Christian religion teaches men that they are too weak to be strong without God.
Define your use of strong in this context. Do you mean physical, willpower, influence, or something else?
For that matter, define religion as well. An hierarchical power structure, simply belief in God, etc?
Thus it is for weak men who feel they can't think clearly without a God to save them when they fail. It rewards failure by telling us it is okay when we fail, because we will be saved in this unfalsiable heaven.
It dovetails very well with other forms of mass control and enslavement such as socialism, which rewards failure and weakness.
This is what I thought, but is not at all what I've found.
From my experience there are many individuals claiming to be Christians who do not practice what is preached, apparently caused by conceptual misunderstanding or an attraction to the lifestyle in a form over function situation.
On the other side, those genuinely following have effectively scraped away layers of cultural and social toxicity to see that their own principled actions encourage and incentivize others to do the same. This highlights the strength of the individual as an integral part of a whole.
Along with that comes the strength to acknowledge and admit that one is learning and can make mistakes, to not fear looking foolish while discovering the optimal path. Likewise, to be just in supporting others in the process of learning as well as chastising those doing wrong. There is a clear distinction in Christianity between giving a helping hand and turning hostile individuals away, just as can be seen with the current immigration differences between Europe and the US where the former has no boundaries and the latter drew a line.
What I have seen:
- Failure is forgiven, not excused
- Strength is rewarded when used to build and support
- Respect is for both men and women because we are different, always learning and improving
Before claiming to be Christian I also misunderstood deeply. It's the kind of thing where you need to experience the change to truly understand, similar to your illness.
This universe, existence, what-have-you is to me a playpen of sorts. I see it as a safe place both to protect us while we collectively grow as spiritual beings, as well as to protect whatever is beyond this universe from us. Yes, from us - we have the potential for immense power, both creative and destructive. We probably don't realize anywhere near the extent of what we can do as gods -
Psalm 82:6My perspective is that humanity collectively forms a unified organism that transcends what we understand individually. Whether what we arrive at is due to an emergent property or remains external is something I don't know, but all of the changes throughout history leave subtle clues in the same direction. The primary point of import is that we have to progress through the stages of growth together and at differing rates.
We can learn everything to know about the here and now, which is all well and good - but we still don't know what lies beyond death, and it doesn't seem we will in the immediate future. In that context, unless we can provably know all there is to know, it makes more sense for me to believe than to hold fast to the notion that we might figure everything out here.
As for the Horus-Jesus link and other comparative mythology, I've spent some time studying them and simply haven't found anything truly convincing. The whole sun god concept falls apart in light of
Deuteronomy 4:19, among other verses, which explicitly prohibits worshiping of the sun, moon, stars or any other celestial object.
I have not studied all religions extensively, but I have seen that Buddhism and Hinduism and Islam and others all echo each other in some way. I find that to be a greater indication that they hint at an absolute truth than anything else.
We have too many dumb ass "men" giving too much socialism money to too many dumb ass bitchez, and thus being a wife, mother, and suppressing (repressing) the undisciplined hindbrain is disincentivized. And the devolution always repeats throughout history
...
Agreed, although I use different terms. We create and destroy with words, perhaps more so than we do with our hands -
Ephesians 4:29 
I think the trouble may lie more in the push to "educate" than in being educated and quotas pushing for more minorities/women in STEM - the strong-willed may not necessarily need to get a degree in higher education, whereas those with an inclination to be led might follow paths that are not always beneficial. Exposure to opportunities is one thing, but if a person does not act on it then forcing won't help. On top of that, how many can fathom the implications of their choices in a non-linear reality?
Everyone in this life has a different path; some women may indeed go on to be prominent leaders, although that is certainly not their most common purpose or strength. What's most important is a sense of respect and understanding that we all have stages in our lives where we misunderstood or were misguided and may have caused harm somehow. It's also critical to remind ourselves that there may still remain areas where we are mistaken, which can indeed be humbling. That humility garners more respect in the long run than any amount of blustering.
Reading through some of your posts on Github and ESR's site, there is evident emphasis and enthusiasm very similar to how I used to write. Your reasoning and technical acumen is commendable, so the frustration during explanation is understandable. It can be a major challenge to remain civil and I only learned how to be judicious with my replies due to lack of time, but its made a world of difference in how my words are received. The years you've spent on these forums and in discussion have undoubtedly made an impact, but they've also taken a great deal of time; that constant pressure will have a profound result at some point, especially as you refine your approach.
As you've stated before, doing will have much greater impact than talking. Patience is the hard part in that.