This is how we achieve world peace?

[Guru-In-Vegas]

Thats where I differ. I don't hate anybody.


Except Jet Fans........they don't count. 

Jets fans are the embodiment of the anti-christ.

[Guru-In-Vegas]

Of all of the possible orthodoxies however, atheism is clearly the worst at allowing contrary viewpoints and diversity.

Forgive me if I'm not understanding this correctly.  But from this statement are you saying that christianity allows for such opposing views as unlike atheism?  Atheism is based on the basic idea that there is no omni-potent creator.  At least that is what my understanding of it is.  So in terms of contrasting ideas being allowed into their orthodoxy, how is it any different from christianity?  I grew up catholic and there was definetely no room for a thought that there might not be a god. 

I agree with you SC on the level of intelorance that has grown among atheists.  However, in terms of hate and intolerance I must confess christianity has all others beat.  Here's an example www.godhatesfags.com

There's also this http://cofcc.org/?cat=17

[run_to_win]

However, in terms of hate and intolerance I must confess christianity has all others beat.  Here's an example www.godhatesfags.com

There's also this http://cofcc.org/?cat=17

Ummm, you do realize that anyone can masquerade as a Christian?  The church has no control over the internet and domain names.  The retards protesting soldier's funerals view themselves as Christians. 

I'm not Catholic nor overly religious.  I've challenged God Himself on many occasions. 

Show me were one respectable Christian has said "fuck the atheists with a rusty screw driver".

Show me one any Christians who would laugh, chuckle or support that statement.

The mods get bent out of shape over heat political discussion when they find it disagreeable but that statement goes unchallenged?  Disgraceful. 

[StL FinFan]

There are extremists in every walk of life.  The KKK considers themselves Christian.  However, extremists are (thankfully) a small portion of any group.

[run_to_win]

Very true ... and "we" always seem to judge groups by their extremists, which is wrong.

I guess one difference is that the majority of Christians do not look up to, support nor enable groups such as the KKK.  Quite the opposite, in fact. 

Hopefully the "most muslims are peaceful" type tolerance/understanding will someday carry over to other groups.  On the otherhand though, as often seen on this message board, there's no stigma that goes with being an intolerant religionphobe or Christianityphobe.

[SCFinFan]

Forgive me if I'm not understanding this correctly.  But from this statement are you saying that christianity allows for such opposing views as unlike atheism?  Atheism is based on the basic idea that there is no omni-potent creator.  At least that is what my understanding of it is.  So in terms of contrasting ideas being allowed into their orthodoxy, how is it any different from christianity?  I grew up catholic and there was definetely no room for a thought that there might not be a god. 

I agree with you SC on the level of intelorance that has grown among atheists.  However, in terms of hate and intolerance I must confess christianity has all others beat.  Here's an example www.godhatesfags.com

There's also this http://cofcc.org/?cat=17

For the most part you understand me correctly. This is what I'll say: do not forget where we are, and where the world has been. In the last 100 years (just those 100 years alone) we have seen the rise of political leaders who enforce their atheism on the populace with a vengeance unlike anything else seen this side of hell. In Russia, churches were bombed, turned into pools (http://www.artmargins.com/content/art/paperny/image8.html), people were murdered, religions were banned and persecuted (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union), I can go on for days. The truth is that people suffered, and suffered immensely, all because atheists are the least tolerant people on the face of the planet.

The same is true in North Korea, China, other parts of Asia, Eastern Europe, South America, and Cuba.

It is also true today. You think that atheists are tolerant? Hardly. At best, they can only squeak out impotent insults on screed-filled blogs. Consider the following:

http://nomorehornets.blogspot.com/2007/02/congregation-thanks-god-for-20-dead.html

or

http://choobus.blogspot.com/2007/04/atheist-motto.html

or

http://ravingatheist.com/archives/2006/07/love_thy_enemies.php (look at the nasty comments)

I could keep going... but I'll save ya the trip down drivel lane.

It may be objected that, in ages past, atheists suffered immensely at the hands of Christians. I have no doubt that some of this may be true. I also have no doubt that it's greatly exaggerated and/or the blame is put inordinately on religion. Consider this: the courts that eventually became part of the inquisition were originally founded because the Church saw that, in many cases, political entities were using religion as a lever to vent their dislike of certain dissidents. Before the separation of church and state became popular in its modern form, the church was actually fighting for it at some points, knowing that the state would misuse it.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08026a.htm
(Do a word search for the word 'Douais' and then read the paragraph thereafter.)

Ecclesiastical courts were usually more gentle and equitably minded. This is why there used to be a doctrine in Anglo-Saxon law known as the Benefit of Clergy, which allowed the accused to plead his case to an ecclesiastical court which would usually let him off with a slap on the wrist. The Constitution, amongst its other defects, banned such rights. Suffice it to say that, more often than not, the tolerant side of life has been with the Church, not the state, and never with the atheists.

As for your family and church, well, I'm sorry there was little room for debate and dissent. The difference between the two, however, is quite plain. While people may vehemently disagree with you over the concept of God or His existence, because God exists they'll usually give you some latitude. For, while God wants you to preach His truth, He also reminds us to love our neighbor... even if he is our enemy. There is no such similar restraint on atheists... and history's proven it.

[CF DolFan]

In the USA, the largest open predjudism is towards Christians.  Look no farther than this board for examples.  No one thing is attacked in here more than Christianity.  There might be more people who hate blacks, Jews, Latinos or even ballet ... but the bottom line is no one is more negative about anything else than the lack of respect for Christians or Christianity.

The funny thing is I get it.  If people feel they can dispel Christianity in their own mind then they somehow feel they don't have to follow it. I wish I could say that is true but I didn't make the rules. Same goes for accepting homosexuals and adulterers.  I can love them all I want and then some but I can't ever say it is acceptable and that they don't need to repent. I didn't get to make those rules either.  Neither did the Pope.

[landlocked]

matthew 10:34
john 15:18

[Dave Gray]

SC,

I'm not really interested in having a religious discussion over private messages.  That's why we have a forum, so we can all discuss.  I'm not interesting in learning about the scriptures, if that's what you thought I meant.  I am more concerned with the effects of religion on society, which are debatable, but I consider the bad to outweigh the good.  I may be behind on the specifics teachings of Christianity, but to me, they don't matter.

[SCFinFan]

Alright, that's fair. You open up the topic, and I'll rebut.

Let's set some boundaries first though:

What do you consider to be beneficial to society?

What evidence do you allow for inquiry?

What is the standard we'll accept as convincing? (i.e. reasonable doubt? preponderance?)

[CF DolFan]

matthew 10:34
john 15:18

Those are both great versus landlocked, as well as relevant to the conversation at hand, but you should have posted them.

matthew 10:34 (I actually went back to 32)
32"Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven. 33But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before my Father in heaven.

 34"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword 35 For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law - 36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household


john 15:18
18"If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.

[Dave Gray]

Well, that's kinda the problem.  I don't really know what to debate.  I don't believe in God, and there is no evidence to support such a belief.  Anyone's belief in God is from their faith, which I lack.  So, I don't really know what there is to rebut about that.  At the same time, my efforts to try to dispute the existence of God will be fruitless as well, because God is not fallible by the rules of reason.

As far as the benefits of society thing, it's pretty much the basics -- War, money, power, control, intolerance, etc.

I don't really have the need to debate the subject, though.  That's kind of it for me.  Bible quotes and stuff -- it's all fake to me -- Made up by some guy a long time ago.  I believe that our morality caused us to create religion, that we are inherently born with some morals and ethics through society bring the other parts.  Some people will lack these morals, religious or otherwise.

The idea that atheists are the most intolerant people doesn't matter (first off, I don't think that's true at all, but whatever...) -- Whether atheists are intolerant or not doesn't change the fact of whether there is a God or not.  Even if atheists are all murderers and rapists, it doesn't mean that God exists.  I don't believe in God, but not because it's the convenient choice.  It'd be much easier to think that I got to go to heaven and that I could pray if I needed help, but in real life I just don't believe that.  Just because I want something to be so, doesn't make it so.

[run_to_win]

In the USA, the largest open predjudism is towards Christians.

Indisputable.

There's no stigma attached to hating/bashing the majority.  Quite the opposite in fact. 

Not only is it not a hate crime to openly hate the majority, it's not even a crime. 

[SCFinFan]

I know it's a little late to post this, but I had to study all day so I couldn't really respond.

Here's the thing. I find it odd, Dave, that you first tell me you don't want to debate in private, that THAT is what forums are for, and then tell me

I don't really have the need to debate the subject, though.  That's kind of it for me. 

I honestly don't know what to say in response to this. That's because it's hard to argue with a creed, which is what the rest of your post really looks like. Here's what I mean:

I don't believe in God, and there is no evidence to support such a belief. 
Anyone's belief in God is from their faith, which I lack.  [...]
God is not fallible by the rules of reason.
Bible quotes and stuff -- it's all fake to me -- Made up by some guy a long time ago. 
I believe that our morality caused us to create religion, that we are inherently born with some morals and ethics through society bring the other parts. [...]

The majesty of that closing doxology hasn't been seen since the Nicene creed hit the scene however many generations ago. But, what I'll say is this... a mind that is willing to say these things, in other words, that is so closed to the subject, is evidence not of a rigorous search into the truth of the matter, but rather of a disingenuous attitude to the whole debate in the first place.

For you have never demonstrated exactly what you mean when you say evidence. I have never know what that term means for you. For all I know, all you could mean by, "there's no evidence" is that you won't really even face the question. I don't say this to impugn your integrity, but honestly, a more conclusory statement was never made.

As for the rest, you've never demonstrated that God is not bound by reason. Or that, should He not be, that this renders the question worthless. Or that anything is bounded by "reason" or "logic." You have not demonstrated that people's belief in God relies wholly upon faith, nor have you ever explained just why, beyond a "well, I just don't," (the pinnacle of empirical inquiry, obviously) you do not think that faith is a valid way to understand the world. There are justifications needed for these positions too.

Frankly, if this is the totality of your thought upon the subject, it's not at all a stretch for me to say that it appears that all you've done is become enamored with the idea that no God exists, and then backed into the reasoning from there.

So, if you want to puzzle this out, then let's do. Or let's not. But let's not make conclusory statements to duck the possibility that we may, terrifying and humbling as it the thought is, be wrong.

The idea that atheists are the most intolerant people doesn't matter (first off, I don't think that's true at all, but whatever...) -- Whether atheists are intolerant or not doesn't change the fact of whether there is a God or not.  Even if atheists are all murderers and rapists, it doesn't mean that God exists.

As hard as it may be to believe, I hated writing what provoked this response. I don't think most atheists are evil. Just wrong. That said, I do think that atheists, when they've held positions of political power, have been more vicious, more tyrannous, and more stultifying than any other breed of religionist. However, what I wrote was in response to Guru-in-Vegas' contrary position. Nothing more. The evil of atheists does not prove, not by a long shot, that their theological conclusions are wrong. Neither does the evil of Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, and the like.

I don't believe in God, but not because it's the convenient choice.  It'd be much easier to think that I got to go to heaven and that I could pray if I needed help, but in real life I just don't believe that.  Just because I want something to be so, doesn't make it so.

I used to march to this drumbeat as well. It doesn't wash. If you think the idea of God is solely comforting, you mischaracterize all theism. The therapeutic value of religion, I think, is a bit higher than atheism, sure, but therapy is not the sole basis for religion. There is such a thing as the fear of God. There is such a thing as the true love of God. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padre_pio)There is such a thing as real cosmological hopes and fears. And when a Christian pickets an abortion clinic, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._E._M._Anscombe#Life) or  says no to illicit sex, (http://saints.sqpn.com/sainta04.htm) or submits to harsh treatment for the sake of another, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Leseur) all for the love of God, one can tell more is going on there than just a feeling that, "oh, well, I believe in the afterlife and now life's all set." No, your characterization is a straw man if there ever was one. And atheists typically have their cake and eat it too on problems like this. One minute, they tell you religion is only widespread because it makes people not fear death. The next they remind you how inhumane and disgusting the idea of eternal damnation is... must be fun to pick and choose which stick to beat your enemy with on any given day, but it certain doesn't lend much credulity to one's line of thought...

The longer one stays in stays in such myths (as you have parroted above), the harder it is to puzzle one's way out of them. For while some dogma is right and good, most of it, and all of the typical atheistical dogma, is flatly false.

[Dave Gray]

What do you want me to say?  I've told you this before -- I'm not really all that interested in this debate.  I already have my answer.  I think that those who believe in God are delusional.

I think that God is made up and there's no evidence.  For a claim as extraordinary as the existence of God, the burden of proof is on you, in my opinion.

There's no way to prove or disprove the existence of God.  Especially coming from my perspective, where God doesn't exist, debating these things is pointless.