@ginja Yeah, I know but you never know who reads the threads and might need the nudge to help them get support. Growing up with being abused is the problem - religious or sexual.
It wouldn't surprise me if people in this thread use religion to groom children.
This has started as a relatively civil debate and completely derailed into whatever this is now. Who in their right mind starts a debate on Religion on the internet. Aside from that the title is not very well made. creationism vs atheism is a bit off. It should have been something like Theism vs Atheism or Creationism vs Evolution.
> This has started as a relatively civil debate and completely derailed into whatever this is now.
What do you expect from a fear-cult? Be (and behave like) a decent person? No, we do it for the fear of gods revenge. And since god has a bad internet connection we have free reign here.
> It should have been something like Theism vs Atheism
The only fanatics i know of who blatantly ignore most of modern science are (fundamentalist) christians and (equally fundamentalist) muslims. But, given, it might be that other religions also have a pool of equally rationally challenged - i just have to see them.
What is absolutely clear is that every religion is an institute of hate for all the other competing religions: where christians have the majority they oppress muslims and jews (and probably all others but the others are mostly not in numbers enough to make them significant), as can easily be shown throughout the centuries: pars pro toto, the christian churches were the driving force behind the hate of jews the Nazis drew upon.
Is that a christian trait? No, as we all know muslims, where *they* have the majority, oppress christians in the same way: unbeliever? Beheaded be! Rape and then "marry" a pre-teen and you go free, but say you can't believe in the muslim sort of invisible friend any more: death penalty. And of course they also oppress all other religions: proselytizing among muslims is forbidden in all islamic states, whereas converting to islam: no problem.
Not to forget the jews: yes, they were one of the most-hated groups in christian europe, but once they got their own country (by expropriation of its inhabitants), they did the same that was done to them - just now the palestinian muslims were on the receiving end instead of the jews.
Are other religions different? Well, in Myanmar, where buddhists are the majority, the muslim minority was/is stripped of citizenship, rights, expropriated. Why? They simply have a different invisible friend. It seems that buddhism is as much a "peace religion" as all the others are: at the front "you shall not kill" is toted with much fanfare and then barely hearable is added "but if its an unbeliever, just kill him and take all he has".
So, do you expect a civil debate with these persons? They don't even stop at killing one another in the millions about differences like to which extent a woman was a virgin after giving birth. All the crusades, the inquisition, the phrygian schisma and the slayer of the markionites (so much for the "peacefulness of the early church").
Up to now, whenever any organised belief is talking "tolerance" it is because either they are in minority or because their means of oppression were taken from them - usually in violent acts because they wouldn't give in otherwise. "Religious freedom" mostly came because of freedom from religion.
I have no dog in this fight but to me it seems that the least sensible and civil side in religious arguments are typically internet atheists, second only to a tiny minority of lunatics that operate on the similair level to that of flat earthers. The argument that religions only tolerate other religions and non believers because they have no means of opressing them, is extremely weak, it takes only a few minutes to look up all the instances of historic and contemporary examples of peaceful coexistance of religions in developing countries to disprove that. You fail to distinguish between tribalism and violence because of religious affiliation. You also did not take the development of modern society into account that made the most difference regarding human rights.
The National Socialist prosecution of jews has nothing to do with religion either, this is why the term anti-semetism is used instead of anti Judaism. They prosecuted the ethnic jewish people regardless of religion.
Do you feel smart for decrying a version of all religions that you seemingly made up in your own head?
I i would ask you: "do you believe in ganjokabinjos respectively do you believe that they exist?" wouldnt you response: "i dont know what ganjakobinjos is or are"?
Its the same with "god". you might have an idea of that, but you must be a god yourself to verify or to "know" what god is. so either you are a god or you dont know what you are talking about if you talk about god.
and by the way - after reading some posts on that theme so far - if want to write something about science and truth. Truth respectively knowledge means that you stopped thinking about it - its just a recent mark of intelecutal activity. I give you an example:
somebody checked out pi with primitive methods and got the result: pi = 3. if he stops thinking about it and nobody lese does then this would be a scientific truth. the next one is more precise and get 3.1 - the next afer 3.14 and so on. and after a while a genius apears on the horizon and says: we will never get a concret number. and this will give a new perspective on numbers. but be sure: its not the only and last perspective to find.
back to god: i think its a good idea not to create an idea of god and instead getting rid off all of them - and if you lost all arrogance of your ego that likes to believe that it is able to realize god, then god can do his job on you and show you who or what he is - because if there is god this would be the only chance to get near to him or to get aware of what he is - so dont try to gell others what god is and let god show you.
> The National Socialist prosecution of jews has nothing to do with religion either, this
> is why the term anti-semetism is used instead of anti Judaism. They prosecuted the
> ethnic jewish people regardless of religion.
> Do you feel smart for decrying a version of all religions that you seemingly made up
> in your own head?
I can write a posting but i can't make you read it. This is what i wrote:
> the christian churches were the driving force behind the hate of jews the Nazis drew upon.
Either you don't understand what i wrote: that the Nazis built upon a sentiment that was already there, fueled by centuries of christian antisemitism, which was not only racial but also religious. How would you call someone "not being able to follow an argument" in this case?
Or, you are aware of what i wrote and misrepresented it knowingly. You may pick yourself the fitting term for someone doing that.
Are there any other statements in my post you were either not able to follow or willingly misrepresenting so that you could call facts "made up in [my] own head"?
> Rape and then "marry" a pre-teen and you go free
> but say you can't believe in the muslim sort of invisible friend any more: death penalty.
> but once they [the jews] got their own country (by expropriation of its inhabitants):
> in Myanmar, where buddhists are the majority, the muslim minority was/is
> stripped of citizenship, rights, expropriated.
> They don't even stop at killing one another in the millions about differences like to
> which extent a woman was a virgin after giving birth.
> the phrygian schisma
> the slayer of the markionites
> or because their means of oppression were taken from them
> The term is often used to specifically refer to such confiscations during
> the French Revolution and the First French Empire,
> The Napoleonic Code, however, differed from Justinian’s in important ways: it
> incorporated all kinds of earlier rules, not only legislation; it was not a collection
> of edited extracts, but a comprehensive rewrite; its structure was much more
> rational; it had no religious content;
> With the exception of the Papal States, the institution of the Inquisition was abolished
> in the early 19th century, after the Napoleonic Wars in Europe and the Spanish
> American wars of independence in the Americas.
Additional Sources for all of the facts above (german):
Karlheinz Deschner; Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums, Bd. 7, 8, 9
Karlheinz Deschner; Die Politik der Päpste im 20. Jahrhundert
Wilhelm Gottlieb Soldan; Geschichte der Hexenprozesse, Bd. 1, 2
Hans Conzelmann/Andreas Lindemann; Grundriß der Theologie des Neuen Testaments
Uta Ranke-Heinemann; Nein und Amen. Mein Abschied vom traditionellen Christentum
So can anyone tell me what they have learned from this forum?
> I for one learned that arguing is pointless.
> And that people (incluing me) are stubborn.
I think we need to be careful when discerning whether arguing is pointless or not pointless. In my area, I've gone out into the community numerous times in order to both enlighten "so called Christians" and to also bring the "unchurched" and non-Christians alike to a life of prayer and holy work. This doesn't mean that I try to get people to come to "my" Church, but it certainly means that I attempt to educate as much as possible that there is a difference between REAL Christians vs those who are more like those of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, or Seventh Day Adventists. To this date I've brought more than 200 formerly non-Church goers to a Church that suits their personal spiritual needs, and I've converted more than 40 Mormon families from the desolate and filthy doctrines of that convicted glass gazer and prolific pedophile, Joseph Smith, to the more righteous and scripturally aligned denominations of community Churches or the Baptists or the Wesleyans or the Roman Catholics etc. There is a difference between the Christians who founded homeless shelters and the first orphanages of Rome like St Ignatius vs those who are simply absolutely disgraceful and do ABSOLUTELY nothing but foster ridiculous claims like the Earth being created 6,000 years ago. This is our mission @BlackBishop9319 to bring the Kingdom of God into people's lives and to change our society into a Christian world that isn't fragmented into bizarre cults and anti-scientific beliefs, but rather a world that is TRULY dedicated to bringing God into "Daily Life!"
There is no God.