Religion

[Skulexander]

I don't know what I believe, nor do I care. I lean more towards atheism though.

Edited November 10, 2011 by Cod Cod

[Rosedamai]

That's... not how it works... at all... ?:/

I know... Hahaha...

[Sonic Screwdriver]

(Sonic Screwdriver @ Nov 5 2011, 07:31 PM)

Hey, I tried posting quotes from the Catechism. People got mad and demanded scriptural evidence.

Phil knows that I do not accept scripture as answers to questions that I did not ask scripture for. If someone asks for scripture evidence, different matter entirely.

Someone asked a question about mortal sin. I answered with quotes from the Catechism, because it was something that involved Catholic doctrine. People got mad and demanded scriptural evidence, which I could not provide because it was not appropriate.

 

The Catechism says that if someone dies without ever knowing Jesus through no fault of their own, they will not go straight to hell. God does, however, reveal himself to those people in other ways.

Prove it. My guess is you can't, which brings me to my original point below.

What do you want me to prove? I can give you the direct quote from the Catechism, if you like.

 

You know what else is pure arrogance? Saying that you can prove there is no God and ridiculing people for believing in God.

There's this quote from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy about this. I don't remember it exactly, but what it basically said was absolute proof of God's existence equals absolute proof of God's nonexistence. Which is true.

 

The interesting thing about this quote? It came from an atheist.

 

NEITHER CAN YOU!

 

Hilarious, since I never denied an existance of God in the first place. More hilarious still is your assumption that I'm an athiest, which is false.

 

I merely pointed out that Christians who go around saying so and so is going to hell for this and that reason is a fallacy. They can't prove it, yet they think their beliefs are absolute, which is arrogance.

 

I apologize for assuming you were an atheist. I was just a bit irritated at the way you were responding to Phil. He (that is the proper pronoun, correct?) was being (in my opinion) very reasonable and meek and you were calling him arrogant.

 

I could say the same thing about atheists. Where's your proof, eh?

 

World War 2

The Crusades

The Muslim Conquests

French Wars of Religion

Reconquista

Thirty Years War

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

 

Where's your proof that atheists caused wars?

 

Hmm...there are a few arguable ones you have up there. I disagree with World War II, because, although it is true that some of the Nazis were Christian, the invasion of Poland was motived by non-religious reasons. And it seems to me that you are ignoring the fact that most of the people who helped Jews and other "non-Aryans" escape from the Nazis were Christians. Pope John XXIII, for example. He gave Jews fake baptismal certificates which allowed them to leave Germany safely. Some Christians ended up in concentration camps. Karol Wojtyla (Blessed John Paul the Great) and Blessed Maximillian Kolbe are two examples.

 

Also, I might argue against the Muslim Conquests, just because of the wording. I actually do not know what those are. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

 

As for wars started by atheists...How about the French Revolutionary Wars? They were practically atheists, after all. Or the Cold War? Or any other war involving Communists?

 

-http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100507210804AAiRqts

-http://www.trektorome.com/do-atheists-start-wars/

-http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081023113309AAihaYA

-http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/05/10/who-is-more-responsible-for-the-mass-murders-of-history-christians-or-atheists/

-http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/281858/offended-atheists-strike-again-david-french?page=0

[KageSora]

That's... not how it works... at all... ?:/

But I can understand how somebody who doesn't have a great knowledge of genetics could think that way. Perhaps they mean because, closer to the time the species were created (and thus the genetics were "pure" and had no mutations, at the time of creation anyway), there were less chances for mutations to ultimately occur? I can understand how that could be seen as a reasonable idea by somebody who knows very little about genetics, like I said.

[lightbird]

But I can understand how somebody who doesn't have a great knowledge of genetics could think that way.  Perhaps they mean because, closer to the time the species were created (and thus the genetics were "pure" and had no mutations, at the time of creation anyway), there were less chances for mutations to ultimately occur?  I can understand how that could be seen as a reasonable idea by somebody who knows very little about genetics, like I said.

Considering how ancestors of current living organisms most likely started out with RNA (which is less stable than DNA) and then eventually turned to storing information in the form of DNA (via employing proteins to translate RNA to DNA) and considering that the more advanced an organism is, the usually more advanced system it has for DNA reparation (the mutation rate for bacteria is higher than that of animals, for example), that concept wouldn't be true.

 

Just informing. 8)

Edited November 10, 2011 by lightbird

[KageSora]

Considering how ancestors of current living organisms most likely started out with RNA (which is less stable than DNA) and then eventually turned to storing information in the form of DNA (via employing proteins to translate RNA to DNA) and considering that the more advanced an organism is, the usually more advanced system it has for DNA reparation (the mutation rate for bacteria is higher than that of animals, for example), that concept wouldn't be true.

 

Just informing. 8)

Oh, I know that--I'm just saying that if somebody believes "everything was created" rather than "things evolved" and has little or no knowledge of genetics, they might think that way. :3

[skinst]

Someone asked a question about mortal sin. I answered with quotes from the Catechism, because it was something that involved Catholic doctrine. People got mad and demanded scriptural evidence, which I could not provide because it was not appropriate.

My point is is they asked you for scripture evidence. I didn't, and I don't like it when whenever I ask a question about beliefs of people, they ctrl + v from the Bible. It's like they can't think of an answer by themselves, even though I'm quite sure that the majority of christians can.

 

It drives me nuts.

 

What do you want me to prove? I can give you the direct quote from the Catechism, if you like.

 

I want you to prove to me that your religious beliefs are the absolute truth, Hell exists and that the only way to escape it is to believe in Jesus Christ as one's saviour. My guess is, as I was saying earlier to Phil, is that you cannot.

 

And the more people who realise this (not just christians fyi) the better.

 

I apologize for assuming you were an atheist. I was just a bit irritated at the way you were responding to Phil. He (that is the proper pronoun, correct?) was being (in my opinion) very reasonable and meek and you were calling him arrogant. 

 

I called his opinion arrogant, not him.

 

Hmm...there are a few arguable ones you have up there. I disagree with World War II, because, although it is true that some of the Nazis were Christian, the invasion of Poland was motived by non-religious reasons. And it seems to me that you are ignoring the fact that most of the people who helped Jews and other "non-Aryans" escape from the Nazis were Christians. Pope John XXIII, for example. He gave Jews fake baptismal certificates which allowed them to leave Germany safely. Some Christians ended up in concentration camps. Karol Wojtyla (Blessed John Paul the Great) and Blessed Maximillian Kolbe are two examples.

 

Religion may not have been the direct cause for WW2, but it sure gave people a reason for the things they did, both good and bad.

 

Also, I might argue against the Muslim Conquests, just because of the wording. I actually do not know what those are. Perhaps you could enlighten me?

 

I'm not surprised, it happened a long time ago. But it is, essentially, one of the most pure examples of religious war:

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

 

As for wars started by atheists...How about the French Revolutionary Wars? They were practically atheists, after all. Or the Cold War? Or any other war involving Communists?

 

Last time I checked, atheism wasn't the cause of those wars. They were just wars caused for non-religious reasons.

 

Also, the links you provided? Not one of them showed evidence that people have caused wars in the name of atheism. They simply stated that some wars have been started for non-religious reasons. There isn't an iota of evidence in those links at all.

 

Religions however?

 

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

http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index...18065457AAzt2Sj

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/war/religious/holywar.shtml

 

There have been many.

Edited November 10, 2011 by skinst

[lightbird]

And it seems to me that you are ignoring the fact that most of the people who helped Jews and other "non-Aryans" escape from the Nazis were Christians.

Hitler was Christian, too, and used Christian beliefs to justify anti-Semitism.

 

And I think it valid to point out that most of the people of that time identified themselves as Christians, that one or the other denomination were pretty much the default religion in Europe. Like in the case of most of the notable scientists being Christian.

So, I don't really think that the willingness to help can be attributed to religious beliefs.

Edited November 10, 2011 by lightbird

[TheDarkCynder]

As for wars started by atheists...How about the French Revolutionary Wars? They were practically atheists, after all. Or the Cold War? Or any other war involving Communists?

 

-http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100507210804AAiRqts

-http://www.trektorome.com/do-atheists-start-wars/

-http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081023113309AAihaYA

-http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/05/10/who-is-more-responsible-for-the-mass-murders-of-history-christians-or-atheists/

-http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/281858/offended-atheists-strike-again-david-french?page=0

The French Revolutionary Wars began because of atheism? My lesson in my World History class leans otherwise.

 

As with most historical events, the French Revolution didn't happen overnight. Bastille Day, July 14, 1789, is the date usually identified as the start of the Revolution, but tensions had already been simmering for years.

 

The absolute monarchy in France under the rule of Louis XIV (1643 – 1715) had been the envy of all European leaders. He successfully centralized the government and encouraged trade and industrialization. But less than 100 years after his reign, the French monarchy was destroyed. The king and queen were beheaded in public spectacles. How did this happen in such a short period of time?

 

Several factors accounted for the demise of the French monarchy. Number one was money. Louis XIV and his successors, Louis XV (1715 – 1774) and Louis XVI (1774 – 1793), participated in many long and costly conflicts. France suffered an agonizing defeat in the Seven Years' War against Britain (1756 – 1763). To get back at Britain, France aided the American colonists during the American Revolution. These wars riddled France with debt. Because of an outdated system of taxation and tax collection, France could not easily pay those debts.

 

Another factor leading to the French Revolution was an internal system of privilege that allowed nobles and the clergy to avoid laws and taxes. Also, there were groups of reform-minded Frenchmen who pushed the monarchy in that direction. These reformers were inspired by the ideas of the Enlightenment and the American Revolution. Movement toward reform raised the expectation of change. It did not help France that the successors to Louis XIV were indifferent or incompetent.

 

By 1789, the ancien régime in France was ready to crumble. This system was an absolute monarchy under which King Louis XVI exercised complete control, and discontent among Louis XVI's subjects was growing rapidly.

[philpot123]

Hitler was Christian, too, and used Christian beliefs to justify anti-Semitism.

 

 

Spouting off the name of a deity and justifying your actions because of it =/= Christianity, especially since he didn't actually believe it. Sorry.

[Kestra15]

 

Spouting off the name of a deity and justifying your actions because of it =/= Christianity, especially since he didn't actually believe it. Sorry.

Which is something we can say to many, many 'Christians.' Also:

 

Spouting off the name of a deity and justifying your actions because of it = Christianity =/= Justification for said actions.

[rogue-fox]

Ok, so my views on them is that theyare different place.

The Underworld is basically the Demon Plane, aworld/ area where alll the demons live/reside.

Hell, on the other hand is a place for the damned. Basically where are bad people go, where they are tortured forever.

And a nother thing, If yu are religious or believe in angels, you believe in demons. You can't have one thing w/out the other.

[potterwolf]

 

Spouting off the name of a deity and justifying your actions because of it =/= Christianity, especially since he didn't actually believe it. Sorry.

I think the argument about whether or not Hitler was an atheist/Christian is totally irrelevant. Does it really matter? He did what he did because of a political ideology, a desire for power, and some extremely anti-semitic views.Just because a Christian/atheist does something horrible doesn't mean that the horrible action was caused by Christianity/atheism.

 

As I understand it, Hitler said a couple of seemingly contradictory things that have caused this argument. He talked about God, and wrote 'God with us' on the Nazi uniforms, but at the same time wrote about Christianity being a poison or something. My guess is that all of the God stuff that he did had a lot to do with him trying to gain popular support, regardless of his actual beliefs.

 

I don't think anyone can prove that Hitler was/wasn't a Christian/atheist, and I don't think it matters all that much. Hitler was a bad dude, but as far as I can tell, it didn't have anything to do with religion.

 

Am I wrong?

[lightbird]

Just because a Christian/atheist does something horrible doesn't mean that the horrible action was caused by Christianity/atheism.

Which is exactly what I was getting at in the post that philpot quoted. /nods

[philpot123]

Spouting off the name of a deity and justifying your actions because of it = Christianity =/= Justification for said actions.

 

 

Which actions are you referring to may I ask? Your reasoning is off. I have never had to "justify my actions" based on my religion, as I have never been accused of anything needing justification. Living my life well whether Christianity is true or not does not lend itself to having to "justify" my actions.

 

Which is exactly what I was getting at in the post that philpot quoted. /nods

 

 

Which was my intention to point out as well. I just find it mildly offensive to assume Hitler was a true Christian given his entire regime was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.

[PlutoIsHades]

Atheist, and proud of it.

 

My grandma doesn't seem to like that I'm atheist.

[ShinyTomato]

I think the argument about whether or not Hitler was an atheist/Christian is totally irrelevant. Does it really matter? He did what he did because of a political ideology, a desire for power, and some extremely anti-semitic views.Just because a Christian/atheist does something horrible doesn't mean that the horrible action was caused by Christianity/atheism.

 

As I understand it, Hitler said a couple of seemingly contradictory things that have caused this argument. He talked about God, and wrote 'God with us' on the Nazi uniforms, but at the same time wrote about Christianity being a poison or something. My guess is that all of the God stuff that he did had a lot to do with him trying to gain popular support, regardless of his actual beliefs.

 

I don't think anyone can prove that Hitler was/wasn't a Christian/atheist, and I don't think it matters all that much. Hitler was a bad dude, but as far as I can tell, it didn't have anything to do with religion.

 

Am I wrong?

Actually, it's not that contradictory if you understand his position.

 

Did Hitler believe that Christ was the Messiah?

 

Yes.

 

Did hitler believe he was crucified for the world?

 

Yes.

 

Did he believe in the Bible?

 

Parts of it.

 

Did he believe that Jesus was Jewish?

 

No.

 

A big belief in Europe in the 1930s through WWII, was that being God "purified" the Jewishness from Jesus. Several dioceses of the Catholic church in Eastern Europe, actually preached this belief. Much like replacement theology declares that the Eternal Covenant is replaced by the New Covenant in Jesus -- the God in Jesus got rid of what was viewed as "dirty Jewish blood" in Jesus.

 

Parts of Christianity did not accept this, which is what Hitler referred to as a "poison." What we consider Christianity to be now has gotten rid of a lot of the trappings of Judaism in a lot of forms.

 

Did he act against Jesus's teachings it depends on what teachings you're talking about -- he gave very rousing speeches, using the more violent words of Christ. Anyone can use almost anything from the Bible and cite scripture.

[Alpha1]

Someone asked a question about mortal sin. I answered with quotes from the Catechism, because it was something that involved Catholic doctrine. People got mad and demanded scriptural evidence, which I could not provide because it was not appropriate.

 

How does the Catechism have the same authority as the Bible?

 

Hmm...there are a few arguable ones you have up there. I disagree with World War II, because, although it is true that some of the Nazis were Christian, the invasion of Poland was motived by non-religious reasons.

 

Some Nazis? Germany was fundamentally a Christian nation.

 

Some Christians ended up in concentration camps. Karol Wojtyla (Blessed John Paul the Great) and Blessed Maximillian Kolbe are two examples.

 

Not unusual for them to persecute their own.

 

Considering how ancestors of current living organisms most likely started out with RNA (which is less stable than DNA) and then eventually turned to storing information in the form of DNA (via employing proteins to translate RNA to DNA) and considering that the more advanced an organism is, the usually more advanced system it has for DNA reparation (the mutation rate for bacteria is higher than that of animals, for example), that concept wouldn't be true.

 

Just informing. 8)

 

Well, something was going on because Noah is said to have lived for 950 years.

 

 

Spouting off the name of a deity and justifying your actions because of it =/= Christianity, especially since he didn't actually believe it. Sorry.

 

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsourc...er_on_Jews.html

 

"He did not call them Abraham's children, but a "brood of vipers" [Matt. 3:7]. Oh, that was too insulting for the noble blood and race of Israel, and they declared, "He has a demon' [Matt 11:18]. Our Lord also calls them a "brood of vipers"; furthermore in John 8 [:39,44] he states: "If you were Abraham's children ye would do what Abraham did.... You are of your father the devil. It was intolerable to them to hear that they were not Abraham's but the devil's children, nor can they bear to hear this today."

 

65,000 word anti-semitic piece by Luther. Mein Kampf takes the message straight out of the Martin Luther playbook.

 

Which was my intention to point out as well. I just find it mildly offensive to assume Hitler was a true Christian given his entire regime was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ.

 

His regime had support from German Christians, and Hitler took advantage of this with the anti-semitic message.

 

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

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

 

Also, what is the punishment of apostasy in Christianity, phil?

 

[Kazeko]

Hitler was Christian, too, and used Christian beliefs to justify anti-Semitism.

 

He also took heavily from eugenic theory, which at the time was a mix of shoddy proto-psychology and biology. Does this mean that therapists and biologists are evil? No.

Edited November 11, 2011 by Kazeko

[Sonic Screwdriver]

How does the Catechism have the same authority as the Bible?

 

The Catechism of the Catholic Church lays out the teachings of the Catholic Church. If you have a question about doctrine, that's where you go.

The teaching authority of the Church is the Magisterium, which consists of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, which are both equally important.

 

 

What do you think about this?

http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2011/11/aft...nt-stop-him.php

Edited November 11, 2011 by Sonic Screwdriver

[ShinyTomato]

What do you think about this?

http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2011/11/aft...nt-stop-him.php

I think, as he's only allowing people of his religion to do it, that it needs to stop -- it has to be all or none. See You At The Pole doesn't allow other religions to join them, and exclude people who are from a different religion or no religion from joining them.

 

Is it illegal? Debatable, but it is inflammatory and hurtful to other students.

[Awdz]

I think, as he's only allowing people of his religion to do it, that it needs to stop -- it has to be all or none. See You At The Pole doesn't allow other religions to join them, and exclude people who are from a different religion or no religion from joining them.

 

Is it illegal? Debatable, but it is inflammatory and hurtful to other students.

I disagree. He is not preventing anyone else from practicing their religion. If the atheists don't like it, they are free to hold some other gathering of their own. What is hurtful is atheist demands that those praying be forced to stop - that clearly goes against freedom of religion.

 

It's not like the prayers are costing anyone anything or disrupting the school. What if the children of the atheists learn something about others' beliefs? It is a school, after all. As long as everyone is equally allowed to gather freely, those objecting sound to me like sour grapes who want to shut up anyone who does not believe the same things they do.

Edited November 11, 2011 by Awdz Bodkins

[philpot123]

He's holding a VOLUNTARY prayer session for ANY children who WISH to stop and pray before school? If that gets shut down, the phrase "freedom of religion" should be modified "freedom of religion unless that religion be Christianity."

[AngelKitty]

I think, as he's only allowing people of his religion to do it, that it needs to stop -- it has to be all or none. See You At The Pole doesn't allow other religions to join them, and exclude people who are from a different religion or no religion from joining them.

 

Is it illegal? Debatable, but it is inflammatory and hurtful to other students.

Nothing's stopping non-Christians from starting up their own prayer group. Heck, nothing's stopping them from starting it up right alongside this guy's group - it says nothing about them chasing away non-Christians, so "but it's only for the Christians!" is an invalid argument. And if you're saying that this Christian pastor SHOULD be leading all other religions in prayer, too, why should a Christian pastor have to lead non-Christians in prayer to a non-Christian god before he can pray to his own?

 

The praying students aren't hurting anything, the school faculty isn't involved in organizing it, it's not being forced on the kids, nobody else is forced to join, nobody else is forced to hear it, nobody else is forced to watch. It hurts nobody in any way, shape, or form, except for those who think it's wrong for people to express their faith publicly in a non-harmful or judgemental way.

 

What they're doing is perfectly okay and harmless. The Wisconsin atheists need to get over it.

[potterwolf]

He's holding a VOLUNTARY prayer session for ANY children who WISH to stop and pray before school? If that gets shut down, the phrase "freedom of religion" should be modified "freedom of religion unless that religion be Christianity."

... Not so much. I think they would have objected just as much if it had been a Muslim prayer group...or any other religion.

 

But, I don't think they should be stopped as long as this pastor guy isn't a teacher or administrator of some kind. He's not really doing anything wrong, but I have to wonder why he's allowed to just interact with these kids at school. Aren't the school officials obligated to keep the children safe from strangers? If there was a non-preacher who met with kids outside a school like that repeatedly, I doubt the school would allow him to continue. I think it's less of a freedom of religion issue and more of a "what is that preacher guy doing interacting with children on school property?" issue. Maybe that's legal, maybe it's not, I don't know.