Are Atheists Air Brushing History?

Originally posted by idle_rocker
reply to post by jimbo999

 

Well you are missing the point of the thread then, I guess. Because what is being put forward is atheists overthrowing Christianity. So I guess it will be okay with you when the government decides to throw all Christians into Nazi-type concentration camps and blast atheistic dogma to us over the loud speakers.

I mean, this is after all, what this thread is about,,,an athiest fanatic who believes all Christians should be killed. So you missed it.

I didn't 'miss' anything - I've read plenty of BW's delusional, paranoid posts before here on ATS Who is this terrible, evil figure that is going to do this to all christians exactly? He must have a serious issue with you lot... Has the Son Of Satan rolled into town and I didn't hear about it?? He must be one hell of a powerful player to be able to pull this one off...

J.

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
But they answer the spiritual question thusly they are a religion.
It's as simple as that.[edit on 22-3-2008 by WraothAscendant]

1+1=God, is religion and unprovable.
1+1=2 => 1+1God, answers the spiritual question and is provable.
Is 1+1=2 so a religion?
There is no solid evidence about God, so I'm atheist. This is not religion.

reply to post by jimbo999


You need to go back and read the entire post. Obviously you've come in somewhere in the middle or toward the end. I'm not going to go back for you and reiterate everything that has been said. Read the first few pages at least, for pete's sake!

Originally posted by idle_rocker
Well, I guess your definition of religion is different than mine. What IS your definition of religion anyway? Since I'm newer here than you, I may have missed it on a thread somewhere.

Well, the word is derived from the latin 'religio'. Which is about reverence of gods, the divine, piety, and religious duties/sacrifice.

Probably a bit restrictive, as it might not take in the non-theistic eastern style religions. So maybe add in mysticism and/or transcendence.

Does that suit? Or do we need to go further to ram in atheism?

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by Gigatronix
I suppose without enough twisting and finagling, you could assert that Atheism is a religion, but the only reason you'd try to do that is to upset Atheists. Personally, you can call it whatever you wnat, a cult, a sect, a faction, whatever. I call it an assessment.

It's an approach that is common with a certain type of ideologue. Thus, evolution is a religion. So is human-induced global warming. And also atheism. All have been proposed to me numerous times.

Amazingly, that means I apparently have three religions. I take it in turns to pray/worship/meditate on a sunday. Tomorrow it's the turn of climate change, and I shall put the recycling out for the bin-men in honour of this, and turn off the central heating.

Good on you Mel!! You obviously lead a busy, and exhilarating existence Be sure to leave some time on the weekends for the voodoo doll and your wickerman now... You don't want to appear discrimanatory now, do you? heheh.

J.
J.

Originally posted by jimbo999

Originally posted by Howie47

Originally posted by Gigatronix
reply to post by Howie47

 

Sorry, none of that proves anything. It's funny how people will just take the words of other people as truth. Anyone can find something that somebody else said that supports what they want supported.

If you are so bent on blaming atheism for things that should obviously be blamed on the weakness of humanity, then you are no better than the atheists that want to blame religion for the weakness of humanity.

Stop being so blinded by your prejudice, and realize it's not religion or the lack therof thats to blame for the ills of the world, it's the greed, ignorance, and fear of men who have power.

If no statistics can be accepted. Then no one should ask for statical
proof.
I made an earlier post. Stating as what you have said.
Atheism is only a tool of the despots. Not that all atheist are despots.
When atheism and Darwinism no longer serve the purpose of justifying,
their behavior. They will return to using religion.


[edit on 22-3-2008 by Howie47]

Ermm..yeah - right. Perhaps it should read 'If no evidence can be accepted...' - which would be a far more accurate statement really.

Religion is NOT the tool of despots??? Puuleeze! Ever hear of the Taliban? No? How about the Catholic Church? No? Hmm... The Church Of England? What about The Jewish religion in your sacred rag The Bible? That book is crammed to overflowing with tales of genocide, mass murder and the pillaging of other peoples who did not share the jewish obsession with burning bushes and stone tablets.

Good try though...

J.

The question at hand is are Atheist air brushing history. No one ever said there aren't despots acting out, in the name of religion.
However, in the last 100 years it has been, by far, atheistic empires that killed the biggest number of people . Est. 250 million political murders. That fact they want to now cover up.
As they now make another bid, to implement another atheistic world order.
If they used, unrestrained murder, in the past. To reach their goals. Are
still doing so today, in some places. Why would we expect them to do any
less; if they gain the power they want?
At a recent scientific gathering; and most are atheist. The speaker suggested that a virus should be unleashed on the world. Killing off 90%
of the population. The applause was uproarious, in support. That is
the mentality of some atheist.
P.S. where did you get the quote. " Religion is NOT the tool of despots"?
Not form any of my post!

[edit on 22-3-2008 by Howie47]

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by idle_rocker
Well, I guess your definition of religion is different than mine. What IS your definition of religion anyway? Since I'm newer here than you, I may have missed it on a thread somewhere.

Well, the word is derived from the latin 'religio'. Which is about reverence of gods, the divine, piety, and religious duties/sacrifice.

Probably a bit restrictive, as it might not take in the non-theistic eastern style religions. So maybe add in mysticism and/or transcendence.

Does that suit? Or do we need to go further to ram in atheism?

Well, we would need to "ram" in atheism if the definition fits. Like you said, there's lots of different kinds of atheists. So, an atheist who believes he, himself is god within himself, is definitely practicing a religion. Just to name one.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


Fox you must be losing your memory. You already have the numbers under you itching little God hating fingers. We have already gone through this charade of yours before. I'll put out a number and then you'll come back with one you think is better. Well I'm not playing your game. You post your numbers. I know they make you hot. Then wipe your famous "hate-jazz" off your shirt.

There is no hard answer, they are all estimates. Why are your figures so correct? Did you help count the bodies while they were doing the executions? It's an absurd ruse on your part. There is no contention that the greatest killers were Stalin, Mao, and Hitler. Oh I know -- shift to Hitler now... People can try to say Hitler was Christian. He wasn't Christian he just tried to justify his racism with a Bible. He was practicing Darwinian eugenics - on Gods chosen people no less.

Originally posted by Howie47
The question at hand is are Atheist air brushing history. No one ever said there aren't despots acting out, in the name of religion.
However, in the last 100 years it has been, by far, atheistic empires that killed the biggest number of people . Est. 250 million political murders. That fact they want to now cover up.

Who's "they"? Atheists? I have yet to see any evidence of "airbrushing" by Atheists. And you said "political murders", that's the key. These were not murders in the name of Atheism, or done through Atheistic ideologies, (or if you think they were show us some evidence); they were the murders of men and regimes who had faith in their own ideologies being superior to that of others. It has nothing to do with Atheism or any other "religion". And where's the airbushing? I still don't see it...

As they now make another bid, to implement another atheistic world order.
If they used, unrestrained murder, in the past. To reach their goals. Are
still doing so today, in some places. Why would we expect them to do any
less; if they gain the power they want?

Who in the world are you talking about???

At a recent scientific gathering; and most are atheist. The speaker suggested that a virus should be unleashed on the world. Killing off 90%
of the population. The applause was uproarious, in support. That is
the mentality of some atheist.

Way to screw the pooch on providing a source for this claim. What kind of ridiculous scientific group was this and how badly did you take those comments out of context?

[edit on 22/3/08 by an3rkist]

Originally posted by idle_rocker
reply to post by jimbo999

 

You need to go back and read the entire post. Obviously you've come in somewhere in the middle or toward the end. I'm not going to go back for you and reiterate everything that has been said. Read the first few pages at least, for pete's sake!

I already did - but I'll be damned if I'm going to waste 2 hours of my life reading all the dribble posted here

I take it you refer to that personification of pure evil - Richard Dawkins, huh?
If so, I somehow doubt you have much to worry about really.

Heck - we have the Bible Basher Weekly's poster boy in the White House itself... and if the Republicans can manage to destroy the Democrats' campaign with their usual barrage of character asassination and inuendo - we'll have another right-wing christian at the helm soon enough - so I think your gonna love the future, as it' will look decidedly rosey for you...



J.

[edit on 22-3-2008 by jimbo999]

reply to post by an3rkist


Now, I'm by no means saying that all atheists are immoral people, in fact I have met highly moral atheists, but I am saying that atheism can lead to a view that there are no moral absolutes. In light of the fact that it is highly likely that individuals like Mao, Stalin, etc. shared such a view, I think the argument can and should be made that atheism had something to do with all the people they killed.

[edit on 22-3-2008 by chromatico]

reply to post by Bigwhammy

Fox you must be losing your memory. You already have the numbers under you itching little God hating fingers. We have already gone through this charade of yours before. I'll put out a number and then you'll come back with one you think is better. Well I'm not playing your game. You post your numbers. I know they make you hot. Then wipe your famous "hate-jazz" off your shirt.

It could be a blouse.

Sorry, I just had to add some humor to that one.

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
People can try to say Hitler was Christian. He wasn't Christian he just tried to justify his racism with a Bible. He was practicing Darwinian eugenics - on Gods chosen people no less.

Um...here you go again claiming Darwinism is equal to Atheism. Very narrow-minded way to look at life. Also, how do you know Hitler wasn't Christian? Are you sure you're not airbrushing history to fit your own paradigm?

reply to post by jimbo999


Well, I get your sarcasm, but ignoring hate-mongers is exactly why history keeps repeating itself. Forgive me for trying my best to prevent that from happening again. And as far as not having anything to worry about with him - he's gaining a lot of followers, so I wouldn't be too quick to brush him off. He might even recruit you if you're lucky! How's that for sarcasm?

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by idle_rocker
Well, I guess your definition of religion is different than mine. What IS your definition of religion anyway? Since I'm newer here than you, I may have missed it on a thread somewhere.

Well, the word is derived from the latin 'religio'. Which is about reverence of gods, the divine, piety, and religious duties/sacrifice.

Probably a bit restrictive, as it might not take in the non-theistic eastern style religions. So maybe add in mysticism and/or transcendence.

Does that suit? Or do we need to go further to ram in atheism?

The original latin word religio. meant to: "to bind again" or "to relink."
Even in older dictionaries. It defined religionn as : "a methodology for making oneself righteous." It didn't necessarily have any thing to do
with belief in God. But most religious people did believe in God, as part of
their quest for being righteous.
Christians don't have to practice religion. God came to us and made us
righteous. We just have to keep ourselves separate from the unbelieving
world.

Originally posted by idle_rocker
Well, we would need to "ram" in atheism if the definition fits. Like you said, there's lots of different kinds of atheists. So, an atheist who believes he, himself is god within himself, is definitely practicing a religion. Just to name one.

Then we'd need to define god. If god is a normal non-omnipotent, non-omniscient, non-omnibenevolent (trust me, I'm not) human who isn't a theist, then yeah. I am now god, and I compel you to worship me. However, then I wouldn't really be an atheist, would I? Because now I do believe in a god - me.

So, if atheist = god. That means that god = atheist. We are made in the image of an atheist, and therefore, we should worship no-one.

These sort of defintional games are pretty stupid really. Words do have some meanings. And one of them is that atheism is a philosophical view on one particular concept. Nothing more, nothing less.

Being an atheist doesn't come anywhere near to practicing a religion. If I was a true humanist, then maybe you'd be in the right ballpark. Even then, questionable, but possible.

Originally posted by an3rkist

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
People can try to say Hitler was Christian. He wasn't Christian he just tried to justify his racism with a Bible. He was practicing Darwinian eugenics - on Gods chosen people no less.

Um...here you go again claiming Darwinism is equal to Atheism. Very narrow-minded way to look at life. Also, how do you know Hitler wasn't Christian? Are you sure you're not airbrushing history to fit your own paradigm?

Hitler was a "self-proclaimed" Christian of the worst sort and used this to contain the masses. While he claimed Christianity, he almost destroyed the whole Jewish people. I doubt seriously he was a true Christian. He was more like one of the hypocritical types we all keep being accused of when we fail to act in what non-Christians try to tell us is perfect Christ-like behavior.

He was evil no doubt about it. One of those sheep in wolves clothing. He only espoused the religion to further his own personal gain. And, that is a lot of what the so-called Christian wars were about. Espousing a good religion to fool the masses into believing what they are doing was good so they could gain a following.

Originally posted by Gigatronix

Originally posted by Spoodily

PS
Atheism is a religion, you buy too many books about false gods not to be.

[edit on 3/22/2008 by Spoodily]

Why would a Atheist buy books about false gods if he doesn't believe in any gods at all?
[edit on 22-3-2008 by Gigatronix]

Exactly. Atheists are searching for a reaffirmation of their beliefs. Thus, they read books that support their belief of the inexistence of "God" that supplement "God" for a preconstructed ideological deity. I've already said deities do not exist and that any being existing within "God" is not "God", only a part of "God". Religion, no matter whether it is the belief in the existence or inexistence of deity, is a fool's game. "God" is not a deity. "God" is existence and existence is infinite.

reply to post by Howie47


"P.S. where did you get the quote. " Religion is NOT the tool of despots"?
Not form any of my post!"

It's difficult to emphasize inflections on a computer screen: I meant "and religion is not the tool of despots?" - as you had inferred that atheisism was the 'tool of despots'

J.

Originally posted by jimbo999
reply to post by Bigwhammy

 

Hmmm...never in ATS history (I'm surmising) have so many words been posted with so liitle attention paid to accuracy, factual relevancy, historical authority, or even inherent logical fluidity. Congratulations BW! You've really outdone yourself this time

I guess all the applause form the mods just was for my ATS history making then. Damn I though they appreciated my work. I suppose it was just for history making ineptitude then. Thanks for clarifying that Jimbo666. I would have never known.

You know, Jimbo666 I think you might qualify for the biggest Christian hater in ATS history. Maybe they will add that to your avatar, you should ask.

I wouldn't want to second guess you here - but I'll give it a shot anyhow...

I'm guessing your idea of heaven on earth would be a Taliban-like theocracy in the US (with a christian slant of course...) where you and your sandal-wearing fellow fanatics can rule the roost and feel really important? Just think - mandatory church every morning for all citizens - and the chance to attend the occasional stoning of sinners on the weekends. Oh joy, oh bliss!!

You're almost right. I don't expect Heaven on earth, while folks like you are around Jimbo666. But it's not up to me or government. Jesus is coming back. Yes Jimbo666, and this time as lion not a lamb.

We talk tough; but this just typing on a screen. I was just like you ten years ago. We probably would have partied together. I don't hate you. I hope you will repent and receive salvation. I hate it for you because I truly believe, if you don't repent from disbelief you won't even be a distant memory.

17 "Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind. 18 But be glad and rejoice forever in what I will create, for I will create Jerusalem to be a delight
and its people a joy. (Isaiah 65)

See we are promised heaven on earth, but it will be a new earth this ones days are numbered.