Is Atheism a religion of War?

Originally posted by borntowatch
Stalin atheist possible death toll 10 to 30 million
Mao atheist possible death toll 20 million
Pol Pot atheist possible death toll at least 1.7 million and maybe 5 million+

Yeah atheism, the religion of peace, and love.
Warmongers who have no respect for others, if they so choose.
There is no evidence God doesnt exist so its a faith.
This is not a fight, just hi lighting every body is capable of evil, religious or not

I dont think Stalin was an atheist, he used theocracy as a means to powermongergrab; his will was in charge before religion rose its natural head that NEVER HAPPENEND for him/others it did and his understanding was, this 'as' Catholic Russian Orthodoxy has to go (too powerful and I want the same grip on potencial minions). Stalin wasnt even a socialist (I doubt he was an intellectual and knew the difference between Communism and Socialism--Hed never side with the Chinese), he was the SUPERHERO known as 'VODKA BOY' drunk powermad dictator that cared nothing for his country or his irresponsible actions. He was not a good a shepherd for his people, as now in death state left a legacy of RUIN to this day. Do you have any idea the energy required to disapate this EVIL thoughtform? Impossible to dispell, its cemented into World history. 'The Garden of the Statues of Shame' (prolatariat workers depicted in motion) are his remnant contribution to the World; not exactly renouned statues found in the Lourvre, but statues intact none the less; a visionary Lunatics SOCIALISTIC "working for the whole" propaganda. They are hilarious to see as "THRIFT STORE" foundlings, and someone had the sense to expose and preserve the EGO this exemplified for all of the free world to see.

reply to post by borntowatch

You are a preacher, evangelist, fundamentalist atheist.

I think you're just irritated by what I have to say.

reply to post by NewAgeMan

The source of the unending humor resides precisely in NOT taking myself too seriously and giving credit where credit is due, but I see what you mean, to a degree, but a God-filled ego-self is imho, dangerous whereby what goes up must come down, or pop.

And I see what you mean. What is a life without laughter?

I'm not sure I've ever seen a God-filled ego-self, or if I can fathom what that is, but I have seen people who are irrational. If this has any connection to what you mean, I agree this habit is quite dangerous.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Is Atheism a religion of War?

I would say no, not at the moment, but potentially rather a religion of oppression, if it was to somehow become idealized politically as the religion of anti-religion, maybe a religion of the state as it did with Stalin's state atheism or in revolutionary Mexico or Albania where atrocities were committed to promote "Atheism". People need religion for whatever reason, and they will die for that right. A rational human would protect that right.

I fear atheism if it becomes an ideology—which would be utterly meaningless, because atheism itself is merely the repudiation of an idea, and nothing more. But I can see it going that way if this frivolous debate continues.

People should believe what they want to believe, but shut up about it. However, keeping one's convictions to oneself is a habit people cannot seem to shake.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if people were able to rely on each other as much as they need to. For lack of humanity, they have resorted to divinity. They no longer have any faith in their fellow man, and they feel powerless to change that. They're tired of the stumbling and the flailing and the desperation. They're tired of being human.

reply to post by LesMisanthrope


Ah but we must risk losing our "sanity" and "pop", to go in-sane or into sanity. It's the one who thinks that he's entirely sane and rational who we need to be leery of because truth be told no one really has a clue as to what's really going on or really happening, so there's a courage required to dive into unknown depths and explore the domain of what was otherwise an unknown unknown or what we didn't even know we didn't know, which ironically is the domain of ALL KNOWLEDGE, not as learned facts but in the knowledge of an experience, which I'm describing as humor but which could just as easily be thought of as unending joy, and the unfettered and unconstrained freedom of authentic self-expression and yes, creativity, which is as playful as it is powerful or influential, even charming.. (comedic), by knowing that it's a great mystery, including the true nature of our own true selves as we really are.

The humor comes out of the knowledge of knowing that we really don't know who and what we are or just what's really going on, except perhaps for the clues we are given in the unfolding of life's story, which is all there is in the final analysis, but oh what joy to discover that we are it's co-creators and inheritors, even in eternity as an already-always state of mind and being that never really was nor could possibly be an imposition upon the mind and heart of man. Truth hurts only that which stands in its way and blinds us to it's light of reason.

However, reason, and logic, only go so far, and then there's a quantum jump into not the irrational, but the supra-rational, and ultra-logical wherein we trust really only that which we KNOW in our innermost heart of hearts, not as learned facts or well reasoned arguments but in the knowledge of real experience in the light of truth, which sheds light on all our prior ignorance, rendering it as the great comedic material that it's been in the making, all along.

So it's not just a "fact of life" set apart, nor can we cleave our own experience from the heart of it all. Therefore, the only real requirement in our approach to reality as it is, is true open mindedness, and willingness to discover things that were otherwise in our own blind spot, so of course it's funny, the truth when it comes, and it's inevitable, that too is funny.

It's like a Train of humor hurtling with great inertia down the tracks of our own ignorance and presumptuousness shining a blinding light that we only really perceive when we are hit, head on, because we were standing in those tracks of largely absurd notions about ourselves, others and the whole of all creation, even "God".

If we knew, or had but a glimpse we would laugh, or cry, or both, every time without fail. We would be moved.

So we fear it. We fear to laugh at the mighty joke of life because to do so will also require by necessity that we laugh at our own ignorance and absurdity and ridiculousness in who we once took ourselves to be, where our true value is really of incalculable measure, but unbeknownst to our prior egoic-self - what humor, what absolute hilarity is this?!

Who then tells and receives this joke?

Meher Baba cannot be right that we originated it because it precedes and transcends us in all our ignorance and folly, but I suppose when we catch up to the realization in time and history we come to recognize or re-cognize that at the most fundamental level, it's true that we are in the world but not of it, begotten and conceived from the time before time, not merely as an evolved "thing", but as an expression of a creative intent, that we might realize the very experience that we're having - that's about the only thing we CAN know for certain, that we are included for a reason and are on a journey of discovery, of things we would not have expected to find in our preconceived expectations and reality filters.

I would rather be forced to go in-sane by normal standards and get to the truth, than be normal yet blind, and I've been there done that got the t-shirt, but there's only so much ignorance and absurdity a person can take, especially when he himself is "at cause" in it's formation and propagation.

The self professed sane and reasonable man is lost imho, and may need to go insane to become really self aware and knowledgeable about the things that matter most.

Best regards,

NAM

P.S. Sorry for going off-topic a bit..

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by LesMisanthrope

 

Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if people were able to rely on each other as much as they need to. For lack of humanity, they have resorted to divinity. They no longer have any faith in their fellow man, and they feel powerless to change that. They're tired of the stumbling and the flailing and the desperation. They're tired of being human.

We have to re-choose it, being human, while remaining open to the possibility that the best of the best of what it means to be human IS divine, and then we come to know as we are known where the new axiom of modern science, and intuited rightly by Descartes, is "to be is to be perceived". It's a closed loop and a tangled hierarchy, and our very experience is intrinsic to the whole of the mystery that is life, so you are right that traditional religious notions and conceptions are unhelpful especially when one sacrifices their own essential character and passion in order to "tow the line" with God as a separate entity, we all or most of us are beginning to realize that that's an absurd proposition and untenable. As a Christian I understand this. Just please don't assume or project as if the whole of Christendom is mired in blind ignorance and fanaticism, that's not fair those atheist barbs that get thrown around. Choose not to "believe" that's fine, but as an atheist please don't assume or project from a bias, that's an ad hominem style of argument and it doesn't pass muster any more.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by borntowatch

 

You are a preacher, evangelist, fundamentalist atheist.

I think you're just irritated by what I have to say.

Irritated or understanding to your atheistic position held by many.
You are welcome to your belief but, sincerely you preach atheism

I am not bothered by that at all, its your choice

Read your own posts if you doubt me, thats the evidence

reply to post by borntowatch

Irritated or understanding to your atheistic position held by many.
You are welcome to your belief but, sincerely you preach atheism

I don't preach atheism, I advocate its advantages. Just like you and your Christianity.

Read your own posts if you doubt me, thats the evidence

Oh, I'm well aware. I'm the one who wrote them, after all. But I still don't call that 'preaching'.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by luciddream

 

People who are not interested in tennis would not be on a tennis forum. Atheist's are interested in religion.

We are forced into the issue because you insist on tearing up our "football field' to build tennis courts and try to force us all to play. (Strangled metaphor, sorry)

If you would shut up about your beliefs, *treat* them like beliefs and not try to legitimize them with your strangled form of science in a vain attempt to gain credibility we wouldnt be interacting.

I am not interested in weeds, but when they invade my garden I have to act.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by borntowatch

 

Irritated or understanding to your atheistic position held by many.
You are welcome to your belief but, sincerely you preach atheism

I don't preach atheism, I advocate its advantages. Just like you and your Christianity.

Read your own posts if you doubt me, thats the evidence

Oh, I'm well aware. I'm the one who wrote them, after all. But I still don't call that 'preaching'.

Well excuse me my apologise, you dont preach atheism, you advocate it then
I hope that appeases your feelings


Definition of PREACH www.merriam-webster.com...

intransitive verb
1
: to deliver a sermon
2
: to urge acceptance or abandonment of an idea or course of action; specifically : to exhort in an officious or tiresome manner
transitive verb
1
: to set forth in a sermon
2
: to advocate earnestly


Here is an interesting link
atheismexposed.tripod.com...

reply to post by borntowatch

to urge acceptance or abandonment of an idea or course of action; specifically : to exhort in an officious or tiresome manner

First of all, if I'm tiresome, you know where the door is. Please don't hesitate to make full use of it.

Second of all, I don't "urge acceptance" nearly as much as some theists around here. I'm relatively mild in comparison, and that's the truth.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by borntowatch

 

to urge acceptance or abandonment of an idea or course of action; specifically : to exhort in an officious or tiresome manner

First of all, if I'm tiresome, you know where the door is. Please don't hesitate to make full use of it.

Second of all, I don't "urge acceptance" nearly as much as some theists around here. I'm relatively mild in comparison, and that's the truth.

Again sorry if you think that dictionary quote was personal, it was a dictionary quote, nothing more.

Secondly you "urge acceptance" more than most, not as much as other anti theists, but its far from mild compared to others.
Now thats my version of the truth

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by LesMisanthrope

 

Maybe it wouldn't be such a problem if people were able to rely on each other as much as they need to. For lack of humanity, they have resorted to divinity. They no longer have any faith in their fellow man, and they feel powerless to change that. They're tired of the stumbling and the flailing and the desperation. They're tired of being human.

Just please don't assume or project as if the whole of Christendom is mired in blind ignorance and fanaticism, that's not fair those atheist barbs that get thrown around. Choose not to "believe" that's fine, but as an atheist please don't assume or project from a bias, that's an ad hominem style of argument and it doesn't pass muster any more.

"Don't group us all together" is gonna be something your gonna have to say over and over again.

Its an obvious truth people should realize.

In the end though, you take fanatics, you take people who follow the word of whichever book they follow exactly as its said. Add them with the rest of the crowds of people who barely go but still claim faith, and then the moral oral goody goodys, following their specified group; mormons, christians, catholics, in the end its all different groups branching off because they Inturpreted things different, because they were given different "visions" to be told to followers of each different group.

If people can not take this as an obvious sign that these books are just stretched out inturpretations of what this or that tribe felt was right back in the day, then they will forever be enslaved. The mind gets what the mind wants, want to believe god is specifically this way instead of that, follow this religion instead of that one........ it defeats the #ing purpose when there are no gods of any of the religions doing anything THEMSELVES, in their own body. Instead its always a "prophet" or someone being spoken through, really the only thing all religions have in common today...... how can they all have everything written so differently, specified to the point we have #ing mormons and other screw off sides of religion...... but still have them all preached the same.

Why is it that there happens to not be a single god who actually comes down themself and starts.... BEING A #ING GOD AMONGST US? Because the ones everyone generally believes in, is setup in the same control scheme.

Instead of realizing they are all wearing the same #ing shackles, they just flail them around at each other instead of working together to free themselves. I suppose some just have been filled with to much fear. I personally would rather die than be enslaved, mentally or physically.

reply to post by shaukuna

Why is it that there happens to not be a single god who actually comes down themself and starts.... BEING A #ING GOD AMONGST US?

Thank you! I still have not gotten a good answer to that one.

reply to post by borntowatch

Secondly you "urge acceptance" more than most, not as much as other anti theists, but its far from mild compared to others.
Now thats my version of the truth

More than most? When's the last time I started a thread on the topic? I've only mad one such thread in the last couple of months...and the rest of the time, I'm participating in other threads because that's why I friggin' joined to begin with! Otherwise, I could have just remained an anonymous lurker and not said a word to anyone. Not much fun, that.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by borntowatch

 

Secondly you "urge acceptance" more than most, not as much as other anti theists, but its far from mild compared to others.
Now thats my version of the truth

More than most? When's the last time I started a thread on the topic? I've only mad one such thread in the last couple of months...and the rest of the time, I'm participating in other threads because that's why I friggin' joined to begin with! Otherwise, I could have just remained an anonymous lurker and not said a word to anyone. Not much fun, that.

yep joined to preach your faith, I didnt say you couldnt or shouldnt or it was wrong to do so,
I am not stopping you, just pointing out you evangelise atheism like a fundamentalist Christian.

Most threrads you participate in are religious innature

No judgement

First, atheism isn't a religion. It isnt even a club.

Second, war does just fine without any help. Religious wars are just as common, if not moreso than secular ones.

The title of this thread seems to me to be a Christian Agenda.

reply to post by borntowatch

yep joined to preach your faith, I didnt say you couldnt or shouldnt or it was wrong to do so,

I actually didn't.

I am not stopping you, just pointing out you evangelise atheism like a fundamentalist Christian.

I challenge the opinions I find that I feel can be refined.

Most threrads you participate in are religious innature

I find religion to be a fascinating subject.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


You just defined my reason and being; none of this involves a FOR ASPECT.