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

What are the odds?

1…1011121416

Comments

  • #392
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    bus77 wrote: »
    Apologies for bringing up the pot again but I think I've sussed out what it was for.

    Along with this huge thing you've got 10 more basins around the temple. They used the big one to refill the little ones every day.

    ''37 After this manner he made the ten bases; all of them had one casting, one measure, and one form.

    38 And he made ten lavers of brass: one laver contained forty baths; and every laver was four cubits; and upon every one of the ten bases one laver.

    39 And he set the bases, five on the right side of the house, and five on the left side of the house; and he set the sea on the right side of the house eastward, toward the south.''

    So each one of the smaller one's hold's 40 baths and there's ten of them.
    To fill each of them once, 40 x 10 = 400.

    Now if you multiply that by a 7 day working week you get 2800. But if you do it by 5 working days you get the 2000 baths that the big one held.

    So a five day working week for the temple, a refill of the big pot on a Saturday, rest on Sunday. And back in business for the Monday.

    On second thoughts, that is probably a bad idea. Wicknight might now use it to argue that the Bible miscalculates the number of days in a week as five! :pac:


  • #393
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,462 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    PDN wrote: »
    And if you want to claim that a lot of the millions of new Christians in China were already Christians then supply some evidence.
    Oh, come now PDN, where did this sudden interest in evidence appear from? :)

    After trying to rubbish a point I'd made a couple of days back, I must say I thought you'd rather lost interest.

    Or is evidence something that only other people have to produce in order for their views to be credible?

    .


  • #394
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    robindch wrote: »
    Oh, come now PDN, where did this sudden interest in evidence appear from? :)

    After trying to rubbish a point I'd made a couple of days back, I must say I thought you'd rather lost interest.

    Or is evidence something that only other people have to produce in order for their views to be credible?

    .

    I might as well ask you why you are so interested in the Bible every time you post a question about a Scripture passage. After all, you claim not to follow the Bible or to see it as an authoritative source. As you well know, the reason you want to keep talking about the Bible is because myself, and other Christian posters here, do view the Bible as an authority. Therefore, if you could show that we are being inconsistent with our approach to the Bible then that would serve as a weapon for you to attack our beliefs or our sincerity.

    I am simply taking a leaf out of your debating manual. You are the guys who continually claim to base your beliefs on evidence. Therefore, when you come on to this board and make a statement, I have a perfect right to ask for the evidence that supports that statement.

    If Wicknight can produce evidence to support his assertion that lots of the 100 million new Christians in China were somehow Christians already and that a large number of Christians somehow kept practicing their faith through the Cultural Revolution, then let him produce that evidence and we can discuss its validity.

    If, however, Wicknight cannot produce such evidence then he would be guilty of making an unsubstantiated assertion. In that case he would be like a Creationist who makes claims about science even though they have no evidence to support such claims. It is, of course, a democratic society, and none of us can stop him making such claims. However, it would reveal his claim to base his beliefs on evidence as hypocritical nonsense.

    What if a poster, like vibe666, not only cannot produce evidence but continues to make their unsubstantiated claims in the teeth of solid evidence to the contrary? In that case they are like Kent Hovind - someone who not only lacks evidence for their beliefs but is prepared to lie to support their beliefs.

    Now, I have no wish to prejudge Wicknight. Maybe I am wrong and all the Chinese Christians I have met are liars. Maybe a thriving Christian church quite happily continued holding Sunday School parties throughout the Cultural Revolution and there was a large pool of pre-existing Christians just waiting to pretend to be converted from atheism so as to fool gullible old fools like myself. I am open to that possibility and await Wicknight's evidence with bated breath. It would certainly cut down my travel expenses for next year!

    However, I do find it ominous that you want to challenge my right to ask for evidence in the first place. Does this betray a lack of confidence on your part that Wicknight will come up with the goods? Surely you have more faith in your sidekick than that?


  • #395
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    And if you want to claim that a lot of the millions of new Christians in China were already Christians then supply some evidence.

    Well you don't supply evidence for anything you claim, from 10 = 9.6 to the claim that millions are converting in China. Your "I've been there" claim is rather worthless considering your looseness with figures strongly suggests you have an agenda to paint the number of Christian conversions in the best possible fashion.

    Polling estimates (you know, actually statistics) that currently there are about 39 million Christians in China, far fewer than the guesstimates that Evangelicals like to claim of 100-130 million.

    http://www.assistnews.net/STORIES/2007/s07100011.htm

    So, are millions atheists converting to Christianity? Very doubtful. If there isn't the massive increase that PDN suggests actually happening, estimates in 1993 place Christian numbers in the 50 million, about the same as it is now. Christianity in China is largely increasing with population size (China's population grew by 11.5% in the last decade), or even remaining static.

    Where are the new Christians coming from? Same as where they come from in most Christian countries. Children for Christian parents are being raised Christians and are being counted as new Christians because their parents were never counted in the first place.

    If one assumes, as evangelicals seem to do, that everyone was atheist in China then naturally that would lead to the idea that all these Christians are converts from atheism. But that is a distortion. There isn't even that many atheists in China, only 10% of the population claim to be atheists.

    I'm sure this doesn't match PDN's view when he pops over there are his tours to see how people are falling over themselves to become Christian. But that view seems largely motivated by religious propaganda than actual facts or a desire to represent reality. PDN claims to have thousands of accounts of atheists converting, I wonder is he embellishing slightly for effect.

    Does that mean that no one is converting to Christianity in China? Not at all. Christianity was estimated to be only 500,000 in 1949, so a growth from half a million to 50 million in a few decades is certainly impressive. But other religions, including Islam and the Asian religions, have done equally as well.

    My goat with this topic is not that Christianity can grow rapidly. Statistics, from both now and ancient times, demonstrate that they can. My goat is people distorting the truth for religious propaganda.


  • #396
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    I'm curious, you state that there were an estimated 50 million Christians in 1993, now there are 39 million or 50 million depending on what figure you are citing. (This does seem to fit in with what the C.I.A's figures of 3% - 4%). Are you suggesting that there is potentially a very significant fall in the number of Christians or stagnancy since the 1993 survey?


  • Advertisement
  • #397
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,462 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    PDN wrote: »
    Therefore, when you come on to this board and make a statement, I have a perfect right to ask for the evidence that supports that statement. [...] However, I do find it ominous that you want to challenge my right to ask for evidence in the first place.
    "Challenge my right to ask for evidence". Good heavens, PDN, how on earth did you get that out of what I wrote? You really do need to read my posts more carefully!

    At the risk of repeating myself needlessly, all I was doing a few posts back was pointing out that you were publicly contemptuous of my suggestion that the strength of evidence and one's confidence in the subsequent conclusions should be linked. Unless you were just being gratuitously rude, which I think is beneath you, I've no idea why you find this fairly obvious idea worth a one-line rubbishing, but rubbish it you did.

    Hence my surprise when you demanded evidence from Wicknight earlier on. Either you think evidence is useful, or you don't, and you'd come across as more coherent if you decided which side of the evidential fence you sit on. From your manufactured outrage here, I suspect you're a reasonable chap and you accept evidence for most things, more or less like most of us. And demanding evidence isn't only a right, but the right thing to do too, and it's good to see you do it.
    PDN wrote: »
    Does this betray a lack of confidence on your part that Wicknight will come up with the goods?
    Nope. See Wicknight's post up above which seems to put the evidential kibosh up your claims that there are 100 million christians in China.
    PDN wrote: »
    Surely you have more faith in your sidekick than that?
    As you know very well, Wicknight is not my sidekick.

    I am, however, very happy to see you acknowledge that we work well together as a debating team. Thanks for the compliment, unintended and all as it was.


  • #398
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,462 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    PDN wrote: »
    If Wicknight can produce evidence to support his assertion that lots of the 100 million new Christians in China were somehow Christians already [...]
    Wikipedia has a useful article on the topic:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_China

    ...which quotes statistics -- from Protestants -- which support Wicknight's claim that there are substantially fewer than the >100 million that you've claimed in the past. The real figure seems much closer to something like half that.


  • #399
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    robindch wrote: »
    Wikipedia has a useful article on the topic:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_China

    ...which quotes statistics -- from Protestants -- which support Wicknight's claim that there are substantially fewer than the >100 million that you've claimed in the past. The real figure seems much closer to something like half that.

    There are a number of estimates for the number of Christians in China. My figure of 100 million is on the higher side of the spectrum but certainly falls short of the highest estimates.
    wikipedia wrote:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_ChinaThe subject of China's Christian population is controversial. The government of the People's Republic of China census enumerated 4 million Roman Catholics and 10 million ‎Protestants. However, independent estimates have ranged from 40 million, to 100 million, to 130 million Christians. According to China Aid, State Administration for Religious Affairs Director Ye Xiaowen reported to audiences at Beijing University and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences that the number of Christians in China had risen to 130 million by the end of 2006, including 20 million Catholics.[9][10] Recent studies have suggested that there are roughly 54 million Christians in China, of which 39 million are Protestants and 14 million are Roman Catholics as the most common and reliable figure among others.

    The Washington Times cites a figure of 100 million in the underground churches (that doesn't include the registered churches). http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/aug/02/20050802-115449-8165r/

    Major Asiian newspapers also treat the 100 million figure as a respectable estimate.
    Asia Times wrote:
    http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JG31Ad01.htmlA Chinese government estimate puts the total number of Chinese
    "Christians" at 130 million, almost 10% of the population, and at least five times the percentage of Christians (Protestants and Catholics) as when the communists took power in China in 1949
    Asia Sentinel wrote:
    http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=590&Itemid=34It is estimated there are 80 to 130 million Christians in China – a figure that includes both Protestants and Catholics in official and underground churches. Indeed, the number has been growing fast in the last two or three decades.

    Now, Wicknight is entitled to believe the lower figures if he chooses - but to imply that the higher figures are not based on evidence is plainly untrue.

    Now, whether the figure is 40 million, 100 million, or indeed 130 million - where is the evidence that "lots of" these were already Christians?

    While I find it interesting that Wicknight still finds the idea of someone rounding figures up to the nearest unit to be proposterous - it is revealing that he tries to use that to avoid my request for evidence.

    I have argued that the huge number of conversions in China is evidence of atheists converting to Christianity. Wicknight has tried to rubbish that by saying that "lots of" these converts were already Christians. I simply want to see his evidence for that claim. That is hardly unreasonable of me.


  • #400
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    Now, Wicknight is entitled to believe the lower figures if he chooses - but to imply that the higher figures are not based on evidence is plainly untrue.

    What evidence are they based on? From what I've read they seem to be simply guesstimates based on the assumption that trends are universal and continue along linear lines, along the lines of saying that there will be 5 million Polish people living in Ireland in 2050.

    When people actually carry out polls they find there are far fewer Christians in China than evangelicals like to proclaim.
    PDN wrote: »
    While I find it interesting that Wicknight still finds the idea of someone rounding figures up to the nearest unit to be proposterous - it is revealing that he tries to use that to avoid my request for evidence.
    I already gave you it, the inaccuracy of your own statistics and that there isn't enough atheists.

    Your argument that these are atheists converting to Christianity doesn't stand up. Firstly there isn't as many convertions as you make out, and secondly there isn't enough atheists to be converting. The statistics are largely explained by Christians "converting" their children.


  • #401
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    What evidence are they based on? From what I've read they seem to be simply guesstimates based on the assumption that trends are universal and continue along linear lines, along the lines of saying that there will be 5 million Polish people living in Ireland in 2050.

    When people actually carry out polls they find there are far fewer Christians in China than evangelicals like to proclaim.

    But you are happy to cite 'estimates' from 1993 and 1949 because they appear to suit your purpose. So estimates are OK from 1993 and 1949, but estimates from 2008 become unreliable 'guesstimates'. Nice one, Wicknight.
    The statistics are largely explained by Christians "converting" their children.
    According to your own 'estimates', the number of Christians increased one hundredfold from 500,000 to 50 million in the space of 44 years. This must mean that the average Christian family has produced children at a rate that would put rabbits to shame. This would appear to require every Chinese Christian family to beat the Guinness Book of Records entry for the largest family. Such an awesome feat of fecundity is even more impressive given China's one-child policy!

    I have to admit at this point that I am puzzled. Are there two Wicknights? You surely cannot be the same Wicknight who heaped scorn and derision on JC in the Creationism thread when he suggested that Noah's family multiplied at a vastly slower rate?


  • Advertisement
  • #402
    Schuhart
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭Schuhart


    In fairness, natural increase must account for some of it. China’s population has more than doubled since 1950. It might also be speculated that religious folk would have more children, even in the face of the one child policy.


    Generally, we know in our own history, people will continue to practice an officially suppressed religion, if necessary in private. Sure there’s even the example of the Moriscos and Marranos in Spain – forced converts to Christianity who practiced their original faiths at home.

    Hence, it would be possible for any increase in raw reported numbers of Christians simply in terms of population increase and a higher tendency to report. But, indeed, to state that totally conclusively we would need some evidence to show Chinese Christians themselves reporting that they had practiced their faith in secret since 1949. I have no such evidence.

    However, the simple fact of the doubling of China’s population would surely account for a fair amount of any increase in absolute numbers of Christians, without any other evidence.

    I know PDN can point to his personal experience in meeting real, live Chinese converts from atheism. However, we also know from this very thread that PDN has an uncanny ability to meet like minded souls when abroad. Did any of these meetings with Chinese converts occur while stopping for petrol at run-down service stations?


  • #403
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    According to your own 'estimates', the number of Christians increased one hundredfold from 500,000 to 50 million in the space of 44 years. This must mean that the average Christian family has produced children at a rate that would put rabbits to shame.

    No, read my posts again PDN

    I've already said that Christianity went through a very impressive increase between 1949 when there were half a million to modern times when there appears to be about 40 to 50 million Christians in China

    Your posts appear to suggest that you think I have an issue with the idea that Christianity can gain a lot of converts. I don't, and such a position would be a bit silly considering how quickly Christianity has grown in various parts of the world such as South America and Africa.

    My issue is not with the idea that Christianity can grow very quickly through conversions, as history demonstrates, but with you distorting facts and figures for the purposes of religious propaganda.

    It is the same reason I get annoyed at JC (since you brought him up) when he goes on about science. I have no issue with looking at the limitations of science or evolutionary theory, or that science cannot disprove God, or the idea that evolution does not say there is no God. I take issue when JC distorts what science and evolution actually say for the purposes of religious propaganda.

    There is such thing as respecting reality, respecting the truth, above the need to preach a cause or view point.


  • #404
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    No, read my posts again PDN

    I've already said that Christianity went through a very impressive increase between 1949 when there were half a million to modern times when there appears to be about 40 to 50 million Christians in China

    Your posts appear to suggest that you think I have an issue with the idea that Christianity can gain a lot of converts. I don't, and such a position would be a bit silly considering how quickly Christianity has grown in various parts of the world such as South America and Africa.

    The above quote appears to me to be irreconcilable with your quote that The statistics are largely explained by Christians "converting" their children.
    My issue is not with the idea that Christianity can grow very quickly through conversions, as history demonstrates, but with you distorting facts and figures for the purposes of religious propaganda.
    So it is not distorting the facts when you cite an estimate for 1949. Neither is is it distorting the facts when you cite an estimate for 1993. However if I cite an estimate (one widely quoted by newspapers, Time magazine etc) then I am distorting facts and figures for the purposes of religious propaganda.

    If I expressed my true feelings for your hypocrisy then I would be compelled to ban myself.
    There is such thing as respecting reality, respecting the truth, above the need to preach a cause or view point.
    Pot. Kettle. Black.


  • #405
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Schuhart wrote: »
    However, the simple fact of the doubling of China’s population would surely account for a fair amount of any increase in absolute numbers of Christians, without any other evidence.
    But for Chinese Christians to increase one hundredfold by procreation (by Wicknight's own estimates) while the general population doubled? Could such an unprecedented biological increase be considered evidence of God's existence?
    I know PDN can point to his personal experience in meeting real, live Chinese converts from atheism. However, we also know from this very thread that PDN has an uncanny ability to meet like minded souls when abroad. Did any of these meetings with Chinese converts occur while stopping for petrol at run-down service stations?

    Well, according to the majority of atheist posters in this thread such things happen all the time anyway.


  • #406
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    The above quote appears to me to be irreconcilable with your quote that The statistics are largely explained by Christians "converting" their children.

    That is because you aren't reading my posts properly, and your tendency to rashly jump to the conclusion that I must not have a clue what I'm talking about.
    PDN wrote: »
    However if I cite an estimate (one widely quoted by newspapers, Time magazine etc) then I am distorting facts and figures for the purposes of religious propaganda.
    Well yes, because it has already been explained to you that that statistic is most likely wrong, yet you continue to use it as if it is a hard cold fact, often adding in the even more inaccurate statement that it is atheists converting to Christianity. You never (as least as far as I've seen) mention the lower guestimates nor do you point out that the figure is most likely highly inaccurate.

    It serves your evangelical propaganda that there are 100 million Christians in China so that is the figure you continue to use despite objections.

    The fact that it is most likely not true seems to come a distant second
    PDN wrote: »
    If I expressed my true feelings for your hypocrisy then I would be compelled to ban myself.
    Well don't let me stop you. :pac:
    PDN wrote: »
    Pot. Kettle. Black.
    I think I preferred you when you were calling everyone a troll ...


  • #407
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    PDN wrote: »
    The above quote appears to me to be irreconcilable with your quote that The statistics are largely explained by Christians "converting" their children.

    I took him to be referring to the changes since 1949... Seems to fit fine that way.


  • #408
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Wicknight wrote: »
    There is such thing as respecting reality, respecting the truth, above the need to preach a cause or view point.

    Well it appears that truth and reality aren't certain here. I don't see that either claim - the 50 million or the 100 million - as having been proved sufficiently to rubber stamp it as truth and reality. I'm going to go with a figure of 75 Million - give or take 25 million.


  • #409
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Well it appears that truth and reality aren't certain here. I don't see that either claim - the 50 million or the 100 million - as having been proved sufficiently to rubber stamp it as truth and reality. I'm going to go with a figure of 75 Million - give or take 25 million.

    Hmmm... you sound like a scientist. :pac:


  • #410
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    I took him to be referring to the changes since 1949... Seems to fit fine that way.

    Unlike what PDN is suggesting I'm perfectly happy with the idea that Christianity went through a large increase during the later half of the 20th century, even if that increase was due to convertions. I don't have a great lot of insight into why that happened, whether or not it was convertions or not, I haven't looked at it much. There seems to have been a lot of missionaries in the country at the time so convert could have been high.

    But PDN is claiming that at the moment there are constantly millions converting to Christianity from other beliefs such as atheism. That claim has always seemed to sound a bit implausible, and if one looks at it there seems to be very little evidence to support it beyond fuzzy guestimates about the over all Christian population in China.


  • #411
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    Hmmm... you sound like a scientist. :pac:


    How dare you!


  • Advertisement
  • #412
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    How dare you!

    One of us! One of us! :pac:


  • #413
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    That is because you aren't reading my posts properly, and your tendency to rashly jump to the conclusion that I must have a clue what I'm talking about.
    I quoted you verbatim. You said that the statistics in China are largely explained by Christians converting their own children.

    I assure you that I have never jumped to a conclusion that you must have a clue what you're talking about.
    Well yes, because it has already been explained to you that that statistic is most likely wrong, yet you continue to use it as if it is a hard cold fact. You never (as least as far as I've seen) mention the lower guestimates nor do you point out that the figure is most likely highly inaccurate.

    It serves your evangelical propaganda that there are 100 million Christians in China so that is the figure you continue to use despite objections.

    It has not been "explained" to me. You have made an assertion that the figure is wrong because it suits your purpose to believe a lower figure.

    The figure squares with my experience of China, and other data such as the number of Bibles printed. It is accepted by non-evangelical sources as a valid estimate.

    I have not mentioned the lower estimates previously for the simple reason that I do not think they are correct. Like any poster I refer to the statistics that I believe to be correct.
    I think I preferred you when you were calling everyone a troll
    So I call 'everyone' a troll?

    What was that bit about "respecting reality, respecting the truth" again?


  • #414
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    Unlike what PDN is suggesting I'm perfectly happy with the idea that Christianity went through a large increase during the later half of the 20th century, even if that increase was due to convertions. I don't have a great lot of insight into why that happened, whether or not it was convertions or not, I haven't looked at it much. There seems to have been a lot of missionaries in the country at the time so convert could have been high

    All foreign missionaries were expelled from China in 1954.


  • #415
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Wicknight wrote: »
    But PDN is claiming that at the moment there are constantly millions converting to Christianity from other beliefs such as atheism. That claim has always seemed to sound a bit implausible, and if one looks at it there seems to be very little evidence to support it beyond fuzzy guestimates about the over all Christian population in China.

    It only sounds implausible if you think that atheism is so wonderful that no-one would want to convert from it.


  • #416
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    PDN wrote: »
    It only sounds implausible if you think that atheism is so wonderful that no-one would want to convert from it.

    I don't think anyone would claim that. Atheism is not an easy life, but if you follow reason alone, it's the only way that makes sense. Sometimes I think I'd prefer to forget what I've seen and just go back to faith, but that can't happen now. I think it's kinda hard to judge just how many of the Chinese were genuinely atheists in the sense we in the west think of it. As I understand it, it was a state enforced religion? You can't just tell people they're atheists, from what I've seen it's not a natural state of belief for people.


  • #417
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,240 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    I don't think anyone would claim that. Atheism is not an easy life, but if you follow reason alone, it's the only way that makes sense. Sometimes I think I'd prefer to forget what I've seen and just go back to faith, but that can't happen now. I think it's kinda hard to judge just how many of the Chinese were genuinely atheists in the sense we in the west think of it. As I understand it, it was a state enforced religion? You can't just tell people they're atheists, from what I've seen it's not a natural state of belief for people.

    Forgive me. But if find the notion that atheists follow 'reason alone' difficult to accept. You are subject to the same irrationality that the rest of us are. Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, after all.

    As a side note, some would disagree with you when you atheism is not the default state of belief.


  • #418
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Forgive me. But if find the notion that atheists follow 'reason alone' difficult to accept. You are subject to the same irrationality that the rest of us are. Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, after all.

    Of course, we are not unfeeling. But our feelings drive us away from atheism and not towards it. It takes a strong body of evidence indeed for a person to willingly hold reason above feeling. That's what we do though. That is how compelling I consider the evidence, and lack of it where appropriate, to be. The process of acceptance took me some 5 years. I'm not the sharpest, mind you.
    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    As a side note, some would disagree with you when you atheism is not the default state of belief.

    I'm sure they would. I think they're wrong though. Our minds seek to deceive us to an extent. There is a weight of millions of years of evolution invested in that deception. To defy it is not something that comes innately at all. In a relative void of information, a human will create a model of the universe based on whatever is available.


  • #419
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    It only sounds implausible if you think that atheism is so wonderful that no-one would want to convert from it.

    Not at all, atheism isn't "wonderful" at all. Humans seem to have a natural tendency to be drawn towards supernatural explanations for the world around them, and deistic religion offers these in a well tried package that both offers easy to understand (in terms of human like agency and pleasing outlook) beliefs. It is not surprising that non-believers, particularly the emerging middle class, would be drawn to what a religion like Christianity or Islam have to offer.

    The implausibility of your claim comes from what the "atheists" you are talking about actually are. They are Taoists or Buddhists, rather than totally non-believers as one associates "atheism" with in the western world.

    Your claims only work in this rather fantasy notion that China is a country full of atheists (as we understand it), simply because that was the official State position. In a country that has been completely "converted" to absolute atheism I can certainly see Christianity spreading like wild fire. But that is simply not the case in China. The "atheists" you talk about are largely followers of Eastern religions. The actual number of non-religious non-believers is relatively small, something like 10% of the population. The idea that half of them have converted to Christianity in the last 10 years is simply ridiculous, and when one looks at the statistics from polling one doesn't find that pattern.


  • #420
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    AtomicHorror wrote: »
    Of course, we are not unfeeling. But our feelings drive us away from atheism and not towards it. It takes a strong body of evidence indeed for a person to willingly hold reason above feeling. That's what we do though. That is how compelling I consider the evidence, and lack of it where appropriate, to be. The process of acceptance took me some 5 years. I'm not the sharpest, mind you.

    That is a good point. There is very little in atheism that is particularly appealing, beyond a vague notion of holding the truth of reality up as being important. Natural human feeling and desire drags people away from atheism to the more comfortable pleasing ideas of religion, particularly over issues of death or morality. Which is probably why most people aren't atheists I imagine. It has been said on this forum rather a lot that atheism is devoid of hope and purpose, which is kinda true in the context of religion, but such statements demonstrate why someone would be drawn away from atheism, not too it.

    The atheist is the person stuck in the sinking boat who, while everyone else is thinking "We are going to make it, we are going to make it, we have to make it!", is instead thinking "Umm, we are most likely all going to die"

    There is nothing particularly pleasing in that statement, it doesn't give hope or comfort. The reason they think it is simply because it is true. If one has an outlook of following reason and evidence above what they want to be true they most likely have to go through life facing things that are quite displeasing. That is just the way it is.


  • Advertisement
  • #421
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    All foreign missionaries were expelled from China in 1954.

    At which time they had created a wide network of established churches throughout China, had they not?


Advertisement