Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Doc Farrell wrote: »I see there's a new sofa shop in town called S.O.U.L which stands for spirit of ultimate lifestyle. If I buy a few cushions there does that make me more or less spiritual?
a case of sofa so good I would think .0 -
-
-
I explained my position i9n message 1969
It is entirely reasonable
Secondly i can make a reasonable inductive inference
We can look at hgistory and see all governments with Christianity ( Christ is God and we should live like Christ) at the centre were not atrocious ( in fact very few were)
All governments with "there is no god" as a central principle were atrocious.
One can quite easily infer atheism used as a principle to rule over people leads to atrocities.
So I will ask again. Are you changing your position from "atheism causes atrocities", to "atheist societies can be perfectly healthy, but state-enforced atheism, due to the nature of the regimes imposing atheism, will more than likely lead to atrocities."But in message 1985 you try the
cop out. In other words "religion is to blame" and atheistic regimes you redefine as a religion. which is very similar to saying belief in God is to blame and it is preferable to believe "there is no God". Which puts you right in there with all the "there is no God " people in history.
No. Not in other words. I do not consider Pol Pot's regime, for example, to be a religious regime. A regime like North Korea, on the other hand is deeply religious. It is an example of a secular religion, with its own mythology and worship. It is an example of a bad religion, and hence an example of a religious instruction being a bad influence. This was entirely beside the point, and was part of a tangent you brought up.
Instead, what I brought up as a counter-point was a) An example of a predominantly atheist society that is perfectly functional, culturally rich, and does not commit atrocities. b) Reasons why your understanding of the underpinning causes behind the atrocities you mention (like Pol Pot's) is wrong.Where did you explain Pol Pot was not a leader of an atheistic regime?
Or are you trying to cop out by redefining "There is no God" not as atheism but as religion?
This has nothing to do with what I said.Fair enough let us go with you on that one too. Let us say i agree.
Why is atheism as a religion so more damaging to society that Christianity as a religion?
Atheist regimes (not religions), unlike Christian regimes, have always emerged as a symptom of anti-democratic "revolutionary" totalitarianism, like the "socialism" practised by Pol Pot. Their entire philosophy is to blame. You are making the mistake of assuming atheism is the offending component of their philosophy, and I have pointed out that plenty of atheists abhor the philosophies of people like Stalin and Pol Pot.And I have responded on Pol Pot - again from Fasgnadh
<Pol Pot references>
Again, I see the blame lying squarely on the policies of Pol Pot. Perhaps you are claiming that, if Pol Pot was not an atheist, he wouldn't have committed atrocities? A claim as baseless as the claim that, if King Leopold was an atheist, he would not have committed atrocities. As you said yourself, we know what we know, and there is no point in conted speculation.
I like this cartoon:
0 -
-
So I will ask again. Are you changing your position from "atheism causes atrocities", to "atheist societies can be perfectly healthy, but state-enforced atheism, due to the nature of the regimes imposing atheism, will more than likely lead to atrocities."
You can go back years and you will find that whenever I have entered ionto this discussion my phrasing has always been "atheistic regimes".
It isn't a question of "more than likely" .every single one i.e. ALL atheistic regimes have been atrocious!
I can't logically formally prove Christianity does not cause atrocities or atheism does cause them.
All I can say is if we look at history ALL atheistic regimes were atrocious and almost all Christian regimes were not atrocious.
I happen to believe that this has somethingto do with people believing in christianity and something to do with atheists not believing in God. I think that belief is reasonable and can be supported with reference to history.No. Not in other words. I do not consider Pol Pot's regime, for example, to be a religious regime.
Really?
In http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76630118&postcount=1985
you stated
[/quote]
Atheistic regimes were deeply religious.
[/quote]A regime like North Korea, on the other hand is deeply religious.
It is an example of a secular religion, with its own mythology and worship.
Back to the cop out of defining all "there is no god" regimes as religions.
Atheism = "there is no God"
Atheistic regimes have atheism " There is no god" as a central tenet
Christian governments ( few are regimes) have "Christ is God live like Christ," as a central tenet.
So...how come the atheistic ones are all murder regimes and the christian ones aren't?It is an example of a bad religion, and hence an example of a religious instruction being a bad influence. This was entirely beside the point, and was part of a tangent you brought up.
I still don't accept your redefinition of atheism as a religion but how come then that atheism as a religion is always bad and Christianity isn't bad?Instead, what I brought up as a counter-point was a) An example of a predominantly atheist society that is perfectly functional, culturally rich, and does not commit atrocities.
When atheism was a core principle of the society did!
And Japan isn't an atheistic society it is not run by an atheistic government.
If and when they reintroduce a "there is no God" I suspect dead bodies will soon follow as they did everywhere else. If however they made Christianity a State religion and gave Christianity or say the Pope or local bishops some political power in Japan I suspect it would not result in piles of dead.Atheist regimes (not religions), unlike Christian regimes, have always emerged as a symptom of anti-democratic "revolutionary" totalitarianism, like the "socialism" practised by Pol Pot. Their entire philosophy is to blame.
Yep including "there is no God" as a central principle.
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
�Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!�
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
We do not fight against believers and not even clergymen.
WE FIGHT AGAINST GOD to snatch believers from Him.
-Vechernaia Moskva, a Soviet newspaper
Let us drive out the Capitalists from the earth,
and God from Heaven! (early Soviet slogan)
"the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
- Daniel Peris,
"Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
"Criticism of atheism was strictly forbidden"
"Between 1917 and 1940, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested.
In 1918, the Cheka under Felix Dzerzhinsky executed over
3000 Orthodox clergymen of all ranks.
Some were drowned in ice-holes or poured over with cold water
in winter until they turned to ice-pillars.
- John Shelton Curtis, The Russian Church and the Soviet State
(Boston: Little Brown, 1953)
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
The Pope! How many divisions has he got? -Stalin 1935You are making the mistake of assuming atheism is the offending component of their philosophy, and I have pointed out that plenty of atheists abhor the philosophies of people like Stalin and Pol Pot.
I accept that some atheists abhor violence. To turn your own reasoning back on you are you seriously claiming they abhor vi0olence because they are atheist? Anyway why is it the non violence abhorring atheists slaughter people to a degree unheard of and say non violence abhorring Catholics don't?Again, I see the blame lying squarely on the policies of Pol Pot.
Atheistic - kill and destroy all things to do with God or any belief - policies?Perhaps you are claiming that, if Pol Pot was not an atheist, he wouldn't have committed atrocities?
Aha! But he WAS an atheist. All the mega murdering regimes were atheist and promoted atheism. Of all the non atheist Christian/Catholic regimes few oif any murdered people en masse and none to the extent of the atheistic ones.A claim as baseless as the claim that, if King Leopold was an atheist, he would not have committed atrocities. As you said yourself, we know what we know, and there is no point in conted speculation.
Leopold did NOT commit atrocities on behalf of Christianity. He didn't say anything about making the Congo christian as part of his central plan. And the atheist Marxists in the Congo who were explicitly atheistic did murder people.
I like this cartoon:[/QUOTE]
I like it too.
Except over 70% of the Norwegian population is not Atheist!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_NorwayNominal religion in Norway is mostly Protestant (Evangelical-Lutheran) with 78.9% belonging to the state Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway.
The CIA world fact book lists over 90% as religious in 2004.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/no.htmlChurch of Norway 85.7%, Pentecostal 1%, Roman Catholic 1%, other Christian 2.4%, Muslim 1.8%, other 8.1% (2004)
And the Norwegian State was constitutionally bound to the Lutheran Church until very recently and still is to some extent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Church_of_NorwayThere is continuous discussion about separating church and state in Norway, and after a decision in Parliament in 2008, it appears a considerable relaxation of the ties will take place, even if state control is still evident
Nor do they have the Second highest GDP per capita. They have the 4th or 5th highest depending on the source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
In 2011 it is listed 7th by CIA WFB
In fact ther is no majority atheist country in the top 100 as far as I know.
The CIA world fact book lists them not 1st but 25th in life expectancy
There Literacy is Ill admit outstanding 100% - Must be all those Priests teaching the Sumi eh? 0 -
Advertisement
-
-
You can go back years and you will find that whenever I have entered ionto this discussion my phrasing has always been "atheistic regimes".
It isn't a question of "more than likely" .every single one i.e. ALL atheistic regimes have been atrocious!
I can't logically formally prove Christianity does not cause atrocities or atheism does cause them.
All I can say is if we look at history ALL atheistic regimes were atrocious and almost all Christian regimes were not atrocious.
I happen to believe that this has somethingto do with people believing in christianity and something to do with atheists not believing in God. I think that belief is reasonable and can be supported with reference to history.
I specifically asked you if you believed "atheism causes atrocities". Are you now "refining" that claim and modifying it to "Atheist societies can be perfectly functional, but state-enforced, atheist regimes that suppress religion and deny basic human rights will more than likely result in atrocities."?
In short, do you accept that a predominantly atheist society can be perfectly healthy and functional? Do you believe the belief in God is necessary to prevent atrocities?Really?
In http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=76630118&postcount=1985
you statedAtheistic regimes were deeply religious.
Yep. So? Many were.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality#Past_examples
But not all:
"Not all dictatorships foster personality cults, not all personality cults are dictatorships (some are nominally democratic), and some leaders may actively seek to minimize their own public adulation. For example, during the Cambodian Khmer Rouge regime, images of dictator Pol Pot (Saloth Sar) were rarely seen in public, and his identity was under dispute abroad until after his fall from power. The same applied to numerous Eastern European Communist regimes following World War II (although not those of Enver Hoxha and Nicolae Ceaușescu, mentioned below)."Back to the cop out of defining all "there is no god" regimes as religions.
Atheism = "there is no God"
Atheistic regimes have atheism " There is no god" as a central tenet
Christian governments ( few are regimes) have "Christ is God live like Christ," as a central tenet.
So...how come the atheistic ones are all murder regimes and the christian ones aren't?
Firstly, read what I write. Not all state atheism was religious. Only those that demanded unwavering worship to supreme leaders, with their own myths and doctrine. Secondly, I have already answered your question. Atheist regimes (not religions), unlike Christian regimes, have always emerged as a symptom of anti-democratic "revolutionary" totalitarianism, like the "socialism" practised by Pol Pot. Their entire philosophy is to blame.I still don't accept your redefinition of atheism as a religion but how come then that atheism as a religion is always bad and Christianity isn't bad?
I still don't accept your definition of theism as a type of hamster food.When atheism was a core principle of the society did!
And Japan isn't an atheistic society it is not run by an atheistic government.
If and when they reintroduce a "there is no God" I suspect dead bodies will soon follow as they did everywhere else. If however they made Christianity a State religion and gave Christianity or say the Pope or local bishops some political power in Japan I suspect it would not result in piles of dead.
Again, I answered this in the post you missed. "Atheist society" and "State-enforced atheism" are not synonymous. Japan is a predominantly atheist, secular pluralist society. They are an example of cultural atheism arising naturally, and not through some emerging extremist regime. Incidentally, they were not a predominantly atheist society in WWII, when they committed horrible acts.Yep including "there is no God" as a central principle.
<snip quotes from totalitarian nut jobs>
So now do you see that it was not atheism, but totalitarian, political philosophies and the neglect of human rights that are to blame?I accept that some atheists abhor violence. To turn your own reasoning back on you are you seriously claiming <snip stuff I didn't claim>
Some? The vast majority.Aha! But he WAS an atheist. All the mega murdering regimes were atheist and promoted atheism. Of all the non atheist Christian/Catholic regimes few oif any murdered people en masse and none to the extent of the atheistic ones.
Leopold did NOT commit atrocities on behalf of Christianity. He didn't say anything about making the Congo christian as part of his central plan. And the atheist Marxists in the Congo who were explicitly atheistic did murder people.
Leopold was not an atheist. He committed atrocities. It is evidence of atrocities stemming from other factors. Claiming he committed atrocities because he was Christian would be as baseless as claiming Pol Pot committed atrocities because he was atheist, as opposed to, say, because of his opinion of forced labour, social experiments, and human life.I like it too.
Except over 70% of the Norwegian population is not Atheist!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Norway
Only 30% believe in God. The rest are atheist. Unless you want to use some obscure and misleading Scotsman "only gnostic atheist materialists are true atheists" definition. In which case not even I am an atheist.The CIA world fact book lists over 90% as religious in 2004.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/no.html
And the Norwegian State was constitutionally bound to the Lutheran Church until very recently and still is to some extent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelical_Lutheran_Church_of_Norway
"Norwegians are automatically registered as members at birth, so this number includes anyone except members of other communities, and those few who take action to unregister."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_demographics
Only 30% believe in God. How come they haven't been slaughtered yet by the Pol Pot-loving Godless hoard?Nor do they have the Second highest GDP per capita. They have the 4th or 5th highest depending on the source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28PPP%29_per_capita
In 2011 it is listed 7th by CIA WFB
In fact ther is no majority atheist country in the top 100 as far as I know.
The CIA world fact book lists them not 1st but 25th in life expectancy
There Literacy is Ill admit outstanding 100% - Must be all those Priests teaching the Sumi eh?
You are nit-picking. GDP obviously changes from year to year, and whether they have the second highest or the 7th doesn't change the fact that they are a predominantly atheist, but remarkably successful society. (The "CIA" book clearly has its numbers wrong, which is not surprising for the CIA).0 -
I specifically asked you if you believed "atheism causes atrocities". Are you now "refining" that claim and modifying it to "Atheist societies can be perfectly functional, but state-enforced, atheist regimes that suppress religion and deny basic human rights will more than likely result in atrocities."?
I note how you take up a belief and turn it into a claim
I have been quite clear while I am suspicious of atheists in power but I do not claim all atheists are bent on atrocity. I don't claim it because I can't logically formally prove it. I don't distrust Christians in power as much. However I am suspicious of anyone in power. I have frequently stated I am anti authoritarian.
But the point is that state enforced atheism resulted in HUGH genocide on a scale that State enforced Christianity NEVER approached!In short, do you accept that a predominantly atheist society can be perfectly healthy and functional?
If they are not allowed get into power and bring their atheism to bear on policy I'm sure a majority atheist society could function. so long as it does not function based on atheism.Do you believe the belief in God is necessary to prevent atrocities?
This isn't about what i believe. It is about what happened in history and whether that is anything from which we can learn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality#Past_examples
I have to laugh at the Turkmen Guy Saparmurat Atayevich Niyazov
Niyazov banned the use of lip syncing at public concerts in 2005.
He also got rid of the death penalty.
Yes he was a despot but had some redeeming features. But not an atheist.
Perons Argentina also not atheist was a despotic regime but again not anywhere approaching the death regimes of atheistic states.
Saddam Hussain similar. He was probably a muslim and not atheist but probably pretended to be devout. He certainly was not so bad or a big a threat as the US claimed although he did use Chemical weapons in Iranians ( probably from chemicals and delivery systems he got from the US when they were pals with Saddam and much worse people). He certainly wasn't Christian."Not all dictatorships foster personality cults, not all personality cults are dictatorships (some are nominally democratic), and some leaders may actively seek to minimize their own public adulation. For example, during the Cambodian Khmer Rouge regime, images of dictator Pol Pot (Saloth Sar) were rarely seen in public, and his identity was under dispute abroad until after his fall from power. The same applied to numerous Eastern European Communist regimes following World War II (although not those of Enver Hoxha and Nicolae Ceaușescu, mentioned below)."
Unlike ALL atheistic regimes which were murder regimes - ALL of them.Firstly, read what I write. Not all state atheism was religious.
But all State Atheism was murderous.Only those that demanded unwavering worship to supreme leaders, with their own myths and doctrine. Secondly, I have already answered your question. Atheist regimes (not religions), unlike Christian regimes, have always emerged as a symptom of anti-democratic "revolutionary" totalitarianism, like the "socialism" practised by Pol Pot. Their entire philosophy is to blame.
Okay I agree. The philosophy of atheistic regimes is to blame. And they did much more damage than non atheistic regimesI still don't accept your definition of theism as a type of hamster food.
My definition of theism was "belief in God or gods"
"Atheistic society" and "State-enforced atheism" are! Which is whay i usually use the term "Atheistic "Again, I answered this in the post you missed. "Atheist society" and "State-enforced atheism" are not synonymous.Japan is a predominantly atheist, secular pluralist society. They are an example of cultural atheism arising naturally, and not through some emerging extremist regime.Incidentally, they were not a predominantly atheist society in WWII, when they committed horrible acts.
They were in Buddhist times of the Shogun.
But again such animism or Paganism even though not atheism is philosophically miles away from Christianity .So now do you see that it was not atheism, but totalitarian, political philosophies and the neglect of human rights that are to blame?
No. I accept that some christian regimes did bad things and also some Buddhist ones and Muslim ones. But the worst damage ever was by atheistic regimes. You are claiming "It doesnt matter whether they believed or not what mattered was respect" but how is it that in religious societies people mostly respected others people but in atheistic societies they slaughtered people.Some? The vast majority.
Do yuo claim the vast majority of atheists abhor violence because they are atheists?
If you don't claim that then why mention the vast majority of atheists subscribe to anything if their atheism is not a contributing factor?Leopold was not an atheist. He committed atrocities. It is evidence of atrocities stemming from other factors.
I agree that non atheists and even christians can commit atrocities. However compared to atheistic regimes they almost never do. Leopold did not act on behalf of the Church.Claiming he committed atrocities because he was Christian would be as baseless as claiming Pol Pot committed atrocities because he was atheist, as opposed to, say, because of his opinion of forced labour, social experiments, and human life.
No it wouldnt! Because Leopold did not order things with a specific goal of promoting Christianity but Pol Pot DID order things to promote atheism.Only 30% believe in God. The rest are atheist. Unless you want to use some obscure and misleading Scotsman "only gnostic atheist materialists are true atheists" definition. In which case not even I am an atheist.
over 90 per cent of the Norwegian population do not claim to be atheist!
Church of Norway 85.7%, Pentecostal 1%, Roman Catholic 1%, other Christian 2.4%, Muslim 1.8%, other 8.1% (2004)
You are no doubt going by the oft quoted Phil Zukerman estimate ( which is in fact onle ONE of his estimates - which range from 31 to 72%. You picked the 72 no surprises there."Norwegians are automatically registered as members at birth, so this number includes anyone except members of other communities, and those few who take action to unregister."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_demographics
SAme source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005 17% answered that "they do not believe there is any sort of spirit, God, or life force".
Approximately 9-10% are probably not members of any religious or philosophical communities, while 8.6 % of the population are members of other religious or philosophical communities outside the Church of Norway.
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/
Norways own statistics Religious and life stance communities, 1 January 2011
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/tab-2011-12-06-01-en.html
Members1 of religious and life stance communities outside the Church of Norway, by religion/life stance. Per 1 January. 2005-2011. Numbers and per cent
As of 1 January 2011, 484 500 persons in Norway were members of religious and life stance communities; an increase of 37 700 compared with the previous year.
More than half of the members, 266 800, were members of Christian communities.
The non Lutheran believer communities are growing in Norway.
This represents an increase of about 8 per cent compared to the previous year. The Christian communities had the largest increase.
There is no Indication of atheism taking over as a belief.
In 2005, a survey conducted by Gallup International in sixty-five countries indicated that Norway was the least religious country in Western Europe, with 29% counting themselves as believing in a church or deity, 26% as being atheists, and 45% not being entirely certain.
That's about a quarter atheist not a majority and not 70% and it is the most atheist country in Europe.
1.7% are Humanist 13% are nones.Only 30% believe in God. How come they haven't been slaughtered yet by the Pol Pot-loving Godless hoard?
1. About 25 % ast most are atheist.
2. Up to 90% believe in a God or gods or spirits.
3. The Church is still linked to the StateYou are nit-picking. GDP obviously changes from year to year, and whether they have the second highest or the 7th
Don't blame me - YOU posted the cartoon claiming 1st!doesn't change the fact that they are a predominantly atheist,
Wrong! you awere wrong about GDP and you are wrong about atheism in Norway. It isnt 70% - a figure trotted out by the cambridge companion to Atheism which they cherry picked from the highest of several levels quoted by Zukerman which has been contradicted by several other surveys before and since.but remarkably successful society. (The "CIA" book clearly has its numbers wrong, which is not surprising for the CIA).
And the Norwegian central stats office?
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/arkiv/
And Gallup?
And Eurobarometer?
And Zukerman's other surveys?
Almost 86 per cent of the population in Norway are members of the Church of Norway. About 8 per cent are members in religious and philosophical communities outside the Church of Norway, and the number is increasing.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
I note how you take up a belief and turn it into a claim
I have been quite clear while I am suspicious of atheists in power but I do not claim all atheists are bent on atrocity. I don't claim it because I can't logically formally prove it. I don't distrust Christians in power as much. However I am suspicious of anyone in power. I have frequently stated I am anti authoritarian.
If they are not allowed get into power and bring their atheism to bear on policy I'm sure a majority atheist society could function. so long as it does not function based on atheism.
Define: "Bring their atheism to bear on policy". Do you believe the campaign for gay marriage is bringing atheism to bear on policy? Do you believe the secular principle that no religion should be oppressed or established by the state is bringing atheism to bear on policy?But the point is that state enforced atheism resulted in HUGH genocide on a scale that State enforced Christianity NEVER approached.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult_of_personality#Past_examples
I have to laugh at the Turkmen Guy Saparmurat Atayevich Niyazov
Niyazov banned the use of lip syncing at public concerts in 2005.
He also got rid of the death penalty.
Yes he was a despot but had some redeeming features. But not an atheist.
Perons Argentina also not atheist was a despotic regime but again not anywhere approaching the death regimes of atheistic states.
Saddam Hussain similar. He was probably a muslim and not atheist but probably pretended to be devout. He certainly was not so bad or a big a threat as the US claimed although he did use Chemical weapons in Iranians ( probably from chemicals and delivery systems he got from the US when they were pals with Saddam and much worse people). He certainly wasn't Christian.
Unlike ALL atheistic regimes which were murder regimes - ALL of them.
But all State Atheism was murderous.
Okay I agree. The philosophy of atheistic regimes is to blame. And they did much more damage than non atheistic regimes
I agree that non atheists and even christians can commit atrocities. However compared to atheistic regimes they almost never do. Leopold did not act on behalf of the Church.
No. I accept that some christian regimes did bad things and also some Buddhist ones and Muslim ones. But the worst damage ever was by atheistic regimes. You are claiming "It doesnt matter whether they believed or not what mattered was respect" but how is it that in religious societies people mostly respected others people but in atheistic societies they slaughtered people.
They were in Buddhist times of the Shogun.
But again such animism or Paganism even though not atheism is philosophically miles away from Christianity .
No it wouldnt! Because Leopold did not order things with a specific goal of promoting Christianity but Pol Pot DID order things to promote atheism
Hooray for the bit in blue (albeit hidden amongst a bunch of silly statements)! Now, as a follow up question: Do you believe Japan, a predominantly atheist society, but not an atheist regime, is on the road to atrocity?My definition of theism was "belief in God or gods"
So now you are saying hamster food believes in God? A laughable position. But I suppose you also believe a lie asserted over and over begins to sound like the truth."Atheistic society" and "State-enforced atheism" are! Which is whay i usually use the term "Atheistic "
No they aren't. Japan can be described as atheistic in the sense that most of the people are atheistic. It can also be described as a secular pluralist "regime" that does not enforce atheism.Do yuo claim the vast majority of atheists abhor violence because they are atheists?
No.If you don't claim that then why mention the vast majority of atheists subscribe to anything if their atheism is not a contributing factor?
To counter your claim that atheists don't abhor atrocities.over 90 per cent of the Norwegian population do not claim to be atheist!
Church of Norway 85.7%, Pentecostal 1%, Roman Catholic 1%, other Christian 2.4%, Muslim 1.8%, other 8.1% (2004)
You are no doubt going by the oft quoted Phil Zukerman estimate ( which is in fact onle ONE of his estimates - which range from 31 to 72%. You picked the 72 no surprises there.
SAme source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005 17% answered that "they do not believe there is any sort of spirit, God, or life force".
Approximately 9-10% are probably not members of any religious or philosophical communities, while 8.6 % of the population are members of other religious or philosophical communities outside the Church of Norway.
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/
Norways own statistics Religious and life stance communities, 1 January 2011
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/tab-2011-12-06-01-en.html
Members1 of religious and life stance communities outside the Church of Norway, by religion/life stance. Per 1 January. 2005-2011. Numbers and per cent
As of 1 January 2011, 484 500 persons in Norway were members of religious and life stance communities; an increase of 37 700 compared with the previous year.
More than half of the members, 266 800, were members of Christian communities.
The non Lutheran believer communities are growing in Norway.
This represents an increase of about 8 per cent compared to the previous year. The Christian communities had the largest increase.
There is no Indication of atheism taking over as a belief.
In 2005, a survey conducted by Gallup International in sixty-five countries indicated that Norway was the least religious country in Western Europe, with 29% counting themselves as believing in a church or deity, 26% as being atheists, and 45% not being entirely certain.
That's about a quarter atheist not a majority and not 70% and it is the most atheist country in Europe.
1.7% are Humanist 13% are nones.
1. About 25 % ast most are atheist.
2. Up to 90% believe in a God or gods or spirits.
3. The Church is still linked to the State
Don't blame me - YOU posted the cartoon claiming 1st!
Wrong! you awere wrong about GDP and you are wrong about atheism in Norway. It isnt 70% - a figure trotted out by the cambridge companion to Atheism which they cherry picked from the highest of several levels quoted by Zukerman which has been contradicted by several other surveys before and since.
And the Norwegian central stats office?
http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/arkiv/
And Gallup?
And Eurobarometer?
And Zukerman's other surveys?
Almost 86 per cent of the population in Norway are members of the Church of Norway. About 8 per cent are members in religious and philosophical communities outside the Church of Norway, and the number is increasing.
--
My definition of theism was "belief in God or gods"
You just repeated the same mistake you made last time, only you used more words, and contradictory definitions (Do you believe a person is Lutheran if they don't believe in God?). Those surveys are completely consistent with the cartoon if we define an atheist as someone who doesn't believe in God or gods.0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement