The Evangelical Atheist

[spidergoat]

Would Christianity have stopped the Nazi plan? No. Many of Hitlers trusted aids, SS, and commanders were Christians. Almost all of his soldiers were. All German soldiers had "God is with us" on their belt buckles.

 

[phlogistician]

Does this sound like orthodox Christianity?

It sounds like the state nationalising assets. The same happened to farms, and factories Sam, and to infer something different is involved when church property got appropriated by the state is again, dishonest.

Anyway, the challenge to you was to name one historical atrocity that can be attributed to atheism. As you have stuffed straw men in the meantime I guess that means you admit defeat.

 

[S.A.M.]

It sounds like the state nationalising assets. The same happened to farms, and factories Sam, and to infer something different is involved when church property got appropriated by the state is again, dishonest.

Anyway, the challenge to you was to name one historical atrocity that can be attributed to atheism. As you have stuffed straw men in the meantime I guess that means you admit defeat.

So can you prove why a theist would not be doing it for the same reasons?

 

[John99]

Spidergoat, your wrong.

Phlogistician,

Stalin grew up in a religious family and joined a seminary as a teenager expecting to enter the priesthood. In his late teens, dropping out of religious studies, he became an atheist and joined the Communist party, as the ruler of which he would go on to slaughter millions.

....oh nooooo.

 

[John99]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beelzebub

 

[phlogistician]

HITLER

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

Also, Adolf Hitler. But anyway, the debate isn't whether Hitler was Christian, it's whether there has ever been an atrocity committed in the name of atheism, and so far, Sam has failed miserably to demonstrate there has been.

 

[phlogistician]

Phlogistician,



....oh nooooo.

He was educated by Catholics, and yes, later became an atheist, but you think his mindset changed completely at that point too? Or did he go on to emulate the actions of those that edcuated him?

Whether he was an atheist is immaterial, the point you fail to grasp is that the atrocities he committed were in the name of Communism, not atheism.

Stalin, Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and Augusto Pinochet all had moustaches for instance, but none committed their atrocities in the name of 'The Handlebar Club'!

 

[John99]

Without a belief there is\was no limits to the cruelty and atrocities perpetrated by the examples given. I tend to agree with that but of course in no way am i saying that Atheism alone had anything to do with these historical events.

She is right about them being anti-religion, except Hitler dabbled in all sorts of odd beliefs. In all these vicious dictators their paranoia included a distrust for organized religion, to the point of it being an outright enemy of their goals and ambitions. But like i said, criminal insanity is not really dependent on religious beliefs.

 

[phlogistician]

So can you prove why a theist would not be doing it for the same reasons?

Again you are being dishonest Sam, that isn't the challenge. It's up to you to show that an atrocity has ever been committed in the name of atheism. The communist party appropriated assets, and the motivation was the same for all of the assets, there was no particular malice shown for the church.

But if you wanted an example of a theist performing similar actions, I need only point you at Henry VIII, who took church assets, and smashed monasteries. Again, the same motivations, the appropriation of assets and the dismantling of a competing power base.

So theist/atheist makes no difference, it's politics.

Please stop being dishonest and meet the challenge set before you.

 

[spidergoat]

Which came first, the desire to perform any acts deemed necessary to purify the nation, or abandonment of Christian values?

Considering that belief in Christianity is a matter of faith, not logic or reason, it's hardly an effective deterrent to immoral acts.

 

[iceaura]

Stalin grew up in a religious family and joined a seminary as a teenager expecting to enter the priesthood. In his late teens, dropping out of religious studies, he became an atheist and joined the Communist party, as the ruler of which he would go on to slaughter millions.

Aside from the obvious guesswork in the "he became an atheist" assumption, we recall this:

Give me the child for seven years, and I will give you the man

usually attributed to Jesuit scholastic maxim.

In any case, the use of theism's grooming of a populace by tyrants and oppressors is well established - if it is one among various tools available to tyranny, still that is a valid criticism to be laid against it. And the evangelical atheist who does that is not wrong.

 

[S.A.M.]

Tell me Sam, what have theists done in recent times to "make the world safer and better for others"? At present the world has seen a theist attack another country and kill over 3 thousand innocent civilians going about their daily lives, and in retaliation, a theist in power has invaded two countries and killed thousands in the process, stating God told him it was the right thing to do. Hmmm, are they making the world safer?

So let me get this straight, if a theist attacks another country, its all because hes a theist, but if an atheist kills 20 million people, his atheism is incidental?

Again you are being dishonest Sam, that isn't the challenge. It's up to you to show that an atrocity has ever been committed in the name of atheism. The communist party appropriated assets, and the motivation was the same for all of the assets, there was no particular malice shown for the church.

But if you wanted an example of a theist performing similar actions, I need only point you at Henry VIII, who took church assets, and smashed monasteries. Again, the same motivations, the appropriation of assets and the dismantling of a competing power base.

So theist/atheist makes no difference, it's politics.

Please stop being dishonest and meet the challenge set before you.

So why did they need to re-educate the people away from "superstitious notions" to appropriate assets?

SAM:

You seem unable to distinguish between politics and religion. Maybe it is a Muslim thing....

Is Dawkins a Muslim too?

Also, I note that you have not replied to the other thread recent on atheism, following several people showing up the ridiculousness of your arguments. I sense some intellectual dishonesty in that instead of facing inconvenient facts you prefer to just ignore them and start a new thread on the same topic

Aside from the obvious guesswork in the "he became an atheist" assumption, we recall this: usually attributed to Jesuit scholastic maxim.

In any case, the use of theism's grooming of a populace by tyrants and oppressors is well established - if it is one among various tools available to tyranny, still that is a valid criticism to be laid against it. And the evangelical atheist who does that is not wrong.

So is atheism's. To even more horrific levels. All in the quest for the good society of course.

Nah just lost track. Which posts do you want answered?

 

[(Q)]

So let me get this straight, if a theist attacks another country, its all because hes a theist, but if an atheist kills 20 million people, his atheism is incidental?

So why did they need to re-educate the people away from "superstitious notions" to appropriate assets?

Is Dawkins a Muslim too?

So is atheism's. To even more horrific levels. All in the quest for the good society of course.

Nah just lost track. Which posts do you want answered?

These are supposed to be your responses? Pathetic, sam. uke:

 

[S.A.M.]

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

Also, Adolf Hitler. But anyway, the debate isn't whether Hitler was Christian, it's whether there has ever been an atrocity committed in the name of atheism, and so far, Sam has failed miserably to demonstrate there has been.

Who is more likely to lie about his beliefs in a majority Christian country? A theist or an atheist?

 

[S.A.M.]

These are supposed to be your responses? Pathetic, sam. uke:

Still waiting to hear your secular humanistic response to the unlawful detention of tens of thousands and deaths of some by torture.

 

[(Q)]

Still waiting to hear your secular humanistic response to the unlawful detention of tens of thousands and deaths of some by torture.

So, as to take the heat off this pathetic thread?

Sorry sam, you buried yourself with this one. Sams credibility = 0.

 

[S.A.M.]

So, as to take the heat off this pathetic thread?

Sorry sam, you buried yourself with this one. Sams credibility = 0.

So no answer huh? I guess Gitmo will not receive any Mo bears from anyone.

 

[(Q)]

Hey sam, when are you actually going to get around to answering everyones posts here? You did create this silly thread, why can't you follow up? Of course, your pathetic OP was SO easily crushed by many here.

Can we assume this is your response? ---> :runaway:

 

[S.A.M.]

Well its clear to me that "secular" atheism is not equal to secular humanism. And those who say it is are only fooling themselves. This was the answer to your claim that atheists are somehow secular humanists.

The massive deaths under communist regimes may have been politically motivated but the transgessors were atheists, so becoming an atheist does not translate to peace and love.

The fact that you were willing to send off 20? bears to support an anti-religion stance but have ignored the incarceration and torture of tens of thousands of possible theists shows your secular "humanism" for the shallow claim it is. You could not even bring yourself to express an opinion about it, for God's sake.

Clearly evangelism by atheists should not be mistaken for a path to the "Free World"

 

[(Q)]

The massive deaths under communist regimes may have been politically motivated but the transgessors were atheists, so becoming an atheist does not translate to peace and love.

A patently fallacious argument. Nixed. Next.

The fact that you were willing to send off 20? bears to support an anti-religion stance but have ignored the incarceration and torture of tens of thousands of possible theists shows your secular "humanism" for the shallow claim it is. You could not even bring yourself to express an opinion about it, for God's sake.

An opinion to a patently fallacious argument? Ok. Here ya go ---> :wallbang:

Clearly evangelism by atheists should not be mistaken for a path to the "Free World"

Clearly. Let's instead follow the path of the faith based evangelist, to rewards in heaven after death.