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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

1…4546485051…196

Comments

  • #2352
    lmaopml
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    Zorbas wrote: »
    Can we settle for "Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist." I know such simplicity will upset academics but would save a lot of hot air and be acceptable to the vast majority of believers and non-believers as we commonly use the term.

    pml :pac: Why in heck is anybody even discussing Norway? It's clear that it's not a top heavy Atheist Nation - neither is it a top heavy Christian Nation - neither is it a top heavy 'Believe in Something out there' Nation - It's a cool nation, with pretty cool people, a crap climate but lots of natural resources like oil - they're happy out!


  • #2353
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Morbert wrote: »
    It all boils down to what ISAW is specifically saying when he claims "Atheism causes atrocities.".

    Interestingly, despite many posters including myself asking him to clarify that, ISAW seems very reluctant to go into detail.

    Odd that :)


  • #2354
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    While I think this whole thread is going down the toilet fast, that isn't necessarily so.

    For example, if you ask people "Do you believe in a God?" Then a Pantheist, an Agnostic or even a Polytheist might well answer 'No'.

    The same survey showed a majority believe in some form of God, lifeforce or spirit. That would mean only a minority of the population are monotheists, but it certainly doesn't mean that a majority are atheists.

    While I agree with the sentiment of your post (by golly we have some whopper threads on A&A over what "atheism" exactly means), in the context of ISAW's argument that a rejection of the principles of an organized religion such as Christianity will eventually lead to atrocities I think it can be taken that the majority of people in Norway fall squarely into the category of people ISAW is claiming should be currently on the slippery slope to totalitarianism and anti-theistic atrocities.

    And perhaps it is too early to tell, but they don't seem to be.


  • #2355
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Zombrex wrote: »
    in the context of ISAW's argument that a rejection of the principles of an organized religion such as Christianity will eventually lead to atrocities

    Is that his claim? Are those his goalposts, or did someone else move them? I understood his argument (which I don't agree with btw) was that an atheist society causes atrocities.


  • #2356
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    PDN wrote: »
    Is that his claim? Are those his goalposts, or did someone else move them? I understood his argument (which I don't agree with btw) was that an atheist society causes atrocities.

    I thought it was that a society that promotes atheism caused atrocities ?


  • #2357
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    PDN wrote: »
    Is that his claim? Are those his goalposts, or did someone else move them? I understood his argument (which I don't agree with btw) was that an atheist society causes atrocities.

    Because atheist societies have rejected the principles of etc etc


  • #2358
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    tommy2bad wrote: »
    I thought it was that a society that promotes atheism caused atrocities ?

    Well actually when you press ISAW on it his actual object is to totalitarian regimes that mandate state enforced anti-theism.

    The problem is getting him to admit that this is what he really objects to, not simply atheism in society or societies rejecting organized religion.


  • #2359
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    marienbad wrote: »
    ISAW , you are going into evasive mode again- it is not semantics I am talking about- can you name any political entities, unions ,etc that were allowed to function under totalitarian regimes that were opposed to those regimes ?

    you added in the bit in bold! Canb you show wher you had that bit in before and i will admit i misquoted you?
    Can you give specific examples of those regimes you refered before the 20th century , middle ages , ancient?

    Yes.

    Well non christian as well
    From the pre-publisher edited manuscript of Chapter 3 in R.J. Rummel, Death By Government, 1994

    in revenge for an arrow from Nishapur's walls that killed Jinghiz Khan's son-in-law in 1221, when the city was finally captured the Mongol Tolui massacred its unarmed inhabitants
    an utterly fantastic 1,747,000 human beings reportedly were slaughtered, a number exceeding the contemporary population of Hawaii, Rhode Island, or New Hampshire; a number that is around a third of the total Jews murdered by Hitler

    . From the banks of the Oxus to Asterabad every town of any importance was reduced to ruins, and its inhabitants slaughtered by the Mongols
    Howorth (1965, p. 92)

    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM
    3. Over 133,147,000 Murdered: Pre-Twentieth Century Democide

    in the 12th and 13th centuries the Sultan of Delhi, Kutb-d Din Aibak, slaughtered his subjects by the hundreds of thousands

    In 1219 Jinghiz Kahn's army captured Bokhara and allegedly murdered 30,000; and another 30,000 people in capturing Samarkand

    n 1221 a Mongol army seized Merv and reportedly took 13 days to slaughter 1,300,000 inhabitants

    in 1220 the Mongols killed 50,000 in Kazvin after it was captured;70,000 in Nessa, and a similar number in Sebzevar.

    1221, the Mongol Tului slew 700,000 to 1,300,000 people in Meru Chahjan, one of the four main cities of Khorassan in the Northern borderland of Persia. Upon capture the inhabitants were made to evacuate the city, a four-day task. Then they were distributed among the Mongols and massacred. It took 13 days to count corpses. Among those who hid from the massacre, 5,000 were killed by Mongol detachments when they later emerge

    The entire population of Rayy, a city with 3,000 mosques, was slaughtered
    Herat was recaptured and it took a whole week to burn it down and murder its estimated 1,600,000 people.
    Mongol khans and their successors and pretenders possibly slaughtered around 30,000,000 Persian, Arab, Hindu, Russian, Chinese, European, and other men, women, and children

    While the Mongol Khans may have established an historical record for individual massacres, surely various Chinese Emperors were in their league. Observe the bacchanalia of blood by Chang Hsien-chung when, near the end of the Ming Dynasty in 1644, he conquered Szechwan province and in Chengtu declared himself emperor of the Great Western Kingdom. The Chinese chronicles say that when the scholars rejected his imperial claim he immediately had them all massacred. Then he set about destroying all the merchants, then all the women and all the officials

    As one Chinese dynasty was taken over from another their was a tremendous loss of life from war, mass murder, and associated hardship, famine, and disease. This can be seen from the resulting steep declines in population--really demographic catastrophes, proportionally akin to that which took place in Cambodia in 1975-1979 with the takeover by the bloody Khmer Rouge

    n the eight years that the Han Dynasty was being replaced by the Qin Dynasty 221-207B.C., the population of China decreased from 20 million to 10 million.
    . . . .
    In the Dong (Eastern) Han Dynasty 206B.C.-220A.D., the population of China was 50 million. After the transition of power to the Three Kingdom period 222-589, the population decreased to 7 million.
    . . . .
    In the Sui Dynasty 581-618, the population of China was 50 million. After the transfer of power to the Tang Dynasty 618-907, only one third was left.
    . . . .
    At the peak of the Song Dynasty 960-1279 the population was about 100 million. But in the beginning of the Qing Dynasty in 1655, the population was 14,033,900. During the 20 year period from 1626 to 1655, the population decreased from 51,655,459 to 14,033,900

    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DBG.TAB3.1.GIF

    while you can chalk up half the Crusades, the thirty years war Inquisitions and witch hunts to Christianity Ill argue the toss on witch hunts and numbers killed by the inquisitions.

    Chinese regimes were atheistic and Mongol ones were "non god animist spiritualist" closer to Morbert,s definition of atheism. certainly not for a religion or a God and certainly not a christian god!

    30Bc-19the century 625 Million less than ten million of which can be attributed to the Church! Like the less than one percent of child abusere who were clergy we still hear about the crusafes witch hunts and inquisitions which are also about one percent of the deaths by non christian and godless regimes.


  • #2360
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,746 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Very minor quibble re witch hunts - AFAIR from a Standford podcast about medieval European history, these hunts were not only unique to Europe and the Church and as well one of the driving forces behind it was a proto-nationalism trend by local authorities targeting differing social groups from the perceived norm.


  • #2361
    Zorbas
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭Zorbas


    Very impressive work isaw but would it not be reasonable to expect that Christians would not have been war mongers in the same way as it would be reasonable to expect that priests were not child rapists on the scale so far exposed?


  • Advertisement
  • #2362
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Zorbas wrote: »
    Very impressive work isaw but would it not be reasonable to expect that Christians would not have been war mongers in the same way

    But that is the whole point!
    christianity is around for 2000 years and coulda shoulda woulda but DIDNT do as you expect them to have done over the last 2000 years to any degree even approaching the godless atheistic regimes.

    How come? As you suggested they had millennia to really go to town in slaughtering populations but the atheistic russians chinese Cambodians French Mexicans Mongols etc all surpassed the 2000 years of the church in less than a decade.
    as it would be reasonable to expect that priests were not child rapists on the scale so far exposed?

    what do yu mean? what scale? Over the last ten years how many rapes in the world? How many by priests? a scale of one in a million or less?


  • #2363
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    ISAW wrote: »
    But that is the whole point!
    christianity is around for 2000 years and coulda shoulda woulda but DIDNT do as you expect them to have done over the last 2000 years to any degree even approaching the godless atheistic regimes.

    *cough* Leopold of Belgium *cough*
    *cough* Nazis *cough*
    *cough* New World Colonisation *cough*
    *cough* USA *cough*

    Sorry, I'm feeling a bit chesty today.


  • #2364
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Morbert wrote: »
    *cough* Leopold of Belgium *cough*
    Not q christian regime done in any way for the spreading of christianity. You of course refer to the Leopold of the Belgian Congo who was not about spreading Chrtistianity like the Marxist ATHEISTIC congo revolutionaries?
    *cough* Nazis *cough*

    Theosophy is NOT christianity and successive pope OPPOSED the Nazis!
    *cough* New World Colonisation *cough*

    Yes SOME of which was done to spread christianity. Particularly in the Early days of the spanish Preponderance. this was not the Us but Carribean and in the very early days Irish slacves outnumbered African ones. But you can add several (by which i mean one or maybe a little mlore i.e; two million NOT eight or nine) million to the numbers of dead for which Christian rules doing political deals involving the church or spread of christianity
    Not insignificant but still not near 100 or 200 million!
    Indeed I would partly dispute it (on the basis not all were to do with christianity) but the source i gave above Rummel suggests 13 million deaths of American natives from the 16th to 19th century. Not all christainity related and over 400 years. Still not anyway near Mao or stalin woith tens of millions eaqch oin a few decades or the godless Mongols or atheitic chinese of the Middle ages. and I didnt even cite ancient regimes.
    *cough* USA *cough*

    Little or nothing to do with the church in europe. Yes some natives were killed to spread the US system but if you are going to argue this you cant call the US a "secular" country after that! As you are wont to. then again you believe Norway is 70% atheist dont you?
    Sorry, I'm feeling a bit chesty today.

    Hope i softened your cough for you.


  • #2365
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    I was out with an atheist this eve and he is struggling within himself, but he used to believe in God but after he lost a loved one he walked away from his faith.

    But he told me he doesn't believe in God but knows God believes in him.


  • #2366
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,746 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Morbert wrote: »
    *cough* Leopold of Belgium *cough*
    *cough* Nazis *cough*
    *cough* New World Colonisation *cough*
    *cough* USA *cough*

    Sorry, I'm feeling a bit chesty today.

    Have you tried Saint Quentin? :)


  • #2367
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    ISAW- it seems to me that your contention at this stage just boils down to ''atheistic regimes'' '' there is no god regimes'' etc kill more that theistic regimes .


  • #2368
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    marienbad wrote: »
    ISAW, the oxford dictionary gives us the following definition for totalitarian

    ''relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state''

    and that subservience applies to churches, political parties, trade unions, newspapers, sports organisations , everything and anything that could engender dissent.

    One could use your arguments just as easily to make a separate case for the supression of political parties or unions etc . Particularly with political parties as such parties are usually eliminated first and in their entirety whereas religion is allowed to continue but under terrible difficulties.

    The key issue is the supression of dissent is it not ?

    Why privilege one organisation over another ? In all those ''atheistic regimes'' ''there is no God regimes'' you are so fond of listing can you name one that tolerated political parties as we know them ? trade unions ? Newspapers ?


    The question I was asking here ISAW was why extract religion from that mix as opposed to trade unions or politicals parties etc. One could argue that political parties have been targeted much more than religion in all of those regimes you quote . Is that not correct ?


  • #2369
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Northclare wrote: »
    I was out with an atheist this eve and he is struggling within himself, but he used to believe in God but after he lost a loved one he walked away from his faith.

    But he told me he doesn't believe in God but knows God believes in him.

    If he believes in the existence of the Christian god but believes that he does not act in a kind and just way towards him he is still not really an atheist. Atheism is the rejection of the claim of existence, not a rejection of the claim of benevolence.


  • #2370
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    Maybe your right Zombrex but you may also be wrong.

    If he wants to call himself an atheist so be it, he is a good friend of mine and if he is content feeling that way that's ok.


  • Advertisement
  • #2371
    Zorbas
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭Zorbas


    Its all right then Christian can keep on killing because they have a lot of catching up to do and priests - well a mans gotta do.......


  • #2372
    outabout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6 ✭outabout


    Gnostic spirituality works good for me. I can accept christianity on a personal interpretation of who JC was and believe the holy spirit power force is the fundemental teaching he conveyed. That is personal spiritual joy in ones existance. I can only relate to him as an equal human. I find it a pity they had to dramatise edit dilute and revise his messages afterwards. Christianity died with him and with the people who really knew him. There is only a christian essence to the bible now.


  • #2373
    tommy2bad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,255 ✭✭✭tommy2bad


    outabout;
    believe the holy spirit power force is the fundemental teaching he conveyed
    Can you expand on that, it's not a notion I'v heard before, some kind of stars wars force or something else?

    I wonder if the idea that Jesus was an anomaly is the sticking point for some people. Perhaps if it was rephrased as a classic instance rather than a unique event the incarnation would be easier grasp.


  • #2374
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    I think some people came to believe Jesus was the next step in human evolution and Bruno Groening was similar.

    There are many people who evolved spiritually over the years.

    Some intelligent idiots say Jesus isn't imortal but yet they still talk and are obsesseds about him.

    He lives on.


  • #2375
    outabout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6 ✭outabout


    yes a cosmic spiritual force. I think in the east they have pranna and chi and yep also in star wars. The understanding that energetic relationships matter more than material things. yup the guy is a classic prophet but such prophetic people can be found in the pub too. As a gnostic i can incorporate mayan and ancient egyptian views into my musings. I believes it helps giving a bigger picture of spirituality.


  • #2376
    outabout
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6 ✭outabout


    northcare i firmly believe the essence and spirit of JC is very alive now. Spirituality is an immortal force good and evil. I have to consider JC as an exceptional mind and man of charachter and conviction. A bit like Nelson Mandela or Martin Luther King. Simillarly oppressed people breaking through barriers imposed.


  • Advertisement
  • #2377
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    Hi Outandabout JC had a powerful infulence on humanity.

    I was watching a movie in the IFI last night about the life of John Moriarty which was very insightful.
    He was another human being who could see things differently to most but yet identify with higher and lower nature within us.

    We all crossed the Kedron with Jesus at one time or the other.


  • #2378
    HamletOrHecuba
    Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭HamletOrHecuba


    outabout wrote: »
    northcare i firmly believe the essence and spirit of JC is very alive now. Spirituality is an immortal force good and evil. I have to consider JC as an exceptional mind and man of charachter and conviction. A bit like Nelson Mandela or Martin Luther King. Simillarly oppressed people breaking through barriers imposed.

    Nelson Mandela was a terrorist who master minded the deliberate murder campaign against civilians of the ANC, very different from Christ who said that is Kingdom was not of this world to render to Caesar the things that were Caesars.


  • #2379
    HamletOrHecuba
    Registered Users Posts: 676 ✭✭✭HamletOrHecuba


    outabout wrote: »
    Gnostic spirituality works good for me..

    So you believe that this creation outside of a divine spark in some people is the work of an inferior or outright evil being?


  • #2380
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    marienbad wrote: »
    The question I was asking here ISAW was why extract religion from that mix as opposed to trade unions or politicals parties etc. One could argue that political parties have been targeted much more than religion in all of those regimes you quote . Is that not correct ?

    This is a shift of emphasis. A bit like shifting from talkoing about victime to focusing on analysing abusers. Here you are shifting from the driving force of regimes to the victims of it.
    I have no doubt regimes spreading communism, atheism, Christianity, capitalism or whatever belief killed a mix of people some of whom mlight even have been atheists. My point is that the regimes which were not Christian and godless killed much much more than anyone else. Why was that? My thesis would hark back to my arguments on natural law.

    You now are proposing a different senario -that of the targets of such regimes. i havent analysed things in such terms. I could say in the first instance that no the political parties thing isnt correct since they are a recent invention. In the more modern political party recent past i would also say the non christian and atheistic regimes of hitler Mao Pol Pot and Stalin for example didnt target political parties so much as "belief" . this indeed may have been belief in a political philosophy such as communism or capitalism but far and away the majority of thiose targeted were believers in a moral code or a god or a religion. that would be my first thoughts on it and i believe the stats would bear them out. so NO political parties have not been targeted more than religion.


  • #2381
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    ISAW wrote: »
    This is a shift of emphasis. A bit like shifting from talkoing about victime to focusing on analysing abusers. Here you are shifting from the driving force of regimes to the victims of it.
    I have no doubt regimes spreading communism, atheism, Christianity, capitalism or whatever belief killed a mix of people some of whom mlight even have been atheists. My point is that the regimes which were not Christian and godless killed much much more than anyone else. Why was that? My thesis would hark back to my arguments on natural law.

    You now are proposing a different senario -that of the targets of such regimes. i havent analysed things in such terms. I could say in the first instance that no the political parties thing isnt correct since they are a recent invention. In the more modern political party recent past i would also say the non christian and atheistic regimes of hitler Mao Pol Pot and Stalin for example didnt target political parties so much as "belief" . this indeed may have been belief in a political philosophy such as communism or capitalism but far and away the majority of thiose targeted were believers in a moral code or a god or a religion. that would be my first thoughts on it and i believe the stats would bear them out. so NO political parties have not been targeted more than religion.

    It is not shifting anything ISAW - you can analyse it anyway you want- but the common ground of all the targets/victims/believers is that they had or were percieved to have the ability to generate dissent. That is why as well as those that offered a moral code such as parties religions unions even sports groups social groups were were taken over.

    After all this time,along with this post and 2344 you are now just saying that your crowd killed less than their crowd. Which is just saying totalitarianism is a bad- big deal .

    There are a number of versions of natural law , what one are you referring to ?


  • Advertisement
  • #2382
    joseph brand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    Northclare wrote: »
    Maybe your right Zombrex but you may also be wrong.

    If he wants to call himself an atheist so be it, he is a good friend of mine and if he is content feeling that way that's ok.
    I was out with an atheist this eve and he is struggling within himself, but he used to believe in God but after he lost a loved one he walked away from his faith.

    But he told me he doesn't believe in God but knows God believes in him.

    Therefore, NOT an Atheist. Just a disgruntled follower. Simple really.


  • #2383
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    Or maybe he is a disgruntled Atheists,caught between a life of comparing himself to being a glass half full or a glass half empty.

    For me the advantages of being a believer, gives me the reassurance that I don't have to compare myself to being a bag of groceries "you are what you eat".

    It's comforting not to believe that all I have to look forward to when I die is to be rotting away in a wooden box :(

    I have an Esotheric way of looking at death.

    Read the Poem by Dylan Thomas called
    "And death shal have no Dominion".

    I can be open to Atheism because Atheism and God are two sides to the one coin and when I was born it just happened that the right side of the coin fell face up when it landed.

    Atheism keeps God alive.

    I have read some wonderful biblical quotes which were a contribution from Atheists.
    You guys worked tirelessly to copy and paste lines from the old Testament and New Testament.
    And Thanks for that.

    Have any of you Atheists much info on Sufism.


  • #2384
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    ISAW wrote: »
    Not q christian regime done in any way for the spreading of christianity. You of course refer to the Leopold of the Belgian Congo who was not about spreading Chrtistianity like the Marxist ATHEISTIC congo revolutionaries?

    Theosophy is NOT christianity and successive pope OPPOSED the Nazis!

    Yes SOME of which was done to spread christianity. Particularly in the Early days of the spanish Preponderance. this was not the Us but Carribean and in the very early days Irish slacves outnumbered African ones. But you can add several (by which i mean one or maybe a little mlore i.e; two million NOT eight or nine) million to the numbers of dead for which Christian rules doing political deals involving the church or spread of christianity
    Not insignificant but still not near 100 or 200 million!
    Indeed I would partly dispute it (on the basis not all were to do with christianity) but the source i gave above Rummel suggests 13 million deaths of American natives from the 16th to 19th century. Not all christainity related and over 400 years. Still not anyway near Mao or stalin woith tens of millions eaqch oin a few decades or the godless Mongols or atheitic chinese of the Middle ages. and I didnt even cite ancient regimes.

    Little or nothing to do with the church in europe. Yes some natives were killed to spread the US system but if you are going to argue this you cant call the US a "secular" country after that! As you are wont to. then again you believe Norway is 70% atheist dont you?

    Hope i softened your cough for you.

    Ahh I see now. All this time I thought you were arguing that atheism causes atrocities, and that atheist regimes were always worse than non-atheist regimes, and that a secular pluralist, but nevertheless predominantly Godless society would commit atrocities. What you have actually been claiming is that regimes which explicitly promote self-described "Christian" values like "do not murder", only murdered thousands of people, which "isn't that bad" compared to other non atheistic and atheistic regimes, or non-European "Christian Value" governments. Governments like Nazi Germany, the U.S. in Vietnam, and Pol Pot. My bad.


  • #2385
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Morbert wrote: »
    Ahh I see now. All this time I thought you were arguing that atheism causes atrocities, and that atheist regimes were always worse than non-atheist regimes, and that a secular pluralist, but nevertheless predominantly Godless society would commit atrocities. What you have actually been claiming is that regimes which explicitly promote self-described "Christian" values like "do not murder", only murdered thousands of people, which "isn't that bad" compared to other non atheistic and atheistic regimes, or non-European "Christian Value" governments. Governments like Nazi Germany, the U.S. in Vietnam, and Pol Pot. My bad.

    Nazi germany was NOT a "Christian value" government! successive popes OPPOSED the nazis.
    Pol Pot was not a christian value government! He specifically promoted atheism.
    Leopold of Belgium did not promote any "christian value government" of the Congo!

    I have yet to see evidence of a beneficial atheistic regime.
    I have yet to see successful influence of atheism on society.
    I am not aware of any majority atheist countries (maybe Japan or China depending on whether Buddhism is atheism) but I have yet to see any officially atheist countries which did anything good for society when they promoted atheism.

    You cant have it both ways. You cant claim, the US is a secular democracy which separates church from state constitutionally and then also claim it is a "christian value " country.
    Which is it?


  • #2386
    Morbert
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,457 ✭✭✭Morbert


    Morbert wrote:
    What you have actually been claiming is that regimes which explicitly promote self-described "Christian" values like "do not murder", only murdered thousands of people, which "isn't that bad" compared to other non atheistic and atheistic regimes, or non-European "Christian Value" governments.

    ISAW wrote: »
    Nazi germany was NOT a "Christian value" government! successive popes OPPOSED the nazis.

    Nazi Germany was a non-atheistic regime.
    Pol Pot was not a christian value government! He specifically promoted atheism.

    Correct.
    Leopold of Belgium did not promote any "christian value government" of the Congo!

    His was a non-atheistic regime.
    You cant have it both ways. You cant claim, the US is a secular democracy which separates church from state constitutionally and then also claim it is a "christian value " country.
    Which is it?

    It is a non-atheist country, with "Christian values" employed heavily as rhetoric. I would certainly like it to be more secular.


  • #2387
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Why are we arguing about who killed more people?

    Why is this relevant to Christianity? - What relevance does this have to the Gospel that has nothing to do with mass murder? What does it have to do with the saving death of Jesus?


  • #2388
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    philologos wrote: »
    Why are we arguing about who killed more people?

    Why is this relevant to Christianity? - What relevance does this have to the Gospel that has nothing to do with mass murder? What does it have to do with the saving death of Jesus?

    Because ISAW contends that unless you believe in God atrocities will inevitably result


  • #2389
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I'm going to suggest that we put this line of reasoning away and actually focus on what the real issues that atheists have with Christianity are.


  • #2390
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    philologos wrote: »
    I'm going to suggest that we put this line of reasoning away and actually focus on what the real issues that atheists have with Christianity are.

    Love to, let me start , why is it that theism inevitably leads to atrocities :)


  • #2391
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    marienbad wrote: »
    Love to, let me start , why is it that theism inevitably leads to atrocities :)

    It doesn't. People do.

    Again, this is a pointless topic that IMO has zero relevance to Christianity.


  • Advertisement
  • #2392
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    Morbert wrote: »
    Nazi Germany was a non-atheistic regime.

    I never said it was atheistic. You however stuck them in with others as 3christian value" regimes

    when in 2362 i stated christianity is around for 2000 years and coulda shoulda woulda but DIDNT do as you expect them to have done over the last 2000 years to any degree even approaching the godless atheistic regimes.

    you in reply 2363 stated
    *cough* Leopold of Belgium *cough*
    *cough* Nazis *cough*
    *cough* New World Colonisation *cough*
    *cough* USA *cough*

    Clearly you link the above four with Christianity doing what godless atheistic regimes did or you dont -which is it?
    Correct.
    His was a non-atheistic regime.
    It is a non-atheist country, with "Christian values" employed heavily as rhetoric. I would certainly like it to be more secular.

    you link the above four with Christianity doing what godless atheistic regimes did or you dont -which is it? when you want tweedledum the Us is secular . When you want to have a go at christianity the Us becomes a Christian Tweedledee which is not secular enough.

    how can you prove the level of death in the US is correlated with secularism? How many abortions in the US for example? Or dont they count?

    I dont claim all the bad regimes ever were all atheistic. Only the worst murder and genocide were. Indeed some other non christian regimes were godless but didnt push atheism. others were pagan. But even christian ones did kill some people . Millions in fact. Over 2000 years that averages out at thousands per year. equivalent to say the number of road deaths in the UK per year. Nothing at all in the League of the hundreds of million killed by atheistic regimes over decades to a few centuries. And not done in the name of christianity for over 500 years. Atheistic regimes are still persecuting people. i wont get into Sharia law and whether Islam is a killer as that is not a Christianity discussion.


  • #2393
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    marienbad wrote: »
    Because ISAW contends that unless you believe in God atrocities will inevitably result

    No . i accept religious societies also kill people. Even so called "christian" ones. But on a tiny scale compared to atheistic and godless ones. It is a bit like ignoring 99% of child abusers and focusing only on the less than 1% of abusers who were roman Catholic Priests.


  • #2394
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Morbert wrote: »
    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."



    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.



    This has nothing to do with what I said.



    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.



    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:

    norway-atheist-610x763.jpg

    I hope they speak norwegian in hell too,or maybe its valhalla they call it;):D:D


  • #2395
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    ISAW wrote: »
    No . i accept religious societies also kill people. Even so called "christian" ones. But on a tiny scale compared to atheistic and godless ones. It is a bit like ignoring 99% of child abusers and focusing only on the less than 1% of abusers who were roman Catholic Priests.


    As I already said in one of the posts you did'nt reply to- ''our crowd killed less than their crowd''- big deal . A long way from atheism causes atrocities.

    Anyway I agree with Philologos - theism ( and I assume atheism ) dos'nt cause atrocities - people do . And with that I am done on this issue.


  • #2396
    lmaopml
    Registered Users Posts: 3,080 ✭✭✭lmaopml


    ISAW wrote: »
    No . i accept religious societies also kill people. Even so called "christian" ones. But on a tiny scale compared to atheistic and godless ones. It is a bit like ignoring 99% of child abusers and focusing only on the less than 1% of abusers who were roman Catholic Priests.

    I thought, I could be wrong - that Norway entered the discussion in relation to and as an example of an 'Atheist' society that hasn't resorted to totalitarianism, but is an overly atheist society?

    Where did Norway enter the debate anyway?

    I don't believe ISAW quoted 'Norway' as an example either way.He/She simply said it was not an 'Atheist' top heavy nation - and there is more to be considered, like progress, and natural and rich resources.

    Afterall, it's a long time ago since they put away the tin hats with the horns on, and plundered the coastlines of western europe, and discovered they were rich in natural resources. In between same they lived among us and were converted pagans. No?

    All the 'Fitz' names are pretty Irish these days.


  • #2397
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    marienbad wrote: »
    As I already said in one of the posts you did'nt reply to- ''our crowd killed less than their crowd''- big deal . A long way from atheism causes atrocities.

    there IS a BIG difference between thousands of dead over 2000 years and hundreds of millions of dead over a century!


    what are the nazis remembered for? the war cost tens of millions of dead but the extermination and targeting of ten million people in camps are what the Nazis are particularly remembered for. And before you suggest it Im not suggesting the nazis prompted atheism. Im just pointing out promoting a belief or set of beliefs as a causal factor in mass genocide. christians promoted a belief in christianity. no mass genocide. But whenever atheism was promoted we had genocide.
    How come?

    And dont go on about I didnt reply. I did then Im sure and i do now .

    If you know anything about statistical analysis and control groups and population analysis you would know an "our crowd" versus "their crowd" is in fact a valid statistical analysis which is used in social science. If you can explain it by something other then their political philosophy please feel free to supply how come nazis and atheistic regimes slaughtered people. surely you cant believe bit was because the controllers of such regimes were human beings and that is the only thing we can consider? so itf it isnt the "crowd" they ran with what other explanation have you to offer?


    Unlike you who claimed God in the Bible ordered his people to rape children and when challenged on it you ran away from the issue!
    Anyway I agree with Philologos - theism ( and I assume atheism ) dos'nt cause atrocities - people do . And with that I am done on this issue.

    so in yur theory Nazis atheists and christians are all the same because they are all people and their beliefs dont cause anything? How come then the christians were not committing genocide and the Nazis and atheists were? Indeed maybe even some so called christians were in support of Naziism or in support of spreading atheism? If the atheism or naziism had nothing to do with it how do you explain the statistical anomaly.


    It is nonsense to say "guns dont kill people -people do" without considering the type of thinking that person entertains in relation to their killing. The point of the phrase is it isnt just because ther is a gun there one must have a person ther to use it. But a person being there isnt enough either; they hzave to have a particular mindset which is more likely to cause them to kill!
    so i am asking you. why is the Nazi or atheist or heathen mindset when compared to the christian one statistically more likely to lead to someone killing someone else?


  • #2398
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    lmaopml wrote: »
    I thought, I could be wrong - that Norway entered the discussion in relation to and as an example of an 'Atheist' society that hasn't resorted to totalitarianism, but is an overly atheist society?

    Where did Norway enter the debate anyway?

    When Morbert orifinally posted the Russels Teapot Cartoon http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=76811495#post76811495
    in order to suggest atheist majority countries are not necessarily atrocious. In spite of plenty of other evidence and of the fudging of what Norwegian stats actually say he then claimed based on this that Norway was 70% atheist.


  • #2399
    Zorbas
    Closed Accounts Posts: 194 ✭✭Zorbas


    ISAW wrote: »
    No . i accept religious societies also kill people. Even so called "christian" ones. But on a tiny scale compared to atheistic and godless ones. It is a bit like ignoring 99% of child abusers and focusing only on the less than 1% of abusers who were roman Catholic Priests.

    Has anyone noticed how the same arguments are being constantly repeated as if that will give them added credence?
    Try to change the record- there are too many shrill posters on this.


  • #2400
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    Zorbas wrote: »
    Has anyone noticed how the same arguments are being constantly repeated as if that will give them added credence?

    Indeed, like the claim that Norway is 70% atheist.


  • Advertisement
  • #2401
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    PDN wrote: »
    Indeed, like the claim that Norway is 70% atheist.

    It is 70% Atheist and i am one of them;)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement