Is compromise possible between militant atheists and religious believers?

Originally posted by sirnex

I don't know much about Dawkins, so what exactly do you think he is 'demanding'?

this is not a demand but an example of ignorant speech - Dawkins equates religion with child abuse - that's inflammatory - the kind of language that promotes fear and misunderstanding among people who have little or no knowledge of what Christianity teaches....

You profess the greatness of Jesus, yet he is a false prophet according to your bible. Christianity cites the messianic prophecies, but ignore that he even fulfilled all of them and in an attempt to justify this they invent the concept of the second coming. Kudos for not listening to God's warning about false prophets!

Here you show your complete contempt for research and lack of knowledge about Christianity or anything it teaches...do you really want me to get into the details of Catholic dogma??? I can if you like but seems like that would be for another thread Suffice to say for the moment you are completely off base but we can continue down that road if you choose and
I'll post on it if you're really interested...but somehow I don't think you are.

Then we should equally be against economics and social philosophy as they are equally contribution to those political forms. Heck, anything used by communism/Marxism should be hated just as equally as atheism if we go by that logic.

Not so - Atheism IS a social philosophy for one thing and more importantly denies the authority of God and provided justification for the destruction of the church which was the center of culture -especially in czarist Russia - can't have a revolution or absolute control if there is a rival contender for the hearts and minds of the proletariat...the modern Marxist state sought to be the only authority in peoples lives and the existence and widespread influence of a powerful church contradicted this - in the end this turning of hearts and minds toward the state could only be accomplished with force, intimidation and ultimately murder -

Economic socialism on the other hand has been achieved peacefully in many European countries in the last eighty years without violence because these governments chose wisely not to force people to change their ideological and religious beliefs - and the upshot is that Europe has had a significant decline in religious activity in recent decades - you should be wooting for joy here

now you need to do the same and stop excusing your brother atheists who have used their philosophy to justify crimes against humanity.... then we can have a more in depth conversation....

I am not excusing what they did, simply pointing out that atheism is not a sole explicit reason in the same light that God is a sole explicit reason. Being an atheist doesn't inherently make atheism explicitly invoked and certainly not when it's only one of many reasons for a political killing.

okay... but I hate to break it you but God was never the sole reason for the atrocities that took place in the name of the church -

The Crusades were a response to the Muslim attacks on Jerusalem and the Muslims won - the Muslims were in a territorial expansion mode and the Christians were in defense mode - often a monarch would whip up the population to go on Crusade for their own aggrandizement much like politicians do today when they are promoting the latest war and say things like "For God and country" - makes my blood boil and I'm pretty sure God
isn't crazy about it either...especially when the war is not justified - ok thats another thread too

The Spanish Inquisition was in large part a political move but also religious and in my opinion the darkest hour of the Catholic church:

The Spanish Inquisition was used for both political and religious reasons. Spain is a nation-state that was born out of religious struggle between numerous different belief systems. Following the Crusades and the Reconquest of Spain by the Christian Spaniards the leaders of Spain needed a way to unify the country into a strong nation.

During this time the Jews of Spain were targeted - the Jews during this period were not allowed into the various craft guilds and because of the usury laws Christians were not allowed to loan money professionally at interest so the Jews filled this niche in many European societies and became wealthy and influential in the process - and envied and feared as a consequence - add the religious element and the pogram is born...


Realshanti

atheism is an absolute requirement for the destruction of the church and its beliefs

The *bleep* it is. Atheism makes no requirements at all, it is simply the non-belief in deities. Whatever political actions are committed are not inherently nor explicitly invoking atheism as atheism by itself does not demand a damn thing. An atheist himself *may* call for the destruction of the church, but non have explicitly invoked atheism as the sole reason, instead they turned to a political action against the church, which is not something atheism demands or requires and never has.

You took my comment out of context here - I stated that in the context of Marxist justification for the destruction of the church - and my statement still stands - I did not say that atheism requires anything - I meant atheism itself IS a requirement of marxist philosphy for the destruction of the church. Marxists used atheism as social justification for this - hope that's clear enough for you

Realshanti

so once again you have not addressed with honesty the issues which have been raised in this thread

I have actually, in fact, it's the second post in this thread. Ah, but you would already know that if you bothered to read the thread from the beginning and have a better understanding of why I even had to start defending atheism against false claims from Christians. Again, Atheism demands nothing, simply a non-belief in any deity.

Actually I have read the entire thread - false claims?? Are you serious? I guess that's what you call disagreement Atheism demands a leap of faith I'm not willing to take - that there is no first cause... and sometimes it demands that I debate with folk who know next to nothing about history or religion they are attacking. A simple non-belief my aunt fanny But its been fun

reply to post by realshanti

this is not a demand but an example of ignorant speech - Dawkins equates religion with child abuse - that's inflammatory - the kind of language that promotes fear and misunderstanding among people who have little or no knowledge of what Christianity teaches....

So, if I am understanding you right, being told it's OK by God to stone your child is *not* child abuse?

Here you show your complete contempt for research and lack of knowledge about Christianity or anything it teaches...do you really want me to get into the details of Catholic dogma??? I can if you like but seems like that would be for another thread Suffice to say for the moment you are completely off base but we can continue down that road if you choose and
I'll post on it if you're really interested...but somehow I don't think you are.

I am interested, so go for it. If you have scriptural evidence that the messiah was *not* supposed to fulfill the prophecies outright, then I'll bow down nad quietly shut it. Until then, as it stands, the messiah as far as I know was not supposed to die before fulfilling all the prophecies and was not supposed to institute a new religious regime. The Messiah was to bring both houses together, not invent Christianity.

Atheism IS a social philosophy

No, it is not. Atheism is nothing more than the non-belief in any deity, not just the monotheistic one. We don't care if it's God or Zeus, no supernatural deity exists. What one atheist wishes to do does not speak for all atheists.

atheism is an absolute requirement for the destruction of the church and its beliefs

Came off as you stating a requirement to me! Don't mix a non-belief in something with a political agenda, please.

Atheism demands a leap of faith I'm not willing to take - that there is no first cause...

It doesn't state that at all. Again, Atheism is nothing more than the simple non-belief in any deity. Science does offer a first cause, leap of faith not need apply. I would hazard a guess that it requires a larger leap of faith to blindly believe in the magical tooth fairy *God* without any actual evidence for him. At least sciences answer to the first cause has *some* evidence in favor of it. I'm sorry, not all religions can be true and with monotheism being the new kid on the block, most likely is less truer than all the other one's proven false.

I'm taking a break for a while but I'll be back to post on the religious points- frankly my dear sirnex your so full of BS with your 'atheism is nothing but a simple belief in no deity' chant - kinda like a broken record with no where to go later - I'm a sleepy God lover

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Donny 4 million

 

Do you realise who coined this term?

Bolshevistic Zionism

I'll give you a hint. He had a funny mustache and caused ALOT of suffering. Communism as part and parcel of it's rhetoric was an atheistic system. That is NOT me trying to demonise atheism though, it's a simple fact of history. To qualify one's belief system in an attempt to pretend that it is somehow magically pure from human tendencies which include his darker side is unrealistic and only opens the door for more attrocity. If there is anything that is shown in history it is that mankind can and will kill for just about anything. Hell, I am sure people have killed for peanut butter preference.

[edit on 11-10-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

If you refer to Hitler I think not. Lenin had a chin beard?

Jewish Bolshevism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

White propaganda poster depicting a demonic Leon Trotsky wearing a Satanic Star, sitting near a pile of skeletons. The caption reads "Peace and Freedom in Soviet Russia."
Jewish Bolshevism, Judeo-Bolshevism, and Judeo-Communism is a pejorative stereotype [1] based on the notion that Jews are the driving force behind the modern Communist movement, specifically the Russian Bolsheviks.

The expression was the title of a pamphlet, The Jewish Bolshevism, and became current after the October Revolution (1917) in Russia, featuring prominently in the propaganda of the anti-communist "White" forces during the Russian Civil War. It spread worldwide in the 1920s with the publication and circulation of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It made an issue out of the Jewishness of some leading Bolsheviks (most notably Leon Trotsky) during and after the October Revolution. Daniel Pipes says that "primarily through the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Whites spread these charges to an international audience."[2] James Webb writes: "t is rare to find an anti-Semitic source after 1917 which does not stand in debt to the White Russian analysis of the Revolution."[3]

The label "Judeo-Bolshevism" was used in Nazi Germany to equate Jews with communists, implying that the communist movement served Jewish interests and/or that all Jews were communists END

Now one thing is for sure. These Bolsheviks used athesim to attempt to rid Russia of all organized religion. Hitler was not an atheist or a Bolshevik as modern Zionist would lead you to think.
This is just an attempt to define atheism. So that it can be weighed in conjunction to religion and it's believers.

[edit on 12-10-2009 by Donny 4 million]

[edit on 12-10-2009 by Donny 4 million]