Originally posted by rwingettSorry if I said that wrong. I did not mean to imply you were Christian (I do know you are not). In that sentence I was talking about Christians (not you).
[b]I really find it amazing when Christians ridicule creationists with a straight face.
???
I am not a Christian.[/b]
But even atheists like me, frequently make the error of giving mainstream religious beliefs like those held by Christians or Muslims greater respectability than say creationism or astrology - yet the fact is that they are no less ridiculous.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by twhiteheadgood point, i used to know an atheist who was into astrology and tarot cards. it used to drive me nuts!!!!
Sorry if I said that wrong. I did not mean to imply you were Christian (I do know you are not). In that sentence I was talking about Christians (not you).
But even atheists like me, frequently make the error of giving mainstream religious beliefs like those held by Christians or Muslims greater respectability than say creationism or astrology - yet the fact is that they are no less ridiculous.
Originally posted by twhiteheadI only partially agree. There are many things about religion which are ridiculous. But I do not think that everything about religion is ridiculous, or that all religions are necessarily ridiculous. While I certainly find the many supernatural claims of Christianity to be ridiculous, there are certain things about it that I find admirable. And I do not share the belief seemingly held by many non-religious people on this forum that a society run by "rationally" educated technocrats will produce better results. In many respects it will be worse.
Sorry if I said that wrong. I did not mean to imply you were Christian (I do know you are not). In that sentence I was talking about Christians (not you).
But even atheists like me, frequently make the error of giving mainstream religious beliefs like those held by Christians or Muslims greater respectability than say creationism or astrology - yet the fact is that they are no less ridiculous.
1 edit
Originally posted by VoidSpiritHitler was motivated by Darwinian evolution and there are many direct quotations to
okay, i will correct you. hitler identified himself as a christian and we don't know how many people he killed. maybe himself and whatever soldiers he shot in world war 1. and there is no reliable evidence of stalin killing anyone; only rumors.
however, none of that is relevant in the least bit. the majority of the people doing the killing identifi ...[text shortened]... mad gods are the leaders of their countries or the dictator of their religion, it is no excuse.
the weak overcoming the strong in his writings and speeches and you begin with the
false premise that i was meaning how many they killed directly when of course it
should have been obvious to any reasoning person capable of rational thought that the
intent was indirectly responsible or responsible through association.
No one is using it as an excuse, facts are facts, both the religious and irreligious have
committed atrocity, its time you sucked that fact up.
Originally posted by FMFactually he accepted being falsely accused of sedition, beaten, scourged, ridiculed and
What would have been wrong with killing Stalin or Hitler or Pol Pot? Would Jesus have just accepted being beaten to death or herded into a gas chamber?
crucified and not once did he lift a finger in retaliation, thank you for bringing that
matter to the forums attention.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnd according to your interpretation of your religious literature he did this in order to demonstrate to you that the sanctity of life can be cherished by standing aside and doing nothing about the slaughter of 100,000,000 people or more at the hands of Stalin or Hitler or Pol Pot?
actually he accepted being falsely accused of sedition, beaten, scourged, ridiculed and
crucified and not once did he lift a finger in retaliation....
Originally posted by robbie carrobiehitler was motivated by his christianity. read his own book, mein komph. but as i mentioned before, that point is irrelevant. i have pointed the relevant facts. it is doubtful that neither hitler nor staling actually killed anyone. but they did both have armies of christians to do the killings for them.
Hitler was motivated by Darwinian evolution and there are many direct quotations to
the weak overcoming the strong in his writings and speeches and you begin with the
false premise that i was meaning how many they killed directly when of course it
should have been obvious to any reasoning person capable of rational thought that the
intent was ...[text shortened]... both the religious and irreligious have
committed atrocity, its time you sucked that fact up.
however, i will grant you that both religious and irreligious have killed. the tendency to kill is not based on religion, in both cases, it was based on ideologies and beliefs. that's the root culprit. beliefs are what need to be eliminated from the human canon.