Christianity. Blasphemy. Brainwashing.

[Guest 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;

[attach=full]1276[/attach]

 

 

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."

[Jhony5]

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.

 

Oh stop it, would ya? How the hell are you gonna call me juvenile and immature not even one post after comparing me to Hitler because I speak out against theism?

 

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

......and a pretty lame guess it was. Thats my rebuttal. Why combat rebuttals with insults? Time after time.

 

To be honest, this whole discussion is misguided and dishonest. We are entering into a "Who killed more people, theist or anti-theist" argument. Its silly and inconsequential. I think it can be said that both theist and anti-theist have contributed greatly to death and destruction. Keeping tally of the final score as if this is a contest of sorts, is silly and frankly a waste of time.

 

 

Agreed?

 

 

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

I'm sure Hitler also believed that the planet was round and the Earth rotates around the sun. Are people that agree with scientific fact, somehow aligned with Hitler's genocidal philosophies, just because Hitler also agrees with said fact?

 

 

TJ, relax man. I have a brutal sense of humor. Anyone from the old GF can vouch for this. Humor doesn't translate well in typed format, so often people might think I'm being immature or insulting, when I'm really just keeping a discussion lighthearted.

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

Please take the time to read what I already posted,

I have read what you wrote TJ.

 

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.

 

Hitler, and Stalin were baptised christians. Unless they formally renounced this religion at some point in later life, then they remained christians no matter what they may have said about it privately or publicly.

 

You say that athiests are responsible for many more deaths than thiests. This is not true.

 

The majority of living people are thiests. The further back in time we go we see less knowledge and understanding, and more superstition. Hence thiests were the majority then also. It follows then that if most people are/were theists, then most persecutions and murderous regimes were fronted by thiests.

 

The exact opposite of what you said is true. Thiests have killed significantly more people than athiests.

 

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

 

I see no comparrison between Hitler and Jhony5

 

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.

Nonsense, two of the worst killers of all time were christians, and not the athiests you would like them to have been.

 

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.

 

As johno5 has already said it is not possible to produce statistics/data from an age when such things were not kept. We only have historical accounts of violence. I have read that the Christian King Charlemaigne killed 20 thousand pagans in his Saxony Wars. I cant imagine how many people, christian and otherwise were murdered by the Spanish Conquistadors. Nor estimate how many were murdered in the Christian persecution of witches. Nor do I have data on all the Jews murdered by Christians in Europe in the Medieval period. Thousands of catholics were murdered by Oliver Cromwell and his chums in Ireland at this time. These are just a few moments of infamy in Europe from this 4-5 century period. I would not be at all surprised if a million or more people died at the hands of christians within Europe at this 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.

 

Nonsense. Goths, Visigoths, Saxons, Angles, Vikings, Rus, Celts, Huns, and Mongols all had their gods, and were therefore theists. These groups have killed huge numbers of people in the past.

 

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.

I am not at all sure that this is typical . I have never called any thiests stupid.

 

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.

 

You very readilly began the name calling. You have even likened J5 to Hitler.

 

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.

 

Christians are not alone in doing good deeds. We all mostly give to charity.

 

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.

 

So, you believe that only your group do good deeds. Nonsense.

 

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.

I am not trying to pull you anywhere. I am just surprised that anyone so readily believes something writen in a book, and blindly follows it.

 

It's a ing god job Josef Mengeles guided to torturing Jews is out of print.

[snafu]

I think religion has killed more people. Look at the Crusades. And they're still going on if you think about it.

[timesjoke]

Oh stop it, would ya? How the hell are you gonna call me juvenile and immature not even one post after comparing me to Hitler because I speak out against theism?

 

You accused all believers of being stupid and directly attacked all religion.

 

Calling me stupid to start every post is not a way to have a light discussion.

 

You told me I needed to read carefully what you said when it was you who could not understand the topic but attacked me from your misunderstanding, it is you who needs to take more time to read before you respond.

 

......and a pretty lame guess it was. Thats my rebuttal. Why combat rebuttals with insults? Time after time.

 

Why is it your uneducated estimates are so profound but a prefessor in European history gives his estimate and you say they are lame?

 

All estimates are lame, we have no provable numbers but they are clearly not even a speck compared to the deaths caused by Athiest killers who killed over 100 million people in the desire to remove all religion from the world.

 

 

To be honest, this whole discussion is misguided and dishonest. We are entering into a "Who killed more people, theist or anti-theist" argument. Its silly and inconsequential. I think it can be said that both theist and anti-theist have contributed greatly to death and destruction. Keeping tally of the final score as if this is a contest of sorts, is silly and frankly a waste of time.

 

 

Agreed?

 

Of course you don't want to discuss something that proves that Athiests in power have committed the greatest killings ever seen. It is not even close, hell we can double even your inflated estimates and we can't even get to 5% of the killings caused by the Athiest movement.

 

I gave the example of Mao Zedong who killed 40 million people just himself and you have nothing to say. If you refuse to even consider the facts, why are you having this discussion?

 

I'm sure Hitler also believed that the planet was round and the Earth rotates around the sun. Are people that agree with scientific fact, somehow aligned with Hitler's genocidal philosophies, just because Hitler also agrees with said fact?

 

It is the "anger" people like you show tword religion and those that follow it that is relivant.

 

TJ, relax man. I have a brutal sense of humor. Anyone from the old GF can vouch for this. Humor doesn't translate well in typed format, so often people might think I'm being immature or insulting, when I'm really just keeping a discussion lighthearted.

 

 

Lighthearted by calling all believers stupid?

 

Stop talking down your nose to me about religion and we can keep it lighthearted but don't ask me to take it easy when your every post is an insult to my life and belief structure.

 

 

 

I think religion has killed more people. Look at the Crusades. And they're still going on if you think about it.

 

It does not matter what you "think" it matters what you can prove. Most killings are done by Athiests, that is proven fact.

 

 

 

 

 

sheik-yerbouti

 

You got your hands over your ears yelling so you don't have to accept the truth and I guess that is okay for you if you prefer to be ignorant of the facts but those of us that require a few facts to base a decision need more than a desire for certain things to be true.

 

Hitler and Stalin were Athiests, this is fact, every historian agrees with this fact, who you are to say all people educated in this area are stupid and only you know the truth is really incredible.

 

 

If I say I am a black man, does me saying it make it true? The same holds true for people who "say" they are religious. In truth few are really religious but still there are many who truly are.

 

Being baptised is irrelivant.

 

Going to church is irrelivant.

 

Saying things in public is irrelivant.

 

Have you ever heard the old saying "actions speak louder then words"?

 

The actions of Hitler and Stalin proves beyone doubt that they were not Christians, combine with that fact statements like Hitler saying he only believed in evolution and all religion needed to be completely removed from the world and you can see who a person "truly" is no matter what else they claim to be.

 

I will tell you like I told Johnny5, if you are not capable of understanding how a person can offer a false public face, then you cannot understand this topic.

 

 

 

 

And no, non-religious people do not tend to help others, it is their selfishness in their hearts that precludes them from helping other people. That is why there are no non-religious groups in places like Darfur helping people.

 

 

But here is your chance to prove me wrong, name a non-religious group that is in Darfur helping like the religious groups (non-government).

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

sheik-yerbouti

 

You got your hands over your ears yelling so you don't have to accept the truth

 

Your truth is imaginary. It was made up by some early businessmen. All these years later, other businessmen maintain this lucrative business, so that vulnerable people like you keep them in well paid emplyment.

 

and I guess that is okay for you if you prefer to be ignorant of the facts

 

Ignorant of the facts ? What facts ? There are no sky-faeries.

 

but those of us that require a few facts to base a decision need more than a desire for certain things to be true.

 

Please share these facts proving your religion to be true with us. You cannot. Your facts are nothing more than supersticious nonsense.

 

Hitler and Stalin were Athiests

 

Nonsense. Hitler and Stalin were baptised Christians who never renounced their religion officially as far as I know. They were indeed theists.

 

this is fact, every historian agrees with this fact,

 

It does not matter who agrees with you, historian or otherwise. Those two murdering creeps were Christians. Provide some proof than one or both of these arse wipes ever officially left their religion.

 

who you are to say all people educated in this area are stupid and only you know the truth is really incredible.

 

Now you accuse me of things I did not do ! I never said historians were stupid. And I certainly did not say that only I knew the truth. It is theists who believe only they know the truth.

 

I accept I may be wrong. Wher as with theists, there can never be such acceptance. For you and others like you, there is just this one certainty- YOU ARE RIGHT ! And anyone who requires such a thing as a fact, is a doubting Thomas, who will surely burn in your imaginary hell fires !!!!!!!!!!

 

If I say I am a black man, does me saying it make it true? The same holds true for people who "say" they are religious. In truth few are really religious but still there are many who truly are.

 

People may not be religious, but if they are members of a religion, they remain members of that religion until they officially leave it, or die.

 

Being baptised is irrelivant.

 

It is certainly relevant. Being initiated into a group, makes you a member of the group. To divorce oneself from the group and all it stands for, one must officially leave the group.

 

Going to church is irrelivant.

 

Saying things in public is irrelivant.

 

Have you ever heard the old saying "actions speak louder then words"?

 

The actions of Hitler and Stalin proves beyone doubt that they were not Christians,

 

I would have said that the actions of Hitler and Stalin confirm that they were Christians. This particular theist sect has a long history of killing, and torturing.

 

combine with that fact statements like Hitler saying he only believed in evolution and all religion needed to be completely removed from the world and you can see who a person "truly" is no matter what else they claim to be.

 

And what of the early Christian Popes, with their retinues of whores and illegitimate children ? Were they not Christians ? What of Tony Bliar and George Bush. These two Christians have sent young men to die abroad in battle, both from the USA and the UK. Thousand of Iraqi civillians are dead because of the desires of these two. Are they not Christian, because their behaviour is offensive ? Shall we now call them Atheists to spare your blushes ? Of course they are Christians !

 

You dont suddenly become a giraffe because you are ashamed of being a lion ! Those people are all Christians, and remain so, regardless of the things they have, or have not done. This is true unless they officially leave their church.

 

It does not matter what Hitler or Stalin said or thought of the church, to leave it, they must have officially and publicly renounce Chrstianity and become appostates. I don't think either ever did this.

 

I will tell you like I told Johnny5, if you are not capable of understanding how a person can offer a false public face, then you cannot understand this topic.

 

More insulting tosh from your closed mind

 

And no, non-religious people do not tend to help others, it is their selfishness in their hearts that precludes them from helping other people.

 

Nonsense, I am non religious and I always give to charity.

 

That is why there are no non-religious groups in places like Darfur helping people.

 

This is a self-serving argument. You select a place where your group are doing some charitable work, and imply that non religious groups do not give to that target group. It does not follow that the athiests are not helping other people period.

I, like you and most other Westerners, regularly find requests for money from charities in my letter box. It is untruthful and unpleasant of you to say that non religious people do not help others.

 

But here is your chance to prove me wrong, name a non-religious group that is in Darfur helping like the religious groups (non-government).

 

There may be no organised athiest assistance to Darfur. It does not follow that Athiests do not help the people of Darfur. It is the public who put money into the hands of the Red Cross and other relief agencies. And a sizeable number of Athiests have contributed, you can be sure of that.

 

After all you unpleasant comments I would like to make one of my own. Perhaps your religious group (non government) are only helping in Darfur, because Darfur has a significant Christian community. Yet your religion insists that all men are equal. Clearly your group does not treat all men as equal. I wonder what your sky-faerie makes of this avoidance of his wishes.

[Jhony5]

You accused all believers of being stupid and directly attacked all religion.

 

You keep saying this, but its not true. I have not once claimed that "All Christians are stupid". We are having a religious debate, but you seem to be taking everything I say so personally, as an attack on you. How can I offer an opposing view on religion in a debate on religion without speaking against religion? Honestly, I never said you were stupid. I said this the first time you accused me of such practice;

To understand something' date=' you have to understand how and why it started. [b']I"][/b] 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. [/u']

I admitted that I don't have an understanding of how people believe in such things. That doesn't mean I write all Christians off as stupid.

 

Calling me stupid to start every post is not a way to have a light discussion.

 

What post number? Where? When? Stop it. I haven't called YOU stupid. But I will call you a liar.

 

Of course you don't want to discuss something that proves that Atheists in power have committed the greatest killings ever seen. It is not even close, hell we can double even your inflated estimates and we can't even get to 5% of the killings caused by the Atheist movement.

 

I gave the example of Mao Zedong who killed 40 million people just himself and you have nothing to say. If you refuse to even consider the facts, why are you having this discussion?

Allow me to drop some facts on your funky ass, since you refuse to drop this pointless . The only leader that appeared on your list of Atheist leaders committing atrocities that is actually recognized as an atheist, is Joseph Stalin. Thats it. Just him.

 

You are defining what an atheist is. You are using your own fouled understanding of the complexities of atheism to draw your own conclusions. You are stating it as an empirical fact that atheism was the cause of the greatest atrocities in human history. When in fact it was something far more sinister than the lack of belief in a god.

 

Narcissism and greed. Deviant sadism and power in the hands of narcissistic leaders. No one but Stalin, on your little list, has ever been recognized as atheist.

 

It is the "anger" people like you show tword religion and those that follow it that is relivant.

 

Anger? No, not anger. Passion maybe, but not anger. The same passion I assume you have for Christ, I have for truth.

 

 

Lighthearted by calling all believers stupid?

Tee hee heee...Christians are so cute when they're mad.

 

See above. I never said that. When? Where? What post? blah blah blah....huh whaaaa?

 

Stop talking down your nose to me about religion and we can keep it lighthearted but don't ask me to take it easy when your every post is an insult to my life and belief structure.

Its a religious debate bro. Two sides. One for, one against. If ya can't take the heat, gets to steppin god boy.

 

Hitler and Stalin were Atheists, this is fact, every historian agrees with this fact, who you are to say all people educated in this area are stupid and only you know the truth is really incredible.

Stalin yes. This is verified as fact. Hitler, not so much. There is no proof either way. He was far too mentally ill to pinpoint his exact belief system.

 

 

 

But here is your chance to prove me wrong, name a non-religious group that is in Darfur helping like the religious groups (non-government).

Atheism is persecuted around the world. They don't have an organized business plan and multi-billion dollar infrastructure, like Christians have. Your logic would dictate that since Atheists don't have millions of dollars behind their movement, it must mean they are selfish.

Also, let it not be forgotten. That these world powers like the United States, who have Christian leaders, are standing by and watching the people of Darfur get slaughtered.

 

Lets discuss the Christian hierarchy of America, and how their compassion has been handed out in recent times.

 

Rwanda;

 

The US government was reluctant to involve itself in the "local conflict" in Rwanda, and refused to even refer to it as "Genocide", a decision which President Bill Clinton later came to regret in a Frontline television interview in which he states that he believes if he had sent 5,000 US peacekeepers, more than 500,000 lives could have been saved.

 

Shame there wasn't any oil there.

 

The population of Kuwait is 1.2 million nationalist. That means, when we felt so inclined to "save" the "people" (oil) of Kuwait, we did so for the sake of protecting 1.2 million people from Saddam's rule. When in fact, we know now that he just wanted their oil, their money, to pay his troops the money he had promised them for their service.

 

Flash forward to Rwanda. 800,000 people died. We knew what was happening. The brief was clear. Many more to die. We let what, 70-75% of the entire amount of Kuwait's population numbers die in Rwanda because ....???? No oil?

 

We're hero's for saving the people (oil) of Kuwait, but we're what for Rwanda?

 

Flash forward; Darfur ; The ongoing crisis in Darfur has killed more than 335,000 and displaced over 2 million Sudanese since February 2003. As of February 2005 the African Union remains the only international organization willing to send troops into Darfur.

 

You want to talk about the terrible things that atheist leaders have done in the last century, without being able to substantiate whether or not they were actually atheist. Hows about talking about the terrible things that Christian leaders allow to happen, simply because there is no profit involved?

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

sheik-yerbouti

who you are to say all people educated in this area are stupid

 

I have never called educated people stupid, and ask that you stop inventing untruths about me.

 

I've just discovered that Vlad the Implaler - Vlad Tepes - Dracula, was a christian. After just one of many battles, he killed 20,000 prisoners. From the 15 century (medieval period )In part three, we are told this good christian impalled perhaps 100,000. Thats .1 million in Romania ( Europe) in a 50 year period. The entire Medieval period was 4-5 hundred years. Watch this:

 

[ame=http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Znyi2mY8eNk]YouTube - Vlad The Impaler part 2 of 3[/ame]

[wez]

The fact is, whatever caused life is the same truth/God for every human being that has ever existed or will ever exist.

 

So, being that's a fact, there is a 0% chance of any more than 1 of the worlds "religions" being totally correct in their beliefs. There is a good chance that not 1 is totally correct and all could be wrong, which to me seems most logical.

 

Furthermore, the fact that there is only one truth/God/whatever caused life, what people say, means squat. It changes nothing. No matter how many people believe it or how many people get killed to prove it, it will forever remain the same for all eternity.

 

So, people should face the facts and realize that every individual person on the entire planet share the same beginning and end and we need to act accordingly.

[snafu]

The fact is, whatever caused life is the same truth/God for every human being that has ever existed or will ever exist.

 

So, being that's a fact, there is a 0% chance of any more than 1 of the worlds "religions" being totally correct in their beliefs. There is a good chance that not 1 is totally correct and all could be wrong, which to me seems most logical.

 

Furthermore, the fact that there is only one truth/God/whatever caused life, what people say, means squat. It changes nothing. No matter how many people believe it or how many people get killed to prove it, it will forever remain the same for all eternity.

 

So, people should face the facts and realize that every individual person on the entire planet share the same beginning and end and we need to act accordingly.

 

But the fact is that the after death is unknown. And man is not content with the unknowing. So we fill the gaps. We pacify our minds with an answer that most of us can correlate with. In my mind I can?t fathom life being a fluke thing. It had to created by a higher power not understandable to the mortal man.

[timesjoke]

It still surprises me how blinded some Athiest followers are to their own bull.

 

 

Let me give you two examples to help you understand the concept of showing a false face to the world:

 

 

 

 

1 sheik joins the march of dimes and has fundraisers for their cause. After a year, he steals millions of dollars and runs off to a remote island to live in the lap of luxery.

 

In this example, does sheik represent the march of dimes true mission in life or did sheik take advantage of the march of dimes to serve his own desires?

 

 

2 Jhony goes out with friends and after many drinks and burnt taters, he hooks up with a pretty girl and spends a drunk, stoned wild night with her. The next morning he wakes up to find out that the pretty girl turns out to be a pretty boy.

 

In this example, did jhony have straight sex because he "thought" the other person was a women or did he have gay sex because the reality is she was a he?

 

 

 

Hitler was an Athiest in reality. He used religion to his own ends at the beginning of his grip on power but his true self was very clear as his actions and frank discussions showed later.

 

 

The idea Hitler was a Christian just because he was baptised is completely stupid and juvinile. Is that to say all people can never change if they are baptised? Of course not. Hitler did not need anyone else to give him permission to believe whatever he wanted to believe just like everyone on this forum. To say Hitler was a Christian after the murders and was openly supporting evolution beliefs is the hight of stupidity and clearly based in the Athiests wanting to distance themselves from the truth of how violent and intolerant Athiest followers truly are.

 

 

 

Jhony5, you did call all religios followers stupid and in the same post you just showed, you did it again with a backwards way of saying the same thing:

"I have no idea how an intelligent person can subscribe to ideas that are so obviously wrong"

 

 

It is not obviously wrong to everyone, just to you and your fellow Athiest followers.

 

 

 

By the way, nice try with the excuse making but the real reason there are no non-religious people helping others around the world is because they don't want to. Look in any town and who is it running the soup kitchens? There are more help programs run by churches than the government, maybe that should tell you something.

 

 

Morals are dropping all over the world and so is religious believers, that is not chance.

 

The fall of Rome happened right after they attempted to change their faith. By the way, do any of you know how the job of page in modern government got it's name? In late Roman times after their decline to very immoral behavoir was clear, it was a status symbol for politicians to have a young boy lover. That boy lover was called a "page".