Existence of God

[PurplePoot]

Because, of course, they didn't edit the bible?

-.-

 

[Elenai]

No they did not edit the bible. If they had edited the Bible the Pharasees, and Sadducees (I think I mispelled it) Would have destroyed it. They would have pointed out Biblical mistakes, errors, and ect. But they did not. And besides, why would the original 12 apostles and many other Christians, allow themselves to be tortured, imprisoned, and killed in many gruesome ways. For a forgery and a lie?

 

[PurplePoot]

Erm, they couldn't exactly stop that if they were 300 years dead, could they?

Also, that was nearing the time when the Catholics were famous for crusades, The Inquisition, burning "witches" at the stake as well as "heretics," and so on and so forth.

They'd do that but they wouldn't edit their documents a bit to gain more power?

And people would let them do all that but not let them edit their documents a bit?

 

[ankaboot]

During his life, Christ did not travel outside of Israel.

He did not travel outside the Promised Land, which is much more than just Israel. Solomon ruled over the entire Promised Land ~ see the map at http://www.muslimamerica.net/gr/promised.gif

No they did not edit the bible.

It had already been edited before Jesus came. See Jeremiah 8:8 ~ "The lying pens of the scribes has changed it into the lie."

So the upshot is that you think that Jesus was God, logically proving the existence of God, based on the writings of people who never met him? Or are all your posts promoting Pauline Christianity off topic?

 

[Elenai]

Forgive me. The promised land...Which was pretty much the area of Palestine (the Judean province of Rome).

The Bible was not edited to misconstrude the message of Christ at all ankaboot. You as a Muslim (I am guessing you are) know alot about the Koran and its history am I correct?...On the flip side I know the history of the Bible and its word.

The word of Christ is what you see now. Albiet translated DILEGENTLY! The Apostles never changed the words message. And even then, the Catholics did not change it either. The Catholic church was not as corrupt as claimed.

upshot is that you think that Jesus was God, logically proving the existence of God, based on the writings of people who never met him? Or are all your posts promoting Pauline Christianity off topic?

May I point out that the Apostles met him, and even if they did not write it themselves physically, they had faithful scribes that wrote the first copies early on after Christs death? They were able to write accurate copies. My posts are the view of God's existence through the word of God.

 

[PurplePoot]

What evidence have you to support your claims, and that the Council of Nicaea was fake?

And another thing;

They would not edit the bible, yet they would leave it in Latin so that priests could quote it out of context and such, and the people would not be able to figure out differently?

Not very corrupt...?

 

[Elenai]

What evidence do you have to support your claim that the Bible was edited. And perhaps you should read a book called "The Case For Christ". This book contains a wealth of knowledge on the Bible's authenticity.

The Council Of Nicaea was not a fake, I never said it was. But it did not change the messages in the Bible nor did they corrupt it. And the Catholic church did keep texts in Latin, but not so they could twist it to their needs. Latin was the educated language during that time, and the Bible was a major scource of knowledge during that time. It would be an equivelent to the latin/greek vocabulary used in today's scientific names and medicinal perscriptions. And may I point out that during the DarkAges in England that the Latin texts were translated into the Anglo-Saxon Anglish. IE Old English the common language of the people of England. The Latin texts were not the only texts in existence. And even if the texts were left in Latin the Bible was not changed.

And all organisations that have human members have a bit of corruption. Do you think that scientific fields of study and Universities are completely clean of corruption?

 

[PurplePoot]

Elenai...

Last time I checked, people were burned at the stake for translating the Bible into German in [the region that is now] Germany.

As for the Council of Nicaea, why would they need to hold it should it not be to change the bible? The subject was, after all, the deification of Christ.

As for England, the Roman Catholic Church lost all power there as of Henry the Eighth.

And no, I don't think many things are 100% incorrupt, but there's a difference between a bit corrupt and torturing/killing people to get their stuff. (oh, also the church collection plate...)

 

[LordDz]

What is Gods real name ? I mean, people worship people like X'elnaga , Shiva etc.. And they are all gods. Why does not this holy god have his own name then ?

 

[Elenai]

As for the Council of Nicaea, why would they need to hold it should it not be to change the bible? The subject was, after all, the deification of Christ.

Incorrect. The subject was not the deification of Christ. The subject was putting together the canonical text. IE the Bible. They took the most widely used and accurate (not apocrypha) texts and made the first codex.

-Last time I checked, people were burned at the stake for translating the Bible into German in [the region that is now] Germany.
-As for England, the Roman Catholic Church lost all power there as of Henry the Eighth.
-And no, I don't think many things are 100% incorrupt, but there's a difference between a bit corrupt and torturing/killing people to get their stuff. (oh, also the church collection plate...)

The people were burnt at the stake by corrupt individuals/groups within the church. Christianity does not condone this act. People having evil natures do evil things. And just because they did evil things does not mean that Christ and Christianity are false or evil. And the collection plate is not corrupt. How else is a non profit organization like a church going to keep it's doors open, or pay the bills? Does this mean that "save cancer victims" and similar organisations are corrupt, evil. and false because they ask for donations? No it does not.

Do not put Christianity under an umbrella of evil a because a minority of people within it do evil things.

I could perhaps point to Atheism's "evil deeds". If you wish to play the character assasination game with Christianity.

What is Gods real name ? I mean, people worship people like X'elnaga , Shiva etc.. And they are all gods. Why does not this holy god have his own name then ?

He does have his own name, Infact he has several.

Elohim, Adonai, YHWH, Elyon, El, El'Shaddai, Jehovah (A mistranslation of YHWH), Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh (I AM that I AM), Shalom, Yah, YHWH Tzevaot/Sabaoth, Shekhinah. And these are just the Hebrew names.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Incorrect. The subject was not the deification of Christ. The subject was putting together the canonical text. IE the Bible. They took the most widely used and accurate (not apocrypha) texts and made the first codex.

The people were burnt at the stake by corrupt individuals/groups within the church. Christianity does not condone this act. People having evil natures do evil things. And just because they did evil things does not mean that Christ and Christianity are false or evil. And the collection plate is not corrupt. How else is a non profit organization like a church going to keep it's doors open, or pay the bills? Does this mean that "save cancer victims" and similar organisations are corrupt, evil. and false because they ask for donations? No it does not.

Do not put Christianity under an umbrella of evil a because a minority of people within it do evil things.

I could perhaps point to Atheism's "evil deeds". If you wish to play the character assasination game with Christianity.

*headpalm* Yeah. It was a corrupt organization that claimed to be Christian that committed those evil deeds and stained the reputation of Christianity. Would you really put it past them to change a few words in a book around?

He does have his own name, Infact he has several.

Elohim, Adonai, YHWH, Elyon, El, El'Shaddai, Jehovah (A mistranslation of YHWH), Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh (I AM that I AM), Shalom, Yah, YHWH Tzevaot/Sabaoth, Shekhinah. And these are just the Hebrew names.

And those are just the names we call God by. I'm sure S/He has other names that humans are not privy to.

 

[PurplePoot]

I didn't say all Christians are or were corrupt.

I just said that the same ones that could have had power over the bible were.

 

[Elenai]

I didn't say all Christians are or were corrupt.

Forgive me. I believe I took your quotes a little too personally.

But the point remains, that the Biblical message has not been changed or altered. To do so would be a grave sin.

I just said that the same ones that could have had power over the bible were.

Even the corrupt clergy members would have feared to even think about changing the message. Lest they themselves be tried for heresy.

Now there are some cults that claim to be Christian denominations that have changed the Bible or made their own. But they are not Christian nor are their Bibles divinely inspired word.

And those are just the names we call God by. I'm sure S/He has other names that humans are not privy to.

Ofcourse. I did say that they were only the Hebrew names did I not? I'm quite sure He has more than a few names.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

But the point remains, that the Biblical message has not been changed or altered. To do so would be a grave sin.

Even the corrupt clergy members would have feared to even think about changing the message. Lest they themselves be tried for heresy.

The message wasn't changed, but some of the nuances easily could have been. And nuances in a book as important as the bible could have huge ramifications.

Now there are some cults that claim to be Christian denominations that have changed the Bible or made their own. But they are not Christian nor are their Bibles divinely inspired word.

And not just for Christianity, either.

Ofcourse. I did say that they were only the Hebrew names did I not? I'm quite sure He has more than a few names.

Oh, I was just adding on. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.

 

[Elenai]

The message wasn't changed, but some of the nuances easily could have been. And nuances in a book as important as the bible could have huge ramifications.

Perhaps, but the message still remains un-mistaken (thats not really a real word but still..). The Ten Commandments, The Mosaic Law, and the New Testament "Salvation by Grace" still stands as unchanged and un-mistaken. And even the various interpretations are being scrutinized today so that we can "get back to the Bible" so to speak.

And not just for Christianity, either.

I'm sorry but I do not understand what is meant by that post. Are you speaking about other religions having cults? Or something else.

Oh, I was just adding on. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding.

Ahhh. I see. Forgive me if I misunderstood.

 

[ankaboot]

The promised land...Which was pretty much the area of Palestine (the Judean province of Rome).

Israel was a small dot on the Promised Land ~ look at the map at http://www.muslimamerica.net/gr/promised.gif and inform yourself. The Promised Land includes the entirety of Arabia and the Horn of Africa, eastern Egypt and the Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, the Lebanon, Jordan, and the little tiny area between the Jordan River and the sea. That's the inheritance of the children of Abraham ~ ALL of the children of Abraham.

You as a Muslim (I am guessing you are) know a lot about the Koran and its history am I correct?...On the flip side I know the history of the Bible and its word.

I know Scripture (Biblical Scripture) and its history.

 

[Deometris]

This thread really is pointless, you can't conclusivley prove God does or does not exist, no matter how you try to approach it with logic.. There are no plausible arguments, only assumptions and stupid beliefs that can only 'seem' true. I guess the thread allows people to express thier oppinions, but i doubt anyone is changing anyones oppinion on this.

As for the argument that our brains can't possibly account for our 'complexity' or what have you. That's fallacious, the brain has been studdied extensivley, and with machines we can see the brain light up with activity when we perform actions/think/feel emotions.

I can't say something is deffintley true, or something has to be completely false concerning the after-life, but the whole idea that we have a soul is really implausible. If i shoot you in the head and you happen to survive, you'll be left as a complete retard most likley, resembling very little of your former self, and thus your identity completley changed. But again I'm not saying this just HAS to be true, perhaps there is something I'm overlooking, perhaps there is something about us we will retain no matter what happens, something in our identity..This leads me to another idea, what if our soul is trapped within our body and has to deal with the limitations of our body, including the limitations of our brain. Then at death the constraints are removed and we become completely differnet people from who we are now; more aware, intelligent, and have clearer perspective, and perhaps actually able to grasp truth in its purest form. So in otherwords, perhaps our true identity is obscured by our human form, and our true desires, and true nature something completely different. Its an interesting idea and is really the only way you can make having a soul seem a little bit plausible, to my logic..

You know how the way we are, the identity we form, is determined by the way our nature REACTS to its envrioment, well perhap the way we are is actually determined by the way our soul REACTS to the nature of our brain/enviorment.

 

[Hakeem]

This thread really is pointless, you can't conclusivley prove God does or does not exist, no matter how you try to approach it with logic.. There are no plausible arguments, only assumptions and stupid beliefs that can only 'seem' true. I guess the thread allows people to express thier oppinions, but i doubt anyone is changing anyones oppinion on this.

Without logic, science is nothing. Logical proof > scientific proof.

As for the argument that our brains can't possibly account for our 'complexity' or what have you. That's fallacious, the brain has been studdied extensivley, and with machines we can see the brain light up with activity when we perform actions/think/feel emotions.

You're describing the chemical reactions. That we can figure out. However, can you describe color to a man that has never seen? I can't know about the rest of you, but I see colors. I feel feelings. I think. I hear. And yet, they are all signals and waves. The signals and waves we can agree on, but feelings and senses are too abstract to describe. Maybe what you feel as taste is the feeling that I would call smell.

I can't say something is deffintley true, or something has to be completely false concerning the after-life, but the whole idea that we have a soul is really implausible. [...] well perhap the way we are is actually determined by the way our soul REACTS to the nature of our brain/enviorment.

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Without logic, science is nothing. Logical proof > scientific proof.

Logic and Science were always meant to go hand in hand, smart one.

You're describing the chemical reactions. That we can figure out. However, can you describe color to a man that has never seen? I can't know about the rest of you, but I see colors. I feel feelings. I think. I hear. And yet, they are all signals and waves. The signals and waves we can agree on, but feelings and senses are too abstract to describe. Maybe what you feel as taste is the feeling that I would call smell.

We don't know the philosophy behind identity, but that in no way calls for piling it all on an unknown entity people made up for the sole purpose of explaining the identity philosophy. In that logic, it's just as plausible that our minds ARE our brains, as possibilities are limitless for any given entity.

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

I like cats.

 

[Gilles]

The biggest pull to God for me is simply because I find that when I am closer to him, ie. I pray more, go to church more ect. I am happier and friendlier. I also find most people seem this way. I find that if someone is religious (I mean a practicing Christian ) they usually are very friendly, and I find a lot more non-religious people to not be friendly. This could be because I have more religious people around me, but I don't think so. I also find more religious people use reason.

Another way to look at God and Christianity is, how would the world be if everyone followed the Catholic church? There would be peace. Sure people will still sin, the world will never be perfect, but there would be very little violence, killing, war, abuse, ect. I think everyone can learn something from religion.

EDIT: Someone in the first few posts said that evolution does not exist in the church. I laugh, he/she has no understanding of the Church at all.
[quote-First, the Church does not deny evolution at all, it doesn't support it either though. I am pretty sure the Church just lets you decide if you believe in it or not. It has no bearing on God or religion.
Link:http://www.catholic.com/library/adam_eve_and_evolution.asp (I didn't finish the article, I probably shouldn't post unless I do, oh well)

"Methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things the of the faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are" (CCC 159)

-Second, the Church started science. The monks were the first scientists (only some of course).

Logic and Science were always meant to go hand in hand, smart one.

I think logic almost always goes with science. Right now I can't think of a time it doesn't, but does science always go with logic?

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

The biggest pull to God for me is simply because I find that when I am closer to him, ie. I pray more, go to church more ect. I am happier and friendlier.

Yes, that's one of the good things about religion. We may not know whether it's true or not, but it will always give a mental cushioning. You always see that guy that tells a dying father that his son is alive and well, even if, in reality, the son is dead. I just happen to be a person who questions such things.

I also find most people seem this way. I find that if someone is religious (I mean a practicing Christian ) they usually are very friendly, and I find a lot more non-religious people to not be friendly. This could be because I have more religious people around me, but I don't think so.

Uh huh. You see, I don't know where you live, but around here, that's called judgmentalism. And I don't blame you, because that's nothing special. People born and raised thinking "godless" is synonymous with "two horns and a tail" tend to think of atheists and such as unfriendly. Not that I'm an atheist, but it's a general trend. I have Christian friends, and I get along with them just fine avoiding the subject of religion. But there will always be the slight friction between religious and nonreligious.

I also find more religious people use reason.

[Citation Needed]

Another way to look at God and Christianity is, how would the world be if they followed the Catholic church? There would be peace. Sure people will still sin, the world will never be perfect, but there would be very little violence, killing, war, abuse, ect. I think everyone can learn something from religion.

Well, if the world was Roman Catholic, it would eventually evolve into different divisions, say, stemming from it might come a few more denominations that eventually split into their own religion, and the holy wars and crusades and such will start again. Sound familiar? Next point. Something making you happy does not make it true. Next point. This can be applied to any religion (or lack thereof). Next point. It wouldn't be "very little". It would, in fact, only change the holy wars, which, as said previously, can be applied to any religion or lack thereof.

 

[JarrardKO]

I also find more religious people use reason.

LOL. Creationist 'scientist' seem to think the world was created 6,000 years ago because the bible says so, while evidence suggest it's billions and billions of years old..

Great reasoning.

Another way to look at God and Christianity is, how would the world be if everyone followed the Catholic church? There would be peace. Sure people will still sin, the world will never be perfect, but there would be very little violence, killing, war, abuse, ect. I think everyone can learn something from religion.

... I can think of what it would be like. We'd be sacrificing animals, stoning gays, owning Jewish slaves, stoning rape victims who didn't yell loud enough, owning sex slaves, stoning kids who don't listen to their parents, killing people who carry sticks on sabbath day, women not allowed to do anything and mass genocide..

Hmm, seems like a great world to me.

 

[Elenai]

And I was so very content to let this thread die.....But once again. Back into the fray.

LOL. Creationist 'scientist' seem to think the world was created 6,000 years ago because the bible says so, while evidence suggest it's billions and billions of years old.

Great reasoning.

And evolutionists fail to realize that chance and random genetic improbability cannot create the incredibly complex and balanced lifeforms we see today or yesterday.

... I can think of what it would be like. We'd be sacrificing animals, stoning gays, owning Jewish slaves, stoning rape victims who didn't yell loud enough, owning sex slaves, stoning kids who don't listen to their parents, killing people who carry sticks on sabbath day, women not allowed to do anything and mass genocide..

Hmm, seems like a great world to me.

You have utterly no knowledge of Biblical reasoning do you? The Mosaic Law was given to the Hebrews (Jews) to keep their line and land pure and clean from sin for the upcoming Christ. And when he came the law was fulfilled and the punishments were no longer needed because of Christ's grace.

And not too mention that those punishments were not always carried out. Those who broke the law had other choices, like cities they could go to for saftety if they accidentally murdered someone, or they could ask for forgiveness and make sin offerings to the LORD your god. And Christ being the final and permanent sin offering, made sacrificing no longer needed. And by God's grace anyone can now seek redemption for their sins.

And if you think that a world ruled by Christianity would be an evil place. Let me point out to you the evils of atheistic nations like Soviet Russia.

Ironic, if we lived in an atheistic world we wouldnt last long. We would fall just as fast as the USSR. approx 1918-1991.

(Note I have nothing against atheists or agnostics, but I will not sit by and let a person call my faith a scource of evil, without showing them their own failures.)

 

[Shados]

And if you think that a world ruled by Christianity would be an evil place. Let me point out to you the evils of atheistic nations like Soviet Russia.

Ironic, if we lived in an atheistic world we wouldnt last long. We would fall just as fast as the USSR. approx 1918-1991.

(Note I have nothing against atheists or agnostics, but I will not sit by and let a person call my faith a scource of evil, without showing them their own failures.)

And as pirates have declined, global warming has increased!

Just pointing out that two pieces of information don't necesarily relate.

 

[Elenai]

That same data could be applied to anything. Including the mating rate of moles.

But a Christian ruled world would not an evil world either. Dont forget that.

To those who look at religion and say that it causes evil, and then look at atheism as a shining example of morality and good. I shall point out to them that it is simply not true.

 

[JarrardKO]

And evolutionists fail to realize that chance and random genetic improbability cannot create the incredibly complex and balanced lifeforms we see today or yesterday.

Kinda like how a magical guy creates things out of thin air. What created God? Hmm..

Chance of science being right; 50-60%
Chance of religion being right: 1%

And not too mention that those punishments were not always carried out. Those who broke the law had other choices, like cities they could go to for saftety if they accidentally murdered someone, or they could ask for forgiveness and make sin offerings to the LORD your god. And Christ being the final and permanent sin offering, made sacrificing no longer needed. And by God's grace anyone can now seek redemption for their sins.

Oh, and where does it say this in the bible? You where there when these people snuck over to other cities were you? A thousand years ago yes?

And if you think that a world ruled by Christianity would be an evil place. Let me point out to you the evils of atheistic nations like Soviet Russia.

Ironic, if we lived in an atheistic world we wouldnt last long. We would fall just as fast as the USSR. approx 1918-1991.

(Note I have nothing against atheists or agnostics, but I will not sit by and let a person call my faith a scource of evil, without showing them their own failures.)

Own failures? Atheism isn't a belief. It's a lack of faith. Go ahead and name the last war that was started in the name of atheism..

 

[Elenai]

Oh, and where does it say this in the bible? You where there when these people snuck over to other cities were you? A thousand years ago yes?

Cities of refuge

"Six cities that were designated by Moses at the command of God as locations to which Israelites could flee in order to be safe from retribution of other Israelites for offenses committed against others. Num. 35:9-16 gives a description of their purpose. In that culture the responsibility of retribution against a family member who had been killed or seriously injured rested on the "goel," the next of kin. The person was required to stay in the city until the death of the High Priest of that city (Num. 35:25-28). Then he was free to return to his home and retribution was not allowed upon him. Note they typology here. When the high priest dies, the offender is set free. In other words, when Jesus our High Priest died on the cross, we sinners were set free from sin."

Own failures? Atheism isn't a belief. It's a lack of faith. Go ahead and name the last war that was started in the name of atheism..

Nomatter how much you say Atheism isnt a belief you cannot deny what it is. You have faith that you are right, and that there is no god and all that implies. It has all the things that make a religion a religion.

And let me see. Wars in the name of Atheism....

Perhaps I should break it down.

North Korea, Communist nation, The root of this kind of Communism is Atheism, North Korea then attacks South Korea in the name of Communism (Thus in the name of Atheism as it is the root), The Korean War begins.

The same thing for Vietnam.

Communism is not just an economic system. It is an entire scocial system rooted in Atheism.

Two wars in the name of a style of communism, that is rooted in Atheism.

(Please note once again I am not saying Atheists are evil)

 

[PurplePoot]

Gilles; there were scientists before the catholic church. Also, the only reason that the first scientists were religious was because everyone was -.-

Also, I have some friends who are atheist and some friends who are catholic, and a friend who is mormon. They're all nice people.

As for more religious people using reason, MSBB summed that up perfectly.

Also, about the whole 'everyone being catholic' thing, A) I can argue about that for anything and B) that's called a dictatorship, they tend to have peace because you get a bullet in the back of the head if you're too anti-the current gov.

Jarrard summed up what I've been saying for several pages brilliantly about the aforementioned 'everyone being cathloic' thing

Elenai -

First, we have given you good logic why it is more likely [probability-speaking] that that could have happened.

Also, last time I checked Church and State have been seperated in most countries for ages, and there hasn't been nuclear war. The closest was actually between a highly religious country [the US] and an atheist country headbutting.

So where your evidence for the horrible world of atheism comes from, I do not know.

And shados, I see you saw my graph?

Also, Elenai, if you want to follow the bible (which is the word of your god, isn't it?) then you'd have to do as we'd say, so I think our claims are justified

Erm, Communism != Atheism. Shall I start saying that Christians caused the war in Iraq because Bush is Christian? No, that's rediculous, and I think we all know it.

Vietnam; that was a colonial war for france more than anything, to start off with anyways. Then it became about the US rampaging around with their Democracy.

---

Anyways, this was left to die for a reason =/

 

[Elenai]

I was content to let it die. But someone decided to resurect the thread.
Dont blame me for the thread rising again.

And JarrardKO wanted an example of wars in the name of Atheism. So I gave him some.

And seperation of Church and State, does not mean that Religion should be abolished from government, It only means that the government wont create a state mandated religion. And that includes a lack of Religion IE atheism shouldnt be supported/mandated either.

And I am not saying that Atheists are bad people. But they are not better people.

Communism is rooted in Atheism. There are many things rooted in Atheism. And Communism has done far worse things in the name of Atheism and ect than Chrstians ever did in the name of God.

So where your evidence for the horrible world of atheism comes from, I do not know.

Like I said I dont think Atheists are bad. But a world that is Atheistic would be like Soviet Russia. And Soviet Russia did many horrible things. 40 million to 100 million citizens approx, killed for the "good of the state". And according to Atheistic philosophy, there is not good or evil, because those are religous concepts, and there is no god to judge good and evil. Thus morality is subjective. And thus Stalin's murderous reign was justified because he did what he percieved was right according to his perception of moral judgment.

That is the kind of world we would live in without the moral absolutes of Religion.

Also, Elenai, if you want to follow the bible (which is the word of your god, isn't it?) then you'd have to do as we'd say, so I think our claims are justified

And what is meant by this?

(once again note, I do not think Atheists are bad. But a world without moral absolutes that religion provides would be a blood bath just waiting to happen.)

 

[PurplePoot]

There's apparently a link between Atheism and Stalin which I'm not seeing.

Like I said I dont think Atheists are bad. But a world that is Atheistic would be like Soviet Russia. And Soviet Russia did many horrible things. 40 million to 100 million citizens approx, killed for the "good of the state". And according to Atheistic philosophy, there is not good or evil, because those are religous concepts, and there is no god to judge good and evil. Thus morality is subjective. And thus Stalin's murderous reign was justified because he did what he percieved was right according to his perception of moral judgment.

That is the kind of world we would live in without the moral absolutes of Religion.

That'd be like me saying that all Christians are bloodthirsty, greedy murderers, because of what some members of the church did 1500 years ago.

Also, those wars weren't in the name of atheism, they were in the name of communism. Just because they were atheists doesn't mean they were in the name of atheism. It'd be like (restating this) me saying that the war in Iraq is a war of religion because Bush is Christian.

I was content to let it die. But someone decided to resurect the thread.
Dont blame me for the thread rising again.

I'm not blaming you for the thread reviving, I was blaming the guy who revived it

Communism is rooted in Atheism. There are many things rooted in Atheism. And Communism has done far worse things in the name of Atheism and ect than Chrstians ever did in the name of God.

Since you want to be extreme... Heil Hitler! (The nazis were Christians...)

Also, last time I checked, Communism doesn't do much in the name of atheism, comparing to the Crusades, the Inquisition, and so on.

 

[Elenai]

http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/communism.htm

And no I wasnt trying to be extreme.

 

[PurplePoot]

Yes you were. You said the world would turn into a totalitarian hellhole if there were only atheists.

That's pretty extreme.

 

[donut3.5]

If you want to go upon things being rooted in Atheism, lets discuss what was influenced by Christianity.
Social Darwinism. Simply, the Europeans were influenced by Christianity to take over many lands in God's name, because since the people were not white Christians, they were "uncivilized".
Oh look, Social Darwinism appears again! Hitler was influenced by by it.
Don't like that example? Am I stretching it too far? Alright, lets take India.
For the same reason, to "civilize" the non-Christians, more died in India than in the Holocaust, just over the course of a much longer period.
And why am I saying they were only "civilizing" the non-Christians and not the non-Whites? Liberia and Ethiopia were Christian at the time when Europe was taking over and "civilizing" Africa, and they were the only ones that remained independent from any European state.
Now, its all fairly indirect, but if you want to say that atheism caused communism with Stalin and stuff, then I'm sure my argument is valid.
--donut3.5--

 

[Elenai]

The primary cause for "Christian" actions in the east was greed. A thing that Christianity teaches against. The kings of Europe wanted riches and land. Christianity was their excuse.

And Christians have not killed approx 160, Million total (Stalin and Hitler) in the name of God. Stalin and Hitler did so "for the good of the state" which was communistic whose root is Atheistic Humanism.

And Hitler was not a Christian. He was far from it.

"When one looks at the atrocities committed under the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler and compares them to the teacher of universal love, Jesus of Nazareth, one might come to the immediate conclusion that the notion that Hitler was a Christian is absurd".

And Stalin an Atheist killed far more than Hitler did.

And a world under an Atheistic Totalitarian rule would be a hellhole.

And Donut, I said the root of Communism is Atheism. And that the USSR as an athesitic nation state failed. So why then would an atheistic global state do any better?

(NOTE ONCE AGAIN!!! I am not saying Atheists as people are bad)

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Couldn't you guys just have let the thread rest in peace?

 

[Elenai]

Couldn't you guys just have let the thread rest in peace?

I can leave it in peace. Infact I was content to before someone decided to play around with threadomancy.

I will leave it in peace as long as everyone else does.

I propose that we atleast compromise on that, or agree to disagree for the sake of peace?

 

[donut3.5]

The primary cause for "Christian" actions in the east was greed. A thing that Christianity teaches against. The kings of Europe wanted riches and land. Christianity was their excuse.

And Christians have not killed approx 160, Million total (Stalin and Hitler) in the name of God. Stalin and Hitler did so "for the good of the state" which was communistic whose root is Atheistic Humanism.

And Hitler was not a Christian. He was far from it.

"When one looks at the atrocities committed under the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler and compares them to the teacher of universal love, Jesus of Nazareth, one might come to the immediate conclusion that the notion that Hitler was a Christian is absurd".

And Stalin an Atheist killed far more than Hitler did.

And a world under an Atheistic Totalitarian rule would be a hellhole.

And Donut, I said the root of Communism is Atheism. And that the USSR as an athesitic nation state failed. So why then would an atheistic global state do any better?

(NOTE ONCE AGAIN!!! I am not saying Atheists as people are bad)

And I was saying the roots of Christianity did it, not Christianity itself. I am not saying that Christianity is a bad thing, it has just caused bad actions. Just like how you argue Atheism isn't bad, it was just the root of Communism.
I was simply taking your ridiculous argument and applying it to the other lens.

Oh and by the way, Christianity and Atheism aren't the only two religions in the world. While no religion is far from perfectly innocent despite their practices, you have to admit that Christians have hardly been the most peaceful people to walk the Earth, as opposed to say, Buddhists. While I'm not saying there has never been blood spilled over Buddhism, it is by far less than that of Christianity.
--donut3.5--

 

[Elenai]

And so it continues.....

That is only because Christianity is both old and wide spread. Thus more will happen concerning Christianity than Buddism or Hinduism or ect.

But also look at the flip side. More Christians have died in the name of Christianity than any other religion.

 

[donut3.5]

True, but I don't know... Killing for your religion is one thing, but somehow I've never liked the idea of people killing those who they didn't like, saying it was the word of God, and "saving their soul" through conversion... It all just disgusts me.
I know that isn't what a true Christian believes, but honestly, that's not a large population, and it never really has been.
Just saying that they're supposed to be good doesn't make them good.
--donut3.5--

 

[Elenai]

And just because a group of people within a larger group are not good, does not mean the the larger group is not good either.

And just because another larger group has not had a group of people do bad things, does not mean that the other larger group is good.


I am really wondering if we should take WILLTHEALMIGHTY's advice and just let the thread die.......again. Can we agree to disagree? Or must we continue?

 

[Razorbrain]

You cant be serious

Christianity basicly created Communism

All the Witches(which were not a part of Christianity) were burned by the Christians since they did not worship God

Wait a minute, the Witches didnt like the way the Government currently was, so they were killed. Where do I remember this from?

When we are talking about number of "kills" made by each person/government/whatever you would like to call it, shouldnt we think about how big % of the worlds population they killed instead of the amount?

We cant survive in a world of Atheism? Com'an, stop lying. All the animals of the world are Atheists, and yet they can still survive in the community they are in.

NOTE : Im not an Atheist, but im not a Christian either. Im not saying Christianity is bad(nor Atheism), and im not saying that there is no God.

 

[donut3.5]

I could sooo relate this to the DotA discussion, but I wont.
Once again, we have to look at who defines good and bad.
Nobody does a large action thinking about how evil they are, they think it is good and justified. So what is? Who defines good and bad?
Please, please don't say God. If you even want to say God, the closest thing you could get are the people who interpreted it. They could have interpreted God's word completely wrong.
--donut3.5--

 

[Elenai]

Christianity did not create communism. Karl Marx was the first modern Communist. His theory was rooted in atheistic humanism.

All the Witches(which were not a part of Christianity) were burned by the Christians since they did not worship God

A few corrupt individuals and ect using Christianity as an excuse. And not too mention that the number of "witches" burned was quite small. Today it is over exadgerated.

Who defines good and bad....Basic moral common sense and absolute truth. Which Christians believe to be the word of God (which we believe is written in the hearts of every person). But just for the sake of things...Morality is built into humanity. Morality is defined by the laws of morality that are found in intelligent beings.

Every intelligent being (that isnt a scociopath) comes with the laws of morality built in. These basic laws are not subjective. IE: Dont murder, dont take what isnt yours, dont lie, ect.

There is no, You can murder....if you want to.

 

[Razorbrain]

Christianity did not create communism. Karl Marx was the first modern Communist. His theory was rooted in atheistic humanism.

A few corrupt individuals and ect using Christianity as an excuse. And not too mention that the number of "witches" burned was quite small. Today it is over exadgerated.

First things first. MODERN is a very big word, if you know what i mean.

If you burn ((Amount of Witches Burned back then / Amount of Humans back then) x Amount of Humans now), the witches burned would be quite large, you see where im going?

 

[Elenai]

I said modern because I do not know of any pre modern communists, and I was simply stating modern as a "I'm not sure" statement.

And even then, the communism of today was rooted in atheistic-humanism.

And the amount of witches burned back then were few even for back then. And even then they were only accused of being witches. Infact they probably were not witches.

The Burning Times, are exadgerated at best.

 

[Hakeem]

Chance of science being right; 50-60%
Chance of religion being right: 1%

Chance of that being calculable: 0%
Also, religion and science are far from exclusive.

We cant survive in a world of Atheism? Com'an, stop lying. All the animals of the world are Atheists, and yet they can still survive in the community they are in.

Bad metaphor, and animals are not Atheists. They don't know or care one way or the other. Humans are the only animal (on Earth) to contemplate god.
Plus, animals don't have peace or war because they can't tip the scale far enough.


No wars have started because of religion or Atheism.
All wars stem from disagreement.

 

[donut3.5]

I said modern because I do not know of any pre modern communists

Jesus was a communist.
Why?
Communism is about sharing, brotherhood, equal treatment, and other such good things. It wasn't about possessions, just the good of the community. Jesus also preached sharing, selflessness, and the basic principles of communism.
While it may seem like stretching it, the only thing that has been stretched is the view of communism by people who created a dictatorship and named it communism.
--donut3.5--

 

[MySpaceBarBroke]

Thread Derailment!

 

[Hakeem]

Jesus was a communist.
Why?
Communism is about sharing, brotherhood, equal treatment, and other such good things. It wasn't about possessions, just the good of the community. Jesus also preached sharing, selflessness, and the basic principles of communism.
While it may seem like stretching it, the only thing that has been stretched is the view of communism by people who created a dictatorship and named it communism.
--donut3.5--

Dirty commie.










Yes. That was a joke.

 

[PurplePoot]

K, here we go...

And a world under an Atheistic Totalitarian rule would be a hellhole.

Yes, but you're assuming it would automatically become that, which is far-fetched.

And Hitler was not a Christian. He was far from it.

"When one looks at the atrocities committed under the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler and compares them to the teacher of universal love, Jesus of Nazareth, one might come to the immediate conclusion that the notion that Hitler was a Christian is absurd".

If you can excommunicate him but we can't excommunicate Stalin, (...)

And I'm pretty sure a lot of people have died in the crusades and the inquisition.

And Christians have not killed approx 160, Million total (Stalin and Hitler) in the name of God. Stalin and Hitler did so "for the good of the state" which was communistic whose root is Atheistic Humanism.

A) Anything for the good of the state is not automatically Communistic
B) Communism does not come from atheism
C) Not all communism is bad. There just haven't been governments who do it well.

(NOTE ONCE AGAIN!!! I am not saying Atheists as people are bad)

My ass you aren't...

But also look at the flip side. More Christians have died in the name of Christianity than any other religion.

That's a bad thing.

A few corrupt individuals and ect using Christianity as an excuse. And not too mention that the number of "witches" burned was quite small. Today it is over exadgerated.

Who defines good and bad....Basic moral common sense and absolute truth. Which Christians believe to be the word of God (which we believe is written in the hearts of every person). But just for the sake of things...Morality is built into humanity. Morality is defined by the laws of morality that are found in intelligent beings.

Every intelligent being (that isnt a scociopath) comes with the laws of morality built in. These basic laws are not subjective. IE: Dont murder, dont take what isnt yours, dont lie, ect.

There is no, You can murder....if you want to.

Translation:

What a small denominator of my group has done wrong doesn't count. What a small denominator of your group has done should get blown out of proportion.