Christianity. Blasphemy. Brainwashing.

[Jhony5]

You seem to concentrate a lot of energy on calling believers stupid, claiming things like storms and such as the reason we believers follow the teachings of God.

To understand something, you have to understand how and why it started. I'm not foolish enough to claim that all Christians are stupid. This is obviously not true. To be honest, I have no idea how an intelligent person can subscribe to ideas that are so obviously wrong. I really just don't get it.

What I'm understanding lately, is that intelligent Christians have created their own Christianity. Writing off the bibles absurd claims and fairy tales as mistranslation. Or simply saying that these tales were never meant to be taken literally.

All that aside, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for an intelligent person to think that Jesus was the son of God. Nor is their any logic behind prophetic projections such as the Rapture.

The very fact that a religion like Christianity can endure many different cultures and Countries speaks more for it's truth than many other factors.

Throughout time wars were fought upon religious ideology as much as they were fought over territory. Christianity endured because it adapted, conquered and essentially, it "won" the war.

Many Christians are in no way Christian at all. They just call themselves that so as to have an identity. Such as my brother and his family. They aren't Christian. They are "posers". Religious wanna be's.

You can duck and dodge the facts for yourself if you like but you can't just remove the fact that when Atheists get power, they tend to be destructive, that is recorded history, not a made up theory. Atheists are responsible for ten times more killings than all the religious based killings put together.

The Spanish Inquisition caused the deaths of about 10,000 people and some say up to 100,000 people died from mistreatment in jails(depending on what historian you talk to). The many other "famous" stories are very sensational sounding but in reality, they are tiny, the Salem witch hunts for example claimed about 30 lives, hardly deserving of the "press" it gets.

Even Muslim fanatics kill very few, a few thousand on things like 9/11 but most of the time, it is only a few people but the attention given these attacks is vary large, so they sound significant.

Atheist leaders are credited with over 100 million killings, yes, 100,000,000 people have died in the pursuit of spreading the Atheist "religion".

I call bullocks on this. No way. Nope. Huh uh. Not.

First of all, you seem to lack an understanding as to what an atheist is. Hitler was fond of the occult and I would hardly call him an atheist. There is quite a debate over this very issue, actually.

A few quotes from Hitler circa 1942;

"We were convinced that the people need and require 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".
"For their interests [the Church's] cannot fail to coincide with ours [the National Socialists] alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness of a community in our national life".

Or read this if you want to get into the issue; http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/murphy_19_2.html

Fact is there are and have been many atheist/agnostic leaders that managed a term or two without resorting to genocidal behavior.

Your quoting of atheist death tolls are unsubstantial, unfounded and wholly irresponsible. The Crusades alone accounted for an incalculable amount of death, a figure that cannot be tolled. Between 1095–1291 alone, so much death was wrought that not even God himself, if he exists, could tally the sum.

Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Chairman Mao, were narcissistic sadist. Some of which did indeed make sorted, albeit convoluted and scrambled, spiritual ramblings. An indication that they weren't atheistic.

You and all other Atheist followers have every right to not believe in God if you wish, I fully support your right to follow whatever belief structure you like but it is when you try to tear down established beliefs in established communities you are doing wrong.

I'm only going to say this once more. I'm not an atheist.
Atheist are narrow-minded if you ask me. Anyone that claims to know either way for sure, are foolish in that regard.

What I'm pointing out, in defense of Atheist, is their right to dispel the dispersions that are cast upon them. Their right to have a voice without being labeled as attacking the church. If teenagers want to have an identity as an atheist, it may be healthy for them to come together and validate each others beliefs. The Christians peering in through their window may feel insulted by what they say. But, just like a snoopy mother that listens in on her child's phone calls, they may hear something they did not wish too.

 

[eddo]

Those Christians sure are a bunch of asswipes for not wanting you to spend eternity in hell...



What is their problem???

 

[Jhony5]

Those Christians sure are a bunch of asswipes for not wanting you to spend eternity in hell...



What is their problem???

I believe that Qwagnar is going to doom you to a life of eternal servitude in the salt mines of Zantar 9 if you don't swear allegiance to him. I bear witness to this because I care. I worry that your sole is lost and you must save your eternal being by offering your love to Qwagnar. Ask him for repentance and he shall grant to thee.



I say this because I care.






Believe it or not, Eddo. Thats exactly how damn stupid it sounds when I have to hear a Christian bear witness to me. It has nothing to do with motive. It has to do with minding one's own damn business. Hearing an atheist rant is EXACTLY the same as hearing a Christian rant.

 

[timesjoke]

atheist rant is EXACTLY the same as hearing a Christian rant.

No, when they rant like you have been doing, you call believers stupid, when you get called out for calling them stupid, you twist it around and say we are stupid in a backward way ("I have no idea how an intelligent person can subscribe to ideas that are so obviously wrong"), but no matter how you twist the words, you are still saying someone must be stupid to believe and that is the problem with your athiest attacks on religion.

We love our children but to science, there is no way to prove that love exists so are you telling me that just because science cannot prove love exists that it does not exist?

Fact, life comes from other life, life cannot come from nothing. DNA is proven to be the defining factor for life and all life must follow it's DNA. Scientists have wasted billions of dollars on the futile attempt to create a living cell from nothing. Every expert has attempted and failed miserably. All the fancy theories and assumptions cannot explain how life was possible without life creating it.



Hitler used religion as a control element in his early days and public speaking, but it was not his true belief structure. Anyone who reads the works about his "private" discussions can see his true mind on religion:

Hitler's Table Talk - Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1953

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941-

"National Socialism and religion cannot exist together....
"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity....
"Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things."

19th October, 1941, night

"The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity."

13th December, 1941, midnight

"Christianity is an invention of sick brains"
"When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease."

9th April, 1942, dinner

"There is something very unhealthy about Christianity."

Hitler's actions against the Jews and his candid and private statements against Christianity proves beyond doubt he was an Athiest.

 

[Jhony5]

Hitler's actions against the Jews and his candid and private statements against Christianity proves beyond doubt he was an Athiest.

Are Muslims atheist too?

Not liking Christians is not the definition of atheism. I would suggest looking it up in a dictionary.

 

[sheik-yerbouti]

Third, in every place Atheist beliefs have taken hold over the direction of a Country (the leaders) we have seen massive death as a result. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, are responsible for killing ten times more people than all the religious based killings combined.

Hitler was a Christian I have read, although he may have disengaged himself from it in later life. Not sure about Stalin, or Mao. Pol Pot may have been a buddhist. Clearly, not a good example of one.

Actually it is not atheists that have first prize at being the most murderous jerks the world has ever seen but theists. Millions of men and women were murdered by the Christian church in medieval Europe, often burned alive after torture. The same was going on elsewhere courtesy of the Conquistadors. Meanwhile Islamists are still murdering people in the name of religion just about wherever they live where they can get away with it.

So I cannot agree T.J. theists are much worse than atheists IMHO

 

[eddo]

I believe that Qwagnar is going to doom you to a life of eternal servitude in the salt mines of Zantar 9 if you don't swear allegiance to him. I bear witness to this because I care. I worry that your sole is lost and you must save your eternal being by offering your love to Qwagnar. Ask him for repentance and he shall grant to thee.
I say this because I care.
Believe it or not, Eddo. Thats exactly how damn stupid it sounds when I have to hear a Christian bear witness to me. It has nothing to do with motive. It has to do with minding one's own damn business. Hearing an atheist rant is EXACTLY the same as hearing a Christian rant.

If you honestly believe that swearing allegiance to Qwagnar is the answer to eternal salvation from working in the salt mines, then yes- I would hope that you would want to share that with others. You would be a selfish jerk not to. When the Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, etc., come round knocking- I don't get upset at them. Sure it is an inconvenience and spreading of lies as far as I am concerned- but I understand the compassion that it takes to try to get others to see God before it is "to late." I see no need to get angry or bent out of shape about it- or call them stupid.


In the end, when death comes- some of us are going to be right, and some of us are going to be wrong. Period. We cannot all be right. We cannot all be wrong. and frankly, whatever we face after death will be the same for everyone.

If the Christian God is true- then I am good. But what do you have then? Nothing. (I don't believe "hell" is a physical place of fire, I think it is just eternal separation from God.)

If we fade into the nothingness after we die- then you were right- Jesus and God were false. But you won't know it. and what will I have? I will have wasted my life trying to better myself, trying to be nicer to other people, and giving of my time, energy, and sometimes money to help others- because that is what the Bible teaches me to do. and ya know what? I'm ok with wasting my life like that.

If one of the other religions is correct (and thus all others false)- then we are both screwed, lol.


For now, I live my life with hope and an encouragement of things to come. I am forgiven, I am striving to be better than I was yesterday, and I try to treat others better than they treat me. Really now- what's so bad about that?

 

[Jhony5]

I would hope that you would want to share that with others. You would be a selfish jerk not to. When the Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, etc., come round knocking- I don't get upset at them. Sure it is an inconvenience and spreading of lies as far as I am concerned- but I understand the compassion that it takes to try to get others to see God before it is "to late." I see no need to get angry or bent out of shape about it- or call them stupid.

Religion is a business. Its takes vast amounts of cash to propagate a church's brethren. When I am approached by their salesmen, I treat them with the same disdain that I would a traveling snake oil merchant. By definition, they are fools. Fools to bother people that know better and want nothing to do with their fairy tales and lands of make believe. When I drive by these crowded church parking lots on Sunday I often ponder, how much money did it take to build that church? How much cash does it take to pay the salaries of the clergy? Whats the upkeep on that multi-million dollar building?

In the end, when death comes- some of us are going to be right, and some of us are going to be wrong. Period. We cannot all be right. We cannot all be wrong. and frankly, whatever we face after death will be the same for everyone. If the Christian God is true- then I am good. But what do you have then? Nothing. (I don't believe "hell" is a physical place of fire, I think it is just eternal separation from God.)

.....and thats the crux of the business. Selling eternal soul insurance, just in case.
Hell isn't even mentioned as such in the original draft of the bible. The imagery of hell was actually derived from a festering trash pit that often had fires burning, rotting trash rolling with maggots and such. The imagery was used later to describe what happens when you don't pony up and join the movement. Hebrews didn't have a word for "hell". Hell was just another cleaver sales advent of the church. Quite clever really. Imagine how much of a particular product you can sell if you convince people of eternal damnation if they don't buy it?

http://www.tentmaker.org/books/TheBibleHell.html

The Hebrew Old Testament, some three hundred years before the Christian era, was translated into Greek, but of the sixty-four instances where Sheol occurs in the Hebrew, it is rendered Hades in the Greek sixty times, so that either word is the equivalent of the other.

"Sheol throughout the Old Testament, signifies not a place of punishment for the souls of bad men only, but the grave, or place of death." Dr Chapman: "Sheol, in itself considered has no connection with future punishment." Dr. Allen: "The term Sheol itself, does not seem to mean anything more than the state of the dead in their dark abode." Dr. Firbairn, of the College of Glasgow: "Beyond doubt, Sheol, like Hades, was regarded as the abode after death, alike of the good and the bad." Edward Leigh, who says Horne's, "Introduction," was "one of the most learned understanding of the original languages of the Scriptures," observes that "all learned Hebrew scholars know the Hebrews have no proper word for hell, as we take hell."

Hell was actually the Valley of Hinnom.
There are stories of fires that were kept burning via the adding of brimstone (sulfur).

?It became the common lay-stall garbage dump of the city, where the dead bodies of criminals, and the carcasses of animals, and every other kind of filth was cast.?
The dump was full of rotting garbage which sent up a stench that could be smelled for miles.

Whats hell really look like?
Here it is today;
View attachment 1276

For now, I live my life with hope and an encouragement of things to come. I am forgiven, I am striving to be better than I was yesterday, and I try to treat others better than they treat me. Really now- what's so bad about that?

With this I picture thousands of Christians, Jews, Muslims and Buddhist standing at the gates of hell after they die. Confused they ask Lucifer "I don't understand. I was faithful to my lord. I was a good Christian. Why I am I here?"

Lucifer; "Ohhhh, I'm sorry. The correct answer was Mormons. Yaaaa, Mormons. Sorry.

 

[eddo]

Religion is a business. Its takes vast amounts of cash to propagate a church's brethren. When I am approached by their salesmen, I treat them with the same disdain that I would a traveling snake oil merchant. By definition, they are fools. Fools to bother people that know better and want nothing to do with their fairy tales and lands of make believe. When I drive by these crowded church parking lots on Sunday I often ponder, how much money did it take to build that church? How much cash does it take to pay the salaries of the clergy? Whats the upkeep on that multi-million dollar building?

Maybe you should stop in and ask? Mega-churches are the exception, not the rule. I forget the actual stat, but somewhere around 70-80% of the churches in the US have less than 100 in attendance each week. These are the churches that struggle to pay bills, these are the churches that need a paint job, have toilets that don't shut themselves off, have pastors that need second jobs to pay their own bills, and from my own experience- these are the churches that care and put into practice what the Bible teaches.

Example:
My pastor probably makes less in a month than most do in a week. As the youth pastor, I make more in five weeks at my second job (as a mechanic) than I make in a year as the youth pastor. Our children's pastor makes less than I do. We aren't in it for the money, so your "business" baloney won't work here. But this is the most caring church I have ever been a part of.

As a church, we are cautious with the money God gives us to run on. and we survive. We don't have a big fancy mural or stained glass windows- because that isn't what we are about. Our sanctuary roof has water spots from where the roof leaked years ago. Yeah, it would be nice to repaint, but again, that isn't what we are about. We do have people in the church who step up and volunteer to paint things (our whole childrens area was just repainted- all with donated time and paint) and a couple years ago I repainted the youth rooms as a youth group project- again with all donated paint.

We let the Boy and Cub scouts use our building for free. We used to have an AA group that met there twice a week. They actually left because we refused to charge them rent to be there. I still don't understand why they would choose that...

I'm probably babbling, and I don't share any of this to brag- but hopefully you can see that making money isn't what all churches are about, and it isn't what any of them should be about.

However, I do understand and agree that some are in it for the money, and that sickens me- probably more than it does you. I would prefer to see churches honor God more with service to and through their people than with glamorous and expensive buildings.

Me thinks you need to broaden your horizons regarding church, as it appears all you see are the big glamorous buildings. Those are out there, but so are real people that really care.

Lucifer; "Ohhhh, I'm sorry. The correct answer was Mormons. Yaaaa, Mormons. Sorry.

lol!!

 

[Jhony5]

Me thinks you need to broaden your horizons regarding church, as it appears all you see are the big glamorous buildings. Those are out there, but so are real people that really care.

Well, you are right. Many churches in low income neighborhoods are actually converted doubles and the roaches make up the predominant number of parishioners. In many despot areas, the church is the only voice of the people and the only organized effort to quell the violence, drugs and fatherless families.

My sweeping generalization was a bit off target.

If I saw more churches of modest structure in my area I would lend more gravity to their cause.

 

[Feckless Wench]

roach....just testing the filter...LOL!

Wienerroach

Willyroach

Knobroach

I'm bored.......can you tell?

Aha! So male chickens are filtered? Isn't that sex discrimination? LOL!

 

[hugo]

The "Our God is real and yours is false" premise has stirred up more war than any other conflict of interest.

False, wars are almost always the result of competition for scarce resources. Appeals to religious faith or nationalism makes recruiting easier. There would have been no 9/11 had there been no oil in the ME.

 

[Jhony5]

False, wars are almost always the result of competition for scarce resources. Appeals to religious faith or nationalism makes recruiting easier. There would have been no 9/11 had there been no oil in the ME.

Religious fanaticism was the cause of 9/11. All the nations of the ME have to gain from their possession of oil, is wealth. Doing business with the West should be to their advantage. Yet it has torn them asunder. Due to the fanatic religious zealots that can't stand any Western presence in their economy.

 

[timesjoke]

Hitler was a Christian I have read, although he may have disengaged himself from it in later life. Not sure about Stalin, or Mao. Pol Pot may have been a buddhist. Clearly, not a good example of one.

Please take the time to read what I already posted, Hitler did use public statements at the beginning of his time in power as a control measure, like many people use misleading public faces but it is his private mind and his actions that define him.

As clearly pointed out in the quotes I provided, when Hitler was talking to his top leadership and setting out the theories and concepts he believed in, Hitler was against religion and thought it needed to be completely removed from the world.

In fact, if you compare what Hitler said to what jhony5 has said here, you can see they sound very much alike.

Actually it is not atheists that have first prize at being the most murderous jerks the world has ever seen but theists. Millions of men and women were murdered by the Christian church in medieval Europe, often burned alive after torture. The same was going on elsewhere courtesy of the Conquistadors. Meanwhile Islamists are still murdering people in the name of religion just about wherever they live where they can get away with it.

So I cannot agree T.J. theists are much worse than atheists IMHO

I am just wondering what professor got you to believe such trash when the facts clearly show very few deaths in connection to religious based battles while 100 million are directly connected to Athiest leaders.

Please provide some kind of support for this claim of "millions" killed in medievel times by the church in Europe because I just got off the phone with a European history professor for the University of Florida and he never heard of such garbage. He told me of a few documented cases but to the best of his knowledge, there were only about 20,000 deaths reliably assigned to those problems relating to religious reasons. There were many battles and deaths during that time but only the most inept would assign all deaths to religious reeasons when most were for power, land, and even a few cases of insult where an arranged marriage was ended, that caused more deaths than all the religious deaths combined during that time.

Again, terrorist attacks get a lot of attention so a couple thousand "sound" very powerful (that is why they do it) but combined, you may have about a million deaths directly assignable to religious zeal over the years while Athiest killings are over 100 million, clearly the Athiest agenda is the more harmful.


Look at it another way, we have the guy pushing the Athiest agenda here calling all religious followers stupid, that is typical of all athiests, they cannot just follow something themselves, they are driven to insult and attack religion any way possible. I have been a Christian my entire life and have never called a non-believer stupid.



If follow my Christian beliefs and I turn out to be wrong, I still provided a great deal of service to my comminity and world (remember, the only non-government groups helping in places like Rwanda are Christian) so I have nothing to be ashamed of. If I am wrong, fine, I will never know but my good deeds will still remain.

If you follow your athiest beliefs and turn out to be wrong, you will find out your wrong pretty fast and will not have any good deeds to speak for you.

It is a gamble, and you are fully allowed to take that gamble, that is the right of free will God has made possible for everyone, just stop trying to pull me down with you, there will be plenty of others to keep you company.

 

[Jhony5]

In fact, if you compare what Hitler said to what jhony5 has said here, you can see they sound very much alike.

Did you just compare me to Hitler?


Holy , thats the coolest thing ever.

Please provide some kind of support for this claim of "millions" killed in medieval times by the church in Europe because I just got off the phone with a European history professor for the University of Florida and he never heard of such garbage. He told me of a few documented cases but to the best of his knowledge, there were only about 20,000 deaths reliably assigned to those problems relating to religious reasons.

I have serious issues with this. First off, death tolls weren't recorded at all in an accurate fashion.

Second, the Crusades (Holy Wars) lasted for over two hundred years and entailed dozens of separate crusades. The toppling of Jerusalem and such. The power at the head of the crusades was the Papacy. No doubt, theist. Yes it was about power and territory. But the forces that seek the power and territory were theist and they fought for god's sake.

Some background to substantiate;

The first Crusade attracted the largest number of peasants and what started as a minor call for military aid turned into a mass migration of peoples. The call to go on crusade was very popular. Two medieval roles, holy warrior and pilgrim, were merged into one. Like a holy warrior in a holy war, one would carry a weapon and fight for the Church with all its spiritual benefits, including the privilege of an indulgence or martyrdom if one died in battle.

Just like a pilgrim on a pilgrimage, a crusader would have the right to hospitality and personal protection of self and property by the Church. The benefits of the indulgence were therefore twofold, both for fighting as a warrior of the Church and for traveling as a pilgrim. Thus, an indulgence would be granted regardless of whether one lived or died. But the crusade was not an indulgence in the medieval sense, medieval indulgences were bought and sold. The crusade was not an easy absolution of sins but a form of penitence because it was undertaken voluntarily and was a type of self-inflicted punishment. This crucial difference separates the medieval indulgence and the original crusade idea.

In addition there were feudal obligations because many crusaders went because they were required to do so by their lord. The poorer classes looked to local nobility for guidance and if a powerful aristocrat could motivate others to join the cause as well. The connection to a wealthy leader allowed the average peasant to contribute and have some sort of protection on the journey, unlike those who undertook the vow alone. There were also family obligations, with many people joining the crusade in order to support relatives who had also taken the crusading vow. Some nobility, including several kings and heirs, were prohibited to join because of their position. All of these factors motivated different people for different reasons and contributed to the popularity of the crusade.

I cannot find any mention of death tolls. There is, as I said above, a reason for this. An utter lack of record keeping. If indeed you were quoted a number of 20k by a professor, I would say he lied to you. 20,000 people died in just the siege of Jerusalem. The toll must be astronomical, as it was a way of life for hundreds of years to wage endless war in the name of God. Not to mention they certainly weren't accounting for the Muslims they slaughtered.

If indeed you and your beloved professor wish to deflect blame from theism for the millions of deaths during this period, you must somehow explain the terminology used by the Papal commanders;

In 1074, Pope Gregory VII called for the milites Christi ("soldiers of Christ") to go to the aid of the Byzantine Empire in the east. The Byzantines had suffered a serious defeat at the hands of the Seljuk Turks at the Battle of Manzikert three years previously. This call, while largely ignored and even opposed, combined with the large numbers of pilgrimages to the Holy Land in the 11th century, focused a great deal of attention on the east. Exhortations by monks such as Peter the Hermit and Walter the Penniless, which spread reports of Muslims abusing Christian pilgrims traveling to Jerusalem and other Middle Eastern holy sites, further stoked the crusading zeal. It was Pope Urban II who first disseminated to the general public the idea of a Crusade to capture the Holy Land with the famous words, Deus vult! ("God wills it!")

Read the next part carefully;

Urban planned the departure of the crusade for August 15, 1096, the Feast of the Assumption, but months before this a number of unexpected armies of peasants and lowly knights organized and set off for Jerusalem on their own. They were led by a charismatic monk and powerful orator named Peter the Hermit of Amiens. The response was beyond expectations: while Urban might have expected a few thousand knights, he ended up with a migration numbering up to 100,000 — albeit mostly unskilled fighters, including women and children.

Lacking military discipline, and in what likely seemed to the participants a strange land (eastern Europe) with strange customs, those first Crusaders quickly landed in trouble, in Christian territory. The problem faced was one of supply as well as culture: the people needed food and supplies, and they expected host cities to give them the foods and supplies — or at least sell them at prices they felt reasonable. Having left Western Europe early, they had missed out on the great harvest of that spring, following years of drought and bad harvest. Unfortunately for the Crusaders, the locals did not always agree, and this quickly led to fighting and skirmishing. On their way down the Danube, Peter's followers looted Hungarian territory and were attacked by the Hungarians, the Bulgarians, and even a Byzantine army near Nish. About a quarter of Peter's followers were killed, but the rest arrived largely intact at Constantinople in August.

Wait, did ya catch that? A quarter of 100,000?? Lemme do some quick math.....carry the one....divided by.....minus the .....THATS 25,0000 RIGHT THERE BUDDY. One fell swoop. One small infinitesimal period within a 200 year war, and already we've surpassed 20k.

Don't feed me your bull . Don't tell me these deaths aren't attributed to theism. Thats dishonest.

 

[eddo]

Just as an FYI: Wikipedia isn't always the most reliable source for factual info. Not saying you are wrong Jhony5, as the crusades are nowhere not an expertise of mine, just saying.

 

[timesjoke]

Did you just compare me to Hitler?

I compared your words to Hitler's words and yes, they sound similar, I have no idea who you are in reality and never will in this environment. I know in many ways people are very different on internet "worlds" compared to their real lives so most likely you are not anything like Hitler, you are just sounding like him when you attack religion the way he did.

Holy , thats the coolest thing ever.

To be compared to the most modern leader of Athiest values that really lived his hope to remove religion and not just talk about it?

I have serious issues with this. First off, death tolls weren't recorded at all in an accurate fashion.

So the "millions of deaths in Europe" is just a crazy claim as I point out right?

Read the next part carefully;


Wait, did ya catch that? A quarter of 100,000?? Lemme do some quick math.....carry the one....diveded by.....minus the .....THATS 25,0000 RIGHT THERE BUDDY. One fell swoop. One small infinitesimal period within a 200 year war, and already we've surpassed 20k.

Don't feed me your bull . Don't tell me these deaths aren't attributed to theism. Thats dishonest.

Being as you completely missed the point let me post what I was responding to again:

Actually it is not atheists that have first prize at being the most murderous jerks the world has ever seen but theists. Millions of men and women were murdered by the Christian church in medieval Europe

Do you see anything about the crusades in that statement?

Being as I was quoting his comment about millions of people being killed in Europe maybe that represents a clue as to what I was talking about when I offered the 20,000 deaths number?

Maybe?

You did know that Jerusalem is located in Israel right?

But, being as you decided to talk about the crusades, There are wild numbers of claimed deaths connected to the crusades and honestly, most of these numbers are just silly as far as I am concerned so I have just had a long messenger discussion with my buddy and he pulled in a few of his history "friends" and after an hour of back and forth offers of one number and the next, the decision was that there is no proven number but the educated "guess" these guys came up with was around 200,000 total deaths for all of the crusades combined including death from imprisonment (died in captivity but not killed first hand).

So, we are still a long way from the 100 Million killed in the name of the Athiest "religion".

 

[Jhony5]

Just as an FYI: Wikipedia isn't always the most reliable source for factual info. Not saying you are wrong Jhony5, as the crusades are nowhere not an expertise of mine, just saying.

You have to watch it when quoting from wiki, yes. I cross referenced the quotes with books linked from the sight by reputable authors. Point noted, though.

I compared your words to Hitler's words and yes, they sound similar, I have no idea who you are in reality and never will in this environment. I know in many ways people are very different on internet "worlds" compared to their real lives so most likely you are not anything like Hitler, you are just sounding like him when you attack religion the way he did.

Thats very lowbrow of you. I speak toward Christianity with honest opinion, and you compare me to Hitler because he saw the church as an obstacle. Just don't do that. Its dishonest.

Do you see anything about the crusades in that statement?

Two things about that. One; I did honestly think he said medieval times, not specifically within European borders. The way he termed it I thought he was referencing the Holy Wars. Maybe not.
Two; I'm addressing the death toll disputes separate from him. You keep drumming up this 100 million number, without substantiating it. You are terming Hitler as an anti-theist, despite evidence that shows otherwise. He began his tirade against the Christian church when he realized they posed an obstacle to his plans.

Anti-Christian is not anti-theism. He had theist ideals in regards to the occult.

You did know that Jerusalem is located in Israel right?

Don't patronize me. You already called me Lil Hitler. When Sheik referred to "medieval Europe", I assumed he meant the crusades, as they were indeed centered in Europe during medieval times and extended outward from there as far as Africa.
Regardless, the Papacy which headed the Crusades, was located in Europe. So stop busting my balls.

There are wild numbers of claimed deaths connected to the crusades and honestly, most of these numbers are just silly as far as I am concerned so I have just had a long messenger discussion with my buddy and he pulled in a few of his history "friends" and after an hour of back and forth offers of one number and the next, the decision was that there is no proven number but the educated "guess" these guys came up with was around 200,000 total deaths for all of the crusades combined including death from imprisonment (died in captivity but not killed first hand).

I see no corroborating evidence being presented. I would guess it at a much higher rate. Calculating in the starvation and famine that was propagated direct as a result of the crusades. As well as the ensuing death tolls from the complications that arose from the Black Plague's correlation with the crusades. The Italians and the Jews that died from the ignorance that ran amok from the complications of the crusades.

The figure of 100 million deaths at the hands of atheist, no doubt, has had starvation and other mitigating factors added in to it, so its only fair to do the same in regards to the Crusades.


Now we're just talking about the Crusades here. You and your "buddies" guessed 200k. I would dispute that as biased and would at least double it when adding the circumstances that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives as a direct result of the Crusades having taken place (famine, sickness, plague).

I'll give you some time to attempt to substantiate your numbers, or at the very least provides some clues to that regard.

I will, in turn, come back with many many more examples of mass death caused by fanatic theism over the several thousand years I have yet to address.

 

[hugo]

Religious fanaticism was the cause of 9/11. All the nations of the ME have to gain from their possession of oil, is wealth. Doing business with the West should be to their advantage. Yet it has torn them asunder. Due to the fanatic religious zealots that can't stand any Western presence in their economy.

We have also had conflicts in the ME with basically secular leaders such as Hussein and Khadaffi. Oil is the only reason we stir up passions against us in the Middle East. The Shiite and Sunnis are killing each other in Iraq because they know the winner will control economic assets and opportunities. If not for religion they would divide themselves into other groups such as communists and fascists.

 

[timesjoke]

Read the next part carefully;


Wait, did ya catch that? A quarter of 100,000?? Lemme do some quick math.....carry the one....divided by.....minus the .....THATS 25,0000 RIGHT THERE BUDDY. One fell swoop. One small infinitesimal period within a 200 year war, and already we've surpassed 20k.

Don't feed me your bull . Don't tell me these deaths aren't attributed to theism. Thats dishonest.

When you jump on me to Read when you completely missed what was being discussed, you prove your not capable of debating in a honest and fair way. You were talking down your nose at me and being a smart ass on top of that.


Your last reply was honestly juvilile and insulting and unless you can grow up, I will simply ignore your posts from this point on.


I clearly said my number was a guess, what part of "guess" did you have difficulty understanding?

Under the areas of a guess, I believe a guess made by professionals in the field would be better then from you who is not in the field, either way, even if we doubled the number, you still have horribly tiny numbers of deaths compared to those killed by Athiest followers.

Let's consider this:

Mao Zedong killed 40 million people himself, mostly by famine, he was an Athiest. This one Athiest killer makes all deaths in the world for "purely" religious reasons look like nothing.



By the way, if you cannot understand the difference between Hitler's public face and his real feelings, you should not be involved in these kinds of discussions. Just because your own attacks against religion sound just like his attacks, that does not mean you must try and defend him to defend yourself.

"Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things."