What good had Christianity done to the world since 2000 years ago?

[Magical Realist]

Wrong. Hitler was a strong atheist and commited atrocities in the name of science and eugenics. So in pretty much every way, atheists have pretty much already destroyed Christianity.

I say this because there only are very few true Christians left in the world today.

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people."

-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

 

[spidergoat]

Wrong. Hitler was a strong atheist and commited atrocities in the name of science and eugenics. So in pretty much every way, atheists have pretty much already destroyed Christianity.

I say this because there only are very few true Christians left in the world today.

He may have had religious feelings, maybe not, it doesn't matter. Plenty of Nazis were also high ranking members of the Protestant church.

The science you refer to was for the most part not real science. The eugenics and race studies they did were laughed at by scientists of the day for being pseudoscience garbage.

 

[Magical Realist]

"Why is religion such a potent source of violence? There is no other sphere of discourse in which human beings so fully articulate their differences from one another, or cast these differences in terms of everlasting rewards and punishments. Religion is the one endeavor in which us–them thinking achieves a transcendent significance. If you really believe that calling God by the right name can spell the difference between eternal happiness and eternal suffering, then it becomes quite reasonable to treat heretics and unbelievers rather badly. The stakes of our religious differences are immeasurably higher than those born of mere tribalism, racism, or politics.”
― Sam Harris

 

[Balerion]

"Why is religion such a potent source of violence? There is no other sphere of discourse in which human beings so fully articulate their differences from one another, or cast these differences in terms of everlasting rewards and punishments. Religion is the one endeavor in which us–them thinking achieves a transcendent significance. If you really believe that calling God by the right name can spell the difference between eternal happiness and eternal suffering, then it becomes quite reasonable to treat heretics and unbelievers rather badly. The stakes of our religious differences are immeasurably higher than those born of mere tribalism, racism, or politics.”
― Sam Harris

This is exactly why apologists for religion have it all wrong. While it may be true that other ideologies can bring about violence and oppression, religion provides the greatest motive for doing so. There is no more at stake in any worldview than there is in that which includes an afterlife. The roadmap is absolute; well worth killing for, and dying over.

 

[lightgigantic]

This is exactly why apologists for religion have it all wrong. While it may be true that other ideologies can bring about violence and oppression, religion provides the greatest motive for doing so. There is no more at stake in any worldview than there is in that which includes an afterlife. The roadmap is absolute; well worth killing for, and dying over.

Yeah this explains why we are currently dealing with a handful of angry militant muslims instead of one billion ... :scratchin:

 

[lightgigantic]

"Why is religion such a potent source of violence? There is no other sphere of discourse in which human beings so fully articulate their differences from one another, or cast these differences in terms of everlasting rewards and punishments. Religion is the one endeavor in which us–them thinking achieves a transcendent significance. If you really believe that calling God by the right name can spell the difference between eternal happiness and eternal suffering, then it becomes quite reasonable to treat heretics and unbelievers rather badly. The stakes of our religious differences are immeasurably higher than those born of mere tribalism, racism, or politics.”
― Sam Harris

Yet for some reason police detectives and legal officials who investigate and prosecute issues of murder and violence see a totally different schemata at work.
IOW this is simply a quote from another cerebral atheist full of hot air based on cherrypicking incidents from history.
It has no relevance to the real world.
:shrug:

IOW he has just as much unfounded ideological persecution as those he is trying to incriminate

 

[qsa]

Yet for some reason police detectives and legal officials who investigate and prosecute issues of murder and violence see a totally different schemata at work.
IOW this is simply a quote from another cerebral atheist full of hot air based on cherrypicking incidents from history.
It has no relevance to the real world.
:shrug:

I come from a Muslim society and so all their shades are present, but we also have all other shades present, like liberals and what not. But I think the real problem is human greed, selfishness and ignorance (they all feed on each other) colored by all kinds of ideologies and those ideologies can change in a snap when situation arises. If it is not religion then it’s ethnic or something. Notice even brothers have conflict, over what, you guessed it money; I do not know many of them who are friends.

If you look at most of the wars in the past between countries, you would see they had nothing to do with religion; it was all about geopolitics of the strong to dominate (territorial/for all kind of resources), that is all that there is to it. Very few like Crusaders where highly religiously painted but it was nothing but geopolitics of the time. But, there is also the fractal effect, where individual groups try to dominate within the country and so on. Coloring the conflict is no problem for humans ,they are smart.

I have lived in and visited many countries, I have never heard of their people saying, oh lets go get that country, but governments do. Why, because they represent the elite and beneficiaries of the societies, the common people they hope for the best (you have heard of the silent majority), they have little choice. They have to go along because the consequences might be grave. But also if they sense that some benefits come their way, why not.
I am not that much of a religious person. But I think that is how fundamentally humans behave (like above), but of course there are all kinds of shades and multi-causes to the issue. When will the situation change? I don’t see any prospect.

 

[spidergoat]

...If it is not religion then it’s ethnic or something. Notice even brothers have conflict, over what, you guessed it money; I do not know many of them who are friends. ....

If it's not religion, that's at least one less reason for conflict. And I think you are overlooking the damage caused by religion, such as the tragedies of unwed mothers, who's children were often stolen from them. Or gay people who were seen as criminals. Or the way conformity of thought was enforced by law. I could go on...

 

[lightgigantic]

If it's not religion, that's at least one less reason for conflict. And I think you are overlooking the damage caused by religion, such as the tragedies of unwed mothers, who's children were often stolen from them. Or gay people who were seen as criminals. Or the way conformity of thought was enforced by law. I could go on...

If the inherent issues are within human nature as opposed to the cultural dressing humans appear in (eg - rich people, theists, gay, scandanavian, blue collar worker or whatever) banning or reducing it will have zero effect.
(aside from appeasing a certain class of person who wants to promote a certain type of bigotry)

 

[elte]

...

Governments use religion as a motivation to get it's citizens to fight wars. There is even a famous quote by a Roman emperor admitting the usefulness of religion as a tool to manipulate citizens.

 

[spidergoat]

If the inherent issues are within human nature as opposed to the cultural dressing humans appear in (eg - rich people, theists, gay, scandanavian, blue collar worker or whatever) banning or reducing it will have zero effect.
(aside from appeasing a certain class of person who wants to promote a certain type of bigotry)

But it's obviously not human nature, look how quickly our attitudes have changed about gays. No one paying attention to this issue in the 1970's would have expected that.

 

[lightgigantic]

But it's obviously not human nature, look how quickly our attitudes have changed about gays. No one paying attention to this issue in the 1970's would have expected that.

yet you would be hard pressed to talk about it reducing the overall nature of conflict ... so obviously it is about human nature (or at least the mechanics of society at a greater level than the mere cultural dressing of its parts)

 

[lightgigantic]

Governments use religion as a motivation to get it's citizens to fight wars. There is even a famous quote by a Roman emperor admitting the usefulness of religion as a tool to manipulate citizens.

Its the nature of government to call on what ever dominant social tropes at their disposal to rally the banners for motivation for war.

If a society is particularly religious, it wouldn't make sense not to expect a great deal of rhetoric to be expended in that direction.

IOW its the nature of war to highlight issues of national identity. As communism illustrates, if there is an absence of religion in the national identity, the government has plenty of other tools at its disposal.

 

[elte]

Its the nature of government to call on what ever dominant social tropes at their disposal to rally the banners for motivation for war.

If a society is particularly religious, it wouldn't make sense not to expect a great deal of rhetoric to be expended in that direction.

IOW its the nature of war to highlight issues of national identity. As communism illustrates, if there is an absence of religion in the national identity, the government has plenty of other tools at its disposal.

Religion is a most effective or maybe the most effective one because the belief in the afterlife plays a big part in so many warriors' "bravery" to risk their only, priceless lives.

 

[lightgigantic]

Religion is a most effective or maybe the most effective one because the belief in the afterlife plays a big part in so many warriors' "bravery" to risk their only, priceless lives.

Kind of an overly simplistic view of things.

You might be surprised to know that effective military training and performance has more to do with discipline and unit cohesion (or a sense of "belonging" to the group). Doesn't matter whether we are talking about the marines or terrorist cell groups.

 

[elte]

Kind of an overly simplistic view of things.

You might be surprised to know that effective military training and performance has more to do with discipline and unit cohesion (or a sense of "belonging" to the group). Doesn't matter whether we are talking about the marines or terrorist cell groups.

What is it with these jabs at the person when replying. It doesn't do anything to make the case with intelligent readers and when I see it, it almost automatically signals that the responder knows he/she was really done earlier.

Marines and terrorists are known for being exceptionally religious. I noticed the link between warriors and religion way before this thread was started and I've been wanting to mention it somewhere.

 

[Magical Realist]

If it's not religion, that's at least one less reason for conflict. And I think you are overlooking the damage caused by religion, such as the tragedies of unwed mothers, who's children were often stolen from them. Or gay people who were seen as criminals. Or the way conformity of thought was enforced by law. I could go on...

Secular governments have gone a long way in restraining christians from enacting their dogmatically programmed intolerance. But here and there we still see it breaking thru in abortion doctor killings, hate crimes, censorship and book burnings, racism, and even child abuse (spare the rod spoil the child). I suspect if the government were somehow dismantled it would take maybe a few months for christians to begin reenacting all the intolerance we have seen from them in the past. Most of them even today dream of a time when Jesus will return to earth to destroy the entire human race and a setup a glorious christian kingdom. Revelation 20 has all the graphic details, complete with vulture-picked corpses.

 

[lightgigantic]

What is it with these jabs at the person people react to when replying. It doesn't do anything to make the case with intelligent readers and when I see it, it almost automatically signals that the responder knows he/she was really done earlier.

Marines and terrorists are known for being exceptionally religious. I noticed the link between warriors and religion way before this thread was started and I've been wanting to mention it somewhere.

I am saying that you might be surprised to know that military training and prep is more about unit cohesion and discipline. IOW its a type of peer pressure of "belonging" to the group. It can function perfectly well with or without religion (as a brief overview of events leading up to the cold war illustrates).

IOW the contemporary witch hunt by a certain class of person is just the same as the "better dead than red" advocates of yesteryear.
:shrug:

 

[lightgigantic]

Secular governments have gone a long way in restraining christians from enacting their dogmatically programmed intolerance. But here and there we still see it breaking thru in abortion doctor killings, hate crimes, censorship and book burnings, racism, and even child abuse (spare the rod spoil the child). I suspect if the government were somehow dismantled it would take maybe a few months for christians to begin reenacting all the intolerance we have seen from them in the past. Most of them even today dream of a time when Jesus will return to earth to destroy the entire human race and a setup a glorious christian kingdom. Revelation 20 has all the graphic details, complete with vulture-picked corpses.

perhaps this statement would make sense if there wasn't a majority strong opposition from the very group you insist on tarring with the same brush

 

[elte]

I am saying that you might be surprised to know that military training and prep is more about unit cohesion and discipline. IOW its a type of peer pressure of "belonging" to the group. It can function perfectly well with or without religion (as a brief overview of events leading up to the cold war illustrates).

IOW the contemporary witch hunt by a certain class of person is just the same as the "better dead than red" advocates of yesteryear.
:shrug:

Aww, you know you did an adhom jab.

The religion plays a very big role in giving the fighter the "bravery" to become a fighter in the first place. Maybe you understand me now; I hope so. Take care.