How is the Church doing?

[Anathema]

Mao ZeDong had the opportunity to realise his sick ideas. There are also theists with sick ideas but they never got the same opportunity that Mao ZeDong had.

[Terror]

NO! NO, NO, NO, NO, NO! NO MORE TOPICS ABOUT RELIGION.. NOT EVEN TOPICS THAT ARE INDIRECTLY RELATED TO RELIGION... GOD IS GETTING OUT OF MY NOSE...

[emprworm]

NO! NO, NO, NO, NO, NO! NO MORE TOPICS ABOUT RELIGION.. NOT EVEN TOPICS THAT ARE INDIRECTLY RELATED TO RELIGION... GOD IS GETTING OUT OF MY NOSE...

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO more posts from you trying to ruin a topic in the General forum by attempting to take it off topic. you dont like it? Read another post then.

Jeez. Cmon dude there's thousands of threads in this forum. Go read another one if you dont like it. Meanwhile, we will continue to talk about it.

[emprworm]

i found this nice little article on the web just now- its quite accurate, too.

Atheist Mass Murder

If we were to tote up the casualty count achieved by those few officially atheistic regimes the world has seen, the atheists have the Inquisitors beat by a mile. Notorious atheist butchers like Mao, Pol Pot, and Enver Hoxha killed and slaughtered their own people at an unheard-of rate. When it comes to piling up a body count, atheists take second place to none.

And it's troubling to reflect that the problem does not seem to be so much communism as atheism itself. In the French Revolution, the first flush of Jacobin anti-Christian sentiment was atheistic rather than Deistic. Before the plundered and looted cathedrals of France became temples to a vaguely defined 'Supreme Being', they were proclaimed 'Temples of Reason': "Bearing a bust of Marat, the crowd marched to the Temple of Reason, the ertswhile cathedral, over whose portals were placed a large tricolor and a placard reading 'Light after darkness'...An orchestra played, and the gathering (alleged to number ten thousand) sang a 'Hymn to Nature':

"Mother of the Universe, eternal Nature,

The People acknowledges your power eternal;

On the pompous wreckage of ancient imposture

Its hands raise your altar..."

(Twelve Who Ruled, The Year of the Terror in the French Revolution, R.R. Palmer, p. 188)

Subsequently outspoken atheists like Hebert were obliged to recant, and Deism was installed as the official religion of the revolution. One must wonder, however, to what extent the atheism which was the fondest dream of the Jacobins contributed to the vast waste of human life that followed.

Robespierre was enough of a practical politician to realize the difficulties involved in imposing state-sponsored atheism upon a heretofore Catholic populace and called a halt to the forcible Dechristianization program: "Some would go further. Under pretense of destroying superstition they would make a kind of religion of atheism itself...It will be said perhaps that I am narrow-minded, a man of prejudice, even a fanatic. I have already said that I spoke not as an individual or as a systematic philosopher, but as a representative of the people. Atheism is aristocratic; the idea of a great Being that watches over oppressed innocence and punishes triumphant crime is altogether popular." (Maximilien Robespierre, quoted in Twelve Who Ruled, The Year of the Terror in the French Revolution, R.R. Palmer, p. 121). Not that this retrenchment could deflect the momentum of the revolution; the killing had already started. Just as it would later, under Josef Stalin, Mao Zedong, Kim Il Sung, on through the depressingly long list of atheist mass killers this century has seen. Has there ever been a counter-example, an officially atheistic regime which did not slaughter its people or subvert their right to religious liberty?

I love how he ends his article with a question.

I agree. Is there one single counter example?

[Edric O]

only about 2% of the world's population is Atheist.

Actually, it's over 15% and growing fast.

How is the Church doing? It is dying. And what do we do about it? NOTHING! Not one damn thing!

Emprworm, according to the latest statistics, Christianity will become a minority religion in the USA by the 2030's.

[Terror]

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO more posts from you trying to ruin a topic in the General forum by attempting to take it off topic. you dont like it? Read another post then.

Jeez. Cmon dude there's thousands of threads in this forum. Go read another one if you dont like it. Meanwhile, we will continue to talk about it.

>:( paf.... Emprworm lies bleeding on the ground.... with a hole in his chest.

Well people, that's what happens if you mess too much with god

[Edric O]

Ah, my dear Emprworm... you do not see that the truth will not help you. When a lie is told often enough, people accept it as truth. Indeed, there wasn't a single openly atheist regime that didn't slaughter and opress religious believers. But that is irrelevant. In the face of atheist propaganda, the truth has no chance to prevail...

[nemafakei]

There is not enough evidence, logical or exemplary, to prove that either atheism or theism is more violent or more moral.

What IS important is good teaching of a good moral code.

"Has there ever been a counter-example, an officially atheistic regime "

I remember reading about one... what was it... it's not cuba, is it?

Besides, there haven't been that many atheist governments, anyway... given that eastern europe and the USSR was basically a single regime.

[Edric O]

There is not enough evidence, logical or exemplary, to prove that either atheism or theism is more violent or more moral.

There is plenty of exemplary evidence. The body counts, for example.

As much as you resent it, Nema, it is a fact that the majority of people take atheism as a way out of having any morals.

[nemafakei]

The body counts... well, let's see... atheist governments have only flourished more recently, when the population, excess and technology has meant a sort of kill-inflation.

So not exactly.

[emprworm]

When a lie is told often enough, people accept it as truth.

yes, i agree with this.

There is not enough evidence, logical or exemplary, to prove that either atheism or theism is more violent or more moral.

If we define religion simply as ALL RELIGIONS,

then I agree with Nema on both counts. If the entire world was suddenly atheist tomorrow, there would still be bloodshed. If the entire world was Christian/ Jewish / Hindu / Islamic......still there would be bloodshed.

WAIT WHAT IS GOING ON HERE? DID I JUST AGREE WITH BOTH EDRIC AND NEMA IN ONE POST?

YOWSA, *slaps himself* am I still a capitalist?

Emprworm: "Yes, emprworm, you are."

Self: "whew. Got worried there."

Emprworm : "He he "

[emprworm]

only about 2% of the world's population is Atheist.

Actually, it's over 15% and growing fast.

where did you get these numbers? 15% seems like an awful lot.

[nemafakei]

Some analysed censuses, I think. It placed Atheism as the second-largest religion.

[Edric O]

Yeah, you're definately still a capitalist. You agree with me that there's a problem, but don't do anything about it... :)

[Edric O]

Fourth-largest, actually. It goes like this:

Christianity

Islam

Hinduism

Atheism

Buddhism

etc.

[Acriku]

Hey emperor, instead of taking the scholars' words for representing athiesm, get your head out of your ass and get ready to discuss. Quoting people who dislike religion, for their own reasons, doesn't mean a housefly. They are people with certain agendas and opinions, and in no way do they represent athiesm. I can't imagine how f*ed up your mind might be for you to try to spread this propaganda of all this. Sure, there have been bad rulers that were athiest, what the hell does that mean? It doesn't mean a thing for athiesm, because they were extreme in their beliefs. They don't simply lack a belief in a god(s), they hate religion. I don't hate religion, but with what you are saying since I am an athiest (and am becoming prouder of it everyday when I run into people like you) I have an internal hatred burrowing in my mind against all religious groups and will do anything I can to kill them all. So watch out Empr, I might come after you!

[emprworm]

Quoting people who dislike religion, for their own reasons, doesn't mean a housefly. They are people with certain agendas and opinions, and in no way do they represent athiesm.

uh, Acriku-, unless I missed something, there is no such thing as "representing atheism" in a general sense. Each atheists actions represent atheism since atheism declares morality subjective. Subjective morality simply means that you determine if its right or wrong- OR society determines. Since Mao ZeDong is the head of society- whatever he determines is what society determines, therefore there is no philosophy in atheism that can condemn his actions of killing 50 million people. YOU might condemn it, but atheism cannot.

I am simply saying that we see atheists commit atrocities, we see theists commit atrocities. The only people that really have heads up their #$$ are those who blame the evil of the world on theism

[Acriku]

Do not confuse thiesm with religion. Two separate things. One simply believes in a higher being, the other has a set system of beliefs to follow.

And holy crap you got my name right!

Athiesm has nothing whatsoever to do with moral development, or lack thereof. It is a lack of belief in a god (whether it be the christian god, the muslim god, the jewish god, etc). Whatever the person does in his/her life is based on everything else, and yes an athiest can grow up under christian/jewish/muslim morals! It doesn't have to include a belief in a specific god! Christianity for example has sets of morals and reasons behind it, like the ten commandments that you must follow or you will go to hell (with other ways of redeeming yourself). They have it all laid out for someone. But if you take out the reasons, you have well written morals that people should abide by! Some, however, might very well be omitted such as never say God's name in vain, since that deals with the issue that there is a god.

[emprworm]

i always get your name right.

Lets look at something:

Jesus never taught violence. He never hurt anyone. His teachings are non-violent. Therefore, it is accurate to say that Christianity does not promote violence.

Yet in practice we still see violence. Why is that? Can we therefore blame Christianity for violence? Logically, no. Yet atheists do all the time. Now lets take what you just said. On the surface, atheism does not promote violence. There is no teaching in atheism that says kill. Yet we see many atheists kill. Again, why is that? Is atheism therefore the cause of the killing? Again, NO

ThEREFORE: THERE IS A DEEPER CAUSE then religion/non-religion. Eliminating all religion from the earth will NOT remove violence.

People HATE in their hearts. They hate ALREADY. Religion/non-religion is just a way to justify/channel their hatred that ALREADY EXISTED PRIOR to them being religious. if you remove religion, people will just find other ways to justify/channel their already existing hatred and STILL be violent. Happens all the time. NOn-religious violent crime is extremely rampant in this world. IN the last hour, somewere within 50 KM of where you are sitting, there is a good chance someone just committed a non-religious crime of violence.

blaming religion for the world's hatred is really asenine and I have low tolerance when people do that.

[Guest Eric E.]

A real agnost does not give a damn about any unproven mass philosphy except maybe for the danger emanating from any lifestyle discontent mass.

Whether you call it roman-catholicism, calvinism, islam, communism, national-socialism, presbyterianism, hooliganism, zionism, nationalism, hinduism, shall i go on? No I want to keep your attention a few seconds longer ::)

All these attitudes have been excelling in mass murder and genocide.

We are dealing with mass psychosis here.

The religious types are the most destructive, because there seems to be no need for scientific evidence to be taken seriously.

One could argue that e.g. communism was mass murderous also.

The difference however is, that newer scientific insight now made it highly improbable that communism based on Marx will ever repeat in such a volume as it did in the 20th century. Marxism died of common sense. Religion is invulnerable to that.

For the scientific mind it should be evident why religious masses are such great risk.

[emprworm]

maybe, then Eric E, you need to scroll up a bit and read some of my quotes from living atheistic scholars who advocate the eradication of religion and them come back and tell me just how "peaceful" they are. They are as intolerant and bigoted as Hitler himself. If given power, they wouldn't hesitate to abolish religion.

Atheism proclaims reason, yet dont forget that to be an atheist means you are a human being filled with emotion. Emotion is what leads to hatred, and violence. emotion is independent of whatever belief system you have. Even PhD Atheist scholars may have genious IQ's still go home and beat their dogs or slam their fists into the tables because their hearts are burning with rage, and intense hatred.

proclaiming science and reason does nothing...aboslutely nothing to control emotion-- anger, intolerance, bigotry, greed, lust, malice, need I go on?

Many of these currently living atheists who are even professors at Oxford, would gladly eradicate organized religion if given the chance. And some of them DID have that chance (Mao, for example). And they took out millions of people. Could it happen again? Darn straight it could. Power has the same effect on people today as it did 2000 years ago. Nothing has changed.

[Acriku]

That's your opinion, but it simply is out of ignorance. Who knows if they will eradicate it if they had the chance? Because they said so? Hey look here, I said I can eat a horse. But you don't see me stuffing my mouth with horsemeat. Emotion is not independent from systems of belief, because those systems of belief do cause emotion, and very profusely at times. You never feel this great feeling when you start praising the Lord? Or feel this very bad feeling when you speak of Satan? Or perhaps when you are feeling down, your emotions are flipped upside down when you start thinking how God is great and this world is his creation, and is great, and he will save you, etc.

[emprworm]

Who knows if they will eradicate it if they had the chance? Because they said so? Hey look here, I said I can eat a horse. But you don't see me stuffing my mouth with horsemeat.

if you have any sense of logic, then it is rational to assume they would. history tells us that when power and desire combine, then the desired actions will come into effect. these men DESIRE that religion be obliterated. given the aboslute power to do so, it would be irrational to conclude they would not. there is no good reason to assume that they would do anything other than precisely what they desire to do.

and as for emotion, people have hatred INDEPENDENT of religion. I already told you that Jesus did not advocate killing- never did. Yet christians have killed. Proof that they act independently of what their religions teaches them. This is because they had hatred burning in them that had nothing to do with religion. Religion was their umbrella to focus and channel their hatred. Atheists kill as well. They used their philosophy that religious people were 'inferior' or 'unevolved' as the channel to focus their hatred. neither atheism nor christianity caused the hatred. they were used to justify/focus it.

how much more proof do you want?

eliminate religion, you still have mass murders. atheists hate as much as any religious zealot. it is well documented. i honestly dont know why you are trying to refute it.

[Acriku]

Emperor, Jesus taught a form of Judaism teachings (not his own!) that starts with a P, forgot what it is, and you don't see Jews going out and exterminating so many people? Hmmm?

[Guest Eric E.]

You're completely beneath ( beyond ) the point, but im tired now. I'll have a beer ;D

Byebye now. ;)