Religion Ask a Christian - Continued in Part 2

[Chief]

Continued in Part Two:

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ask-a-christian-part-2.1295001/unread

 

[Boston tiger]

There's little to no evidence for any religious practice / ritual by homo sapiens beyond about 50,000 years ago, even though they have been in existance for 300,000 years.

Neanderthals may have performed funerary practices as long as 150,000 years ago.

Ok then

 

[Boston tiger]

What is the point of the exercise? Assuming for a moment that communism killed more people, "Religion, not quite as bad as communism" really doesn't sound like a slogan that recommends religion.

And of course the problem is that communism has only been around for 160 years while religion has been around for thousands of years. But on the other hand the last 160 years have been seen the world have a much higher population then any time before that.

Just replying to a post with facts and figures. Infer what you like.
But I think we all agree that atheism and humanity is a bad mix. ( no higher power TP)

Christianity and humanity now that’s a beautiful thing ( look us now)

An atheist is basically a wild animal. Wouldn’t you agree?

 

[Roylion]

An atheist is basically a wild animal. Wouldn’t you agree?

Please. This comment is just trolling.

 

[madmug]

Just replying to a post with facts and figures. Infer what you like.
But I think we all agree that atheism and humanity is a bad mix. ( no higher power TP)

Christianity and humanity now that’s a beautiful thing ( look us now)

An atheist is basically a wild animal. Wouldn’t you agree?

Troll, idiotic, ignorant, Sunday school brainwashed? Take your pick

You have no facts, just your own limited imagination/interpretation based of your own biased view.

Talk about a victim mentality, you take the cake,

 

[Gethelred]

Dunno why you're biting. He's just throwing whole chunks of bait out.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

More importantly...
How long before Atheists take up arms?

I think the only way an athiest would take up arms is if some kind of theocratic rule came to power in the nation they resided in and started imposing doctrine on non-believers. As long as things stay secular and there is seperation of church and state, no problem!

 

[Number37]

I think the only way an athiest would take up arms is if some kind of theocratic rule came to power in the nation they resided in and started imposing doctrine on non-believers. As long as things stay secular and there is seperation of church and state, no problem!

That seems like the most likely turn of events...
However...
Is it wishful thinking that an Athiest would never let power go to their head or use force to get power?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

That seems like the most likely turn of events...
However...
Is it wishful thinking that an Athiest would never let power go to their head or use force to get power?

It could be - it all depends on the athiest in question. If we're talking about a ruthlessly ambitious athiest without a shred of empathy for other people we'd have a problem on our hands for sure.

 

[Gethelred]

That seems like the most likely turn of events...
However...
Is it wishful thinking that an Athiest would never let power go to their head or use force to get power?

I mean, atheism is not a position on the morality of power; there's no more of an encumbrance towards meglomania for an atheist as there is a theist.

 

[Number37]

It could be - it all depends on the athiest in question. If we're talking about a ruthlessly ambitious athiest without a shred of empathy for other people we'd have a problem on our hands for sure.

Obviously it depends on the person.
That's not the point.
The point is what makes Atheism so special that someone with that proclivity doesn't appear in the Atheist ranks?
Someone like a Dawkins?

 

[Evolved1]

Obviously it depends on the person.
That's not the point.
The point is what makes Atheism so special that someone with that proclivity doesn't appear in the Atheist ranks?
Someone like a Dawkins?

Nobody is saying that atheists can't be violent. You're like an old man shouting at clouds.

 

[Number37]

Nobody is saying that atheists can't be violent. You're like an old man shouting at clouds.

If I want to be critical of Atheism I will be directly critical of Atheism, I don't need to veil my criticism.
But you can keep jumping at shadows if you want.

I'm just waiting for the band of merry men to come with their "you're unhinged because you asked when atheists will take up arms waa-waa-waaa".

Is it possible to have a discussion about Atheism without all the waa-waa-waa'ing?

 

[Evolved1]

If I want to be critical of Atheism I will be directly critical of Atheism, I don't need to veil my criticism.
But you can keep jumping at shadows if you want.

I'm just waiting for the band of merry men to come with their "you're unhinged because you asked when atheists will take up arms waa-waa-waaa".

Is it possible to have a discussion about Atheism without all the waa-waa-waa'ing?

I don't believe I've asked you to pull your punches. All I ask is that you don't get upset when your fallacious reasoning is laughed at and pulled apart.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Some serious misrepresentation of atheism over these last few pages.

And it doesn’t seem to matter how often atheists correct the record.

 

[Number37]

I don't believe I've asked you to pull your punches. All I ask is that you don't get upset when your fallacious reasoning is laughed at and pulled apart.

I have said, in many different contexts, Atheists are no different to anyone else, including the religious.
The response each time has been waa-waa-waa we're not the same, we're different.

So far the ONLY explanation that I have read is Atheists are different because they're Atheists.
I say yeah nah, apart from being circular that's a load of codswallop...unless you ignore history.

 

[Number37]

If I said I had a staunchly non-religious uncle, who then went off to war, and when he came back was the religious, would that be proof of anything?

Hell no.

But If I say I had a religious uncle who went off to war and came back non-religious magically that is proof of something.

Vacuous garbage.

 

[Evolved1]

Some serious misrepresentation of atheism over these last few pages.

And it doesn’t seem to matter how often atheists correct the record.

Atheism isn't complicated unless you treat it like it's a religion, which is the domain of the ignorant. You have to wonder what they're learning at church to be so ignorant and fearful about atheism.

 

[Evolved1]

I have said, in many different contexts, Atheists are no different to anyone else, including the religious.
The response each time has been waa-waa-waa we're not the same, we're different.

So far the ONLY explanation that I have read is Atheists are different because they're Atheists.
I say yeah nah, apart from being circular that's a load of codswallop...unless you ignore history.

We don't believe in deities. That's the only difference. Do you go out killing people who believe in Bigfoot just because you dont?

 

[Total Power]

Just replying to a post with facts and figures. Infer what you like.
But I think we all agree that atheism and humanity is a bad mix. ( no higher power TP)

Christianity and humanity now that’s a beautiful thing ( look us now)

An atheist is basically a wild animal. Wouldn’t you agree?

I am not sure whether you are trolling or not. Secularism is a product of Age of Enlightenment, which came from the separation of the Church and the State. We only started to become human since then. Womens rights, sexual rights, slavery, liberalism, freedom of speech etc etc, are a product of Age of Enlightenment. Without that we will still be having blasphemy laws (although it still exists in some form unfortunately) and still be stoning women for adultery and burning gays and homosexuals and converting by force.

Your Christian heathens of Europe enslaved the entire world, before and after the age of enlightenment. The whole world has suffered in their hands, from slavery, to genocide to mass looting of a countries wealth, leaving them with absolutely nothing. Look at the French and Africa (and it's still going on, what a shame). You are not going to take responsible for these acts and continue saying 'Christianity and humanity' are a good thing? Commuism may have killed millions but countries are recovering from it, but how do we recover from religion? Look at the 3rd world countries now.

Atheism has no ideals, communism isn't exactly atheism, an atheist can be a communist but they don't have to be. Communism is an ideology, just like religion. I suggest you visit the Scandinavian countries to see how 'wild animals' they are. You think it's just a coincidence that all religious countries these days are 3rd world countries? Are you not going to take responsible for destruction of cultures? robbing? genocide? Of course not, making loaded statements without having to back them up is all you have done here.

You really need to read history.

 

[Total Power]

He's trying to link atheism to communism so that he can say Christians aren't as bad as atheists. Then he'll tell you that Christians who kill aren't true Christians. They must learn how to debate at Sunday school.

Yeah, Christianity is the worst thing humans have ever done to themselves. It is a 1600+ year long blight.

I detest it too. It has brought nothing but rape, torture, violence, discrimination, humiliation, joblessness, and homelessness into my life. My father is indigenous and he has suffered all his life in the hands of em Christians. My grandfather was shot many moons ago cause he refused to be converted. I have posted this many times in this thread only to get an answer 'Christianity is love'. Cool, ok.

Rational and compassionate is not the default setting if you think human sacrifice is effective at curing intergenerational magic curses.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Obviously it depends on the person.
That's not the point.
The point is what makes Atheism so special that someone with that proclivity doesn't appear in the Atheist ranks?
Someone like a Dawkins?

I guess it boils down to an athiest believing that they're not doing it on anyone else's behalf, or on behalf of anyone else, but either by and for themselves, or for humanity if they so happen to share in feelings of actual empathy for others.

Now I know that doing things on behalf of nothing but your own self could lead to incredibly selfish acts but then again, how often has the mindset of "I'm merely acting as the agent of a higher power therefore absolving me of all earthly guilt in all that I do" poisoned the mind of the believer?

I think the common denominator here is being human. We each of us have the capacity of doing great good or great evil. With or without help from insubstantial friends.

 

[Total Power]

I guess it boils down to an athiest believing that they're not doing it on anyone else's behalf, or on behalf of anyone else, but either by and for themselves, or for humanity if they so happen to share in feelings of actual empathy for others.

Now I know that doing things on behalf of nothing but your own self could lead to incredibly selfish acts but then again, how often has the mindset of "I'm merely acting as the agent of a higher power therefore absolving me of all earthly guilt in all that I do" poisoned the mind of the believer?

I think the common denominator here is being human. We each of us have the capacity of doing great good or great evil. With or without help from insubstantial friends.

Agree.

Problem is they are starting to see evil things as good.

“Yeah, the Holocaust was bad. But look how religion has given us Israel which helps keep peace in the Middle East. AND we get revelations soon!”

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Agree.

Problem is they are starting to see evil things as good.

“Yeah, the Holocaust was bad. But look how religion has given us Israel which helps keep peace in the Middle East. AND we get revelations soon!”

Exactly.

 

[Number37]

I guess it boils down to an athiest believing that they're not doing it on anyone else's behalf, or on behalf of anyone else, but either by and for themselves, or for humanity if they so happen to share in feelings of actual empathy for others.

Now I know that doing things on behalf of nothing but your own self could lead to incredibly selfish acts but then again, how often has the mindset of "I'm merely acting as the agent of a higher power therefore absolving me of all earthly guilt in all that I do" poisoned the mind of the believer?

I think the common denominator here is being human. We each of us have the capacity of doing great good or great evil. With or without help from insubstantial friends.

You'll have to reconcile something for me...

When a believer in a higher power cites that belief for any reason the Atheist response is you're an idiot for believing in fairytales, you must be crazy, none of it is true.
When a believer in a higher power cites that belief in commiting acts of violence why isn't the Atheist response you're an idiot for believing in fairytales, you must be crazy, none of it is true. Why is the Atheist response "see what religion does"?

Why isn't the belief fake in both instances?
Why the distinction?

 

[Number37]

We don't believe in deities. That's the only difference. Do you go out killing people who believe in Bigfoot just because you dont?

Telling people their religious beliefs are wrong/stupid because you don't believe it is the same thing.