Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: blacken700 on April 18, 2013, 08:58:01 AM
-
why does this matter ??? who the hell knows
-
Looks to be confirmed that he's a leftist DEMOCRAT, as well.
-
also confirmed he has brown hair and 2 eyes,i know,it's hard to believe
-
why does this matter ??? who the hell knows
He's also a DEMOCRAT, like I said in another thread, you can't have both. Ask Benny/Hawk/blacken700
-
why does this matter ??? who the hell knows
This question should be made to all the news outlets that you watch who are hoping that it is a white man, preferably an NRA member, who planted the bombs in Boston.
-
why does this matter ??? who the hell knows
blacken700, I don't get it. This guy is a liberal Democrat. Obama won the election. Why would this guy be angry at Obama and at the government? Why would he do this? Is he already disillusioned and dissatisfied with Obama's 2nd term performance so far?
-
It is impossible to be a terrorist and a christian.
-
It is impossible to be a terrorist and a christian.
sarcasm?
-
It is impossible to be a terrorist and a christian.
Christians have a long history of being terrorists
-
Christians have a long history of being terrorists
Christians or the catholic church?
There is a difference. But, you don't know that.
By the way. Anyone who kills in the name of Christ is not a christian. So no. True Christians have never been terrorists.
Now atheists and false religious teachers is a different story.
-
Christians or the catholic church?
There is a difference. But, you don't know that.
By the way. Anyone who kills in the name of Christ is not a christian. So no. True Christians have never been terrorists.
Now atheists and false religious teachers is a different story.
so what are you
-
blacken700, I don't get it. This guy is a liberal Democrat. Obama won the election. Why would this guy be angry at Obama and at the government? Why would he do this? Is he already disillusioned and dissatisfied with Obama's 2nd term performance so far?
Bump
-
Christians or the catholic church?
There is a difference. But, you don't know that.
By the way. Anyone who kills in the name of Christ is not a christian. So no. True Christians have never been terrorists.
Now atheists and false religious teachers is a different story.
Both
Fundie Christians have murdered people, blow up abortion clinics and the Olympic Park bomber, etc..
-
Bump
mmmmm maybe he's fucking crazy ;D
-
Both
Fundie Christians have murdered people, blow up abortion clinics and the Olympic Park bomber, etc..
Nobody has ever murdered more innocent people than Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, all atheist leaders.
-
Nobody has ever murdered more innocent people than Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, all atheist leaders.
yeah, but they didn't murder people because due to their Atheism
haven't we been over this before many times
let's face it
All kinds of people commit murder and sometimes fundies do it and they often state their reasons as their religious belief (though my personal opinion is that even these people are crazy and that is the real reason)
-
Both
Fundie Christians have murdered people, blow up abortion clinics and the Olympic Park bomber, etc..
"Fundi Christians" that commit such acts are not Christians. Jesus' teachings were far from that.
A person can claim their belief in Christ and still be far from him.
Matthew 15:8,9:
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
-
Nobody has ever murdered more innocent people than Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, all atheist leaders.
how about hitler wasn't he catholic
-
"Fundi Christians" that commit such acts are not Christians. Jesus' teachings were far from that.
A person can claim their belief in Christ and still be far from him.
Matthew 15:8,9:
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
ok
I'm glad you think so
Most people would say the nutbags at the Westborough Church aren't Christians either but I think the Phelps family would disagree
-
Both
Fundie Christians have murdered people, blow up abortion clinics and the Olympic Park bomber, etc..
You have baby killing machines going on in this country everyday by liberism, Obama being one of the biggest proponents of it, makes no mention of the trial that's going on where the abortion Dr killed new borns and a mother, stuffed fetuses into plastic jugs and froze them. Don't give us your leftist Bullshit on how a few crazy "Christians" blew up abortion clinics when leftists murder everyday with a quota. You're one dumb SOB.
-
You have baby killing machines going on in this country everyday by liberism, Obama being one of the biggest proponents of it, makes no mention of the trial that's going on where the abortion Dr killed new borns and a mother, stuffed fetuses into plastic jugs and froze them. Don't give us your leftist Bullshit on how a few crazy "Christians" blew up abortion clinics when leftists murder everyday with a quota. You're one dumb SOB.
if you want to believe the people who bomb abortion clinics and murder doctors are not crazy and are instead just acting out on their religious beliefs then so be it
hey - do you still believe that Obama spent 1.4 billion dollars a year on vacations and parties?
-
if you want to believe the people who bomb abortion clinics and murder doctors are not crazy and are instead just acting out on their religious beliefs then so be it
hey - do you still believe that Obama spent 1.4 billion dollars a year on vacations and parties?
Not one time did I say they weren't crazy.
-
Not one time did I say they weren't crazy.
glad to see that you agree they are crazy
other fundies were say they are not christians either
would you agree with that too
-
Christians or the catholic church?
There is a difference. But, you don't know that.
By the way. Anyone who kills in the name of Christ is not a christian. So no. True Christians have never been terrorists.
Now atheists and false religious teachers is a different story.
Thank you , It gives me hope that someone knows the difference.
-
Thank you , It gives me hope that someone knows the difference.
rationalization seems to be a large part of christianity
-
how about hitler wasn't he catholic
"The Führer is deeply religious, but deeply anti-Christian. He regards Christianity as a symptom of decay."
Joseph Goebbels(one of Hitler's closest associates and most devout followers), The Holy Reich by Richard Steigmann-Gall, p. 253
“You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"
Adolf Hitler as reported by Albert Speer(Hitler's chief architect before becoming his Minister for Armaments during the war), The Holy Reich by Richard Steigmann-Gall, p. 252-253
On Martin Bormann, Head of the Party Chancellery and private secretary of the Fuhrer
"Nazism, based as it was on a 'scientific' world-view, was completely incompatible with Christianity whose influence was regarded by Bormann as a serious obstacle to totalitarian rule"
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/bormann.html
-
yeah, but they didn't murder people because due to their Atheism
haven't we been over this before many times
let's face it
All kinds of people commit murder and sometimes fundies do it and they often state their reasons as their religious belief (though my personal opinion is that even these people are crazy and that is the real reason)
So what? They were atheists, and they murdered many millions of innocent people. Stalin alone murdered millions. Mao alone murdered millions. Pol Pot alone murdered millions.
The worst religious nut job can't compare by far.
-
Not arguing either way about hitler, but gobbles, the propganda mister's comments as support for your argument? :)
-
So what? They were atheists, and they murdered many millions of innocent people. Stalin alone murdered millions. Mao alone murdered millions. Pol Pot alone murdered millions.
The worst religious nut job can't compare by far.
and again, Stalin, Mao did not commit murder due to being atheists
they were eliminating political rivals
how many times are you going to trot out the same nonsense
like i said, rationalization seems to be a large part of christianity
-
and again, Stalin, Mao did not commit murder due to being atheists
they were eliminating political rivals
how many times are you going to trot out the same nonsense
like i said, rationalization seems to be a large part of christianity
Works both way too. It could be rationalized that BUSH was a Christian and killed thousands of Iraqis.
-
Christians or the catholic church?
There is a difference. But, you don't know that.
By the way. Anyone who kills in the name of Christ is not a christian. So no. True Christians have never been terrorists.
Now atheists and false religious teachers is a different story.
I understand your reasoning here Dario73.
Tell me, would you grant the same to those who feel that way about islam?
I know many who claim that anyone who kills in the name of Islam, is not a true muslim even if they claim to be.
-
Works both way too. It could be rationalized that BUSH was a Christian and killed thousands of Iraqis.
what is the rationalization in that statement?
is it that he is not really a christian or that that he was doing the lords work when killing thousands (possibly hundreds of thousand of innocent men, women and children given the sanctions and other shit)
-
what is the rationalization in that statement?
is it that he is not really a christian or that that he was doing the lords work when killing thousands (possibly hundreds of thousand of innocent men, women and children given the sanctions and other shit)
Well, it seems like what some are saying is that Stalin and Mao were atheists and mass murderers. Supporting the argument: atheist commit more mass murders than Christians.
You countered that by saying that their beliefs in region were irrelevant because they killed these people to eliminate political rivals.
I just reversed it, showing it also works boths ways. BUSH is Christian and he ordered the invasion of Iraq resulting in the death of thousands of Iraqis. Using the same logic you can say BUSH committed mass murder as a Christian.
Did Stalin and Mao order the killings for atheistic reasons? Or political reasons?
did Bush order the invasion of Iraq for religious reasons or preemptive, political, etc (what ever you believe) reasons?
In a sense I am saying you can apply that logic both, hence its flawed to say bush did it because he was Christian or Stalin did it because he was atheist.
And how can we actually keep count of religious leaders or leaders who were religious through out history who killed and started wars vs those who were not?
-
and again, Stalin, Mao did not commit murder due to being atheists
they were eliminating political rivals
how many times are you going to trot out the same nonsense
like i said, rationalization seems to be a large part of christianity
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
-
and again, Stalin, Mao did not commit murder due to being atheists
they were eliminating political rivals
how many times are you going to trot out the same nonsense
like i said, rationalization seems to be a large part of christianity
And those political rivals were Christians, Jews, and anyone who believe in a power higher than the state.
Atheism, in its purest form, is simply man worshipping himself. Hitler, Mao, and the others wanted their subjects to see them as their salvation, not their God. So, the argument can be made that they were indeed atheists.
And, as Loco said, the blood they spilled make the Crusades look like a lingerie pillow fight.
-
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
Are they? I have seen it been argued that the moral code with ahtiests is stricter.
-
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
::) Because people who claim to have religious backgrounds always behave morally? And there have never been murders committed in the name of religion?
BTW,Lack of religion =/= lack of morals.
-
Did he do it for Jesus or Elvis?
-
And those political rivals were Christians, Jews, and anyone who believe in a power higher than the state.
Atheism, in its purest form, is simply man worshipping himself. Hitler, Mao, and the others wanted their subjects to see them as their salvation, not their God. So, the argument can be made that they were indeed atheists.
And, as Loco said, the blood they spilled make the Crusades look like a lingerie pillow fight.
How about not worshipping anyone Mcway?
-
Atheism, in its purest form, is simply man worshipping himself. Hitler, Mao, and the others wanted their subjects to see them as their salvation, not their God. So, the argument can be made that they were indeed atheists.
This is complete bullshit.
-
I see it as the abcense of the need to worship anything. Live only based on what you can prove, see, touch,tangible etc.
-
I see it as the abcense of the need to worship anything. Live only based on what you can prove, see, touch,tangible etc.
This thread is a perfect example of how warped some Christians' perspectives can be. "Worshipping" something is not a biological obligation. Morals don't exist because of religion. These posts exemplify the worst of Christian stereotypes: brain-dead zombies.
-
This is complete bullshit.
I agree. National socialism was a religious cult and does not represent atheism. Also, morality and ethics are biological phenomenon. We have evolved to be social creatures who depend on each other. Humans give birth to extremely vulnerable offspring who require more care and nurturing than other species. Human offspring take much longer than other species to mature to adulthood as well.
For this reason, humans have formed societies as a means of increasing offspring survival. Understand we are not born with instincts as other animals are. Humans need time to learn specific skills of society. Societies affirm those skills.
We are stronger against threats such as predators and the elements working together. Morality, specifically empathy, has developed to cement societal relationship- well enough to create a semblance of order at least.
This is such a complex topic it is nearly impossible to really discuss on a forum.
-
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
first you would have to prove the "lack of religion and therefore morals" claim
-
And those political rivals were Christians, Jews, and anyone who believe in a power higher than the state.
Atheism, in its purest form, is simply man worshipping himself. Hitler, Mao, and the others wanted their subjects to see them as their salvation, not their God. So, the argument can be made that they were indeed atheists.
And, as Loco said, the blood they spilled make the Crusades look like a lingerie pillow fight.
Atheism as worshiping oneself is your perspective (which of course is derived from your own personal religious beliefs)
I know that fundies like to pretend that somehow they have some moral high ground and they definitely love this idea that Stalin, Hitler (fill in the blank) we evil pieces of shit DUE TO the claim they were atheist but it's simply not true (as it zero proof has been offered to support this claim)
Now, if you could offer some actual historical proof such as these guys saying their atheism was their motivation or inspiration to commit atrocities you might have something
-
first you would have to prove the "lack of religion and therefore morals" claim
what morals does atheism subscribe to?
-
It is impossible to be a terrorist and a christian.
Yes, according to many Getbiggers. Apparently only people that follow Islam can be terrorists.
-
what morals does atheism subscribe to?
morals or lack thereof have nothing to do with religion
there are moral atheists and immoral religious people
I assume you well know this and are just playing dumb for some reason
-
morals or lack thereof have nothing to do with religion
there are moral atheists and immoral religious people
I assume you well know this and are just playing dumb for some reason
;D
-
morals or lack thereof have nothing to do with religion
there are moral atheists and immoral religious people
I assume you well know this and are just playing dumb for some reason
absolutely there are moral atheist just as their are immoral religious ppl, the practice of the individual subscriber to the respect theology is irrelevant.
you are wrong in saying morals have nothing to do with religion....religion teaches morals whether you agree with them or not
Atheism doesnt subscribe to any moral code, atheist can be moral but it has nothing to do with the fact they are atheist.
Religious ppl can be moral and it can be a direct relation to their religion.
If you disagree, Ill ask again...what morals does atheism subscribe to?
I can tell you what morals christianity subscribes to, why cant you tell us what morals atheism subscribes to?
b/c there are none!!!!
-
::) Because people who claim to have religious backgrounds always behave morally? And there have never been murders committed in the name of religion?
BTW,Lack of religion =/= lack of morals.
LFMAO where did I say any of that and what does any of this have to do with the point I made?
now run along fat albert....
-
absolutely there are moral atheist just as their are immoral religious ppl, the practice of the individual subscriber to the respect theology is irrelevant.
you are wrong in saying morals have nothing to do with religion....religion teaches morals whether you agree with them or not
Atheism doesnt subscribe to any moral code, atheist can be moral but it has nothing to do with the fact they are atheist.
Religious ppl can be moral and it can be a direct relation to their religion.
If you disagree, Ill ask again...what morals does atheism subscribe to?
I can tell you what morals christianity subscribes to, why cant you tell us what morals atheism subscribes to?
b/c there are none!!!!
sorry man
it's Friday night and I don't have time/patience for you nonsensical jibberish
feel free to prove that lack of religion is equivalent to or leads to lack of morals
you might want to start with defining morals so that we know you even have a working knowledge of that
I'll check back in a couple of days and see what you've come up with
-
sorry man
it's Friday night and I don't have time/patience for you nonsensical jibberish
feel free to prove that lack of religion is equivalent to or leads to lack of morals
you might want to start with defining morals so that we know you even have a working knowledge of that
I'll check back in a couple of days and see what you've come up with
LMFAO I never said that lack of religion means no morals, try and follow along here...
Atheism does not teach morals, this is not really up for debate. This isnt to say that atheist cant have morals but if they do its not due to their atheist belief.
Religion teaches morals, whether you agree with them or not...Some ppl have morals due to their religious beliefs
As atheism doesnt subscribe to any moral doctrine, an atheist may not look at their actions such as mass murder are wrong....
-
LMFAO I never said that lack of religion means no morals, try and follow along here...
Atheism does not teach morals, this is not really up for debate. This isnt to say that atheist cant have morals but if they do its not due to their atheist belief.
Religion teaches morals, whether you agree with them or not...Some ppl have morals due to their religious beliefs
As atheism doesnt subscribe to any moral doctrine, an atheist may not look at their actions such as mass murder are wrong....
Atheist do teach morals. Behaving a particular may is mutually beneficial.
-
LMFAO I never said that lack of religion means no morals, try and follow along here...
Atheism does not teach morals, this is not really up for debate. This isnt to say that atheist cant have morals but if they do its not due to their atheist belief.
Religion teaches morals, whether you agree with them or not...Some ppl have morals due to their religious beliefs
As atheism doesnt subscribe to any moral doctrine, an atheist may not look at their actions such as mass murder are wrong....
what does this quote mean
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
Atheism does not "teach" anything
It the word we use for a personal belief that there is no god
that's it
individuals can have morals or not have them independent of their religious beliefs or lack of beliefs
why do you always tie yourself up in these ridiculous knots
I have no idea what point you think you're trying to make with this line on nonsense
-
Atheist do teach morals. Behaving a particular may is mutually beneficial.
yes but that ideal is not b/c they are a atheist. What makes it wrong from an atheist standpoint for someone to say screw the common good Im out for myself?
I can point to my belief that murder is wrong and say exactly why I believe it to be so based in my religious beliefs. Atheist cant b/c atheism does not a set of morals that atheist subscribe.
-
what does this quote mean
Atheism does not "teach" anything
It the word we use for a personal belief that there is no god
that's it
individuals can have morals or not have them independent of their religious beliefs or lack of beliefs
why do you always tie yourself up in these ridiculous knots
I have no idea what point you think you're trying to make with this line on nonsense
goodness gracious I agree you can have morals and be religious or atheist.
Answer the question as you certainly do know where I am going which is why you wont answer the question.
what morals does atheism subscribe to?
-
yes but that ideal is not b/c they are a atheist. What makes it wrong from an atheist standpoint for someone to say screw the common good Im out for myself?
I can point to my belief that murder is wrong and say exactly why I believe it to be so based in my religious beliefs. Atheist cant b/c atheism does not a set of morals that atheist subscribe.
Because the origins of morality is biological. It is a completely internal phenomenon. Because of the way humans are made, we have evolved to be moral because it keeps society stable and benefits indivduals and groups to be so. You don't kill someone because it may jeopardize your place in the herd and because humans form bounds with indivduals in a group.
-
goodness gracious I agree you can have morals and be religious or atheist.
Answer the question as you certainly do know where I am going which is why you wont answer the question.
what morals does atheism subscribe to?
I've already told you what atheist means and as with most of your confused and tortured conclusions I have no idea where you are going
since you've just stated that an atheist can have morals why don't you answer your own question instead of asking me
-
I understand your reasoning here Dario73.
Tell me, would you grant the same to those who feel that way about islam?
I know many who claim that anyone who kills in the name of Islam, is not a true muslim even if they claim to be.
Bump for an answer from Dario73
Dario, are you a Christian?
-
Because the origins of morality is biological. It is a completely internal phenomenon. Because of the way humans are made, we have evolved to be moral because it keeps society stable and benefits indivduals and groups to be so. You don't kill someone because it may jeopardize your place in the herd and because humans form bounds with indivduals in a group.
so what? and what if you have a group of ppl who believe that killing others and taking their shit is good?
who are you to say theyre wrong?
Religion gives specific reasons for its basis of morals, atheism does not. You dont hold certain moral beliefs b/c youre atheist, you do hold certain moral beliefs b/c youre religious.
This isnt to say that atheists cant be moral, just that their morality isnt bc of their atheist beliefs
-
LMFAO I never said that lack of religion means no morals, try and follow along here...
Atheism does not teach morals, this is not really up for debate. This isnt to say that atheist cant have morals but if they do its not due to their atheist belief.
Religion teaches morals, whether you agree with them or not...Some ppl have morals due to their religious beliefs
As atheism doesnt subscribe to any moral doctrine, an atheist may not look at their actions such as mass murder are wrong....
What you did say is this:
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
Presumably, what you meant is that "lack of a religious foundation and therefore a lack of moral foundation..."
and that's where your bullshit flies off the rails. True, religious foundation does provide a moral foundation, but LACK of religious foundation does not equal LACK OF MORAL FOUNDATION . First of all, it does not take a religious parent to instill morals in a child. Secondly, many atheists are raised by religious parents.
-
I've already told you what atheist means and as with most of your confused and tortured conclusions I have no idea where you are going
since you've just stated that an atheist can have morals why don't you answer your own question instead of asking me
first I never asked what atheism mean, so I have no clue as to why you bring that up.
atheist can have morals b/c they derive them from culture, not b/c they are atheist.
You dont answer the question b/c you know that it kills you ignorant argument.
Thats ok archer looks like he wants and actual conversation so just sit there and read boss, maybe youll learn something
-
What you did say is this:
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
Presumably, what you meant is that "lack of a religious foundation and therefore a lack of moral foundation..."
and that's where your bullshit flies off the rails. True, religious foundation does provide a moral foundation, but LACK of religious foundation does not equal LACK OF MORAL FOUNDATION . First of all, it does not take a religious parent to instill morals in a child. Secondly, many atheists are raised by religious parents.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that alone was found to be the #1 reason for atheism in the first place. lol
-
What you did say is this:
One could argue that it was the lack or religion and therefor morals that is inherent in atheism that allowed these sick ppl to murder so many
Presumably, what you meant is that "lack of a religious foundation and therefore a lack of moral foundation..."
and that's where your bullshit flies off the rails. True, religious foundation does provide a moral foundation, but LACK of religious foundation does not equal LACK OF MORAL FOUNDATION . First of all, it does not take a religious parent to instill morals in a child. Secondly, many atheists are raised by religious parents.
I agree with you Al but I never said it means lack of moral foundation. As a matter of fact I have said many times that atheist can be moral ppl.
BUUUUUTTTTTTT, that morality does not stem from their atheist belief like the morality of religious ppl.
Atheism itself doesnt have morals, an atheist is free to believe that murder is ok doesnt mean he will but a fellow atheist has no grounds to say he is wrong.
Ill ask you seeing as it sounds like youre open to having an actual discussion on the subject.
What morals does atheism subscribe to?
-
so what? and what if you have a group of ppl who believe that killing others and taking their shit is good?
who are you to say theyre wrong?
Religion gives specific reasons for its basis of morals, atheism does not. You dont hold certain moral beliefs b/c youre atheist, you do hold certain moral beliefs b/c youre religious.
This isnt to say that atheists cant be moral, just that their morality isnt bc of their atheist beliefs
I have an indepth rebuttal which I will post later. I'm on my iPad and its ten here.
-
I have an indepth rebuttal which I will post later. I'm on my iPad and its ten here.
look forward to it sir
-
I agree with you Al but I never said it means lack of moral foundation. As a matter of fact I have said many times that atheist can be moral ppl.
You specifically said "lack of religion and therefore lack of morals inherent in atheism." So, if you're not saying that atheists lack moral foundation, then what you literally said is that they are inherently immoral.
-
As for what morals atheists subscribe to, I'm not even sure where you're going with that.
Atheism is not a belief system. It is a rejection of the concept of deities. There is not
a collection of organized beliefs and ideas. It's like asking where do political independents
stand on the issue of abortion There's nothing precluding them from having beliefs that line up
with either party, but the beliefs of the group itself aren't defined.
-
You specifically said "lack of religion and therefore lack of morals inherent in atheism." So, if you're not saying that atheists lack moral foundation, then what you literally said is that they are inherently immoral.
atheism does lack morals, atheist do not necissarily as they can subscribe to morals taught by other dogma.
atheist may have morals but they didnt derive from atheism
why is that so hard to understand?
-
As for what morals atheists subscribe to, I'm not even sure where you're going with that.
Atheism is not a belief system. It is a rejection of the concept of deities. There is not
a collection of organized beliefs and ideas. It's like asking where do political independents
stand on the issue of abortion There's nothing precluding them from having beliefs that line up
with either party, but the beliefs of the group itself aren't defined.
EXACTLY so an atheist is free to believe that anything is moral including murdering millions of ppl or even that their is no morality....
Religion however teaches that there is morality and there is a right and wrong.
So one could argue that b/c they were atheist they didnt hold a moral belief system that said murder is wrong.
-
atheism does lack morals, atheist do not necissarily as they can subscribe to morals taught by other dogma.
atheist may have morals but they didnt derive from atheism
why is that so hard to understand?
Because it's ridiculous. It's like saying carpentry lacks morals. Atheism is not devised as a moral system. Subscribing to dogma isn't necessary to possess morality.
EXACTLY so an atheist is free to believe that anything is moral including murdering millions of ppl or even that their is no morality....
All of this can be said (and has been said) about people with strong religious backgrounds. What your describing is either a lack of moral foundation or a psychotic disorder.
-
All this arguing. It's very simple. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were all educated, modern, atheist leaders, and they murdered millions of innocent people.
You can't say that about any religious person that ever existed. So Straw and other atheists just need to stop pointing fingers at "fundies".
-
Because the origins of morality is biological. It is a completely internal phenomenon. Because of the way humans are made, we have evolved to be moral because it keeps society stable and benefits indivduals and groups to be so. You don't kill someone because it may jeopardize your place in the herd and because humans form bounds with indivduals in a group.
You could just as well say
"You must kill Jews, Gipsies, cripples, the mentally challenged, the terminally ill and the elderly because they may jeopardize your place in the herd and because humans form bounds with individuals in a group that are like them."
This has been the "moral" norm before, you know.
In other words, who decides what is moral and what isn't?
-
All this arguing. It's very simple. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were all educated, modern, atheist leaders, and they murdered millions of innocent people.
You can't say that about any religious person that ever existed. So Straw and other atheists just need to stop pointing fingers at "fundies".
Sure, but Hitler was Christian, so it obviously isn't about religion or the lack thereof.
-
Sure, but Hitler was Christian, so it obviously isn't about religion or the lack thereof.
Hitler wasn't really a Christian, I'm pretty sure
-
Hitler wasn't really a Christian, I'm pretty sure
That's what he said he was... You are what you claim to be right?
If Muslims say they are Muslim, then they do very non-Muslim things, we say they are Muslims still... Even if they don't act like it.
If you say you are a Christian but you don't act Christ like... You're still a Christian.
That's not how the title thing works.
-
That's what he said he was... You are what you claim to be right?
If Muslims say they are Muslim, then they do very non-Muslim things, we say they are Muslims still... Even if they don't act like it.
If you say you are a Christian but you don't act Christ like... You're still a Christian.
That's not how the title thing works.
Muslims are killing in the name of their religion.
I think Hitler mentioned Christianity occasionally but I'm pretty sure he wasn't a Christian and I know he didn't claim to be acting in the name of Christianity.
-
Muslims are killing in the name of their religion.
I think Hitler mentioned Christianity occasionally but I'm pretty sure he wasn't a Christian and I know he didn't claim to be acting in the name of Christianity.
(http://truth-saves.com/images/hitler.jpg)
-
(http://truth-saves.com/images/hitler.jpg)
Which lord? ???
I don't know enough about it, I could be wrong, but I'm about 80% sure that Hitler never really professed to be a Christian.
I think privately he was an occultist like many other top nazis
-
All this arguing. It's very simple. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were all educated, modern, atheist leaders, and they murdered millions of innocent people.
You can't say that about any religious person that ever existed. So Straw and other atheists just need to stop pointing fingers at "fundies".
Sure, but Hitler was Christian, so it obviously isn't about religion or the lack thereof.
Hitler was not a Christian. If "it obviously isn't about religion or the lack thereof", then why are atheists constantly pointing fingers at "fundies"? Their own track record isn't very impressive.
"The Führer is deeply religious, but deeply anti-Christian. He regards Christianity as a symptom of decay."
Joseph Goebbels(one of Hitler's closest associates and most devout followers), The Holy Reich by Richard Steigmann-Gall, p. 253
“You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"
Adolf Hitler as reported by Albert Speer(Hitler's chief architect before becoming his Minister for Armaments during the war), The Holy Reich by Richard Steigmann-Gall, p. 252-253
On Martin Bormann, Head of the Party Chancellery and private secretary of the Fuhrer
"Nazism, based as it was on a 'scientific' world-view, was completely incompatible with Christianity whose influence was regarded by Bormann as a serious obstacle to totalitarian rule"
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/bormann.html
-
Which lord? ???
I don't know enough about it, I could be wrong, but I'm about 80% sure that Hitler never really professed to be a Christian.
Yes... Yes he did.
Just a quick google search to get the information correct.
a) Hitler was baptized as Roman Catholic during infancy in Austria.
b) As Hitler approached boyhood he attended a monastery school. (On his way to school young Adolf daily observed a stone arch which was carved with the monastery’s coat of arms bearing a swastika.)
c) Hitler was a communicant and an altar boy in the Catholic Church.
d) As a young man he was confirmed as a “soldier of Christ.” His most ardent goal at the time was to become a priest. Hitler writes of his love for the church and clergy: “I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal.” -Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow my self to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows . For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people." –Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922
We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.” -Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Berlin on 24 Oct. 1933 [This statement clearly refutes modern Christians who claim Hitler as favoring atheism. Hitler wanted to form a society in which ALL people worshipped Jesus and considered any questioning of such to be heresy. The Holocaust was like a modern inquisition, killing all who did not accept Jesus. Though more Jews were killed then any other it should be noted that MANY ARYAN pagans and atheists were murdered for their non-belief in Christ.
-
it obviously isn't about religion or the lack thereof.
If that's so, then why are atheists constantly pointing fingers at "fundies"? Their own track record isn't very impressive.
-
If that's so, then why are atheists constantly pointing fingers at "fundies"? Their own track record isn't very impressive.
I don't know.
I consider myself pretty much an atheist and I don't blame anything but CRAZY.
-
Because it's ridiculous. It's like saying carpentry lacks morals. Atheism is not devised as a moral system. Subscribing to dogma isn't necessary to possess morality.
All of this can be said (and has been said) about people with strong religious backgrounds. What your describing is either a lack of moral foundation or a psychotic disorder.
atheism is a belief system just as religion is, it is not filled with doctrine and dogma but youre cannot deny it is a belief system.
You also agreee that it doesnt not have inherint morals, there is not absolute right and wrong to atheists. There is I feel this is right and this is wrong b/c of such and such.
I agree that religious ppl can have lack of morals but RELIGION teachs morals so it could be stated that an atheist may feel that murder is ok bc they are atheists.
Religion taught in accordance with its dogma and doctrine does not teach that.
one could say that about a religious person but not b/c of that religion(maybe the teachings of a warped view of that religion but not the religion itself), one could say that about an atheist person b/c they are atheist
-
That's what he said he was... You are what you claim to be right?
If Muslims say they are Muslim, then they do very non-Muslim things, we say they are Muslims still... Even if they don't act like it.
If you say you are a Christian but you don't act Christ like... You're still a Christian.
That's not how the title thing works.
not according to some christians on this board (and in this thread)
they can tell you who the "real" christians are
-
not according to some christians on this board (and in this thread)
they can tell you who the "real" christians are
Kinda like you democrat tools arguing he's not a 'real' democrat. ::)
-
Kinda like you democrat tools arguing he's not a 'real' democrat. ::)
such as ?
-
atheism is a belief system just as religion is, it is not filled with doctrine and dogma but youre cannot deny it is a belief system.
You also agreee that it doesnt not have inherint morals, there is not absolute right and wrong to atheists. There is I feel this is right and this is wrong b/c of such and such.
I agree that religious ppl can have lack of morals but RELIGION teachs morals so it could be stated that an atheist may feel that murder is ok bc they are atheists.
Religion taught in accordance with its dogma and doctrine does not teach that.
one could say that about a religious person but not b/c of that religion(maybe the teachings of a warped view of that religion but not the religion itself), one could say that about an atheist person b/c they are atheist
I teach my kid right and wrong and it has nothing to do with religion.
PEOPLE teach morals. Religion does not.
-
i don't know if religion teaches morals but i do know religion teaches hypocrisy,most seem to be the biggest hypocites around
-
i don't know if religion teaches morals but i do know religion teaches hypocrisy,most seem to be the biggest hypocites around
some of the most dishonest and vile people I've dealt with in business have been very vocal "born again" christians
-
some of the most dishonest and vile people I've dealt with in business have been very vocal "born again" christians
Get taken to the cleaners a few times sucker?
-
Get taken to the cleaners a few times sucker?
never as of yet
how about you Nancy
still underwater on that shithole in the ghetto
-
Get taken to the cleaners a few times sucker?
Do you think he has time to work in between stalking you 20 hours a day? I certainly don't. My guess is he's a disability parasite.
-
All this arguing. It's very simple. Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were all educated, modern, atheist leaders, and they murdered millions of innocent people.
You can't say that about any religious person that ever existed. So Straw and other atheists just need to stop pointing fingers at "fundies".
If what you are saying is: cetian atheists have committed more mass murders than any Christians you may be correct.
But by using your premise here then, bush for example, as a Christian committed mass murder and to prove that atheists committed more mass murders than Christians you would have to take into account every leader who was Christian who went to war and as a result killed innocent people, such from bombing or their armies raping and piliging. Considering there are far more Christians through out history then atheists, may 100,000 to 1, I think the leaders who are Christian win this one.
-
I teach my kid right and wrong and it has nothing to do with religion.
PEOPLE teach morals. Religion does not.
really I bet alot of the morals you teach your kids coincide with alot of the morals religion teachs as well.
To say that religion doesnt teach morals is ignorant
-
some of the most dishonest and vile people I've dealt with in business have been very vocal "born again" christians
some of the most murderous ppl in history have been atheists....
whats your point?
-
As I said, Sirota, Matthews, Burnett, Amanpour, that professor on Uygur's show, et. al. were all hoping the Boston bomber would be the caricature that I described as, "Billy Bob Bubba Williams of Negro-Keep-Runnin', MS, hoisting a "Don't Tread On Me" flag and rocking a "I (heart) Sarah Palin" wife-beater tank top, with his half-dead hounddog in the back of his beat-up pickup truck.
That wasn't the case with the bombers. It's not the case here, which is why many lefties are a tad miffed.
-
Which lord? ???
I don't know enough about it, I could be wrong, but I'm about 80% sure that Hitler never really professed to be a Christian.
I think privately he was an occultist like many other top nazis
true, you can't take something Hitler said to the public as his personal belief. Just because a scumbag like that makes a christian statement publically and lol in an era where politicians were mastering public perception and not afraid to completely change their image to do just that when they needed. Oh wait, we kinda have politicians doing that shit today! Must work I guess... ;D
-
If what you are saying is: cetian atheists have committed more mass murders than any Christians you may be correct.
Yes. I said it was very simple, didn't I? And I am correct on this, based on what we know about History.
But by using your premise here then, bush for example, as a Christian committed mass murder and to prove that atheists committed more mass murders than Christians you would have to take into account every leader who was Christian who went to war and as a result killed innocent people, such from bombing or their armies raping and piliging. Considering there are far more Christians through out history then atheists, may 100,000 to 1, I think the leaders who are Christian win this one.
Funny how you have to add up all Christians, throughout all of History, in an attempt to remotely compare the murder count to a single one of three individual, atheist leaders of our time. The murder count of Stalin alone is in the millions. The murder count of Mao alone is even greater, much greater. Same goes for Pol Pot. All three were modern, educated atheist leaders.
The atheist track record isn't impressive. So atheists need to drop the subject and stop pointing fingers at "fundies."
-
Yes. I said it was very simple, didn't I? And I am correct on this, based on what we know about History.
Funny how you have to add up all Christians, throughout all of History, in an attempt to remotely compare the murder count to a single one of three individual, atheist leaders of our time. The murder count of Stalin alone is in the millions. The murder count of Mao alone is even greater, much greater. Same goes for Pol Pot. All three were modern, educated atheist leaders.
The atheist track record isn't impressive. So atheists need to drop the subject and stop pointing fingers at "fundies."
I don't "have to", I am just being exact here. Saying more people innocent people died indirectly or directly from leaders who were Christian vs atheists is probably true. Saying athiest leaders killed more people directly or indirectly than any Christian leader is probably true. Or maybe not. Don't know about the pope who ordered the crusades and how many innocent heathens died as a result. And the issues get real muddled. How do you define leaders? Are we talking about a town priest who tortured and killed in the name of god in the 1400,s. what about the Salem which trials? Where they considered Christians? and then one might argu that the popes weren't Christian. It can go on and on.
Atheists on this board as well as Christians, unless they are murderers them selves can and should point their fingers. Christians should be ashamed as we'll as atheists. Murder is murder.
-
really I bet alot of the morals you teach your kids coincide with alot of the morals religion teachs as well.
To say that religion doesnt teach morals is ignorant
Just because religion teaches something does not mean that it's where I get my foundation from.
They have nothing to do with each other. People have been saying don't steal and don't kill since the dawn of time. Just because someone wrote it in a book doesn't mean anything.
-
not according to some christians on this board (and in this thread)
they can tell you who the "real" christians are
You and the rest of the "people" that harp on "you are what you say you are" are a bunch of morons.
You are NOT what you say you are.
Your SPIRITUAL FRUITS are proofs of who you really are.
I don't care if Hitler was baptized a million times. His actions showed he never believed with his heart.
You idiots actually believe that a person who commits atrocities should still be considered a Christian just because they say they are or because at one time they were baptized as a Christian? This is why atheists should never comment on spiritual doctrines. None of you nitwits know what you are yapping about.
Look at Obama. Who claims to be a Christian yet is in favor of abortions and homos tying the knot as "married couples". He is far from being a christian.
Again:1 John 3:10
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
Mattew 15:8
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mattew 7:16
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits.
-
You and the rest of the "people" that harp on "you are what you say you are" are a bunch of morons.
You are NOT what you say you are.
Your SPIRITUAL FRUITS are proofs of who you really are.
I don't care if Hitler was baptized a million times. His actions showed he never believed with his heart.
You idiots actually believe that a person who commits atrocities should still be considered a Christian just because they say they are or because at one time they were baptized as a Christian? This is why atheists should never comment on spiritual doctrines. None of you nitwits know what you are yapping about.
Look at Obama. Who claims to be a Christian yet is in favor of abortions and homos tying the knot as "married couples". He is far from being a christian.
Again:1 John 3:10
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
Mattew 15:8
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mattew 7:16
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits.
That's a ridiculous statement.
Was the Pope not a Christian when he was ordering the crusades?
-
Its a pretty convenient position for an argument isn't?
If the person murders someone then he wasn't a "real" christian.
So as the innocent victims totals go up from leaders or people who were Christians, they can go down because of these people weren't "real" Christians
Or because they were the Pope, or because they were a democrat, or because they didn't observed or buy into this particular belief, etc.
Christianity = Religion of Rationalization
-
I don't "have to", I am just being exact here. Saying more people innocent people died indirectly or directly from leaders who were Christian vs atheists is probably true. Saying athiest leaders killed more people directly or indirectly than any Christian leader is probably true. Or maybe not. Don't know about the pope who ordered the crusades and how many innocent heathens died as a result. And the issues get real muddled. How do you define leaders? Are we talking about a town priest who tortured and killed in the name of god in the 1400,s. what about the Salem which trials? Where they considered Christians? and then one might argu that the popes weren't Christian. It can go on and on.
It's very simple. Mao Zedong's alone murdered around 43,000,000 innocent people, maybe even more. He was the leader of his country, a modern, educated, atheist leader. No need for a "definition" of what is a "leader". Name one religious leader in history with a murder count anywhere near that.
Funny that you bring up the Crusades, the Inquisition and the Witch Trials, none of which can be attributed to anyone particular individual. The Crusades were a war between Christians and Muslims, hardly comparable to what Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot did. Historians put the Crusades casualties at many thousands at the most, the Inquisition at hundreds at the most, and the Witch Trials probably less than one hundred. There is no comparison.
"It is a law of nature that scientists must bring up the Crusades within five minutes of mention of religion. In any case, the argument goes, atheists are as ethical as any believer, and religion needn’t be kept about for purely moral reasons. But Gould again argues that this claim misses the historical fact that the Church was a secular and not merely religious institution. When the Church was a powerful state, it, not surprisingly, acted like a powerful state. It is also worth noting that when avowedly atheist governments called the shots their ethical track record was less than awe-inspiring. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot are not, so far as I know, in line for sainthood. The point isn’t that godless commies are bad. The point is that it is dishonest to pretend that the Crusades count against theism but that Stalin doesn’t count against atheism." - H. Allen Orr is University Professor and Shirley Cox Kearns Professor of Biology at the University of Rochester.
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html
Atheists on this board as well as Christians, unless they are murderers them selves can and should point their fingers. Christians should be ashamed as we'll as atheists. Murder is murder.
No. Murder is murder, and atheists must stop pointing fingers at religion when murder takes place. Atheists' track record is less than impressive.
-
atheism is a belief system just as religion is, it is not filled with doctrine and dogma but youre cannot deny it is a belief system.
How is atheism a belief system? You've posted that it is not filled with doctine, or dogma and doesn't teach morals, so what is atheism's system of beliefs?
-
That's a ridiculous statement.
Was the Pope not a Christian when he was ordering the crusades?
Let's not forget that God is in favor of abortions and has given them to his own children.
You can't argue with someone getting their cues from a fairy tale book.
-
really I bet alot of the morals you teach your kids coincide with alot of the morals religion teachs as well.
To say that religion doesnt teach morals is ignorant
You mean like regarding your wife as property, the same as cattle? Or sacrificing animals? Or if you are unhappy with your kids then to just kill them all? Those kind of morals?
-
You and the rest of the "people" that harp on "you are what you say you are" are a bunch of morons.
You are NOT what you say you are.
Your SPIRITUAL FRUITS are proofs of who you really are.
I don't care if Hitler was baptized a million times. His actions showed he never believed with his heart.
You idiots actually believe that a person who commits atrocities should still be considered a Christian just because they say they are or because at one time they were baptized as a Christian? This is why atheists should never comment on spiritual doctrines. None of you nitwits know what you are yapping about.
Look at Obama. Who claims to be a Christian yet is in favor of abortions and homos tying the knot as "married couples". He is far from being a christian.
Again:1 John 3:10
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
Mattew 15:8
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mattew 7:16
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits.
thanks for proving my point
thank the baby jeebus we have real christians like you on this board to help us understand who the real christians are You gotta admit all those fake christians are sneaky bastards and are giving real christians like you a bad name
-
You mean like regarding your wife as property, the same as cattle? Or sacrificing animals? Or if you are unhappy with your kids then to just kill them all? Those kind of morals?
thanks for proving my point
thank the baby jeebus we have real christians like you on this board to help us understand who the real christians are You gotta admit all those fake christians are sneaky bastards and are giving real christians like you a bad name
:D :D :D :D :D
-
It's very simple. Mao Zedong's alone murdered around 43,000,000 innocent people, maybe even more. He was the leader of his country, a modern, educated, atheist leader. No need for a "definition" of what is a "leader". Name one religious leader in history with a murder count anywhere near that.
We both agree on this, nor have i denied it. I don't know why you seem to feel you have to say essentially the same thing again. But feel free to do it again if you like.
Funny that you bring up the Crusades, the Inquisition and the Witch Trials, none of which can be attributed to anyone particular individual. The Crusades were a war between Christians and Muslims, hardly comparable to what Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot did. Historians put the Crusades casualties at many thousands at the most, the Inquisition at hundreds at the most, and the Witch Trials probably less than one hundred. There is no comparison.
Do you actually read what i posted starting with my response to your post pages earlier?
Were these people not Christians who participated in the crusades led by other "Christians" who were sanctioned by the Pope? Maybe Pope Urban II? Maybe a Byzantine emperor's (who was Christian) appeal to the Pope to call for a "holy war" a war that resulted in the 1st crusade?
Is the Pope the leader of the Church?
Why are you trying to minimize the fact there was leadership in the crusades by dismissing it as a religious war only?
And yes, these other things such as the Salem witch trial ALL had leadership in that the people involved looked to a town elder, judge or mayor or what you, who was also "Christian" who deemed it necessary to burn someone at the stake for suspicion of witch craft.
No. Murder is murder, and atheists must stop pointing fingers at religion when murder takes place. Atheists' track record is less than impressive.
No they must not stop pointing the finger no more than the other way around.
If you just take the fact that there are far more "Christians" through out history who have committed murder one way or another versus the very small amount of Atheists through out history makes "saved by grace" a pure fucking joke.
-
Were these people not Christians who participated in the crusades led by other "Christians" who were sanctioned by the Pope? Maybe Pope Urban II? Maybe a Byzantine emperor's (who was Christian) appeal to the Pope to call for a "holy war" a war that resulted in the 1st crusade?
Is the Pope the leader of the Church?
Why are you trying to minimize the fact there was leadership in the crusades by dismissing it as a religious war only?
And yes, these other things such as the Salem witch trial ALL had leadership in that the people involved looked to a town elder, judge or mayor or what you, who was also "Christian" who deemed it necessary to burn someone at the stake for suspicion of witch craft.
So?
-
So?
;D
-
So?
so why not just admit that Christians along with all other people have done some really horrific shit rather than going through all these contortions and rationalizations that just get torn to pieces every time you bring them up
-
so why not just admit that Christians along with all other people have done some really horrific shit rather than going through all these contortions and rationalizations that just get torn to pieces every time you bring them up
Beucase to do so would open the door to so many other things that perhaps his faith cannot win against.
Christins committ murder just as atheists do. The difference is Christianity is a religion that survives on rationalizing contradictions.
-
Beucase to do so would open the door to so many other things that perhaps his faith cannot win against.
Christins committ murder just as atheists do. The difference is Christianity is a religion that survives on rationalizing contradictions.
Yep!
The art of cherry picking what you want to follow word by word, or "interpret" those words as "what it really means", in order to support a biased outlook towards those who do not share your viewpoint.
-
You and the rest of the "people" that harp on "you are what you say you are" are a bunch of morons.
You are NOT what you say you are.
Your SPIRITUAL FRUITS are proofs of who you really are.
I don't care if Hitler was baptized a million times. His actions showed he never believed with his heart.
You idiots actually believe that a person who commits atrocities should still be considered a Christian just because they say they are or because at one time they were baptized as a Christian? This is why atheists should never comment on spiritual doctrines. None of you nitwits know what you are yapping about.
Look at Obama. Who claims to be a Christian yet is in favor of abortions and homos tying the knot as "married couples". He is far from being a christian.
Again:1 John 3:10
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
Mattew 15:8
8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
Mattew 7:16
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits.
That's an impossible distinction. I've had Jehova's Witnesses tell me other faiths are not 'real' Christians. I've had Orthodox tell me the same.
And Lutheran's openly welcome gays. To suggest they are not 'real' Christians is absurd.
-
That's an impossible distinction. I've had Jehova's Witnesses tell me other faiths are not 'real' Christians. I've had Orthodox tell me the same.
And Lutheran's openly welcome gays. To suggest they are not 'real' Christians is absurd.
probably best if all religious folks stop appointing themselves arbiter of who is authentic and who is not
also probably a good idea to stop pretending that people who share your faith (not "yours") can't also do horrible shit from time to time
-
so why not just admit that Christians along with all other people have done some really horrific shit rather than going through all these contortions and rationalizations that just get torn to pieces every time you bring them up
Why not just admit that modern, educated, atheist leaders have murdered by far more innocent people than any religious leader who ever lived?
-
Why not just admit that modern, educated, atheist leaders have murdered by far more innocent people than any religious leader who ever lived?
because you've shown no proof that it's true and definitely no proof that their actions were due to their atheism
Let me know when you'd like to admit that christians have killed and have done so explicitly due to their religious beliefs
-
because you've shown no proof that it's true and definitely no proof that their actions were due to their atheism
Let me know when you'd like to admit that christians have killed and have done so explicitly due to their religious beliefs
What do I have to prove? You're gonna toss modern history out the window now? ::)
Name one Christian who has murdered as many innocent people as Stalin, or as Mao, or as Pol Pot.
-
What do I have to prove? You're gonna toss modern history out the window now? ::)
Name one Christian who has murdered as many innocent people as Stalin, or as Mao, or as Pol Pot.
never said there was one
you've never proven that their alleged atheism was the cause of their actions
why even bother mentioning atheism
they all had being male in common
maybe that was their reason for their actions
what do you think?
-
What do I have to prove? You're gonna toss modern history out the window now? ::)
Name one Christian who has murdered as many innocent people as Stalin, or as Mao, or as Pol Pot.
God.
He killed all his children. Unless of course you are going to claim he wasn't a Christian.
-
"It is also worth noting that when avowedly atheist governments called the shots their ethical track record was less than awe-inspiring. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot are not, so far as I know, in line for sainthood. The point isn’t that godless commies are bad. The point is that it is dishonest to pretend that the Crusades count against theism but that Stalin doesn’t count against atheism."
- H. Allen Orr is University Professor and Shirley Cox Kearns Professor of Biology at the University of Rochester.
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html
-
"It is also worth noting that when avowedly atheist governments called the shots their ethical track record was less than awe-inspiring. Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot are not, so far as I know, in line for sainthood. The point isn’t that godless commies are bad. The point is that it is dishonest to pretend that the Crusades count against theism but that Stalin doesn’t count against atheism."
- H. Allen Orr is University Professor and Shirley Cox Kearns Professor of Biology at the University of Rochester.
http://bostonreview.net/BR24.5/orr.html
congratulations
you've posted someone offering his opinion and it just happens to be the same as your opinion
too bad it's not proof of anything other than someone shares your opinion
what do you think of my theory that Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot were all males and that's why they committed such atrocities
If you don't like that how about the fact that they were all dictators
Any chance that it's pretty common for dictators to kill lot's of people (take a look at Saddam Hussein as an example - he was a dictator and killed thousands of his own citizens). Any chance you think he did that in an attempt to secure and solidify his dictatorial power?
-
congratulations
you've posted someone offering his opinion and it just happens to be the same as your opinion
too bad it's not proof of anything other than someone shares your opinion
what do you think of my theory that Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot were all males and that's why they committed such atrocities
If you don't like that how about the fact that they were all dictators
Any chance that it's pretty common for dictators to kill lot's of people (take a look at Saddam Hussein as an example - he was a dictator and killed thousands of his own citizens). Any chance you think he did that in an attempt to secure and solidify his dictatorial power?
Many religious leaders were male too. Many religious leaders were dictators too. Yet not a single one of them came even close to the number of innocent people that modern, atheist leaders have murdered.
-
Many religious leaders were male too. Many religious leaders were dictators too. Yet not a single one of them came even close to the number of innocent people that modern, atheist leaders have murdered.
give me some examples the religious dictators you have in mind
btw - since we're now to the point of posting opinions of others that share our own opinion I'll do the same (and even give you a link)
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/harris06/harris06_index.html
People of faith often claim that the crimes of Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot were the inevitable product of unbelief. The problem with fascism and communism, however, is not that they are too critical of religion; the problem is that they are too much like religions. Such regimes are dogmatic to the core and generally give rise to personality cults that are indistinguishable from cults of religious hero worship. Auschwitz, the gulag and the killing fields were not examples of what happens when human beings reject religious dogma; they are examples of political, racial and nationalistic dogma run amok. There is no society in human history that ever suffered because its people became too reasonable.
btw -since you beliefs about Stalin, Pol Pot etc... are such a common argument by fundies you'll know doubt be aware of all the arguments against your belief. Here is an site where you can find 9 pages of people talking about it
http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/1779-hitler-stalin-mao-etc-were-atheists-and-they-were-terrible-answer-that#page1
-
Let the rationalizing begin!
;D
So?
;D
-
Many religious leaders were male too. Many religious leaders were dictators too. Yet not a single one of them came even close to the number of innocent people that modern, atheist leaders have murdered.
Hitler was not an atheist!
If you say you are a christian, you are a christian. You believe that Jesus was the son of God and died for your sins. That's all it takes.
-
Hitler was not an atheist!
If you say you are a christian, you are a christian. You believe that Jesus was the son of God and died for your sins. That's all it takes.
yep,
isn't that the "good news"
-
I like how the Bible says don't judge. Yet people up in this thread passing judgement on who is a Christian and who isn't. ::)
-
I like how the Bible says don't judge. Yet people up in this thread passing judgement on who is a Christian and who isn't. ::)
As long as I don't say I'm a Christian, and I don't, then I can judge ALL day long.
-
As long as I don't say I'm a Christian, and I don't, then I can judge ALL day long.
I'm pretty sure I recall a few people on this board saying if you're not a believer then you can't judge them or something to that effect. Somehow you're disqualified from having and expressing an opinion
-
lol
So the terrorists in Boston were in fact Muslim, and this guy was a Democrat?
Sorry Otwink! ;D
-
lol
So the terrorists in Boston were in fact Muslim, and this guy was a Democrat?
Sorry Otwink! ;D
what are you sorry about?
-
what are you sorry about?
-
some of the most dishonest and vile people I've dealt with in business have been very vocal "born again" christians
I have to echo this sentiment. It has also been my experience as well.
On the flip side, some of the kindest, most honest, decent and morally upright people I've dealt with also claimed to be Christians. As far as I'm concerned, all religions contain good people as well as assholes.
The most striking coincidence I've found across all religious stripes however, is the most vile, sociopathic, and machiavellian people I've encountered in my life, have been evangelical fundamentalists ... whether they ascribed to any religious denomination or atheism. The more vocal they were about their religious beliefs or non-beliefs (in the case of atheists) the more justified and self-righteous they felt about whatever selfish actions they undertook or whatever attrocities they were committing against others.
They viewed their belief in their particular deity as justification and sanctification for their misdeeds.
-
give me some examples the religious dictators you have in mind
btw - since we're now to the point of posting opinions of others that share our own opinion I'll do the same (and even give you a link)
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/harris06/harris06_index.html
btw -since you beliefs about Stalin, Pol Pot etc... are such a common argument by fundies you'll know doubt be aware of all the arguments against your belief. Here is an site where you can find 9 pages of people talking about it
http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/1779-hitler-stalin-mao-etc-were-atheists-and-they-were-terrible-answer-that#page1
Congratulations, you have found one person who shares your delusion about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. ::)
Like OzmO said, there has been many more Christians throughout history than atheists. Now if three atheists alone murdered so many millions of innocent people in such a short time, in numbers unmatched by anyone else, then I guess it's a good thing we haven't had more atheists.
-
As long as I don't say I'm a Christian, and I don't, then I can judge ALL day long.
*high five*
(P.S. heading to pick up my DI : Riptide copy today)
-
If you say you are a christian, you are a christian.
Matthew 7:21
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
-
People who pray in public will not enter heaven either. So much for the Christians.
-
Matthew 7:21
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
But THAT is not the definition of a Christian. You are confusing someone who will get into Heaven with a "christian", they are not always the same.
Definition of Christian (n)
Chris·tian
[ kríschən ]
believer in Jesus Christ as savior: somebody whose religion is Christianity
You ain't gotta be a great person to be a "Christian".
-
But THAT is not the definition of a Christian. You are confusing someone who will get into Heaven with a "christian", they are not always the same.
Definition of Christian (n)
Chris·tian
[ kríschən ]
believer in Jesus Christ as savior: somebody whose religion is Christianity
You ain't gotta be a great person to be a "Christian".
and the majority of them aren't
-
These should be what we are asking:
Were people murdered by Christians because they weren't Christians?
Were people murdered by Atheists because they weren't atheists?
-
APNewsBreak: Ricin suspect released from jail
AP 4/23/2013 5:25:18 PM
(AP) APNewsBreak: Ricin suspect released from jail
By JEFF AMY
Associated Press
OXFORD, Miss.
The Mississippi man charged with sending poisoned letters to President Barack Obama, a U.S. senator and a state judge was released from jail on Tuesday, federal official said, though the reason for the release wasn't immediately clear.
Jeff Woodfin, chief deputy with the U.S. Marshals Service in Oxford, Miss., said Paul Kevin Curtis has been released from custody. Woodfin said he doesn't know if there were any conditions on the release.
The development comes hours after officials canceled a detention and preliminary hearing without explaining the reason for the change.
His lawyer Christi McCoy, who has been pushing for the charges to be dropped, said in a text message Tuesday that she could only confirm that her client has been released.
"I can tell you he is with his family," McCoy said.
McCoy has said that there is a news conference scheduled for 5 p.m. CDT with federal authorities and defense attorneys.
Curtis was arrested last Wednesday at his house in Corinth, Miss., and charged with sending ricin-laced letters to Obama, Sen. Roger Wicker and a Lee County, Miss., judge.
Tuesday's hearing in federal court was canceled about 90 minutes after it was supposed to begin. Lawyers spent that time conferring with the judge. Later, Curtis and family members were escorted into a meeting room with his lawyers, followed by a probation officer.
On Monday, FBI Agent Brandon Grant testified that Friday searches of Curtis' vehicle and house in Corinth, Miss., found no ricin, ingredients for the poison, or devices used to make it. A search of Curtis' computers found no evidence he researched making ricin.
"There was no apparent ricin, castor beans or any material there that could be used for the manufacturing, like a blender or something," Grant testified. He speculated that Curtis could have thrown away the processor.
Through McCoy, Curtis has denied involvement in letters containing ricin sent to Obama, Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker, and a Lee County, Miss., judge. The first of the letters was found April 15.
"The searches are concluded, not one single shred of evidence was found to indicate Kevin could have done this," McCoy told reporters after the hearing Monday.
McCoy also questioned why Curtis would have signed the letters "I am KC and I approve this message," a phrase he had used on his Facebook page.
McCoy said in court that someone may have framed Curtis, suggesting that a former business associate of Curtis' brother, a man with whom Curtis had an extended exchange of angry emails, may have set him up.
Still, Grant testified that authorities believe they have the right suspect.
"Given the right mindset and the Internet and the acquisition of material, other people could be involved. However, given information right now, we believe we have the right individual," he said.
Grant said lab analysis shows the poison in the letters was in a crude form that could have been created by grinding castor beans in a food processor or coffee grinder.
Grant testified Friday that authorities tried to track down the sender of the letters by using a list of Wicker's constituents with the initials KC, the same initials in the letters. Grant said the list was whittled from thousands to about 100 when investigators isolated the ones who lived in an area that would have a Memphis, Tenn., postmark, which includes many places in north Mississippi. He said Wicker's staff recognized Curtis as someone who had written the senator before.
All the envelopes and stamps were self-adhesive, Grant said Monday, meaning they won't yield DNA evidence. He said thus far the envelopes and letters haven't yielded any fingerprints.
http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/DA5RC8380
-
These should be what we are asking:
Were people murdered by Christians because they weren't Christians?
Were people murdered by Atheists because they weren't atheists?
Please do not complicate things with silly logic and useless common sense. ;)
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/23/paul-kevin-curtis-released_n_3140326.html#comments
They just let him go - so all we know is that this guy is w ierdo
-
Congratulations, you have found one person who shares your delusion about Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. ::)
Like OzmO said, there has been many more Christians throughout history than atheists. Now if three atheists alone murdered so many millions of innocent people in such a short time, in numbers unmatched by anyone else, then I guess it's a good thing we haven't had more atheists.
many people share my opinion regarding your phony beliefs about Stalin, Mao, etc..
You can find people on this very thread and I gave you a link with 9 pages of people sharing the same opinion
somehow I doubt If I showed you ten million people who shared that opinion that it would make any difference to you
You've decided that Stalin, Mao, etc.. committed their atrocities because they were atheist and no amount of information is going to change that belief for you
-
Tell me Loco,
Dario is out calling people idiots and morons while quoting scripture.
Hardly what most people would consider Christian like behavior.
Would you consider him a 'real' Christian?
-
Tell me Loco,
Dario is out calling people idiots and morons while quoting scripture.
Hardly what most people would consider Christian like behavior.
Would you consider him a 'real' Christian?
Of course not. He isn't a real Christian in many ways.
-
So the new Ricin suspect was arrested
Alleged child molester and failed GOP State Senate candidate
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/27/ricin-suspect-j-everett-dutschke-arrested.html
-
So the new Ricin suspect was arrested
Alleged child molester and failed GOP State Senate candidate
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/04/27/ricin-suspect-j-everett-dutschke-arrested.html
Also a failed Democratic candidate as well.
-
Also a failed Democratic candidate as well.
Some people just fail no matter what they promote.
-
They just cught the lady. She was trying to frame her husband.