| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Pastor Frank" |
| Date: |
22 Oct 2006 03:21:08 AM |
| Object: |
Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@nothingbutthe.truth> wrote in message
news:45398F72.2020708@nothingbutthe.truth...
Pastor Frank wrote:
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:fkucj2p7sht1fnnrb2fujbsrnh61bjrsgq@4ax.com...
On 18 Oct 2006 12:00:24 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote:
===>Gods can exist by accident, but universes must be created. ;-) --
L.
The better way to say that is "God Exists"..There is no origin or
causality ( accident)..."Always existing and ever the same"
Feel free to demonstrate that it does.
The Material Universe is different. It had a beginning and will
eventually have an end.
And your evidence for this, is?
All the things which do have a beginning and an end, and the paucity
of things which do not. Why be secretive Christopher? Tell us already of
all the things you know which don't have a beginning nor an end.
===>You know as well as I do, "pastor" Fake.
EXISTENCE, the universal substance, the Cosmic Totality has np beginning
and no end, though its processes do produce ephemeral entities. Perhaps
even beings you would recognize as gods,
e.g. the Elohim of the Bible. -- L.
The opposite is true Libertine!!! God created "the Cosmos", not the
other way around.
.
|
|
| User: "thomas p." |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 05:33:25 AM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
But ONLY the belief. Can you tell the difference?
Pay attention..... Most people believe in God..You can therefore
surmise that the case for the existence of God is reasonable...Most
people are reasonable.
Reality is not determined by a vote. Furthermore it is clearly
possible for the majority of people to believe in something that does
not exist.
The world has seen what Christian theocracies are like--full
of terror and burnings.<<
Christian Theocracies ???..Like Byzantium ? LOL
Forgotten the eils of teh Reformation? Thirty Years war? Even the
holocaust was the result of 2000 years of institutionalised
anti-Semitism.<<
None of those things were taught by Jesus Christ... They are
aberrations based on Heresies.
They are based on the faith of the people who believed their Christian
religion required it. The majority of Christians throughout the
history of Christianity have believed that tolerance of what they
called "false beliefs" or "heresies" was immoral. I remember you
saying something about most people being reasonable. Special pleading
anyone?
The atrocities against Christians by Atheist States were not
aberrations but were in fact a bona fide function of Official State
Atheism
Since atheism is not a belief or a philosophy, the above is clearly
wrong.
Lets just make sure that you guys don't blather on about how nice a
world it would be if you could just get rid of religion...The USSR is
strong evidence that Atheism is not beneficial in practice and leads to
depravity.
When it creates brainwashed morons like yourself it needs to go.<<
All ad hominem attacks all the time.......... Tells much
Your insistence on creating a strawmant that you call "Atheism" while
ignoring the positions of atheists also says a lot. The truth is that
atheists can be good, evil, amoral, etc., but none of those follows
from atheism; which is merely the lack of a belief in any god.
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 11:01:30 AM |
|
|
Reality is not determined by a vote. Furthermore it is clearly
possible for the majority of people to believe in something that does
not exist.
Correct..I am only arguing at this point for reasonableness......
Furthermore, you cant assume that a human can ever really claim that
they can know what absolute reality is..And that is a major flaw in
your argument since you seem to want to dictate what "Reality" actually
is.. For all you know, "Reality" includes the real presence of God.
They are based on the faith of the people who believed their Christian
religion required it. The majority of Christians throughout the
history of Christianity have believed that tolerance of what they
called "false beliefs" or "heresies" was immoral. I remember you
saying something about most people being reasonable. Special pleading
anyone?<<<
It all depends on what you understand as the authority within
Christianly.. If you think final authority is within the Historical
Church and not via individual interpretation of the faith, then your
point is moot. Whenever something or someone goes off track there our
mechanisms to correct the error within the authority of the Church..So
institutionalized anti-Semitism for one example has been condemned.....
What imperfect people do on their own will always be problematical.
The atrocities against Christians by Atheist States were not
aberrations but were in fact a bona fide function of Official State
Atheism
Since atheism is not a belief or a philosophy, the above is clearly
wrong.<<
Not only is it a specific World View, it was OFFICAL Doctrine of
Atheist based States like the USSR..
You are confusing Atheism with Nilism
All ad hominem attacks all the time.......... Tells much
Your insistence on creating a strawmant that you call "Atheism" while
ignoring the positions of atheists also says a lot. <<
Name one that I have ignored and I will be happy to reply to it ASAP...
The truth is that
atheists can be good, evil, amoral, etc., but none of those follows
from atheism; which is merely the lack of a belief in any god.<<<
See above...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 11:35:58 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 09:01:30 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Reality is not determined by a vote. Furthermore it is clearly
possible for the majority of people to believe in something that does
not exist.
Correct..I am only arguing at this point for reasonableness......
Regardless, the number of people who believe something has no
bearing on its reasonableness.
Your insistence on creating a strawmant that you call "Atheism" while
ignoring the positions of atheists also says a lot. <<
Name one that I have ignored and I will be happy to reply to it ASAP...
You keep ignoring the fact that atheism isn't a position, and
that the only "thing" in conformity with atheism is atheism itself.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 12:53:21 PM |
|
|
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 09:01:30 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Reality is not determined by a vote. Furthermore it is clearly
possible for the majority of people to believe in something that does
not exist.
Correct..I am only arguing at this point for reasonableness......
Regardless, the number of people who believe something has no
bearing on its reasonableness.<<
Of course it does..If nearly all people nearly everywhere for all of
human existence have accepted a Spritual Realm etc, then that speaks
powerfully to the existence of enough evidence to persuade an
ordinarility prudent person... The argument you guys keep trying to
sell is that everyone is stupid, which simply doesnt wash.
Name one that I have ignored and I will be happy to reply to it ASAP...
You keep ignoring the fact that atheism isn't a position, and
that the only "thing" in conformity with atheism is atheism itself.<<
I have addressed this directly and several times now..Disagreeing with
you is not the same thing as ignoring you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 01:36:24 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 10:53:21 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Don Kresch wrote:
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 09:01:30 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Reality is not determined by a vote. Furthermore it is clearly
possible for the majority of people to believe in something that does
not exist.
Correct..I am only arguing at this point for reasonableness......
Regardless, the number of people who believe something has no
bearing on its reasonableness.<<
Of course it does..
Of course it doesn't. To believe so is the argument from
numbers/argument from popularity fallacy.
Name one that I have ignored and I will be happy to reply to it ASAP...
You keep ignoring the fact that atheism isn't a position, and
that the only "thing" in conformity with atheism is atheism itself.<<
I have addressed this directly and several times now.
No, you have not.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 04:41:54 PM |
|
|
I have addressed this directly and several times now.
No, you have not.
I have several times..Here, let me repost just one so you can catch
up:
From Wikipedia:
Defined positively: Atheism as the belief that no deities exist
While it is rare to find a general-use dictionary that explicitly
acknowledges "absence of theism" as a true form of atheism, numerous
ones recognize the positive definition of atheism, as a "belief" or
"doctrine". This reflects the general public's view of atheism as a
specific ideological stance, as opposed to the simple absence of a
belief.[6]
In philosophical and atheist circles, however, this common definition
is often disputed and even rejected. The broader, negative has become
increasingly popular in recent decades, with many specialized textbooks
dealing with atheism favoring it.[25] One prominent atheist writer who
disagrees with the broader definition of atheism, however, is Ernest
Nagel, who considers atheism to be the rejection of theism (which
George H. Smith labelled as explicit atheism, or anti-theism):
"Atheism is not to be identified with sheer unbelief... Thus, a child
who has received no religious instruction and has never heard about
God, is not an atheist-for he is not denying any theistic
claims."[26]
Some atheists argue for a positive definition of atheism on the grounds
that defining atheism negatively, as "the negation of theistic belief",
makes it "parasitic on religion" and not an ideology in its own right.
While most atheists welcome having atheism cast as non-ideological, in
order to avoid potentially framing their view as one requiring "faith",
writers such as Julian Baggini prefer to analyze atheism as part of a
general philosophical movement towards naturalism. Baggini rejects the
negative definition based on his view that it implies that atheism is
dependant on theism for its existence: "atheism no more needs religion
than atheists do". However, his view is in the minority in the atheist
community.[12]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 09:08:22 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 14:41:54 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
I have addressed this directly and several times now.
No, you have not.
I have several times.
No, you have not.
[snip, as what you posted doesn't address the point]
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p." |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
27 Oct 2006 04:57:24 AM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
Reality is not determined by a vote. Furthermore it is clearly
possible for the majority of people to believe in something that does
not exist.
Correct..I am only arguing at this point for reasonableness......
There is no reason to believe that the majority of people are more
likely to be reasonable than a minority.
Furthermore, you cant assume that a human can ever really claim that
they can know what absolute reality is..And that is a major flaw in
your argument
No it isn't, since I never claimed anything like that - you did.
since you seem to want to dictate what "Reality" actually
is.. For all you know, "Reality" includes the real presence of God.
That is your claim. I merely pointed out that you have no evidence for
it.
They are based on the faith of the people who believed their Christian
religion required it. The majority of Christians throughout the
history of Christianity have believed that tolerance of what they
called "false beliefs" or "heresies" was immoral. I remember you
saying something about most people being reasonable. Special pleading
anyone?<<<
It all depends on what you understand as the authority within
Christianly.. If you think final authority is within the Historical
Church and not via individual interpretation of the faith, then your
point is moot. Whenever something or someone goes off track there our
mechanisms to correct the error within the authority of the Church..So
institutionalized anti-Semitism for one example has been condemned.....
What imperfect people do on their own will always be problematical.
The above has absolutely nothing to do with my point, which is that you
have no evidence for the existence of any god; and what the majority
believes is no indication of either reasonable or true.
The atrocities against Christians by Atheist States were not
aberrations but were in fact a bona fide function of Official State
Atheism
Since atheism is not a belief or a philosophy, the above is clearly
wrong.<<
Not only is it a specific World View, it was OFFICAL Doctrine of
Atheist based States like the USSR..
You are confusing Atheism with Nilism
No, you are confusing Marxism with atheism. Even if all Marxists were
atheists (they are not), it would not make Marxism the equivalent of
atheism. My position with reference to the existence of a deity has
nothing to do with nihilism, which is, by the way, a philosophy.
All ad hominem attacks all the time.......... Tells much
Your insistence on creating a strawmant that you call "Atheism" while
ignoring the positions of atheists also says a lot. <<
Name one that I have ignored and I will be happy to reply to it ASAP...
The one that I and others have repeatedly pointed out to you, i.e.
atheism is the lack of belief in any god. Atheists can be supporters
of democracy, monarchy, fascism, communism or what ever system one can
think of; the only thing that makes an atheist an atheist is lack of
belief in a deity. I am an atheist. I have never approved of
totalitarianism in any form, yet, according to you, atheism is the same
as Marxism.
The truth is that
atheists can be good, evil, amoral, etc., but none of those follows
from atheism; which is merely the lack of a belief in any god.<<<
See above...
I have. You are wrong. There is absolutely nothing in atheism that
requires a person to be a communist or to have no respect for other
people. The only requirement is lack of belief in a deity.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lucifer" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 12:40:13 AM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
No, that's just a claim. It's not evidence.<<
Er no..Thats a fact that is decent evidence for the reasonableness of
believing in God..Would you like to see the poll numbers for the USA
alone about how many people believe in God?
The world has seen what christian theocracies are like--full
of terror and burnings.<<
Christian Theocracies ???..Like Byzantium ? LOL
Lets just make sure that you guys dont blather on about how nice a
world it would be if you could just get rid of religion...The USSR is
strong evidence that Atheism is not beneficial in practice and leads to
depravity.
A word. Bollocks. The USSR substitued one dogma for another. Communism
became like religion, with all the same adverse consequences, you'll
find most of us on here are anti-dogmatic, and inclined not to support
soviet russia. Now lets look at the nazis, the crusades, the
inquisition, franco etc.
Christianity obviously only leads to genocide and murder (by your own
logic)
--
Lucifer the Unsubtle, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil and
General Purpose Igor
The Anti-Theist
"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 04:45:39 PM |
|
|
Lucifer wrote:
marcinmd wrote:
No, that's just a claim. It's not evidence.<<
leads to
depravity.
A word. Bollocks. The USSR substitued one dogma for another. Communism
became like religion, with all the same adverse consequences, you'll
find most of us on here are anti-dogmatic, and inclined not to support
soviet russia. Now lets look at the nazis, the crusades, the
inquisition, franco etc.
The USSR was officially Atheist.... I realize how embarrassing that is
for you...
The Nazi's were not officially theist as a point of doctrine and in
practice they persecuted and imprisoned and killed believers....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 09:08:55 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 14:45:39 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Lucifer wrote:
marcinmd wrote:
No, that's just a claim. It's not evidence.<<
leads to
depravity.
A word. Bollocks. The USSR substitued one dogma for another. Communism
became like religion, with all the same adverse consequences, you'll
find most of us on here are anti-dogmatic, and inclined not to support
soviet russia. Now lets look at the nazis, the crusades, the
inquisition, franco etc.
The USSR was officially Atheist....
No, it was officially communist.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 09:13:56 PM |
|
|
Don Kresch wrote:
The USSR was officially Atheist....
No, it was officially communist.
Atheism was officially the view of the Communist Party CPSU and the
Soviet State..
Communists are by definition ( and written decree in this case)
Atheists.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 07:06:29 AM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 25 Oct 2006 19:13:56 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Don Kresch wrote:
The USSR was officially Atheist....
No, it was officially communist.
Atheism was
only lip service. The official view of the CPSU was State
Worship.
Communists are, by definition, Religious Statists.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 02:34:54 PM |
|
|
Atheism was only lip service.
Apparetnly they took action against all relgions in Russian and
especially the Orthodox Christian Chruch which most Russians belonged
to.....So cearly they were not just playing pretend as you imagine.
The official view of the CPSU was State
Worship.Communists are, by definition, Religious Statists.<<
LOL Nice rationalization....... Youre kidding, of course.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 03:02:21 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 26 Oct 2006 12:34:54 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
Atheism was only lip service.
Apparetnly they took action against all relgions in Russian and
especially the Orthodox Christian Chruch which most Russians belonged
to.....So cearly they were not just playing pretend as you imagine.
So that was for atheism, huh? No--it was for the state and
leader.
The official view of the CPSU was State
Worship.Communists are, by definition, Religious Statists.<<
LOL Nice rationalization....... Youre kidding, of course.
No. I am, of course, quite serious. I do, of course, know more
than you.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 03:36:44 PM |
|
|
So that was for atheism, huh? No--it was for the state and
leader.
The well spring of hatred for Christianity was the Atheist World View
of the CPSU...
No. I am, of course, quite serious. I do, of course, know more
than you.
Oh okay..That must be it then.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Kresch" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 08:24:42 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism On 26 Oct 2006 13:36:44 -0700, "marcinmd"
<marcinmd@aol.com> let us all know that:
So that was for atheism, huh? No--it was for the state and
leader.
The well spring of hatred for Christianity was the Atheist World View
There is no such thing.
of the CPSU...
No, it was the hatred of competition for the minds of those
they were about to enslave.
No. I am, of course, quite serious. I do, of course, know more
than you.
Oh okay..That must be it then.
It is. I've studied far more about economics and politics than
you could hope to.
Don
---
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 12:40:08 AM |
|
|
On 25 Oct 2006 19:13:56 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
The USSR was officially Atheist....
No, it was officially communist.
Atheism was officially the view of the Communist Party CPSU and the
Soviet State..
Atheism isn't a "view", liar. It's the absence of one of your views.
Communists are by definition ( and written decree in this case)
Atheists.
Unless they are Catholic, Eastern Orthodox etc, liar.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Father Haskell" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 06:08:57 PM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
Don Kresch wrote:
The USSR was officially Atheist....
No, it was officially communist.
Atheism was officially the view of the Communist Party CPSU and the
Soviet State..
Communists are by definition ( and written decree in this case)
Atheists.
Isn't xianity really an early form of communism?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 04:52:49 PM |
|
|
In article <1161812739.774121.162130@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> writes:
Lucifer wrote:
marcinmd wrote:
No, that's just a claim. It's not evidence.<<
leads to
depravity.
A word. Bollocks. The USSR substitued one dogma for another. Communism
became like religion, with all the same adverse consequences, you'll
find most of us on here are anti-dogmatic, and inclined not to support
soviet russia. Now lets look at the nazis, the crusades, the
inquisition, franco etc.
The USSR was officially Atheist.... I realize how embarrassing that is
for you...
The Nazi's were not officially theist as a point of doctrine and in
practice they persecuted and imprisoned and killed believers....
Beg pardon? Between the Lutherans and the Catholics, Germany
was overwhelmingly Christian at the time. If they had imprisoned
and killed all the Christians, they couldn't have scrounged together
enough troops to invade East Elbownia.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 09:03:59 PM |
|
|
Beg pardon? Between the Lutherans and the Catholics, Germany
was overwhelmingly Christian at the time. If they had imprisoned
and killed all the Christians, they couldn't have scrounged together
enough troops to invade East Elbownia.
Surely you are not serious..Atheism is a basic tenet of Soviet
Communism and an OFFICIAL doctrine of the Party which they actively
pursued...
The Nazi's had nothing at all to do with Christianity in any form what
so ever and in fact murdered Priests by the thousands..Lutheranism was
not an Official belief of the Nazi Party.
Nearly every Japanese was a Buddhist.. Are you saying Japanese
Imperialism is a branch of Buddhism?
Which part of this is unclear to you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 12:37:28 AM |
|
|
On 25 Oct 2006 19:03:59 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote:
Beg pardon? Between the Lutherans and the Catholics, Germany
was overwhelmingly Christian at the time. If they had imprisoned
and killed all the Christians, they couldn't have scrounged together
enough troops to invade East Elbownia.
Surely you are not serious..Atheism is a basic tenet of Soviet
Communism and an OFFICIAL doctrine of the Party which they actively
pursued...
How the ***** can a non-event be "a basic tenet", a motivation for
anything, or any kind of justification, bigoted lying moron?
The Nazi's had nothing at all to do with Christianity in any form what
so ever and in fact murdered Priests by the thousands..Lutheranism was
not an Official belief of the Nazi Party.
Look up "Gott mit uns", liar.
Nearly every Japanese was a Buddhist.. Are you saying Japanese
Imperialism is a branch of Buddhism?
Yet again the liar puts words into people's mouths.
Which part of this is unclear to you?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Father Haskell" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 06:02:59 PM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
Beg pardon? Between the Lutherans and the Catholics, Germany
was overwhelmingly Christian at the time. If they had imprisoned
and killed all the Christians, they couldn't have scrounged together
enough troops to invade East Elbownia.
Surely you are not serious..Atheism is a basic tenet of Soviet
Communism and an OFFICIAL doctrine of the Party which they actively
pursued...
And the drunken pogroms were an official tenet of the Russian
orthodox church.
.
|
|
|
| User: "marcinmd" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 07:26:40 PM |
|
|
And the drunken pogroms were an official tenet of the Russian
orthodox church.
You simply cant compare the drunken rampages of ignorant peasents and
the full force of State Power carrying out the Atheist agenda...But if
it's all you got, I guess you have to go with it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 07:37:29 PM |
|
|
"marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote in news:1161908800.402330.187150
@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
And the drunken pogroms were an official tenet of the Russian
orthodox church.
You simply cant compare the drunken rampages of ignorant peasents and
the full force of State Power carrying out the Atheist agenda...But if
it's all you got, I guess you have to go with it.
I've seen the atheist agenda . . . well, I would have seen it if it
existed. It didn't include killing opponents, just teaching them to think.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
http://www.thoughts.leaddogs.org/
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
So far as I can remember, there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of
intelligence.
-- Bertrand Russell
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
27 Oct 2006 04:45:57 AM |
|
|
On 26 Oct 2006 17:26:40 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote:
And the drunken pogroms were an official tenet of the Russian
orthodox church.
You simply cant compare the drunken rampages of ignorant peasents and
the full force of State Power carrying out the Atheist agenda...But if
it's all you got, I guess you have to go with it.
What "atheist agenda" would that be, deliberately button-pushing liar?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Father Haskell" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
26 Oct 2006 08:23:36 PM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
And the drunken pogroms were an official tenet of the Russian
orthodox church.
You simply cant compare the drunken rampages of ignorant peasents and
the full force of State Power
The drunken rampages of ignorant peasants WERE the full force of
state (and church) power.
carrying out the Atheist agenda...But if
it's all you got, I guess you have to go with it.
Atheist agenda? What's that? Sleeping in late on Sunday?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p." |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
27 Oct 2006 07:24:36 AM |
|
|
marcinmd wrote:
And the drunken pogroms were an official tenet of the Russian
orthodox church.
You simply cant compare the drunken rampages of ignorant peasents and
the full force of State Power carrying out the Atheist agenda...
One of the major differences being is that there is no such thing as an
Atheist agenda.
But if
it's all you got, I guess you have to go with it.
As compared to your argument, which is totally based on strawmen.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 08:30:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:52:49 +0000 (UTC),
(Cary Kittrell) wrote:
- Refer: <ehombh$g9g$1@onion.ccit.arizona.edu>
In article <1161812739.774121.162130@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> writes:
Lucifer wrote:
marcinmd wrote:
No, that's just a claim. It's not evidence.<<
leads to
depravity.
A word. Bollocks. The USSR substitued one dogma for another. Communism
became like religion, with all the same adverse consequences, you'll
find most of us on here are anti-dogmatic, and inclined not to support
soviet russia. Now lets look at the nazis, the crusades, the
inquisition, franco etc.
The USSR was officially Atheist.... I realize how embarrassing that is
for you...
The Nazi's were not officially theist as a point of doctrine and in
practice they persecuted and imprisoned and killed believers....
Beg pardon? Between the Lutherans and the Catholics, Germany
was overwhelmingly Christian at the time. If they had imprisoned
and killed all the Christians, they couldn't have scrounged together
enough troops to invade East Elbownia.
He wants it both ways.
They weren't *real* Christians, apparently!!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "George Peatty" |
|
| Title: Re: ANOTHER GOD QUESTION |
25 Oct 2006 05:01:59 PM |
|
|
On 25 Oct 2006 14:45:39 -0700, "marcinmd" <marcinmd@aol.com> wrote:
The Nazi's were not officially theist as a point of doctrine and in
practice they persecuted and imprisoned and killed believers....
Hitler talked out of both sides of his mouth. There are plenty of
quotations where he both embraces and repudiates both Christian doctrine and
organized Christian worship. He was baptized a Catholic, and never publicly
repudiated that circumstance (out of affection for his mother, at whose
request it was done, no doubt); some of his key advisors, I forget which,
were pagans.
He tried to identify the Nazi party with the church. In so doing, he hoped
to give the party the church's enduring stability, but more importantly, he
wanted to pervert, distort, and vitiate Christian doctrine. I found at
least one "hate site" online testifying to Hitler's "positive Christianity"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
