to their logical conclusion. We must show that if we adopt an unbelieving outlook on life, we ultimately end with foolishne…
Wesley Huff | The Historical Reliability of the Bible https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkSoTR_vhmg Originally published in the previous channel on 2026-07-21 17:43:42.
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @answering_atheist. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 16 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Answering Atheists” (@answering_atheist), 74 subscribers as measured 16 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/answering_atheist.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.