Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
+5
BaStUn
Nihil
dandaman7
Dray The Fingerless
Champion
9 posters
Jedi vs Sith :: General :: Rancor Pit
Page 2 of 2
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
claudio- Join date : 2009-11-22
+Light/-Dark : -3
Posts : 149
Experience Points : 5753
Location : ca
Comments : []
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Ah damn, i missed it Claudio. good eye. im getting sloppy at these.
Dray The Fingerless- Senate Representative
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 265
Posts : 10355
Experience Points : 27155
Location : your FACE is a location.
Comments : FIRST!
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Damn that reminded me of this:
Champion- Founder
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 415
Posts : 4837
Experience Points : 17397
Location : Pennsylvania, USA
Comments : Champion (n):
3. An ardent defender or supporter of a cause or another person: a champion of the righteous.
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Yeah, and that's my point.claudio wrote:dandaman7 wrote:That's one of the only problems I have, don't call yourself an atheist if you believe God exists but are against religion.
If you believe god(s) exist you aren't an atheist by definition
Well, how many practitioners of Voodoo have you met? I did not mean that the practitioners of the religion are destructive, but what the religion teaches, living sacrifice etc. And that's what I mean when I agree with Christianity more. Seriously, not sure how to make it clearer, but saying you are something doesn't make you something. History has proved that people are willing to lie to obtain power, and that is one of the more clear lies. If these were not lies, then the people who have done ruthless things are deeply confused, but I think it would be safe to say that that is not the case for everyone. Christianity really has gone through societal evolution. An example like you used, preachers blessing troops. Christ taught that there are no priests that should be treated better than others, because all who follow the Word are priests. So, I am not Catholic, so I am free to disagree with the Pope idea. And yes, I am well aware that the first Pope was a disciple, but having taken religious studies, I am able to say that that whole group that we call Catholics, were then just a group of followers who just had a representative/leader (Pope). I personally don't think it is fair to say that you adhere to a certain religion if you really don't. In fact, I find it a little offensive and degrading to the religion if you do things against it's teachings. And if you agree with me there, then how can you say that these people were Christians? I can prove that they were not with the simple teaching of Christ that we call the Golden Rule. Treat others the way you would like to be treated. I wouldn't want someone coming and killing my family and torturing myself, so I am not going to do it, even it is for the New Land. There is a separation of Church and State in America, at least there is supposed to be. Jesus never really taught against alcohol either, except to not get extremely drunk off of it. Nor did Jesus teach not to stay up or out past a certain time. If you really think about, I think you might find that most of these 'laws and legislature that you have to deal with because of churches', were made by Churches and people to suit themselves, for their own wellbeing, nothing to do with Christianity. Though Christianity may be a fine scapegoat for things, that doesn't mean its right. How is Christianity hypocritical? People are. Again, a few people who have claimed to be religious, and have done terrible things, that does not mean a whole religion is terrible. There have been a few atheist rulers, who aren't exactly great people, but that doesn't mean atheism is a dangerous force. Not sure the tumor/religion comparison is completely valid, simply because it makes the assumption that all religions are bad.Champion wrote:dandaman7 wrote:Oh it's fine to be against religion, but if a religion is wrong, that does not mean God doesn't exist. That's one of the only problems I have, don't call yourself an atheist if you believe God exists but are against religion. I don't think religion in general is dangerous. It really depends on which religion, I think we could all agree that Voodoo is a fairly destructive religion. Some could say that Christianity is destructive too, but like Gandhi's quote, and I know it might get annoying to hear, but they aren't true Christians, simple as that. Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ, did Christ teach to kill as many people in God's name for the Holy Land? Christ didn't even say to fight for the Holy Land. Christ specifically taught AGAINST things like these.
If you remember correctly, religion, Christianity at the main, was extremely thought as royal. People thought they could just buy their way to Heaven. But with it being royal, it was one of the easiest grabs for power.
People like Christopher Columbus came and destroyed the Native's land in the name of Christ, but was it really for Christ? Did Christ really teach that it was okay to slit someone's wrists till they are just hanging off? Did Christ teach that it was okay to hang parents, kids, animals, just because people were different? No, Christ taught to love thy neighbor, who is a neighbor? The parable of the Good Samaritan tells us that everyone is a neighbor.
de las Casas was one of the main apologists for the Native treatment and how people vainly used Christ's name. People did things that were completely separate from religion but did it in religion's name. Think about if I found an atheist who killed thousands of people, or how recently in Nigeria, hundreds of Christians were killed for being Christians, by atheists. Is it fair to say atheism is dangerous? Sorry to sound repetitive, I just don't agree with the 'religion is abuse' movement.
And I agree with that Claudio lol
I find it funny that you mention voodoo when not once have I ever been maltreated by a practitioner of it, nor have I ever seen on the news countless millions or even thousands or even tens of people getting injured or killed because of it. Christianity on the other hand has literally MILLIONS of lives worth of blood guilt on its hands (the preachers blessing troops in WW1 and 2, Crusades, etc). On the other hand, I have to deal with laws and legislature pushed into politics by the christian church. Such as certian liquor laws, curfews etc. Christianity as a whole is a hypocritical cess pool. I do not doubt you can find good christians and even good churches (look no further than Aragorn and his Dad). But they are by far the complete and miniscule minority. Religion is a dangerous force, and while it would seem practical to allow it to continue since some of it is benign, that is like saying you will allow a tumor to stay in your body because it is not malignant.. .yet.
dandaman7- Join date : 2010-01-10
+Light/-Dark : 2
Posts : 1194
Experience Points : 7265
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
The bible is a big book of multiple choice, Christians pick and choose verses to follow and ignore others. Why do you think there are so many denominations to choose from? Some Christians believe gays should be killed and others don't even think hell is that big of a deal. Saying you're a Christian really doesn't describe much in terms of a world view.
Good people do good things and bad people do bad things (pretty much), some just quote scripture along the way. Are they misinterpreting what was written? That's one opinion in a sea of others.
Good people do good things and bad people do bad things (pretty much), some just quote scripture along the way. Are they misinterpreting what was written? That's one opinion in a sea of others.
claudio- Join date : 2009-11-22
+Light/-Dark : -3
Posts : 149
Experience Points : 5753
Location : ca
Comments : []
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
dandaman7 wrote:Well, how many practitioners of Voodoo have you met? I did not mean that the practitioners of the religion are destructive, but what the religion teaches, living sacrifice etc. And that's what I mean when I agree with Christianity more. Seriously, not sure how to make it clearer, but saying you are something doesn't make you something. History has proved that people are willing to lie to obtain power, and that is one of the more clear lies. If these were not lies, then the people who have done ruthless things are deeply confused, but I think it would be safe to say that that is not the case for everyone. Christianity really has gone through societal evolution. An example like you used, preachers blessing troops. Christ taught that there are no priests that should be treated better than others, because all who follow the Word are priests. So, I am not Catholic, so I am free to disagree with the Pope idea. And yes, I am well aware that the first Pope was a disciple, but having taken religious studies, I am able to say that that whole group that we call Catholics, were then just a group of followers who just had a representative/leader (Pope). I personally don't think it is fair to say that you adhere to a certain religion if you really don't. In fact, I find it a little offensive and degrading to the religion if you do things against it's teachings. And if you agree with me there, then how can you say that these people were Christians? I can prove that they were not with the simple teaching of Christ that we call the Golden Rule. Treat others the way you would like to be treated. I wouldn't want someone coming and killing my family and torturing myself, so I am not going to do it, even it is for the New Land. There is a separation of Church and State in America, at least there is supposed to be. Jesus never really taught against alcohol either, except to not get extremely drunk off of it. Nor did Jesus teach not to stay up or out past a certain time. If you really think about, I think you might find that most of these 'laws and legislature that you have to deal with because of churches', were made by Churches and people to suit themselves, for their own wellbeing, nothing to do with Christianity. Though Christianity may be a fine scapegoat for things, that doesn't mean its right. How is Christianity hypocritical? People are. Again, a few people who have claimed to be religious, and have done terrible things, that does not mean a whole religion is terrible. There have been a few atheist rulers, who aren't exactly great people, but that doesn't mean atheism is a dangerous force. Not sure the tumor/religion comparison is completely valid, simply because it makes the assumption that all religions are bad.
A lot actually. I used to live in miami and voodoo along with "Santeria" which is the spanish form of it is very prevalent. In fact, my own father was a practitioner of santeria at one point of his life and I even witnessed him make animal sacrafices. If you think practitioners of voodoo are dangerous you have been watching wayyy too many movies.
On your second point, I highly doubt the muslims slaughtered by "christians" would have cared about your argument. They were fighting catholic infidels and no discussion would have changed their minds, much like today we are fighting "islamic radicals". You don't like the misrepresentation? Too bad, it was up to your forefathers and the pope or whoever to say "we will not tolerate this" but instead they endorsed it.
Back to the original point, it is the very foundation of christianity which led to these atrocities, so what may have started with good intentions and ideals was merely used for violence and death. This seems to be the case with any religion, and will never change.
Champion- Founder
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 415
Posts : 4837
Experience Points : 17397
Location : Pennsylvania, USA
Comments : Champion (n):
3. An ardent defender or supporter of a cause or another person: a champion of the righteous.
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
I thought I clarified I did not think that the people themselves are dangerous, but not so much their teachings.
I simply ask you, do you think, if you know Christianity's teachings, that these people were actual Christians? A clear answer.
I also ask, since you know the foundation of Christianity, what is it?
I simply ask you, do you think, if you know Christianity's teachings, that these people were actual Christians? A clear answer.
I also ask, since you know the foundation of Christianity, what is it?
dandaman7- Join date : 2010-01-10
+Light/-Dark : 2
Posts : 1194
Experience Points : 7265
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
dandaman7 wrote:I thought I clarified I did not think that the people themselves are dangerous, but not so much their teachings.
I simply ask you, do you think, if you know Christianity's teachings, that these people were actual Christians? A clear answer.
I also ask, since you know the foundation of Christianity, what is it?
No they were not actual Christians. Christianity died in its pure form around 150 AD when the last of the living apostles and their direct descendants died off. Once that occurred, the apostasy of the Catholic church began (we can debate the catholic church in another discussion). Pure christianity has not been seen on this Earth for a very long time, and as I said, the only group I can see even coming close to the original teachings are the modern day Witnesses.
The foundation of christianty was a preaching one, Jesus expected his disciples to follow his example and preach the word in all nations throughout the earth, peacably and without earthly government intervention (which is where the catholic church began its apostasy). Once the early "christians" began to get involved with politics and mixing other religious practices into their own (such as christmas, etc) they could no longer be considered true christians.
But either way, that is regardless of the facts which I stated, that others will not agree with my viewpoint, and claim the catholic church is the original church (whch it is not) and that it is the oldest christian organization (which it is not, the original christians are).
Champion- Founder
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 415
Posts : 4837
Experience Points : 17397
Location : Pennsylvania, USA
Comments : Champion (n):
3. An ardent defender or supporter of a cause or another person: a champion of the righteous.
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
what if they said its the oldest one alive today?
Dray The Fingerless- Senate Representative
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 265
Posts : 10355
Experience Points : 27155
Location : your FACE is a location.
Comments : FIRST!
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Dray The Fingerless wrote:what if they said its the oldest one alive today?
huh?
Champion- Founder
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 415
Posts : 4837
Experience Points : 17397
Location : Pennsylvania, USA
Comments : Champion (n):
3. An ardent defender or supporter of a cause or another person: a champion of the righteous.
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
claudio wrote:Champion wrote:claudio wrote:Ask yourself why they had to stop calling it creationism and start referring to it as intelligent design . If you have the truth on your side you don't have to use dishonest tactics. They act as if disproving evolution will somehow make them right"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Sums up the creationist movement.
is that Ghandi?
Yup
Well, I have to say, Ghandi is DA MAN.
claudio wrote:Champion wrote:The catholic church is by far one of the most affluent entities in history, sitting on almost 1 trillion dollars (thats 1000 billion dollars) in assets including Gold, Stocks and Bonds and raw Cash. The ability of the church to literally change the face of the earth in ONE day is unparalleled. They could release that money to Africa and feed, clothe and medicate the entire continent for YEARS to come.
That's disgusting and evil. Not to mention the other scandals the church is involved in, there has even been talk of arresting the pope when he travels
I don't think you can arrest the pope though, considering he is the nominal ruler of the country, The Vatican City. What are you gonna do though, right? XD
dandaman7 wrote:Yeah, and that's my point.claudio wrote:dandaman7 wrote:That's one of the only problems I have, don't call yourself an atheist if you believe God exists but are against religion.
If you believe god(s) exist you aren't an atheist by definitionWell, how many practitioners of Voodoo have you met? I did not mean that the practitioners of the religion are destructive, but what the religion teaches, living sacrifice etc. And that's what I mean when I agree with Christianity more. Seriously, not sure how to make it clearer, but saying you are something doesn't make you something. History has proved that people are willing to lie to obtain power, and that is one of the more clear lies. If these were not lies, then the people who have done ruthless things are deeply confused, but I think it would be safe to say that that is not the case for everyone. Christianity really has gone through societal evolution. An example like you used, preachers blessing troops. Christ taught that there are no priests that should be treated better than others, because all who follow the Word are priests. So, I am not Catholic, so I am free to disagree with the Pope idea. And yes, I am well aware that the first Pope was a disciple, but having taken religious studies, I am able to say that that whole group that we call Catholics, were then just a group of followers who just had a representative/leader (Pope). I personally don't think it is fair to say that you adhere to a certain religion if you really don't. In fact, I find it a little offensive and degrading to the religion if you do things against it's teachings. And if you agree with me there, then how can you say that these people were Christians? I can prove that they were not with the simple teaching of Christ that we call the Golden Rule. Treat others the way you would like to be treated. I wouldn't want someone coming and killing my family and torturing myself, so I am not going to do it, even it is for the New Land. There is a separation of Church and State in America, at least there is supposed to be. Jesus never really taught against alcohol either, except to not get extremely drunk off of it. Nor did Jesus teach not to stay up or out past a certain time. If you really think about, I think you might find that most of these 'laws and legislature that you have to deal with because of churches', were made by Churches and people to suit themselves, for their own wellbeing, nothing to do with Christianity. Though Christianity may be a fine scapegoat for things, that doesn't mean its right. How is Christianity hypocritical? People are. Again, a few people who have claimed to be religious, and have done terrible things, that does not mean a whole religion is terrible. There have been a few atheist rulers, who aren't exactly great people, but that doesn't mean atheism is a dangerous force. Not sure the tumor/religion comparison is completely valid, simply because it makes the assumption that all religions are bad.Champion wrote:dandaman7 wrote:Oh it's fine to be against religion, but if a religion is wrong, that does not mean God doesn't exist. That's one of the only problems I have, don't call yourself an atheist if you believe God exists but are against religion. I don't think religion in general is dangerous. It really depends on which religion, I think we could all agree that Voodoo is a fairly destructive religion. Some could say that Christianity is destructive too, but like Gandhi's quote, and I know it might get annoying to hear, but they aren't true Christians, simple as that. Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ, did Christ teach to kill as many people in God's name for the Holy Land? Christ didn't even say to fight for the Holy Land. Christ specifically taught AGAINST things like these.
If you remember correctly, religion, Christianity at the main, was extremely thought as royal. People thought they could just buy their way to Heaven. But with it being royal, it was one of the easiest grabs for power.
People like Christopher Columbus came and destroyed the Native's land in the name of Christ, but was it really for Christ? Did Christ really teach that it was okay to slit someone's wrists till they are just hanging off? Did Christ teach that it was okay to hang parents, kids, animals, just because people were different? No, Christ taught to love thy neighbor, who is a neighbor? The parable of the Good Samaritan tells us that everyone is a neighbor.
de las Casas was one of the main apologists for the Native treatment and how people vainly used Christ's name. People did things that were completely separate from religion but did it in religion's name. Think about if I found an atheist who killed thousands of people, or how recently in Nigeria, hundreds of Christians were killed for being Christians, by atheists. Is it fair to say atheism is dangerous? Sorry to sound repetitive, I just don't agree with the 'religion is abuse' movement.
And I agree with that Claudio lol
I find it funny that you mention voodoo when not once have I ever been maltreated by a practitioner of it, nor have I ever seen on the news countless millions or even thousands or even tens of people getting injured or killed because of it. Christianity on the other hand has literally MILLIONS of lives worth of blood guilt on its hands (the preachers blessing troops in WW1 and 2, Crusades, etc). On the other hand, I have to deal with laws and legislature pushed into politics by the christian church. Such as certian liquor laws, curfews etc. Christianity as a whole is a hypocritical cess pool. I do not doubt you can find good christians and even good churches (look no further than Aragorn and his Dad). But they are by far the complete and miniscule minority. Religion is a dangerous force, and while it would seem practical to allow it to continue since some of it is benign, that is like saying you will allow a tumor to stay in your body because it is not malignant.. .yet.
Every religion is hypocritical, sometimes they have illogical explanations for these fallacies, other times, they don't. Also, people go around calling themselves Christian and, either way, they all disagree as to who is the "real" christian, what I find strange is that many Christians are open and shut, they say, this part can be interpreted, and when others disagree with them, they say, it says it right here. What ever happened to interpretation?
Also the Golden Rule has been manifested back to babylonian times, if not in a more crude form.
I bet Jesus would be a socialist! Golden Rule,
And, just because I remembered, Claudio showed me this guy
A
Nihil- Join date : 2009-10-23
+Light/-Dark : -912
Posts : 4431
Experience Points : 12475
Location : Arkansas
Comments : https://www.facebook.com/mattbcarr
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Actually Nihil that is why I mentioned the Witnesses being the closest to 1st century christians, due to there almost literally and cross-reference adherence to scripture.
Champion- Founder
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 415
Posts : 4837
Experience Points : 17397
Location : Pennsylvania, USA
Comments : Champion (n):
3. An ardent defender or supporter of a cause or another person: a champion of the righteous.
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Nihil wrote:
I don't think you can arrest the pope though, considering he is the nominal ruler of the country, The Vatican City. What are you gonna do though, right? XD
claudio- Join date : 2009-11-22
+Light/-Dark : -3
Posts : 149
Experience Points : 5753
Location : ca
Comments : []
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
History is filled with liars. If it was written by a man you can question its intent and creditability. Any person who blindly follows something is dangerous. When your born into something and brought up to believe it and fear it and taught its always right, we have a problem. As for the holocaust unless you were there how could you really know? Besides the left over camps and evidence and the books people have written, nothing is certain.
this is a good clip from the daily show that has some relation with this discussion (text books censorship and how it works) http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-17-2010/don-t-mess-with-textbooks
this is a good clip from the daily show that has some relation with this discussion (text books censorship and how it works) http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-march-17-2010/don-t-mess-with-textbooks
rsG- Join date : 2009-10-22
+Light/-Dark : -1
Posts : 373
Experience Points : 6216
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
Well RsG, i dunno the PURPOSE of MASS CONSPIRACY to lie about the holocaust. Apart from making the Nazis look worser, There really is no purpose in it. The war was already justified without the camps, so there is no reason for massive, global forces, to do so much to tell a lie that i see wins nothing for them, or at least makes it worth the lie.
Dray The Fingerless- Senate Representative
- Join date : 2009-10-21
+Light/-Dark : 265
Posts : 10355
Experience Points : 27155
Location : your FACE is a location.
Comments : FIRST!
Re: Richard Dawkins compares creationism to holocaust denial
lol who said anything about global forces. hitler got most of his money from american banks who were all close with those evil people. we delayed going into ww2 for so long why? until just like in the gulf of tonkin an american vessel was attacked and now we should goto war... america and many other nations needed hitler to fight communism. He would be laborer in the fight against communism in Europe. Maybe thats why no one except the countrys he invaded cared what he did. He claimed to be a strong catholic man who needed to help his people. He something happen kinda similar to 911 in germany and he passed the enabling act pretty much giving him more power with the military and killed major parts of germanys constitution thats when he start his empire. So hitler not looking so evil would make people like the pope who was in the army not look as evil. to make Prescott bush g. w bushes great grandfather who was in charge of the national bank who supported hitler not look so bad. Why are the jews so important, to have their holocaust be called the holocaust. They wernt the first of a people to be rounded up and killed. Surly not the last. But it almost makes the 6 year war and the massacres justifiable. And pretty much gives the jews every right to be savages and never the victim.Dray The Fingerless wrote:Well RsG, i dunno the PURPOSE of MASS CONSPIRACY to lie about the holocaust. Apart from making the Nazis look worser, There really is no purpose in it. The war was already justified without the camps, so there is no reason for massive, global forces, to do so much to tell a lie that i see wins nothing for them, or at least makes it worth the lie.
rsG- Join date : 2009-10-22
+Light/-Dark : -1
Posts : 373
Experience Points : 6216
Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Jedi vs Sith :: General :: Rancor Pit
Page 2 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum