Emotions, God, and Atheism

[godfree12]

how can you begin to compare the inquistion to the atheist regimes

inquisition = 4,000 deaths over 140 years

soviets = 20,000,000 deaths in 35 years

ww2 = 50,000,000 total

mao = 40,000,000

pol pot = 2,000,000

as you can see these rough numbers total 112,000,000 people in this century alone.

which boils down to a 1 to 28,000 ratio. hardly comparable, atheism places no value on human life, because of that it is directly responsible for genocide of millions of innocents, no their is truly nothing human in humanism

these numbers were taken from this site -Death Tolls for the Major Wars and Atrocities of the Twentieth Century

Ok, first of all the world’s population has skyrocketed in the last century. Second, atheism was not the battle-cry call, or painted on flags, or main purpose of any of those atrocities. Third and most importantly not all those people in your ridiculous numbers died from a policy of atheism.

Your logic is severely flawed.

The inquisition represents the Absolute stance many religions have on their views. I call that HUBRIS.

 

[quaestio]

Spanish Inquisition? Oh wait, that was the “Church” of Christ…

The Spanish Inquisition was a state rather than church inquisition. Established in 1481 by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, the king appointed the Grand Inquisitor and the other officials, and also signed the decrees; the penalties were inflicted in his name.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Ok, first of all the world’s population has skyrocketed in the last century.

how does that change the fact that these millions of innocents died?

Second, atheism was not the battle-cry call, or painted on flags, or main purpose of any of those atrocities.

no, it was just the common creed of the perpetrators of these atrocities.

Third and most importantly not all those people in your ridiculous numbers died from a policy of atheism.

atheism allowed so little value to be placed on these lives that these atrocities became possible in the name of such unimportant concepts as communism, ethnic cleansing, collectivization, political re-education, etc.

further please google the title of the site i took these numbers from and you will see they are an average of both the high and the low estimates.

but no matter how you cut it up, whether by practical, or applied atheism. atheism kills tens of thousands of people for everyone we killed hundreds of years ago

Your logic is severely flawed.

in what way?, it seems pretty solid to me

The inquisition represents the Absolute stance many religions have on their views. I call that HUBRIS.

what are you saying here? that it is better to murder tens of millions than to claim your religion is correct to the exclusion of all other?s, i am sure the victims of these atrocities would say surely not.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Ok, first of all the world’s population has skyrocketed in the last century. Second, atheism was not the battle-cry call, or painted on flags, or main purpose of any of those atrocities. Third and most importantly not all those people in your ridiculous numbers died from a policy of atheism.

Your logic is severely flawed.

The inquisition represents the Absolute stance many religions have on their views. I call that HUBRIS.

LOL!! That’s your answer?? The world population has skyrocketed?? That’s hilarious!! Your conclusion is funnier.

You didn’t read the message carefully. He didn’t say atheism was the purpose or policy of those atrocities. He said atheism doesn’t value human life. You may be a nice guy, but atheists who run governments are not and it’s their atheism that allows them to murder millions. His logic is flawed???!!

At the time of the Inquisitions, the Church and the state were closely aligned and a threat to the Church was considered a threat to the state. The heretics of the time were threats to the state (primarily Spain at first) and were treated that way.

What you call the Inquisition was a civil matter and the executions were carried out by civil authorities. When it started to get out of hand, the Pope at the time sent Dominican priests to conduct hearings into the accusations to assure the accused were being treated fairly. From those inquiries came the practice of recording everything spoken at a trial, which continues to this day. That said, any attempt to compare the Inquisition with the horrors of the 20th Century is just plain silly.

 

[godfree12]

Alright, so “Ferde Rombola” and “Petey” have justified the Spanish Inquisition. Wonderful. I hope God forgives you for your ignorance. Well, I suppose you can justify whatever you want as he is your God, and the Spanish Inquisition’s according to your logic. Jesus surely did not decree a slaughter of the Romans who killed him. Jesus surely did not decree a slaughter of the “infidels” infesting the “Holy” Iberian peninsula.

Death to the infidels! Death to reason!

The fact that the death of millions is necessary for Atheism as the “one” religion, Catholicism as the “one” religion, and Islam as the “one” religion, proves that the common perspective of God as a supernatural “outside of our realm”, yet material “ruler of our world”, is completely flawed and violent.

The Hindus don’t murder anyone. The Tibetans don’t start mass genocide. They don’t buy up land in the Western fashion, and they don’t decree the murder of thousands in the Islamic, Protestant, “Atheist” and Catholic fashions.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Alright, so “Ferde Rombola” and “Petey” have justified the Spanish Inquisition. Wonderful. I hope God forgives you for your ignorance.

we aren’t trying to justify an inquisition. you tried to compare the death of a few thousand over the course of a hundred and forty years, to the deaths of 112,000,000 innocents, over the course of thirty five years, who only died for flimsy political reasons.

the ignorance does not seem to rest with us.

further, as you should know, if you wish to debate with us in a sensible manner, ignorance is not a sin that needs to be forgiven.

Well, I suppose you can justify whatever you want as he is your God, and the Spanish Inquisition’s according to your logic.

nobody is justifying it, but you are comparing it to much worse deeds as though it were the same thing.

Jesus surely did not decree a slaughter of the Romans who killed him. Jesus surely did not decree a slaughter of the “infidels” infesting the “Holy” Iberian peninsula.

no, indeed he didnt, he would have been ashamed, i believe

Death to the infidels! Death to reason!

ahhhh… here we come to the real problem, you seem to believe that Faith and Reason are at odds, they are not. nor does the Catholic Church say they are.

an admission of Faith is not a denial of Reason. they are quite compatible, Jesuits say that Faith is built on a ladder of Reason.

The fact that the death of millions is necessary for Atheism as the “one” religion,

atheism has actually led to the deaths of 112,000,000 million people just this century.

Catholicism as the “one” religion,

Catholicism is the one true, apostolic faith

Islam as the “one” religion

Islam is not

proves that the common perspective of God as a supernatural “outside of our realm” yet material “ruler of our world”, is completely flawed and violent.

what evidence do you have that it is flawed? and what about that concept makes it inherently violent?

The Hindus don’t murder anyone.

indeed they do, they have wars over religion too, they have general murderers as does any society

The Tibetans don’t start mass genocide.

neither do the andorrans, the swiss, the paraguyans, etc whats the point?jthey dont have the numbers or the geopolitical problems that lead to such atrocities

They don’t buy up land in the Western fashion

whats the problem with that? property rights are important in capitalism.

and they don’t decree the murder of thousands in the Islamic, Protestant, “Atheist” and Catholic fashions.

i assume you are implying you are not holding the atheist position, now that you are aware of their record.

however, how did we or the protestants 'decree the deaths of thousands? Ferde pointed out that the spanish inquisition was a national phenomenon not done by the church proper. as to the matter of islam they are a completely different religion that i feel no need to defend.

so do you have any evidence or other arguments that we may consider?

 

[godfree12]

we aren’t trying to justify an inquisition. you tried to compare the death of a few thousand over the course of a hundred and forty years, to the deaths of 112,000,000 innocents, over the course of thirty five years, who only died for flimsy political reasons.

You are diminishing the significance of the Inquisition. The Pope sanctified the Spanish Inquisition. There is no Pope of atheism. The inquisition was not abolished until 1834, and it began in 1478. That is 352 years.

neither do the andorrans, the swiss, the paraguyans, etc whats the point?jthey dont have the numbers or the geopolitical problem
whats the problem with that? property rights are important in capitalism.

Do you consider the separation of Church and State evolution of government or blasphemy?

 

[Fran65]

I’ll admit to being ignorant of the academic curriculum priests undertake. Is it essentially an undergraduate degree with a major in theology? Would you be kind enough to post an example link? And their texts?

Why? Do you think you may have a vocation?

God works in mysterious ways and where there is strong emotion, there is God.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

You are diminishing the significance of the Inquisition.

and you are trying to compare religions effects to atheisms effects, by giving the inquisition much greater import than it actually had.

it is plain to see that atheism is much less desirable than religion

atheism has killed tens of millions

the inquisition killed a few thousand

the numbers will never be on your side

your ideas have been tried several time in just the last century under the guise of several different nations, yet the out come is always the same.

The Pope sanctified the Spanish Inquisition. There is no Pope of atheism.

how does that make a practical difference? the outcome doesnt change

The inquisition was not abolished until 1834, and it began in 1478. That is 352 years.

how does that help your case?, it hurts it, now instead of killing 4,000 across 140. we killed 4000 across 352 years, though the executions stopped long before the tribunals were finally suppressed.

in effect you just cut the kill rate in half about 11 deaths per year, less than 1 a month. for the entire inquisition.

by contrast the atheist regimes killed 3,200,000 per year in the 35 concurrent years of these atrocities.

there is no comparison, atheism is by far a greater evil than the inquisition ever was.

no matter how you slice it we have found through recent experience that atheism is no solution to the human condition, it is deadly beyond belief

religion is not the problem, lack of it is.

Do you consider the separation of Church and State evolution of government or blasphemy?

i consider the modern interpretation of church and state ridiculous, having no bearing on the actual intent of the framers of the republic.

humanity has tried to evolve a political state without a G-d for several times this century, the end result has always been the same, massive deaths, loss of freedom, authoritarian regimes and massive human suffering

you seem to be diminishing the significance of these atrocities

your ideas are simply wrong, and we have the history to prove it

 

[Dameedna]

I’m going to step in here to try and add a thrid perspective. There is much discussion about personal experience and reality. As a former believer, I can tell you that I have had experiences that at one time convinced me there was a God - the Judeo Christian one. I have since had other experiences that have led me to re-examine my beliefs and the assumptions I made about my experiences. I fully admit that I do not know the “TRUTH”, nor do I believe it is possible to do so with our limited human capacity. Unlike atheists, I do believe in the paranormal/supernatural. Some of my experiences do defy explanation other than one that is paranormal; however, I no longer credit any particular power/god with their causation.

Regarding the Bible, I have done some reading by scholars who left Christianity as a result of the conclusions their work led them to. Once I lost my fear of “God” I was able to really examine the basis of Judeo Christianity and realized that there was simply no more reason to believe this set of myths over any other. I realize my conditioning as a Christian set me up to make the assumptions that I did about my experiences - I was pre-disposed to do so based on the belief system I had been taught and accepted.

Now that I have let all of that go (once you don’t believe, you don’t believe - as has been stated before - I can’t talk myself in Santa either), my horizons have expanded greatly and I think that most religions are very limiting (probably by necessity as control seems to be a huge part of most theologies). I belive in many levels/planes of existence and find the possibilities fascinating. I believe there is much more to existance than our current 3-dimensional “reality”. But I find the idea of a personal god to be not only unbelievable but also unnecessary.

I honestly don’t mean to offend anyone - most of my loved ones are Christians and I would not try to talk them out of their faith. But we can only live our own lives and we have to do what makes sense to us. I don’t know a single non-believer who is just out to annoy folks. I think, when you boil it all down, we are doing the best we can - all of us. And that is what we need to understand about each other.

This was a lovely and honest post. Thank you. I feel very much the same way.

It isn’t all that we’ve been told…but it isn’t all that we think we know either.

It’s a mystery But we can love each other…regardless

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

Alright, so “Ferde Rombola” and “Petey” have justified the Spanish Inquisition. Wonderful. I hope God forgives you for your ignorance.

Thank you, brainfree, for a good laugh to start the day.

You have nothing to say to the facts presented to you so you respond with a personal attack. Ignorance?? I hope you’re not deluded into think you’re intelligent.

Jesus didn’t decree a slaughter of the Romans?? Do you know any history or is your head completely empty? Jesus conquered the Roman Empire with the power of His cross and He also “decreed” the slaughter of the Jews in Palestine who did not know Him at His coming. That’s more history about which you are ignorant. Hindus don’t murder anyone?? In addition to ignorance of history, we can add ignorance of current events. Hundus are killing Christians every day in India. Didn’t hear about that, huh?

You’re new here and off to a bad start. Collect yourself and try again in a few weeks.

 

[godfree12]

Thank you, brainfree.

1

Ignorance?? I hope you’re not deluded into think you’re intelligent.

2

Jesus didn’t decree a slaughter of the Romans?? Do you know any history or is your head completely empty?

3, I was citing the fact that Jesus did not incite revengeful sentiments in his followers. You, however, are too furious from your own unchristian reaction to my mere speculation that you turn to invective insults.

He also “decreed” the slaughter of the Jews in Palestine who did not know Him at His coming.

I’d like a quote, please.

That’s more history about which you are ignorant. Hindus don’t murder anyone?? In addition to ignorance of history, we can add ignorance of current events. Hundus are killing Christians every day in India. Didn’t hear about that, huh?

4

You’re new here and off to a bad start. Collect yourself and try again in a few weeks.

and the fifth insult. Bad according to your church, your bible, and your biases.

 

[Ferde_Rombola]

1, 2, 3, I was citing the fact that Jesus did not incite revengeful sentiments in his followers. You, however, are too furious from your own unchristian reaction to my mere speculation that you turn to invective insults.
I’d like a quote, please.

Find them yourself. They’re in the Gospels.

1. and the fifth insult. Bad according to your church, your bible, and your biases.

So basically your message says: 1. You have nothing to say, except: 2. My insults are better than yours.

 

[utunumsint]

I’m going to step in here to try and add a thrid perspective. There is much discussion about personal experience and reality. As a former believer, I can tell you that I have had experiences that at one time convinced me there was a God - the Judeo Christian one. I have since had other experiences that have led me to re-examine my beliefs and the assumptions I made about my experiences. I fully admit that I do not know the “TRUTH”, nor do I believe it is possible to do so with our limited human capacity. Unlike atheists, I do believe in the paranormal/supernatural. Some of my experiences do defy explanation other than one that is paranormal; however, I no longer credit any particular power/god with their causation.

Regarding the Bible, I have done some reading by scholars who left Christianity as a result of the conclusions their work led them to. Once I lost my fear of “God” I was able to really examine the basis of Judeo Christianity and realized that there was simply no more reason to believe this set of myths over any other. I realize my conditioning as a Christian set me up to make the assumptions that I did about my experiences - I was pre-disposed to do so based on the belief system I had been taught and accepted.

Interesting. I’ve thought about the idea of pre-disposition to receive a certain forumulation of doctrine, etc… You could say that every culture is predisposed to receive a certain doctrinal formation by the very fact that it is the dominant religion in that country. For example, Chinese people would be more likely to embrase Budhism, or Maoism, than say Christianity. This talk of predisposition can go on and on. The cultural climate of our society predisposes us to many many things. That it predisposes us to something does not necessarily make it true or false. It simply means we have a predisposition that leads us in a certain direction.

So the question I have for you is how do you explain those Muslims who convert to Christianity, or those Buddhists who convert? Did they somehow have a predisposition?

Now that I have let all of that go (once you don’t believe, you don’t believe - as has been stated before - I can’t talk myself in Santa either), my horizons have expanded greatly and I think that most religions are very limiting (probably by necessity as control seems to be a huge part of most theologies). I belive in many levels/planes of existence and find the possibilities fascinating. I believe there is much more to existance than our current 3-dimensional “reality”. But I find the idea of a personal god to be not only unbelievable but also unnecessary.

What do you think predisposed you to this conclusion? Are you the only one without this tendancy?

I honestly don’t mean to offend anyone - most of my loved ones are Christians and I would not try to talk them out of their faith. But we can only live our own lives and we have to do what makes sense to us. I don’t know a single non-believer who is just out to annoy folks. I think, when you boil it all down, we are doing the best we can - all of us. And that is what we need to understand about each other.

Agreed.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Fran65]

Hi Swan (I assume that it is your post quoted above),

Several posters wonder why discussion gets heated and people get personal or angry.

I thought that I would make an observation of my own regarding an aside in your post.

Saying “I can’t talk myself into believing in Santa either” can be regarded as an offensive statement to many Christians. Drawing an analogy between God and an ‘obviously’ fictional character who we all know does not exist, and in addition, using a figure from childhood can be seen as provocative in the sense of trying to offend and draw a response. It suggests that belief in God is clearly and obviously absurd and childish.

It is a tactic that I have observed in many who wish to question the faith of others and it is one that draws high levels of emotion. (Along with being called stupid and superstitious of course!)

 

[crowonsnow]

Saying “I can’t talk myself into believing in Santa either” can be regarded as an offensive statement to many Christians. Drawing an analogy between God and an ‘obviously’ fictional character who we all know does not exist, and in addition, using a figure from childhood can be seen as provocative in the sense of trying to offend and draw a response. It suggests that belief in God is clearly and obviously absurd and childish.

But Fran, tens if not hundreds of millions of humans believe sincerely in some version of Santa. Do you think this childhood belief is “absurd?” Why or why not? How does it differ from your own dynamic when it comes to Christian belief? How else do you explain this phenomenon of mass belief?

Swan’s point is to make you aware that you are seeing Santa through your adult Christian lens. Perhaps you cannot appreciate this distinction. If you cannot it only further reinforces Swan’s position.

I think Christians and theists generally do not appreciate the “absurdity” in religious stories as viewed by a larger majority of doubters. Once you strip away all the Christian paint from the picture there isn’t anything left but absurdity, probably the same thing you do with Santa belief.

Christians claim that an invisible alien they call Yahweh that lives in the sky impregnated a Hebrew virgin two thousand years ago. This virgin then gave birth to a sacrificial hybrid offspring. After we killed it, which is what it wanted to happen anyway, it came back to life and flew away into the sky, and in doing so saved us all. And we needed saved because our ancestral parents disobeyed the invisible sky alien when it first made them.

Helloooo??? Reality check!

Further, this invisible sky alien is really three different things that are all the same thing. There’s the sky alien, but then there’s also the hybrid human/alien offspring, and also a tinkerbell-like entity called a holy ghost. They’re separate but they’re the same.

Hellooooo again. Reality check again.

And then there’s this evil sky alien and its followers that somehow manage to mess up the plans of the other three-in-one alien. And when we die we’re going to have to go live with one group of aliens or the other, so we’d better go live with the first one because it will be better. So we’d better talk to it and sing songs to it, worship it and ask it to forgive us because if we don’t we’re going to be living with the other, bad invisible alien.

Helloooooo again. Reality check again.

And I’m sincerely not trying to insult, merely demonstrating how silly this all appears. It would be as if you observed millions of persons in their thirties and older who still wrote letters to Santa. Would you start believing in Santa? Again? Maybe you would. I don’t know. Maybe it then wouldn’t be “absurd” to you anymore, because now you believe it yourself.

I think this can all be explained by the fact that humans are credulous creatures with the ability to imagine and to pretend. But that’s another thread.

 

[utunumsint]

But Fran, tens if not hundreds of millions of humans believe sincerely in some version of Santa. Do you think this childhood belief is “absurd?” Why or why not? How does it differ from your own dynamic when it comes to Christian belief? How else do you explain this phenomenon of mass belief?

Swan’s point is to make you aware that you are seeing Santa through your adult Christian lens. Perhaps you cannot appreciate this distinction. If you cannot it only further reinforces Swan’s position.

I think Christians and theists generally do not appreciate the “absurdity” in religious stories as viewed by a larger majority of doubters. Once you strip away all the Christian paint from the picture there isn’t anything left but absurdity, probably the same thing you do with Santa belief.

Christians claim that an invisible alien they call Yahweh that lives in the sky impregnated a Hebrew virgin two thousand years ago. This virgin then gave birth to a sacrificial hybrid offspring. After we killed it, which is what it wanted to happen anyway, it came back to life and flew away into the sky, and in doing so saved us all. And we needed saved because our ancestral parents disobeyed the invisible sky alien when it first made them.

Helloooo??? Reality check!

Further, this invisible sky alien is really three different things that are all the same thing. There’s the sky alien, but then there’s also the hybrid human/alien offspring, and also a tinkerbell-like entity called a holy ghost. They’re separate but they’re the same.

Hellooooo again. Reality check again.

And then there’s this evil sky alien and its followers that somehow manage to mess up the plans of the other three-in-one alien. And when we die we’re going to have to go live with one group of aliens or the other, so we’d better go live with the first one because it will be better. So we’d better talk to it and sing songs to it, worship it and ask it to forgive us because if we don’t we’re going to be living with the other, bad invisible alien.

Helloooooo again. Reality check again.

And I’m sincerely not trying to insult, merely demonstrating how silly this all appears. It would be as if you observed millions of persons in their thirties and older who still wrote letters to Santa. Would you start believing in Santa? Again? Maybe you would. I don’t know. Maybe it then wouldn’t be “absurd” to you anymore, because now you believe it yourself.

I think this can all be explained by the fact that humans are credulous creatures with the ability to imagine and to pretend. But that’s another thread.

I think you’ve been watching too much Star Gate.

But this raises a good point. If the events described in Star Gate were actually true (e.g. alien worms take over human bodies, providing it with special powers, and install themsevles as gods over human beings and this was the basis for all human mythology), they would seem ridiculous to some people who lived thousands of years after the event. And yet, they might be true. How is it that you can know?

I’m not saying you should believe just because it might be true. But the Christian story should not be dismissed just because you feel it sounds ridiculous.

God bless,
Ut

 

[crowonsnow]

I think you’ve been watching too much Star Gate.

But this raises a good point. If the events described in Star Gate were actually true (e.g. alien worms take over human bodies, providing it with special powers, and install themsevles as gods over human beings and this was the basis for all human mythology), they would seem ridiculous to some people who lived thousands of years after the event. And yet, they might be true. How is it that you can know?

I’m not saying you should believe just because it might be true. But the Christian story should not be dismissed just because you feel it sounds ridiculous.

Yo Ut,

And I’m just saying that by analogy neither should the Santa story, or the Tooth Fairy story or a Gremlin story, or a unicorn story, or a Bigfoot story, or an alien abduction story. When you get right down to it, the Christian story is an alien abduction story. When we die we get abducted and have to go live with aliens. Better listen to the alien abduction story devotees so we have the best chance of living with a good one.

At least the Stargate stories are technologically conceivable. The Christian story isn’t about technology or even magic. It’s supposedly beyond technology and magic, when in fact it’s just all about pretending.

And maybe the pretending has a benefit. I certainly think it does. But Christians and other religious believers don’t say, “Yes, I know it’s absurd and foolish and that I’m probably just pretending. But it helps me be a better person. I need that help. I don’t know why. I just do. It’s fine to not pretend, but I have a need if I’m going to have a decent life. So let me alone to pretend.”

That’s not what you hear.

 

[Fran65]

We know, *for a fact *that Santa does not exist. As adults we have the experience of buying, wrapping, hiding and then delivering the presents while pretending to our children that they are from Santa. The more imaginative amongst us placed footprints outlined in icing sugar on the carpet and reindeer prints in the garden. We ate the mince pie and drank the sherry whilst telling our children that Santa did it. We may have rung sleigh bells outside the children’s bedroom window and encouraged them to write letters knowing that when posted they are picked up by the post office and occasionally answered by someone who wants to keep the childhood dream alive. *No one *other than children (under @7) believes in Santa. Billions believe in God. In addition, there is no reason for Santa to exist, although I am aware that you feel the same way about God that does not make you right!

Now tell me that it is just like Christianity. I’m not aware of anyone deliberately faking or lying about they witnessed and experienced and reported in the Gospels. I’m not aware of anyone lying about their spiritual experiences and the impact that their belief in God has had on their life. I’m not aware of anyone carrying out charity work then bare faced saying I didn’t do it - God did it. What they do say is that often God works through people. I’m not aware of people dressing up like Jesus and appearing in shopping centres all over the world; although I have to say that would be an improvement I’m not aware of the Santa story having an enormous, positive, global impact on many lives for thousands of years. I’m not aware of a belief in Santa giving people the strength to carry on in the face of enormous odds and tremendous suffering, giving people the desire to love others as they love themselves and putting others first.

If believing in God makes life so much easier and is such a childish notion why do many sincere Christians question and doubt themselves? Why do we wrestle with the problem of evil and of suffering? Why do I, as someone with a life threatening heart condition not make it easier for myself and say - hey, there is no god, I can finally do what I like…?

I’ll tell you why. Because I can hear that still small voice. I experience God’s presence when I am at my lowest and sickest and I know that He is with me.

Someone accuse me of being patronising on another thread when I said how sorry I was that they don’t experience that. But I am sorry. It is a tragedy that some experience themselves as ultimately alone in a dark, cold and meaningless universe with nothing to look forward to except annhilation.

 

[Fran65]

Your summation of faith as ‘just pretending’ is breathtaking in its arrogance.

You can pretend all you like. I ain’t pretending or mad.