Pope Says Christianity Trumps Secularism in Building Good Societies

[Armyvet007]

Athiestgirl-

“Well, a glance at the Holy Roman Empire and a quick look to the current East and Middle East tells us exactly why that idea should never be supported.”

The HRE wasn’t a theocracy. In fact, it was one of the major opponents (along with France) to one of the few theocracies during European history (namely the Papal States). At best, you could contend that theocracies, in the form of Prince-Bishop states, existed within the HRE.

 

[irishpatrick]

Not so it would seem:

michaelshermer.com/2006/12/bowling-for-god/#more-77

Sarah x

Not sure what you are trying to say. There is no higher morality than God.

 

[irishpatrick]

Buffolo’s point, as I read it, when he/she used the words ‘build into [me]’ was I have a conscience because of the judeo-christian influences that are ‘built into’’ me! I may be mistaken. I dont deny the influence of the christian religions on the geography, politics, sociology, etc of the modern world. It’s quite obvious when you look around you.

My point was he/she is wrong in claiming that the judeo-christian influences have anything to do with my heritage or any kind of ‘‘spiritual’’ formation I may have had, or anyone in my history may have had Very wrong indeed

Whether you feel comfortable admitting it, or not, Judeo-Christian morals and ethics have had a profound impact on the world, and you live in the world–so like it or not, you are part of that. Further, there would be no historical Europe, or the USA, had Christianity never come into exsitence through Jesus Christ. There would still be peoples and nations, but they would have been utterly different than what we know, and chances are incredibly much more barbaric. Chances are there would no INTERNET.

Atheists (and all people) should, imo, give credit, where credit is due, even if they do not believe.

 

[atheistgirl]

Further, there would be no historical Europe, or the USA, had Christianity never come into exsitence through Jesus Christ.

My ancestors would have been particularly grateful to never have heard of Christianity. Many were killed due to the diseases brought by these ‘christians’; or had their children forcibly taken from them, and proud strong communities were divided, destroyed and subdugated.

I’m not in the least bit uncomfortable acknowledging the impact of christianity on the world.

I just dont subscribe to the idea it was a wholly good experience for everyone.

And I’m pretty sure we’d still have a Tim Berners-Lee, and thus the internet

Berners-Lee had a religious upbringing, but left the Church of England as a teenager, just after being confirmed and “told how essential it was to believe in all kinds of unbelievable things”.

Sarah x

 

[Tenofovir]

My ancestors would have been particularly grateful to never have heard of Christianity. Many were killed due to the diseases brought by these ‘christians’; or had their children forcibly taken from them, and proud strong communities were divided, destroyed and subdugated.

Were your ancestors abused in order to make them Christian? Were Christian ideals responsible for your ancestors problems, or perhaps secular ones?

I’m not in the least bit uncomfortable acknowledging the impact of christianity on the world.

I disagree strongly. I would say that Christianity had an overwhelming positive effect.

I just dont subscribe to the idea it was a wholly good experience for everyone.

You’d need to distill this. Were people abused to make the Christian or did Christians abuse your people as part of a general secular program of colonisation?

I have a question. Why don’t you capitalise Catholic and Christian? Maybe you hate Catholicism and Christianity so much, but at least for me, even things (and people) I disagree with strongly (and hate-although I try not too), like secular atheist USSR, Adolf Hitler and Lavrenti Beria, I capitalise. It’s convention.

 

[LiveCatholic]

My ancestors would have been particularly grateful to never have heard of Christianity. Many were killed due to the diseases brought by these ‘christians’; or had their children forcibly taken from them, and proud strong communities were divided, destroyed and subdugated.

**So your argument amounts to the claim that ‘Christians are diseased’ and therefore objectionable?

Let’s get real, Sarah, they weren’t that strong or prideful, because their way of life was rejected in favor of Christianity and [Judeo-Christian] Western manners. This is just a load-of-baloney strawman anti-Christians roll out to get people riled up. Christianity has always been on the side of Civilization’s upward-march, whether you like it or not. **

I’m not in the least bit uncomfortable acknowledging the impact of christianity on the world.

… so long as you can distort it, in unrealistic ways, as above?

I just dont subscribe to the idea it was a wholly good experience for everyone.

… please tell us, Sarah: which group wasn’t benefited by the advent of Christianity? Name. One.

And I’m pretty sure we’d still have a Tim Berners-Lee, and thus the internet

Yeah right, good argument, Sarah… NOT! There’s a quote–especially relevant for the purposes of science and technology–about dwarves standing on the shoulders of giants. Look into it.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

Why don’t you capitalise Catholic and Christian? Maybe you hate Catholicism and Christianity so much, but at least for me, even things (and people) I disagree with strongly (and hate-although I try not too), like secular atheist USSR, Adolf Hitler and Lavrenti Beria, I capitalise. It’s convention.

I don’t hate Catholicism or Christianity! Purlease!

And I’m pretty sure if you go through my posts, you’ll see I DO capitalize these words, including Pope, etc, as they are proper nouns and should be capitalized!!! Where I haven’t it’s nothing more than a typo. I type fast, and very often don’t reread what I’ve written due to time constraints, or I’m posting in between doing other things on the computer.

If you’re desperately looking for a conspiracy theory I’m sure you could relook at those lunar landings!

Sarah x

 

[LiveCatholic]

I don’t hate Catholicism or Christianity! Purlease!

If you’re desperately looking for a conspiracy theory I’m sure you could relook at those lunar landings!

Sarah x

Conspiracy theories according to Sarah.*

Conspiracy theory: Atheist girl who can be arsed to capitalize Holy Roman Empire and Middle East, but routinely un-capitalizes ‘Catholic,’ ‘Christian,’ and religious terms to demonstrate her internet contempt of them.

Counter argument: Flicking her pinky over to the ‘Shift’ key is simply too onerous for atheist girl, when religious terms are concerned.

---

Not a conspiracy theory: Cultures touched by (Catholic) Christianity were raped, demoralized, and destroyed… DESPITE the fact that none of these cultures would be considered tolerable in the modern world AND WOULD LIKELY BE ANNIHILATED WITH VENGEANCE, FOR BEING SO INHUMANE.

Counter argument: No one who isn’t a rabid anti-Christian actually takes this seriously. Pardon my argument by authority/popular consensus.

 

[Armyvet007]

Athiestgirl-

“My ancestors would have been particularly grateful to never have heard of Christianity. Many were killed due to the diseases brought by these ‘christians’; or had their children forcibly taken from them, and proud strong communities were divided, destroyed and subdugated”

You meant Europeans/the West, not Christians (Christianity). Blaming Christianity for those acts is like blaming Buddhism/Shintoism for what the Japanese did to the Chinese during WW2. Also, your implied argument that the spread of disease was intentional is for the most part wrong (there were only limited instances of when the spread was intentional, it was mostly localized and the examples that come to mind were done by non-religously motivated individuals).

 

[irishpatrick]

My ancestors would have been particularly grateful to never have heard of Christianity. Many were killed due to the diseases brought by these ‘christians’; or had their children forcibly taken from them, and proud strong communities were divided, destroyed and subdugated.

I’m not in the least bit uncomfortable acknowledging the impact of christianity on the world.

I just dont subscribe to the idea it was a wholly good experience for everyone.

And I’m pretty sure we’d still have a Tim Berners-Lee, and thus the internet

Sarah x

The entire western world–the greatest and most moral culture in all history–was built on the foundation of Christianity. Take away the foundation, and you take awat all of that culture. Certainly, something would have filled the gap, and it likely would have been a far more barbaric culture that would never have thought personal freedoms meant anything. Take those freedoms away and creative work like computers and the internet would likely never have happened.

Does that mean it was something everyone would have embraced? No, of course not.

(Note: I said it has been the most moral, not that it was free of immoral acts)

 

[atheistgirl]

You meant Europeans/the West, not Christians (Christianity). Blaming Christianity for those acts is like blaming Buddhism/Shintoism for what the Japanese did to the Chinese during WW2. Also, your implied argument that the spread of disease was intentional is for the most part wrong (there were only limited instances of when the spread was intentional, it was mostly localized and the examples that come to mind were done by non-religously motivated individuals).

Hi Armyvet

Youre reading more into what I said than what I meant. I do not imply the spread of disease was intentional. Large numbers of people were wiped out due to having no natural immunity. It would be like me meeting you and you unintentionally give me some weird horrible disease I have no immunity against. You would not have done it intentionally, but I would be perfectly justified in wishing I had never met you!!!

You seem to know your history so you know missionaries were hot on the heels of government policy. The argument that no real Christian would have ever done anything wrong, such as forcibily removing children from families, supporting forced assimilation, supporting forced removal from land, deceiving people to sign land over, forced labor, not to mention the raft of physical and sexual abuses that came to light in recent years, is nothing more than the tired old No True Scotsman argument.

So I stand by my initial comment - there are people who’s experience of ‘‘Christianity’’ is something they would rather never have had.

That is NOT to say Christianity is not and has not been a force for good. But it hasnt been so everywhere.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

(Note: I said it has been the most moral, not that it was free of immoral acts)

Dang … edited before I jumped all over it I’m kidding with you

Listen, I never said Christianity wasnt a force for good, or that it didnt have a major impact on western civilization. I do not doubt or dispute this.

I said not everyone experienced it that way. And I stand by that comment. We will just have to agree to disagree. Because nothing you can say about however it SHOULD have been, will erase or change the experience of my ancestors.

Sarah x

 

[atheistgirl]

It’s convention.

Oh look … I’ve made two posts and capitalized Christian in both

Now that you have drawn this to my attention - although I have and do capitalize these words - I will pay particular attention to when I type them and ensure, to the best of my ability, they are always capitalized.

However, this will slow my typing down a nano-second or two, and as a result I will have to type faster after those words appear in text, resiltung in posablie mure spollink ellers thain usuil

Sarah x

 

[irishpatrick]

Hi Armyvet

Youre reading more into what I said than what I meant. I do not imply the spread of disease was intentional. Large numbers of people were wiped out due to having no natural immunity. It would be like me meeting you and you unintentionally give me some weird horrible disease I have no immunity against. You would not have done it intentionally, but I would be perfectly justified in wishing I had never met you!!!

You seem to know your history so you know missionaries were hot on the heels of government policy. The argument that no real Christian would have ever done anything wrong, such as forcibily removing children from families, supporting forced assimilation, supporting forced removal from land, deceiving people to sign land over, forced labor, not to mention the raft of physical and sexual abuses that came to light in recent years, is nothing more than the tired old No True Scotsman argument.

So I stand by my initial comment - there are people who’s experience of ‘‘Christianity’’ is something they would rather never have had.

That is NOT to say Christianity is not and has not been a force for good. But it hasnt been so everywhere.

Sarah x

Of course there are some who have no experienced the best face of Christianity. Since the faith is populated by fallen and imperfect people, that is going to happen (sadly). However, the vast majority of those living in the west would not want their culture yanked from under them, and that culture is built of a foundation of Christianity.

You must understand that not all professing Christians actually live as Christians–and those people often give the faith a bad name.

Universities and colleges, hospitals and modern medicine, charities, most sciences, most art, most architecture found in the west, etc…all of that was generated by Christians living in Christian countries and cultures…all that advancement, including liberty and civil rights and laws that people try to make just for the average person—all of it was based on a culture founded on Christianity.

Christianity is the most liberating and enlightening faith that has ever come upon earth, and we see the incredibly wonderful fruit of it all across the world, and especially in the west (and yes, we also know of the scars left by those who have perverted Christianity for their own gain).

 

[LiveCatholic]

Hi Armyvet

Youre reading more into what I said than what I meant.

Given that we can only understand what you mean by what you say, this is not surprising…

I do not imply the spread of disease was intentional. … You would not have done it intentionally, but I would be perfectly justified in wishing I had never met you!!!

1. So wait, what does this have to do with Christianity?
2. But certainly their descendents would be thankful for their immunity…
3. This would only affect the initial generation, but unfortunately for your argument–
4. Its still largely irrelevant to our current topic (c.f. 1).

You seem to know your history so you know missionaries were hot on the heels of government policy. The argument that no real Christian would have ever done anything wrong, such as forcibily removing children from families, supporting forced assimilation, supporting forced removal from land, deceiving people to sign land over, forced labor, not to mention the raft of physical and sexual abuses that came to light in recent years, is nothing more than the tired old No True Scotsman argument.

** (A) The ‘No True Scotsman’ argument is one of the most frustratingly stupid instruments in the orchestra of atheist polemics.

I probably don’t need to remind you that the actual argument is based on the Scottish national identity (i.e., the Scotsman) who doesn’t do something (i.e., eat haggis) which is part of a broad cluster of practices considered constituent in Scottishness.

But this doesn’t work with systematic ideologies, where there is a well-defined essence of fundamental beliefs/practices… if the ‘NTS’ argument is misapplied, then we can’t say anything meaningful about anyone or anything. For instance, are you, AtheistSarah, a Christian, despite not (I) believing in Jesus Christ, (II) endorsing/practicing Christian morals, &c.? So, simply because some barbarian painted a cross on his tunic and started hacking people apart doesn’t make him a Christian…

(B) Your argument relies on an insidious oscillation between pragmatic heavy-handedness and sensitivity.

That is, you’re sensitive** when the object is this totally primitive, warlike, unschooled, and hyper-superstitious civilization.

Then you’re heavy-handed with an emerging culture (Western Christianity), and critical when its unsupervised, against-all-odds missionaries and explorers govern the native culture in a way that only SLIGHTLY approaches what the native culture was already doing to its own members.

Things only got better after that, so I don’t see why you’re making such bones about it. The period when two different cultures interface or ‘clash’ is not normative for the rest of its history, so this argument falls apart pretty quick IMHO. Not to mention the fact that its totally inconsistent, and completely opportunistic.

So I stand by my initial comment - there are people who’s experience of ‘‘Christianity’’ is something they would rather never have had.

That’s awfully stupid of you, in light of my arguments. But you go girl!

 

[LiveCatholic]

Hi Armyvet

That is NOT to say Christianity is not and has not been a force for good. But it hasnt been so everywhere.

Why don’t you go to Mexico, the Philippines, or New Guinea and tell the Christian church there that they should return to their pre-Christian religious practices? I’m sure that this would be an extremely enlightening experience for you…

 

[Armyvet007]

Athiestgirl-

LiveCatholic did a better job of responding to your post then I could. So basically, what LiveCatholic said. That being said, I’d like to address your previous comment concerning the Middle East (your comment concerning the HRE having previously being addressed). The current state of affairs of the region isn’t rooted in religion, it’s rooted in the rise of nationalism, the rise of a secular/political Arab identity (of which religion is only one part), the after effects of the Cold War (the region was a hotbed of activity between the East and the West), and what I would term as meddling by European powers from at least post-WW1 on. Most of the states in the region are based on a non-theocratic system of government.

There are actually only around 4 states in the region one could classify as theocratic [SA, Iran, Yeman, and Oman]. Some of the worse offenders [in terms of human rights, etc] were/are the ones that fully embraced the “progress” of secularism so rapant in the 50s-70s [Egypt, Libya, Syria, Iraq (Saddam held Stalin as a role model)]. To simply point to the Middle East and say “see religion caused it all” is to ignore the history and historical political and national development of the region. Lastly, if theocracies are such a horrible political construct, I would assume you would support China [not really known for it’s human rights, fair treatment, etc] over the exiled government of Tibet (yes, a theocracy).

 

[atheistgirl]

Athiestgirl-

LiveCatholic did a better job of responding to your post then I could.

I have no idea. I dont get to see their posts, and with respect, please dont quote the posts either as I have no interest in what they say or conducting a conversation with them. I find it best to ignore those who’s only purpose is to rile and disparage people from some perceived sense of smug superiority rather than wanting to engage fruitfully with someone who has genuine and honest questions and doubtless misunderstandings. No, these people are simply best ignored.

Lastly, if theocracies are such a horrible political construct, I would assume you would support China [not really known for it’s human rights, fair treatment, etc] over the exiled government of Tibet (yes, a theocracy).

I’m actively involved with Amnesty International and have been for many years. I’m well aware of the human rights abuses that go on everywhere, and I deplore them in equal measure, be they in China or Tibet. The abuses are relatively well known with regards to China, less well known are things such as the Losar Festival, where monks routinely flogged people to death!

I support both China and Tibet in any measures they take to enhance human rights for all and deplore and condemn any human rights abuses where-ever they take place.

Sarah x

 

[LiveCatholic]

I have no idea. I dont get to see their posts, and with respect, please dont quote the posts either as I have no interest in what they say or conducting a conversation with them. I find it best to ignore those who’s only purpose is to rile and disparage people from some perceived sense of smug superiority rather than wanting to engage fruitfully with someone who has genuine and honest questions and doubtless misunderstandings. No, these people are simply best ignored.

Oh, the irony.

 

[Tigg]

buffalo;8717679:

No matter what you believe you were not born in a vacuum. The Judeo- Christian influence is already built in to you.

Lol … no it’s not You might like to think so, but you would be very much mistaken lol.

What I do believe is “built” into you is what the creature experiences as a result of being created. Man reaches for a source of truth which lies beyond himself – he can’t help it! We call this transcendence, that which is beyond anything material. Man is perfected by briefly “touching” or reaching for this transcendency and thus finds meaning to his life. You may deny God’s existence, but if you do, you will reach for a human desire as your highest value.