The WP Strident Atheists

Post Reply New Topic

Pray? What he hell are you smoking?

Count me in.

Updated list:
Awesomelyglorious
Fuzzy
skafather84
Sand
Master_Pedant
DentArthurDent
Exclavius
Ergo Proxy
manifoldrob
Cheeseroyale34
LKL
MONKEY
Bethie
just_ben
MasterJedi
01001011
Vince

There we go!

LKL: First off, I never said christians are more moral than anyone else. I said people who have moral codes are more inclined to be moral than people who do not have moral codes. Do you disagree?

by your logic, the following is a "no true scotsman" fallacy:

"all vegens don't eat meat."
"my uncle is a vegan and he eats meat!"
"all true vegans don't eat meat."

Fuzzy:

Glad to hear it. I've met some people who's response has been "It's the most logical way to respond! Now spend two hours typing or concede defeat!"

Wether or not religion could have changed stalin depends on what stalin's underlying motivations where.

If he was just an evil SOB looking for a way to control people, no religion wold not have changed him.

If he had deluded himself into believing he was doing good, but was, in reality only pursuing his own selfish desires (Kind of like Mithos, if you've ever played tales of symphonia) religion might have helped him break that delusion. However, if the selfish desires where strong enough, (i.e. even if he realized he was "wrong" he wouldn't care) little would have been different.

If he was legitimately concerned with helping his people, but got lost in his power along the way (reminds me of ganonndorf) religion would have had the best chance to help him.

If he truly believed everything was right and just and wasn't trying to mask some selfish desire with delusions of being the hero, he probably would have just twisted religion to suit his ends, believing that's what God wanted him to do.

From the second premise conclude nothing is both a vegan and a meat eater from which we further conclude your uncle is nothing.

ruveyn

Note please:

the said dialogue is problematic only as long as there are two parties who never attempt to achieve a common definition.

If one party honestly defines Christian as some variation of churchgoer and another party equally honestly defines it as regenerate follower of Christ - where these are NOT equivalent - then all you got is miscommunication.

There are plenty of true and sincere 'believers in Christ' who have nonetheless lied, cheated, murdered, abused children, and even committed massacres. The phrase, "Kill them all; God will know his own," was invented by Christians who were waging war for Christ. The largest child abuse scandal and conspiracy was and is being committed by professional worshipers of Christ and 'moral authorities.' Public figures who actively campaign against gay people and advocate for traditional marriage while secretly conducting gay affairs are almost universally 'good,' born-again Christians.
Since Tensu wants to expand it to everyone 'with a moral code,' the people who blow themselves up in crowds of civilians have strong moral codes and sincerely believe that they'll go to heaven for it. That's why the do it. The people who hijacked several planes on 9/11 and killed thousands of people had strong moral codes. The people who cut of women's noses or throw acid in their faces in Afghanistan have strong moral codes. The Hindis who riot and kill Muslims in Kashmir, and the Muslims who riot and kill Hindis in Kashmir all have strong moral codes.

Good people do good things both with and without religion;
bad people do bad things both with and without religion.
It takes faith, however, to make good people do bad things: faith in gods, faith in a leader, faith in the State.
Denial of reality leads to suffering - not always, but often enough to say that it is categorically dangerous in large populations over time.

I noticed something interesting:

So LKL cite a bunch of stuff people claiming to be Christians have done. But wait! that's all stuff Jesus told them not to do! My argument hinges on people who do that stuff aren't following Jesus's teachings and therefore are not real Christians! LKL will need to provide an example of Christians doing something bad their religion told them to do. Let's see what LKL comes up with:



Hey, wait a second! That's all stuff Muslims did! I never once defended Islam or suggested it was a good moral authority!

Give me an example of some bad thing a Christian did that Christianity tells them to do. And I don't mean something from the Law because I already have a defense against that. Something from the new testament.

Off the top of my head?
Defended slavery for 1850 years or so (yes, some Christians helped to end slavery, but they didn't get to use any words of Jesus to justify their cause).
Opposed women's equality for 2011 years.
Opposed environmental protections because Jesus is going to 'come back and fix everything' for the last 200 years.

Also, wrt. Islam: you didn't specify a moral code that you agreed with. First you said Christians, then you said 'real' Christians, then you said those 'with a moral code.' Now it's that it has to be that those with a moral code that you agree with are more 'moral' (by your standards) than those with a moral code you disagree with.
Circular reasoning, anyone?

What quote in the Bible tells Christians that slavery is ok? (Note: paul telling slaves not to rebel against their masters isn't the same as saying slavery is ok. I seem to remember several quotes implying it isn't, but I've forgotten where to find most of them (sorry. the Bible is a big book)
It's been said many times that the New testament was very Pro-Women, especially for it's day. And while most of Paul's comments towards women can be dismissed by the fact that he said to do it to win converts I'll admit that Paul makes one or two comments that can be perceived as a little sexist, but the Bible never says that women shouldn't have their own jobs (Solomon even says that Women should have their own jobs) and stuff like that. But I will admit if you can make a point, it wold be here.
However, your claim that it's the Bible's fault that people oppose environmentalism is preposterous. Nowhere in the Bible, neither old nor new testament, says anything about letting the environment go to hell (pun intended). In fact, The Bible makes mention of things like humane treatment of animals and the importance of giving the land a rest (albeit mostly in the old testament)

When I said Christians, I meant Christians. Christians means real Christians. Referring to "moral codes" in general was done only to explain that I was aware that atheists can have moral codes, not to say that all codes are as moral as they claim to be. You're projecting What you want me to have said over what I actually said. That's a bad habit. please try not to do not do it again.

Of course, it is mportant to remember that Jesus himself did not repudiate the old testament:
Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Antisemitism:
Matthew 8:11 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.
8:12 But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (ie, the Jews are doomed; see also Matthew 27:25 and at least a dozen other passages of the New Testament, in multiple books).

Peace and family values:
Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.(see also Luke 12:51-53)
10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
and Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children,and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
but
Mark 7:10 For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death.


citations for the post above:
regarding the environment, see all of Revelation.
Slavery:
Matthew 10:24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.
Luke 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
Ephesians 6:5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
Colossians 3:22 Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God;
Titus 2:9 Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things...

The idea that this isn't condoning slavery is nothing but deliberate blindness.

Women's rights:
Corinthians 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
11:8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.
11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.
14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
5:23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
5:24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Colossians 3:18 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Regarding atheism/blasphemy and homosexuality, there's Romans 1:22-32, where God makes blasphemers and atheists into gay men and women "...which commit such things are worthy of death..."
Despite being an atheist and/or a blasphemer (pantheist, actually), I'm not gay. I don't have any problem with being gay, though, so maybe that counts.
But I'm not, "Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful...

there's also Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,{generally taken to mean gay men}
6:10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

Honestly, one would think that you've never read the Bible. There's a hell of a lot more nastiness in there, but frankly I have neither the time nor the inclination to wallow in that much filth.

Tensu, wrt. xianity I would also like to point out that you never addressed the illogic of attonement by scapegoat, which I brought up a day or two ago.

Honey, firstly I'm not a mind reader, only a text reader. If you say 'moral codes,' I'm going to interpret that as 'moral codes.'
Secondly, you seem to be defining 'Real Christians' as 'Nice people whom I like,' and given that there are at least a dozen preachers on TV who have different definitions of 'Christian' than you do (and who seem to know the Christian Bible better than you do), I have to disagree with the limits you place on the definition.

The fact is Jesus is dead for some 2000 years. What you call Jesus' teaching is nothing but a book of what supposedly said. The same is true for Muslim. Exactly how do you know Hitler unrepentently and unremorsefully refuse to follow the moral code of christianity and is not true christians? Quoting the bible is irrelevant. Hitler cannot care what YOU think about Jesus' teaching.

"It takes faith, however, to make good people do bad things: faith in gods, faith in a leader, faith in the State."

I heartily disagree, A good person doing bad things may be deceived or may be past faith and hope.

And you know guys? We do NOT need to listen to definitions of Christianity on TV [I wouldn't I hope you don't] or to my definition which whatever anyone else may say is not for me "person with a moral code acceptable to me".

We have four accounts from four instinct of overlapping viewpoints and spare me comments on Q and Thomas, I know about them, not totally ignorant, nuff said which relate to us brother Josh's own definitions and standards on what is a Christian and NO the term was not apparently used in his lifetime but it is handy to use it so cut me a little slack.

A lot of pew people might find it surprising.

Right. But Tensu is using an exclusionary principal that has no bearing on the current world. That ultimately these faux-Christians will be judged and sanctioned by their divinity does not provide the living with a shibboleth by which to sort them.

Which is why we have gay televangelists hypocritically hurling invectives against their own desires, priests raping little kids, Darth Popes, and why monsters like Stalin really can become priests. This fifth column of amoral twats are giving the rest of you a bad name, but you seem maddeningly unconcerned: "They'll get theirs later."

Earthly justice, peace and social cohesion matter too. These people are acting as Christians. They are working publicly in Christ's name, and your recalcitrance to sort them out means that you get tarred with their brush too. Your behaviour - really lack of action - is just like that of the "good" Muslims who refuse to speak out against the "bad" Muslims.

Its as if you were in the room during a drug bust and you told the cops "Wasn't me." A mighty ineffective defence. Worse, you dont even seem to feel embarrassed by the association. Maybe if you did you would do something about it.

edit