common ailments of atheists?

[Tosho]

[quote]all morals didnt come from christianity.. but many did.[quote]

Can you give us some examples?

[quote]I havent bashed anyone........ yet.[quote]

Nice threat /sarcasm /.

[quote]nope.. i can envision cases where war/killing would be inevitable.. surely history proves that.[quote]

How does the necessity of war justify the butchering of civilians?

{quote}(Dead Sea Scrolls: They showed that the Bible had been altered, I believe.){quote}


[quote]quite the opposite.[quote]

Explain how you know they've not been altered.


{quote}(Bigot: Saying that athiests are inherently selfish because they're athiests is bigotry.){quote}


[quote]its just my impression..... i dont think all atheists are these horrible people, but maybe some are..[quote]

I could say the same about christians.

[Stravo]

how is it cowardly? do you realize that you're being hypocritical, in criticizing christians for killing, when americans have done the same in the past? how can you justify us killing people - vietnam, other wars.. when you criticize christians, or people who were perhaps misled christians doing the same?

Not only are you an idiot, but now you put words in my mouth you tard!! WHEN point it out WHEN did I insert the US's track record on ANYTHING in this thread....WHERE????? You can't can you? You inserted your own thought because you KNOW that what is written there is true. Don't scurry away like a rat, stand up there and defend what you believe. I said that Christians have done some VERY horrific things in the past, YOU said "different laws for different times" YOU, sir, dragged extraneous shit into that argument that I am most emphtically pulling out and leaving my statment as it stands. ANSWER IT!!!

I think the point was, history concurs with much of what is in the Bible.. not what you typed.

NO....the point was that you CANNOT make historical arguments PARTICULARLY the grand sweeping ones you're making without having some grounding in history or citing to actual historical facts not some vague "Empires tend to do this" and "Pagans didn't have moral strictures against homosexuality and tattos."

killing, while im not pro-kill anything.. i think in some cases its almost unavoidable.. in some eras killing was probably so commonplace, that it wouldn't draw a second glance. if you lived in one of those eras, and believed that killing wasnt all that big a thing.. how would you POSSIBLY convince someone that it was wrong? short of brainwashing them.. or shooting them in the head? just tell them its wrong, think that would work?

There you go again with grand sweeping remarks about history, where did you learn this? IN the movies? Cliff Notes on History perhaps? Killing has ALWAYS been wrong, every CIVILIZED nation, empire, city state, has always said so, there have been laws aginast this GASP BEFORE the TEN Commandments. You think people strolled around and just killed people all throughout history until now????? Mass death in the past coincided with war and war is an altogether different animal, and before you go off spouting about the horrors of war in the past we killed more combatants and non combatants in WWII than any other war before or since.

weak..... pagans had no restrictions against either of those things..... since christians did, i used it to point out how some morals didnt come from paganism...... never said anything about pagans being............ whatever it is you think i said

JESUS CHRIST!! You can't even scroll back a few paragraphs to read what I said about pagans and morality...OR did you just not understand it????

No....... I think other people are ignoring the fact, that Hitler strangely didn't seem to follow christian beliefs.. a christian is one who follows christ, or christ's beliefs.. etc etc.... since hitler made up in many cases his own whacked out theology, that wasnt parallel to christian beliefs.. you cannot beyond all doubt classify him a christian.. which many of you seem to ignore, because you want so badly to rank him amongst us.

READ HISTORY...It's a simple thing, you pick up a book, you turn the pages...you may not LIKE what you find there but there it is...Jitler was indeed Christian, was he a good christian, NO, but he certainly identified himself as such and just to let yuou in on a little well known fact, Christianity had been blaming the jews for the death of Christ for 2,000 YEARS...so his progroms were usually either following a disturbing trend in European history in regard to treatment of the Jews.

Some other tidbits that draw my ire.

So why was the Church silent during the Holocaust? Why didn't it try to get other countries involved in helping the Jews, even though it knew (as the US did) what was going on inside of Germany?)


Why was the Church silent? do we look like the Marines to you, buddy?

NO, the Church is SUPPOSED to stand up to evil and injustice. Are we NOT Christ's representatives on Earth, would NOT Christ have sacrificed his life before letting one of his won slaughter jews - of which Christ was one. Are we NOT Soldiers of Christ as some have chosen to call themselves???? That's your answer...we're not fighters...are you not ashamed fro whipping out that argument??? Can you say how UTTERLY moronic that sounds when we are supposed to be the bastion of truth, justice and morality.

that doesnt prove anything.. and ive already proven that there are morals that didnt come from paganism, so obviously the 'myth,' that all christian beliefs are derived from paganism.. is false.

WHERE IS THE PROOF. A sentence written by you is NOT proof. PROVE IT!!! Just because you say it deosn't make it so....

And my personal FAVORITE

so, nope, not Catholic. maybe your worst nightmare, eh? your worse nightmare = an educated christian.

ROTFLMAO!!!!! You sir are most certainly NOT Catholic, anyone educated by Jesuits knows more about basics of faith than you and all your prattling. WE know because we are taught to question our faith so that we can be stronger and defend it, YOU haven't a clue.

[Nick]

And my personal FAVORITE

so, nope, not Catholic. maybe your worst nightmare, eh? your worse nightmare = an educated christian.

ROTFLMAO!!!!! You sir are most certainly NOT Catholic, anyone educated by Jesuits knows more about basics of faith than you and all your prattling. WE know because we are taught to question our faith so that we can be stronger and defend it, YOU haven't a clue.

*Stands and applauds*

Now that is something I can respect. Are you paying attention Shaolin?

[Nick]

(--ShAoLiN is an unrepentant irrational bigot. I'm not even going to bother replying to the little bitch. He is only worthy of our contempt, scorn, and derision. He should be mocked, spit on, and ridiculed. He should not be indulged by actually discussing his topic rationally!)

lol, you replied when you clicked the submit button.. genius.

Hmm, third person rather than second person. I'm guessing this message was actually for all the _other_ people following this topic. Genius.

(This "Shaolin" moron obviously believes that he is not accountable to human society, but rather, he should only hold himself accountable to a deity whose wishes he gets to define himself, through selective and inconsistent interpretation of ancient mythologies.)

eh?

Can't recognise a description of your self when you see it? Or did Mike use too many big words?

(Most of the stories, myths, and morals can all be traced back to Sumeria, Babylon, and Egypt. It is a myth that all morals are derived from Christianity.)

All morals definitely aren't derived from christianity.. but many are..

I'll add my voice to the ever-growing chorus asking you to back this up with examples - enough to justify the presence of the word 'many', don't forget. One or two is merely a novelty.

(Must I really point out the history of the christain faith to you? You seem to have a opinion that atheists lead a life of "self indulgence and conveniance as opposed to one of morality" Are you suggesting thats Ahtesits have no morals? that atheists lead lives of decadent indulgence of every whim?
What would you have them do, and why? Answer that and we shall see where 'affront to freedom comes from'.)

i never said/typed/stated that all atheists are immoral or anything close.. it "seems," that many dont really care whether there is or isnt a God.. or whether christianity has its merits.. many SEEM to find it easier to go through life with the opinion that there is no God.. based solely on 2nd-hand rumor, opinion, or speculation.. and that it is more convenient for people to worship themselves, and indulge in whatever they want.. then be responsible.

You have stated OVER and OVER, that you believe atheists in general SEEM to be more interested in their own convenience than is the case for other groups in society.

Let's try an experiment:

In my experience, it seems that Christians have a tendency to follow the tenets of their faith, even in the face of significant evidence that doing so has definite damaging consequences.

In my experience, it seems that Christians have a tendency to follow the tenets of their faith without question, because questioning would mean that they actually had to think for themselves..

(So you can't be morale without believing in God?)

its possible to be moral without God.. but for me, its not about with or without God.. Truth is what im after.. people have tried for more than 2000 years to disprove christianity, and it hasn't happened.. so keep in mind, that many of the arguments people will cite, are often taken out of context.. or just manipulated quotations, that are mis-translated.. or bent into someone's belief system.

Err, to disprove Christianity, it would be necessary for it to meet the criteria for a valid scientific theory. However, at this point, I'm just going to borrow Durandal's sig:

I contend that we are both atheists. I merely believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, then you will understand why I dismiss yours.

(Outright lie. Science can explain how bees fly, they have long since figured that out. You just never bothed to follow science well enough to figure that out.)

you could be right.. still, the fact is that science is limited.. and many scientific theories are proven wrong, years down the road, and need to be redressed..

Proven wrong? Not exactly. Demonstrated to be incomplete, or inadequate to cover all possible situations? Certainly.

But the remarkable thing about the replacing theory is that, for all cases that were correctly described by the old model, the new model has exactly the same predictions (e.g. general relativity supplements Newtonian mechanics to cover a few more esoteric cases - for everyday calculations, Newton's laws work fine).

(When they say that only ten percent genetics separates us from bovines, they are trying to support the theory of evolution by saying that cows are in the mammalian family. Ten percent is very significant, but it is a far smaller percentage than what separates us from, say, lizards. I have absolutely NO idea what you are trying to tell us here. Cows are fairly similar to us. Ten percent is a big difference, but not that big, genetically. I really don't see why you object to this, except that you are an anti-scientific bigot, and probably a religious zealot. BTW, science is not more biased than religious bigots like you. AND you mispelled "classified.")

Im not a bigot. That you accuse me of being one, is just weak. Ill post the abiogenesis stuff later.... maybe.

Stop acting like a bigot, and we'll stop calling you one (eventually).

Anyway, the real reason I started replying to this post at all: What the fuck has abiogenesis got to do with anything? Can you stretch any harder after those red herrings? Pull in something from out past Pluto perhaps? Maybe the Oort cloud has some bearing on our current discussion. Yeah, let's bring that into it.

[Nick]

(Shaolin, you currently get credit that your remarks come from naivete and ignorance. In other words, I'm assuming you haven't bothered reading anything anywhere on this site or these forums. Regardless, I get to have fun taking your "argument" apart )

like the other ppl.. you have your statements - my remarks come from "naivete and ignorance," but lack the means to back it up..

Yes, hence the use of the word 'assume'. You do know what the word means, don't you?

Oddly enough, you also seem to think that being stupid and irrational is preferable to being naive and ignorant.

(Obviously, I don't believe all religionists are like the fundamentalists that final paragraph describes - but such people _do_ have it easy, because they never have to learn to use their brain.)

likewise.. im sure there are people who are comparable among "atheists," for every category you mentioned.. I'd probably be a mix of 1 + 3.. although the categories you mentioned - any categories have their limitations.. and exceptions.

No shit, Sherlock. Did I ever claim the categories were exhastive? For someone who thinks he fits into category 3, you're doing a damn good job of acting like someone who lands fair and square in category 2 (the fundie category).

see above URL for some account of historical fact backing up prophecy.. there were specific prophecies that seem to validate christianity.

Bleh. Other people have already pointed out the invalidity of interpreting prophecies after the fact. "Oh, if only we'd understood the prophecy sooner, we might have been able to do something", and its more odious companion "I always said that was what the prophecy was talking about".

[oberon]

Whatsisname said:
"
"science," can't even explain aerodynamically, how a bee flies.
"

A clear indicator of someone who hates and fears math class.

[oberon]

"Why was the Church silent?" Why was America silent during the war (both of them)? Why was England silent between wars, with the exception of Churchill? Why did Henry Ford trade with the Nazis, keeping them supplied with vehicle tires? Why aren't you feeding Sally Struthers?

[Soulman]

Christianity did give me something, soul music, with lots and lots of saxophones and a horn section....

[Tebrak'aun]

speaking purely for myself i dislike a codified religion that tells us the answers to the questions we all ask ourselves. I feel that the bible amongst other texts is too open to interpretation at its core it promotes a set of moral strictures(10 commandments) that most people would agree are a necessary blueprint for creating a peaceful, flourishing society based on lawfulness, mutual respect and civic spirit. But there will always be people who use obscure passages or wordings to morally justify a course of action that contravenes the spirit of these laws.
I prefer a more introverted teaching that validates the asking of these questions, tells you the answers are out there and encourages you to discover them for yourself while constantly questioning the answers you find.... when it comes to people there are no absolute truths and the most dangerous person is the one who is so certain they are right they cannot entertain the idea that they maybe wrong

[Mr Bean]

Exactly Tebrak'aun

Here some Fun sample passages

If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:9

If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:10

If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:13

A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:27
And just to make sure you don't think its all just one boook

When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations--the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you-- and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the LORD's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles and burn their idols in the fire.

Deuteronomy 7:1-5


So we have kill Gays, Adultuere, When you win a war kill everyone in the loosing country annnd

If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer ... That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God.

Deuteronomy 13:1-5
Kill Prophets

And in case you run into a Hindiu or Buddist

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people

Deuteronomy 13:6-9
Kill them too

Infact you should

If you hear it said about one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you to live in that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all
who live in that town. Destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock.

Deuteronomy 13:12-15
Kill everyone just to be safe


Oh and for you Christian Fokes playing at home next time you go to chuch listen how many times Deuteronomy is quoted by your preacher/minster if not nessary these parts


And one last fun quote incase you think God's just kidding around

If you do not carefully follow all the words of this law, which are written in this book, and do not revere this glorious and awesome name -- the LORD your God -- the LORD will send fearful plagues on you and your descendants, harsh and prolonged disasters, and severe and lingering illnesses. He will bring upon you all the diseases of Egypt that you dreaded, and they will cling to you. The LORD will also bring on you every kind of sickness and disaster not recorded in this Book of the Law, until you are destroyed.

Deuteronomy 28:58-61

[ShAoLiN]

(Proven: You haven't proved anything. All you did was make an unsupported claim. The Christian Religion incorporates various beliefs and morals from earlier pagan religions, like the religion of Zoroaster.)


nope.. Zoroaster is more a early form of buddhism, or hinduism, than christianity.


(There: So? The Bible endorses such things. And we have plenty of knowledge to judge Yaweh, no matter what immoral things the people of the destroyed cities may or may not have done, that's no excuse for killing pregnant women or children, or ordering their deaths.)


you cant judge anyone.. i cant judge anyone.. maybe you're arrogant enough to think you can, but i wouldnt trust you or anyone else to do a decent job of it.. you love judging people too much.. it blinds you.

when the US dropped the atomic bombs on nagasaki and hiroshima.. do you think that spared women? children? the unborn? Does a President who declares war on another country become an immoral butcher? its a fact of life, at times when the situation becomes kill or be killed.. there isnt much of a choice in the matter..


(The Bible doesn't support reincarnation, by the way.)


it doesnt support or denounce reincarnation one way or the other.. but, you need to keep in mind, that God could have ways of working things out, that we aren't aware of.


(Defend: Because they're part of your religion, simply put. You seem to think Christians and the other followers of Yaweh are so moral, so you must explain their actions and defend their reasoning and justification.)


Everyone should have to answer for their actions.. how much is a clear conscience worth these days, eh?


("Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."5 (Hitler obviously believed in a supreme being)


that ideal contradicts many christian teachings.. as do many of his others, hence, he wasnt a follower of christianity but someone who made up his own policies concerning jews. just as bin laden claims to be a muslim, and ignores islamic beliefs - or bends them to suit his own purposes.

that you ignore this.. and think you're "winning," an argument or some nonsense only lessens your own credibility.

[ShAoLiN]

(Bashed: That athiest/automatically selfish idea is bashing.)


Its not bashing.. although there might be a few atheists around here, who could teach me something of that.. maybe someday you'll understand the difference.


(Envision: That doesn't disprove Yaweh isn't a butcher.)


so a general who gives orders for his men to go into battle is a butcher? Or, whatever president ordered the dropping of a-bombs on japan is a butcher? you ignore facts to achieve labeling of God as a butcher...... and are hypocritical in doing it.


(Maybe: You're not looking hard enough.)


im thinking.. you're the one's who are blind.


(Guilt: Good for you. But i was referring to the fact that you seem to think that just because people reject Yaweh, and they have more happiness and less guilt as a result, that means they're immoral.)


you take my quotes out of context.. nit-picking and trying to find some tiny morsel of fact to slander me with.. its weak.. ya'all are making atheists look bad.


(Impression: You're changing your position, I see.)


That was my position all along......

[ShAoLiN]

(I don't understand people like Shaolin. Aside from the powerfully ironic name for a christian fundie, what mind state do you have to be in to do what he's doing? Did he honestly think he can march on to a message board full of people who can't stand fundies, banner flying, bible thumpin', with his sleeves rolled up to do the "Lord's Work" and then expect to get anywhere? Especially when they, despite being provacative at best, insulting at worst, expect people to go "Oh, gee! You're right! Praise the Lord!" just like that.
It's sad, in the same way the movie "The Postman" was sad. Such blind effort for so little product.... you have my pity, Shaolin.)


The name? Chalk it up to respect for Shaolin monks, who devoted themselves to truth, and oftentimes had an impeccable work ethic, things i can aspire to.

Who said, I thought I was doing God's work.. or any such nonsense.. i am probably not even worthy of doing God's work.. I was engaging in some propaganda christian stuff? Nah. Just came across the board one day, and saw a proliferation of atheism.. indulging themselves in pointing out their perceived weaknesses in christianity's belief systems.. and wondered if they could discuss their own point of view, without resorting to petty, degrading insults, like 12-year olds.. i think ive been respectful so far.. some of the "atheists," however.. SEEM TO BE, behaving just as intolerably as they accuse some christians of.. but np, its cool.. slander away.

[ShAoLiN]

(Ahh, but now he is in full duck dodge and weave mode. Whereas he has never made _any_ attempt to limit his views to "lazy, immoral' atheists (which would have been a tautology - of course lazt and immoral people are only interested in their own convenience, be they atheists or bible-bashing fundies), instead stating them in terms that indicate a tendency to hold that view of _all_ atheists, the rest of us have (generally) tried to make it clear that the problem is with Christian fundamentalists, not with liberal Christians who have let their moral code be informed by the lessons of humanism.)


did i ever imply that all atheists are assholes? did i? nope.


(Unfortunately, admitting the above would mean acknowledging either:
That Shaolin actually believes that atheism is inextricabbly linked with immorality; or
That Shaolin has stated his position badly, creating the impression that (1) is true.)


thats taken out of context.. you're interpreting my words to mean something other than what they did. And, labeling my points as "bad," in an effort to convince yourself and others, that they are weak.. or inaccurate.. but, like always, you lack the facts to back up your own point of view.. thus its just weak accusations.. and character assassination, which is more or less.. all ive seen from ya'all so far.


(I doubt Shaolin has the guts or intellectual honesty required to admit either. *shrug* Who knows, maybe he'll surprise me.)


I wonder if any of you have the guts or intellectual honesty.. to reply to one of my posts.. without taking quotes out of context.. or attempting some childish.. petty.. "Shaolin sucks," nonsense.

[ShAoLiN]

[quote]nope.. i can envision cases where war/killing would be inevitable.. surely history proves that.[quote]

How does the necessity of war justify the butchering of civilians?


leaving them alive.. could have allowed them a chance to grow and indulge themselves in revenge later on. it could have been a risk they couldn't take.. taking them as wives or adopting the children.. could have been a bad influence, since ideas, beliefs, etc, can be contagious.. i wasnt there.. but dont see why there couldnt have been a good reason for it.


({quote}(Dead Sea Scrolls: They showed that the Bible had been altered, I believe.){quote}
Explain how you know they've not been altered.)


simple compare dead sea scrolls to existing versions of the bible.. dont you think if the Bible of today was significantly different from what was recorded in the Dead Sea Scrolls.. christians everywhere would lose faith? IF there was solid evidence disproving christianity, I doubt any of us would be christians.. is what many of you fail to realize.


({quote}(Bigot: Saying that athiests are inherently selfish because they're athiests is bigotry.){quote}
[quote]its just my impression..... i dont think all atheists are these horrible people, but maybe some are..[quote]
I could say the same about christians.)


*nod*

[ShAoLiN]

(Not only are you an idiot, but now you put words in my mouth you tard!! WHEN point it out WHEN did I insert the US's track record on ANYTHING in this thread.... WHERE????? You can't can you? You inserted your own thought because you KNOW that what is written there is true. Don't scurry away like a rat, stand up there and defend what you believe. I said that Christians have done some VERY horrific things in the past, YOU said "different laws for different times" YOU, sir, dragged extraneous shit into that argument that I am most emphtically pulling out and leaving my statment as it stands. ANSWER IT!!!)



lol.. extraneous? no, what im asking is how can you put God down for ordering a war / killings, or any thing of that type.. and accept the bombing of hiroshima.. or an of the countless acts that men have done... which is in context, because it shows your bias towards God, and haste in judging him.


(NO....the point was that you CANNOT make historical arguments PARTICULARLY the grand sweeping ones you're making without having some grounding in history or citing to actual historical facts not some vague "Empires tend to do this" and "Pagans didn't have moral strictures against homosexuality and tattos.")


..... thats the way its done man.. THAT is scientific method. TOTAL OBJECTIVITY, open mind, facts and truth over personal prejudice, bias, and discrimination.


(There you go again with grand sweeping remarks about history, where did you learn this? IN the movies? Cliff Notes on History perhaps? Killing has ALWAYS been wrong, every CIVILIZED nation, empire, city state, has always said so, there have been laws aginast this GASP BEFORE the TEN Commandments. You think people strolled around and just killed people all throughout history until now????? Mass death in the past coincided with war and war is an altogether different animal, and before you go off spouting about the horrors of war in the past we killed more combatants and non combatants in WWII than any other war before or since.)


yeah.. allrite... the point is, how can we engage in wars/killing.. then go around and criticize God, for doing the same. Seems hypocritical. Throughout history, was there ever a country that wasn't forced to defend, or kill to preserve its future?


(JESUS CHRIST!! You can't even scroll back a few paragraphs to read what I said about pagans and morality...OR did you just not understand it????)


There's like...... 20 of you, and 1 of me, its hard to keep up everything.. so, unless it was a good argument.. for the most part, im just going to skip it.


(READ HISTORY...It's a simple thing, you pick up a book, you turn the pages...you may not LIKE what you find there but there it is...Jitler was indeed Christian, was he a good christian, NO, but he certainly identified himself as such and just to let yuou in on a little well known fact, Christianity had been blaming the jews for the death of Christ for 2,000 YEARS...so his progroms were usually either following a disturbing trend in European history in regard to treatment of the Jews.)


You NEED Hitler to be a christian.. because it supports your view that christians = assholes. Its a double standard, since most of you probably dont hold all muslims accountable for the actions of osama bin laden.. yet you hold all christians accountable for the actions of hitler. biased & prejudiced.



(NO, the Church is SUPPOSED to stand up to evil and injustice. Are we NOT Christ's representatives on Earth, would NOT Christ have sacrificed his life before letting one of his won slaughter jews - of which Christ was one. Are we NOT Soldiers of Christ as some have chosen to call themselves???? That's your answer...we're not fighters...are you not ashamed fro whipping out that argument??? Can you say how UTTERLY moronic that sounds when we are supposed to be the bastion of truth, justice and morality.)


.. if we are soldiers, its not in the literal sense of the word. we arent the marines


(ROTFLMAO!!!!! You sir are most certainly NOT Catholic, anyone educated by Jesuits knows more about basics of faith than you and all your prattling. WE know because we are taught to question our faith so that we can be stronger and defend it, YOU haven't a clue.)



.. eh? how so?

[ShAoLiN]

Let's try an experiment:

(In my experience, it seems that Christians have a tendency to follow the tenets of their faith, even in the face of significant evidence that doing so has definite damaging consequences.)

(In my experience, it seems that Christians have a tendency to follow the tenets of their faith without question, because questioning would mean that they actually had to think for themselves)



both of those are definitely true, in some cases.. because christians are people, and people aren't perfect.. However, there are some of us out there, maybe even a lot of us.. that wouldn't fit either profile.



(Err, to disprove Christianity, it would be necessary for it to meet the criteria for a valid scientific theory. However, at this point, I'm just going to borrow Durandal's sig:

I contend that we are both atheists. I merely believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, then you will understand why I dismiss yours.)


most religions ive taken the time to study.. have their faults.

religions where the deities divide their power along lines of human perception.. ie - god of sun, goddess of moon, goddess of beauty - if you were a god would you talk amongst your fellow gods, and decide to rule over things according to how humans perceive the world? probably not, so those are likely designed.. by people..

if Dur had some deep.. intellectual reason for dismissing any God.. i think he would have posted it by now. so, his sig is probably just a facade.


(Proven wrong? Not exactly. Demonstrated to be incomplete, or inadequate to cover all possible situations? Certainly.)
(But the remarkable thing about the replacing theory is that, for all cases that were correctly described by the old model, the new model has exactly the same predictions (e.g. general relativity supplements Newtonian mechanics to cover a few more esoteric cases - for everyday calculations, Newton's laws work fine).


in some equations.. if you take einstein's brand of physics, and then newton's to calculate something, you'll get different answers.

"We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality."

-Einstein

[Stravo]

lol.. extraneous? no, what im asking is how can you put God down for ordering a war / killings, or any thing of that type.. and accept the bombing of hiroshima.. or an of the countless acts that men have done... which is in context, because it shows your bias towards God, and haste in judging him.

WHAT DOES THE US POLICY HAVE TO DO WITH CHRISTIANITY'S RECORD????????????????????????????
Answer the question, pointing to something else does NOT answer the question...WON't or more likely CAN'T BTW I'm not putting god down, I'm questioning the role that Christainity has played in history, last time I checked, God didn;t come down and personally start smiting ANYONE....But PLENTY of Christians have.....

NO....the point was that you CANNOT make historical arguments PARTICULARLY the grand sweeping ones you're making without having some grounding in history or citing to actual historical facts not some vague "Empires tend to do this" and "Pagans didn't have moral strictures against homosexuality and tattos.")


..... thats the way its done man.. THAT is scientific method. TOTAL OBJECTIVITY, open mind, facts and truth over personal prejudice, bias, and discrimination.

I HAD to put this quote in perspective with what I wrote earlier....ROTFLMAO!!! The SCIENTIFIC method is PRECISLY what you're NOT doing....have you even cited to a SINGLE FACT YET?????? Oh, yeah you strike me as someone with a truly open mind....open as in hole in the head. YOU are rife with personal prejudice, bias and discrimination!!

yeah.. allrite... the point is, how can we engage in wars/killing.. then go around and criticize God, for doing the same. Seems hypocritical. Throughout history, was there ever a country that wasn't forced to defend, or kill to preserve its future?

OK, ONCE AGAIN, I am not dragging God into this , you are. I am saying explain the actions of Christianity not the actions of god...Christians and God are two seperate entities. I am not going to go through the mental gymnastics of accusing God of anything, I am saying that Christians have done TRULY HORRIFIC things...YET AGAIN UTTER SILENCE from you on this point.

There's like...... 20 of you, and 1 of me, its hard to keep up everything.. so, unless it was a good argument.. for the most part, im just going to skip it.

Ah, Just as I will just skip this whole thread because it is obvious that you are a fanatical moron who has not for ONE MOMENT ever really examined why he believes....a true beliver my friend is one that has looked at all the arguments, considered them and still held on to that faith. Someone who can say "Yeah, Christianity is a mess, BUT I still believe." Last count there were only a few of us actually trying to debate you...but hey not being able to count does not surprise me in the least.

You NEED Hitler to be a christian.. because it supports your view that christians = assholes. Its a double standard, since most of you probably dont hold all muslims accountable for the actions of osama bin laden.. yet you hold all christians accountable for the actions of hitler. biased & prejudiced

REALLY...you gathered from my one post that I think Christians are assholes AFTER I ended the thread by telling you that I'm a Catholic...hmmmmmm

Hitler = All Christians?? I DID not say that, in the very quote you cite I distinctly said Hitler was certainly NOT a good christian...BUT He was a christian believing in many of the same things that you and I believe in and you need to face the ugly side of christianity JUST as every religion has an ugly side...you know why, because reeligion is MAN's way of interrpetting the divine and MAN is a very flawed creature. You would never admit that because you equate religion with god and that is a sad thing because then you hit the wall of, well, then God must condone killing heretics, burning witches, molesting children, etc....Because the christian religion IS god and NOT man's interpetation of God's word.....WHY do I get the feeling that this is all a waste of breath on my part????


THIS IS THE KICKER

(NO, the Church is SUPPOSED to stand up to evil and injustice. Are we NOT Christ's representatives on Earth, would NOT Christ have sacrificed his life before letting one of his won slaughter jews - of which Christ was one. Are we NOT Soldiers of Christ as some have chosen to call themselves???? That's your answer...we're not fighters...are you not ashamed fro whipping out that argument??? Can you say how UTTERLY moronic that sounds when we are supposed to be the bastion of truth, justice and morality.)


.. if we are soldiers, its not in the literal sense of the word. we arent the marines

DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO ANSWER THIS....This is the one point that you used that pisses me off the most....it is the utter lack of caring that the church DROPPED THE BALL and betrayed an entire race to DEATH. Maybe you just don't give a shit, maybe you could care less that they were jews (EVEN THOUGH CHRIST WAS A JEW) DO you give a shit about the fact that as Christians we are SUPPOSED to lay down our lives for our brothers:

Be not overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good.
--Romans 12:21

You don't have any shame about this do you????

[lgot]

what is your complaint? or are you only interested in people stating opinions, that parallel yours? Is this a biased discussion group where only atheist views are tolerated? you claim that we're the mislead brainwashed types.. yet you seem to be the one's with the selective reasoning, and censorship of the truth - or anything else you dont want to hear.

My complaint ? Is for your lack of respect plus your ignorance. I never said that was a place for one view or anything like this. But you have to come here using the same style of bigotony to argument in a place where people are stated to at least follow a argument with logic and reason. My complain is your constant contradction of yourself or your lack of knowledge of so many terms you claim to use and often from the Bible you claim to follow. My complaim is for you claiming the mistake of atheists to generalize about religious people and them do the same thing. My complaim for you is not for being a supporter of religion but for you using the same preaching in a place where that was clearly stated as not welcome. You should read his site and notice this perhaps.

[Master of Ossus]

Is Shaolin really trying to get us to buy that the Church has never done anything wrong in its existence? What about when they were charging people HUGE amounts of money so they could "skip" purgatory and go straight to heaven. And that's after they created purgatory to try and get people to rejoin the church. And those little tokens they gave out to let you skip purgatory were only available to the very rich nobles, and not peasants!

[Darik Sdair]

Be not overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good.
--Romans 12:21

You don't have any shame about this do you????

Hmmm... according to the Bible:

Evil
1) all non-christian religeons
2) gay folks
3) eating shellfish

Good
1) slavery
2) genocide
3) mysogeny

So, yes, as it happens I'm often ashamed when my countrymen blindly expound the virtues of the Christian religeon.

Then again, maybe its just late and I'm cranky. Don't know for sure. Have fun guys, this one's been interesting so far.

[Master of Ossus]

Nope.. for reference research "Dead Sea Scrolls." The fact remains, the majority of historical facts we've been able to uncover validate the credibility of the Bible..

Oh, good, let's use ancient JEWISH texts to support a small portion of the Bible. Your statement also does not clear anything up. There are still many Bibles out there, and many sub-sections of Christianity, that use Bibles that do not take these into account. They are essentially researched entirely from secondary sources, as is virtually all of the New Testament.

(So you can't be morale without believing in God?)

its possible to be moral without God.. but for me, its not about with or without God.. Truth is what im after.. people have tried for more than 2000 years to disprove christianity, and it hasn't happened.. so keep in mind, that many of the arguments people will cite, are often taken out of context.. or just manipulated quotations, that are mis-translated.. or bent into someone's belief system.

People have been trying to disprove the existence of the Holocaust for fifty years, and Aliens visiting us for thirty years, and it hasn't happened. Christianity has set itself up so that it cannot be disproven, only parts of it can be disproven. Do you really think the world is less than 10,000 years old? Do you really think it was created in six days? Do you REALLY think that men have more ribs than women?

(Outright lie. Science can explain how bees fly, they have long since figured that out. You just never bothed to follow science well enough to figure that out.)

you could be right.. still, the fact is that science is limited.. and many scientific theories are proven wrong, years down the road, and need to be redressed..

That's exactly the problem with Christianity. It cannot be modified ten years down the road when parts of it are proven wrong. Oh, I forgot, you didn't think of all those times, did you? Scientific theories are meant to be discussed and revised to make them better fit the available data. They become more accurate when this is done. Christianity never becomes more accurate. Are you seriously saying that this is bad for science? How could science exist without it? BTW, I AM right about bees.

[Nick]

Let's try an experiment:

(In my experience, it seems that Christians have a tendency to follow the tenets of their faith, even in the face of significant evidence that doing so has definite damaging consequences.)

(In my experience, it seems that Christians have a tendency to follow the tenets of their faith without question, because questioning would mean that they actually had to think for themselves)

both of those are definitely true, in some cases.. because christians are people, and people aren't perfect.. However, there are some of us out there, maybe even a lot of us.. that wouldn't fit either profile.

Well, I have to give you credit for that - at least in this case you apply the same rules to yourself as you do to other people.

Let me tell you something, though - there are many, many, Christians who would find the two comments I wrote above extremely offensive (hell, I'm not even a Christian anymore, and I consider them offensive - that's why I used them in my experiment). The reason they could be seen as offensive is that Christianity is an extremely large group, covering extremely diverse ranges of beliefs. The two comments I made are accurate for a small subset of Christians (the hardline fundamentalists) and inaccurate for the rest of them. Unsurprisingly (and quite justifiably) people may be offended that I am tarring the entire group of Christians with a couple of undesirable attributes taken from a single subgroup.

Now do you start to see why people may have taken offense at your original post? You may not find that sort of comment offensive, but if you don't want to piss people off, you need to learn what others may consider offensive.

In other words - I believe you have answered my question. It appears you really didn't understand how what you wrote might be construed as being offensive. My original inclination to judge you as being naive and ignorant seems to be borne out (not something to be ashamed of, by the way, as the situation can easily be remedied as you acquire knowledge and experience).

(Err, to disprove Christianity, it would be necessary for it to meet the criteria for a valid scientific theory. However, at this point, I'm just going to borrow Durandal's sig:
I contend that we are both atheists. I merely believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, then you will understand why I dismiss yours.)

most religions ive taken the time to study.. have their faults.

religions where the deities divide their power along lines of human perception.. ie - god of sun, goddess of moon, goddess of beauty - if you were a god would you talk amongst your fellow gods, and decide to rule over things according to how humans perceive the world? probably not, so those are likely designed.. by people..

"And God created man in his own image"
"And God became man"
"You are my chosen people"

You were so close - 'most religions ive taken the time to study.. have their faults'. Right - you look at other religions (the ones you don't believe in), and don't see any compelling evidence that their way is the "right" way.

Are you having such a hard time grasping the fact that people who don't believe as you do have exactly the same reaction to your religion? (This is, after all, what the quote is about)

if Dur had some deep.. intellectual reason for dismissing any God.. i think he would have posted it by now. so, his sig is probably just a facade.

Alternatively Durandal simply hasn't felt like contributing to this thread, or hasn't seen any major points that have been ignored, or, quite possibly, isn't even reading the thread.

By jumping to such a hasty conclusion (not borne out by the available evidence - the evidence being the posts Durandal has made to other threads on these forums), you once again demonstrate a lamentable lack of judgment. A lack of judgment you have been repeatedly berated for.

Here's another tip: If you aren't confident of your ability to construct a rational position, and state it in terms which a reasonable person would not find offensive, then be prepared for the fact that you will end up offending people, and they may not be particularly polite as they set out to demolish your arguments. In fact, always be prepared for the fact that you might offend someone, no matter how innocent you think a comment may be. If someone does get offended, you have a choice - either apologise for the misunderstanding, and chalk it up as a learning experience, or blithely continute on, saying openly that the other person is wrong in getting offended. If you offend one person, then the latter is often a reasonable course. If you offend several, then the former is frequently a good option.

(Of course, none of that applies when you've aready decided you don't give a damn about the people who might be offended).

(Proven wrong? Not exactly. Demonstrated to be incomplete, or inadequate to cover all possible situations? Certainly.)
(But the remarkable thing about the replacing theory is that, for all cases that were correctly described by the old model, the new model has exactly the same predictions (e.g. general relativity supplements Newtonian mechanics to cover a few more esoteric cases - for everyday calculations, Newton's laws work fine).

in some equations.. if you take einstein's brand of physics, and then newton's to calculate something, you'll get different answers.

That's exactly what I said. The situations where the answers are the same are ones where the old model (Newtonian mechanics) was accurate. The reason they started working to improve the model was that they realised there were cases where Newtonian mechanics got the answer wrong (i.e. its predictions didn't match the results they observed in their experiments).

"We should take care not to make the intellect our god; it has, of course, powerful muscles, but no personality."
-Einstein

Yes, quite right. Knowledge, in and of itself, says nothing about how that knowledge should be used. That latter job falls to morality.

[Tosho]

[quote]How does the necessity of war justify the butchering of civilians?[quote]


[quote]leaving them alive.. could have allowed them a chance to grow and indulge themselves in revenge later on. it could have been a risk they couldn't take.. taking them as wives or adopting the children.. could have been a bad influence, since ideas, beliefs, etc, can be contagious.. i wasnt there.. but dont see why there couldnt have been a good reason for it[quote]

How about this alternative: hey we beat you, nothing's stopping us from massacring you but luckily we are giving you a choice, convert or leave. If you choose to leave not only do you get to keep your material possessions, but you get to settle to the north of our territory once we are done with our conquests, we'll help you get settled form a stable economy ect. If you stay and convert you get to be a equal, keep your property, hell we'll pay you to stay&convert assuming you won't be a slacker.

[Mr Bean]

Yep I sure do know alot of politcly ratical one year old Babys!

Leave not one of them alive from the man who fought you to the baby born yesterday

Kindly explain to me how 1 Year old and Less Babys present a threat to your religion?