Failure to Retain God in our Knowledge has led to to Societal Degrade

a reply to: buster2010

So much deflection. You never answered why you care. You blamed money(?) , make insinuations about my "problems", and upbringing ,but you didn't answer one thing.

There are previous post about the death toll institutionalized atheism has produced so lets not rehash. You are denying that religion has affected basic laws that prevent harm to you?

Many people complain or think of the downsides when food is thrown out, and there are starving people that could be fed with it. What's the differences with dead babies. If their small withering corpses can be used for something, it's better than tossing them out. I mean they are dead, they couldn't give less of a you know what. Where might I purchase a fetus? I hear rumors (lies) that the Chinese use them as aphrodisiacs. May be worth a try. Delicious (sarc).

Waste not, want not. As they say.

I can't understand objection some made about research on steam cell. So far we learned a lot and are able to cure some things we would never be able to achieve without research. About 15 years ago I did research and presentation on steam cell research and it is just incredible what kind of applications this research will allow... From growing organs out of your cells that are compatible with you to breakthrough in some diseases and conditions. Just imagine growing lost tooth, or no transplant organ waiting lists...

Videos are proven hoax, bringing them again does not make much sense.

As for food, no, we don't waste food!!!

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: flammadracoPlease to be fair list out the wars and atrocities caused by secular, atheist and socialist you will see that there are just as many.

Religious folks state that Communism and Nazism, along with the regime of the Cambodian tyrant Pol Pot, as evidence of murderous “atheist” tyrannies that have caused the deaths of tens of millions. While it may be true that Communism portrayed itself as “godless,” it did not wage war in the name of atheism, nor were its founders and leaders raised as atheists. They were, in fact, preponderantly Jewish and Christian.

I think you’re asking for the following information as they have often been misconstrued as famous atheist;

* Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,00 people murdered
* Jozef Stalin (USSR 1932-39 only) 15,000,000 people murdered
* Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000 people murdered
* Kim II Sung (North Korea 1948-94) 1.6 million people murdered
* Tito (Yugoslavia 1945-1987) 570,000 people murdered
* Suharto (Communists 1967-66) 500,000 people murdered
* Ante Pavelic (Croatia 1941-45) 359,000 people murdered
* Ho Chi Min (Vietnam 1953-56) 200,000 people murdered
* Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20) 30,000 people murdered
* Adolf Hitler (Germany 1939-1945) 12,000,000 people murdered

However, not all aforementioned were atheist and it’s a common mistake being made in these kinds of debates.

For example;

HITLER – Christian

“Besides that, I believe one thing: there is a Lord God! And this Lord God creates the peoples.” ~Adolf Hitler

“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” ~Adolf Hitler

Hitler was a Christian. This undeniable fact couldn’t be made any clearer than by his own confessions. This demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that Hitler and his Christian Nazi Party were acting in complete concordance with traditional Christian anti-Semitism and Hitler himself was very good friends with the Pope during his reign of terror.

MAO ZE_DONG - became a Buddhist, but abandoned this faith in his mid-teenage years

JOSEF STALIN - was raised in the Georgian Orthodox faith, but I contend that in adulthood he was an atheist.

POL POT - almost certainly a Buddhist, believed in the teachings of the Buddha, no matter how perverted his interpretations may or may not have been.

KIM SUNG II - Kim Il Sung thought he was a god in North Korea. Juche itself is a religion.

SUHARTO – was a Muslim

ANTE PAVELIC - was a Jew who converted to Catholicism at the age of 18

HO CHI MIN – Believed in Confucianism, also known as Ruism is a system of philosophical and "ethical-socio-political teachings" sometimes described as a religion

VLADIMIR ILICH LENIN – Was Jewish

Have I missed anyone out?

Again, Atheist have never fought a war in the name of atheism, so most of those millions of deaths attributed to Atheism are actually religious in nature so you can blame the holocaust on religion and not atheism as Hitler was a Christian and plenty of evidence to prove that fact as well as threads on this site.

For the record and before I get flamed for being a "Common Atheist" as some folk call me, I'm a deist, which means I do believe in god, just not man made religion!

originally posted by: flammadraco

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: flammadracoPlease to be fair list out the wars and atrocities caused by secular, atheist and socialist you will see that there are just as many.

Religious folks state that Communism and Nazism, along with the regime of the Cambodian tyrant Pol Pot, as evidence of murderous “atheist” tyrannies that have caused the deaths of tens of millions. While it may be true that Communism portrayed itself as “godless,” it did not wage war in the name of atheism, nor were its founders and leaders raised as atheists. They were, in fact, preponderantly Jewish and Christian.

I think you’re asking for the following information as they have often been misconstrued as famous atheist;

* Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50) 49-78,000,00 people murdered
* Jozef Stalin (USSR 1932-39 only) 15,000,000 people murdered
* Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79) 1,700,000 people murdered
* Kim II Sung (North Korea 1948-94) 1.6 million people murdered
* Tito (Yugoslavia 1945-1987) 570,000 people murdered
* Suharto (Communists 1967-66) 500,000 people murdered
* Ante Pavelic (Croatia 1941-45) 359,000 people murdered
* Ho Chi Min (Vietnam 1953-56) 200,000 people murdered
* Vladimir Ilich Lenin (USSR, 1917-20) 30,000 people murdered
* Adolf Hitler (Germany 1939-1945) 12,000,000 people murdered

However, not all aforementioned were atheist and it’s a common mistake being made in these kinds of debates.

For example;

HITLER – Christian

“Besides that, I believe one thing: there is a Lord God! And this Lord God creates the peoples.” ~Adolf Hitler

“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” ~Adolf Hitler

Hitler was a Christian. This undeniable fact couldn’t be made any clearer than by his own confessions. This demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that Hitler and his Christian Nazi Party were acting in complete concordance with traditional Christian anti-Semitism and Hitler himself was very good friends with the Pope during his reign of terror.

MAO ZE_DONG - became a Buddhist, but abandoned this faith in his mid-teenage years

JOSEF STALIN - was raised in the Georgian Orthodox faith, but I contend that in adulthood he was an atheist.

POL POT - almost certainly a Buddhist, believed in the teachings of the Buddha, no matter how perverted his interpretations may or may not have been.

KIM SUNG II - Kim Il Sung thought he was a god in North Korea. Juche itself is a religion.

SUHARTO – was a Muslim

ANTE PAVELIC - was a Jew who converted to Catholicism at the age of 18

HO CHI MIN – Believed in Confucianism, also known as Ruism is a system of philosophical and "ethical-socio-political teachings" sometimes described as a religion

VLADIMIR ILICH LENIN – Was Jewish

Have I missed anyone out?

Again, Atheist have never fought a war in the name of atheism, so most of those millions of deaths attributed to Atheism are actually religious in nature so you can blame the holocaust on religion and not atheism as Hitler was a Christian and plenty of evidence to prove that fact as well as threads on this site.

For the record and before I get flamed for being a "Common Atheist" as some folk call me, I'm a deist, which means I do believe in god, just not man made religion!

So because someone was born into a religion that means they are always that religion? Your argument has been used and taken apart in academics. I am also a Diest but come on man.

Did Mao destroy budhists temples and kill people for practicing religion, as well as target religious leaders? How many of the others did the same?

That is a misleading arguement.

I was born Catholic and even baptized am I catholic? No.

Are wars waged in the name of God really that under your definition or are they really over resources in a time when leaders can motivate people who are starving.

a reply to: luthier

That is a misleading arguement.

No it is not, it's a valid point and addresses the question I was asked by listing all the so called Atheism and Secular wars committed.

Why did you only use Mao in your response? Were the others to hard to argue against, what about Hitler and his Christian Nazi party? We always hear how Hitler was an atheist when in fact he was at war with Atheist.

Can't cherry pick parts of history to suit your argument, Hitler for example was either an Atheist or not, which one was it?

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: luthier

That is a misleading arguement.

No it is not, it's a valid point and addresses the question I was asked by listing all the so called Atheism and Secular wars committed.

Why did you only use Mao in your response? Were the others to hard to argue against, what about Hitler and his Christian Nazi party? We always hear how Hitler was an athesist when in fact he was at war with Atheist.

Can't cherry pick parts of history to suit your argument, Hiler for example was either an Athist or not, which one was it?

I have never used hitler nor did the arguments I am referring to. Why are you cherry picking and only focus on hitler.

Which of those you mentioned purposely forced the public to have no religion and destroyed religious sites as well as killed and imprisoned religious people and leaders?

What would anthropology label that. If you look honestly you will see having no religious premise or a religious premise of war is mutually destructive. That is the point. Your argument is just a smokescreen of the issue at hand.

a reply to: luthier

I concur that most of the wars fought were over religion in name only, as the leaders would use whatever geographical religion to rile up the masses to fight against whomever. Whether that was over resources or something else is immaterial as the leaders who went to war still had to use religion to get the populace to fight.

Your argument is just a smokescreen of the issue at hand.

My "Post" (not argument) was in response to a question put to me by the OP and again for ease of reference I've included the question again below;

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: flammadraco Please to be fair list out the wars and atrocities caused by secular, atheist and socialist you will see that there are just as many.

So no need to argue the toss with me as I merely answered a question put to me.

originally posted by: flammadraco
a reply to: luthier

Which of those you mentioned purposely forced the public to have no religion and destroyed religious sites as well as killed and imprisoned religious people and leaders?

ISIS

I concur that most of the wars fought were over religion in name only, as the leaders would use whatever geographical religion to rile up the masses to fight against whomever. Whether that was over resources or something else is immaterial as the leaders who went to war still had to use religion to get the populace to fight.

Your argument is just a smokescreen of the issue at hand.

My "Post" (not argument) was in response to a question put to me by the OP and again for ease of reference I've included the question again below;

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: flammadraco Please to be fair list out the wars and atrocities caused by secular, atheist and socialist you will see that there are just as many.

So no need to argue the toss with me as I merely answered a question put to me.

My point is its misleading to use what religion people were born with and play with semantics.

As far as the relevancy to this op. Atheism and religion are just as likely to be immoral since psychopathy can occur in any religious or cultural back round.

There is an argument that the Koran is pro active in prose to incite violence and death to those who are non believers. The Christians and Jews would require quite a bit more contextual manipulation to be pro active in causing war against non believers.

I think if you want to use direct religious atrocity or absolute pure hatred of each other there are some very clear examples with Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs. Although there is also a significant lack of resources in the region as well and the vaccuum of the British departure also complicate the argument.

This also goes on in animism with tribes over resources.

So why don't you explain direct religious connections for example with genocide in Rwanda??

www.theguardian.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

Some time ago there was debate where they first asked everybody if Catholic church is force of a good, and they did the same later, at the end of debate. It was interesting to see difference, mostly thanks to good arguments from late Christopher Hitchens. If you interested, please watch and follow Hitchen's argument against religion.



And no, religion does not deserve free pass as you suggest...

originally posted by: SuperFrog
So why don't you explain direct religious connections for example with genocide in Rwanda??

www.theguardian.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

Some time ago there was debate where they first asked everybody if Catholic church is force of a good, and they did the same later, at the end of debate. It was interesting to see difference, mostly thanks to good arguments from late Christopher Hitchens. If you interested, please watch and follow Hitchen's argument against religion.

And no, religion does not deserve free pass as you suggest...

Explain what? Follow the posts. Where did I say there was Never religious wars?

Hitchins also had a poor debate partner.

What exactly is your argument?

I did say if you study the Anthropology the reasons behind war are most often jealousy, greed, conquest, and resources. Meaning the Catholic bible itself doesn't say go kill all the infidels.

originally posted by: luthier
I did say if you study the Anthropology the reasons behind war are most often jealousy, greed, conquest, and resources. Meaning the Catholic bible itself doesn't say go kill all the infidels.

Seriously??

Deuteronomy 17

1 Do not sacrifice to the Lord your God an ox or a sheep that has any defect or flaw in it, for that would be detestable to him.
2 If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant,
3 and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky,
4 and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel,
5 take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.
6 On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.
7 The hands of the witnesses must be the first in putting that person to death, and then the hands of all the people. You must purge the evil from among you.

Please, explain to me how this does not tell/instruct to kill...

Also, let me know if you need more examples.

Double

originally posted by: SuperFrog

originally posted by: luthier
I did say if you study the Anthropology the reasons behind war are most often jealousy, greed, conquest, and resources. Meaning the Catholic bible itself doesn't say go kill all the infidels.

Seriously??

Deuteronomy 17

1 Do not sacrifice to the Lord your God an ox or a sheep that has any defect or flaw in it, for that would be detestable to him.
2 If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant,
3 and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars in the sky,
4 and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel,
5 take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.
6 On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.
7 The hands of the witnesses must be the first in putting that person to death, and then the hands of all the people. You must purge the evil from among you.

Please, explain to me how this does not tell/instruct to kill...

Also, let me know if you need more examples.

Uh the OT? Christians are not required to follow old testament laws. There was a new covenant in their world with Jesus.

Just to clarify I personally do not believe in the bible.

originally posted by: luthier
Uh the OT? Christians are not required to follow old testament laws. There was a new covenant in their world with Jesus.

Just to clarify I personally do not believe in the bible.

Really, can you source where Christians are instructed not to follow old testament laws. As far as I know, those who wrote NT could not make up their mind... www.gci.org...

But, let's move to new testament....

Matthew 15

1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’
5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’
6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.

If you don't believe in Bible, why do you defend it?!

Please don't tell me you're only trolling...

originally posted by: SuperFrog

originally posted by: luthier
Uh the OT? Christians are not required to follow old testament laws. There was a new covenant in their world with Hears.

Just to clarify I personally do not believe in the bible.

Really, can you source where Christians are instructed not to follow old testament laws. As far as I know, those who wrote NT could not make up their mind... www.gci.org...

But, let's move to new testament....

Matthew 15

1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’
5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’
6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.

If you don't believe in Bible, why do you defend it?!

Please don't tell me you're only trolling...

Because I have a love of philosophy and debate. I have had these arguments (granted in academics almost 15 years ago) and I had an atheist teacher who did the same. It's to elevate the level of debate by examining what is a valid arguement or not.

Your example is not very good nor do you understand the parrables being used. You will not find Jesus condoning violence against a passive non believer (meaning someone not forcing you to convert by death). He does say God will do the work but never that followers should.

Read the whole wheat and weeds parable. They are supposed to live togwther until the day of judgement.

My point is to show how power corrupts people to do things even their teachings don't condone.

Again mankind has been wicked in every form and belief that is known. There is a long enough history to say the OP is false and religion can be either destructive or useful depending on the followers and leaders.

rable of the Wheat and Weeds
24 Here is another story Jesus told: “The Kingdom of Heaven is like a farmer who planted good seed in his field. 25 But that night as the workers slept, his enemy came and planted weeds among the wheat, then slipped away. 26 When the crop began to grow and produce grain, the weeds also grew.

27 “The farmer’s workers went to him and said, ‘Sir, the field where you planted that good seed is full of weeds! Where did they come from?’

28 “‘An enemy has done this!’ the farmer exclaimed.

“‘Should we pull out the weeds?’ they asked.

29 “‘No,’ he replied, ‘you’ll uproot the wheat if you do. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. Then I will tell the harvesters to sort out the weeds, tie them into bundles, and burn them, and to put the wheat in the barn.’”

a reply to: SuperFrog

once again the misuse of scripture by and intellectual shows ones true ignorance of the Bible.

That was meant only for Israel to follow and very few ever followed it. It is not a Christian doctrine nor is it meant for the Body of Christ, or todays Gentiles to follow.

Ignorance is truly bliss for some of you.

a reply to: SuperFrog

Really, can you source where Christians are instructed not to follow old testament laws. As far as I know, those who wrote NT could not make up their mind

Let us make it simple.
Jesus said to love your God and to love your neighbor as yourself.
There are many other factors but the cross was reformation of the old testament.

BTW
You do not want to live in a world where Christians go back to the roots as you suggest is already happening.

a reply to: SuperFrog

Paul restated the commandment you quote about mother and father here

Eph 6:1 ¶ Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. 2 Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise

3 That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

Paul restated 9 of the so called ten commandments for the church, However he did not include the religious observance of the sabbath and with a caution to the church he said not to judge anyones holy day or what they ate or drank (Rom 14, Col 2).

All the other laws and commandments such a circumcision were not put upon the Gentile believers and was even counted as useless for the Jews in this age who become Christians.

I know you do not rightly divide the word of truth so OT laws and traditions to you, apply to the Body of Christ today, but they don't and never could be.

I would like to say it's what the OP says, but I believe mental illness is on the rise in a large way.
Christian/religious or Atheist it doesn't matter what you believe, once sanity leaves anything can happen, I believe really evil people are actually insane because they have deviated so far from what is natural. And religious people can lose it too and do bad things.
How bad is it, suicide the ultimate manifestation of mental illness expressed is on the rise big time

The global suicide rate is 16 per 100,000 population. On average, one person dies by suicide every 40 seconds somewhere in the world. Global suicide rates have increased 60% in the past 45 years.