 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Atheist Delusion
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 06 Nov 10 - 04:21 PM I would tend to ask "How many of these wars and atrocities were actually less about theological disagreements and more about secular power and economic advantage, with religion being a rationalization to cover the real goals?" Sorry for a me too but in trying to get myself back to the thread subject.. me too and very much so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Nov 10 - 04:43 PM Politicians use any pretext they can to get people in support of a war, and religion's a handy one. What the wars are generally really about though are land, resources, trade, and money. Politicians also use religion to get people's votes, but they don't do that FOR religion itself. They do it to get into power. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 06 Nov 10 - 05:15 PM Politicians use any pretext they can to get people in support of a war. That is a pretty broad statement. Have you heard of Neville Chamberlain? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Steve Shaw Date: 06 Nov 10 - 05:23 PM Politicians use any pretext they can to get people in support of a war which they want support for. Little Hawk's statement was crystal clear to me. So wassup, Jacko? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 06 Nov 10 - 05:47 PM Jack, it is quite easy. If you belonged to a race of green people and I belonged to a race of blue people some (not all) politician with want for power is going to say something maybe like the cause of our problems are the green people. We have gone that sort of way for centuries. Personally and doubly personally as this is the way I want to believe, Christianity should offer a way out of that, not in to that. Love thy neighbour but most of us fail in some way at some point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 06 Nov 10 - 05:59 PM Love thy neighbour but most of us fail in some way at some point. Sorry, no at numerous points. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Slag Date: 06 Nov 10 - 07:23 PM I sense denominational differences may soon result in disaeastablishmentarieanism and a plethora of new non-churches of non-believers. Un-A, Un-men! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 06 Nov 10 - 07:48 PM Waht are non-churches of non-believers? Round here atm , I am aware of a Christian fellowship which has no affiliation (although I think they follow the Baptist ideas) I am also aware of a COE church that pretty well sorts itself out - it would have been closed had it not. I have met the people who do the organisation of both and I can assure you they are very much believers. I can't speak for them but I think you would find that it is their faith/belief/whatever and wanting to share that which keeps them going. If I ever did find faith properly, I'd personally rather be at one of these places than I would a "major church".. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Slag Date: 06 Nov 10 - 07:52 PM It was meant to be humorous, Jon! Sorry if I failed. re the second point, the "called out" are the church. "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst." JC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 06 Nov 10 - 07:57 PM More likely my reading slag - sorry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Nov 10 - 07:54 AM When I said, we should look for shades of gray, I did not mean to deny that there are such things as true villains. My top candidates for truly evil people would be those who cause the deaths of the largest number of humans. That would be: Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Atheists all. Not to forget Lenin--another atheist. To return to the book by Cornwell, Hitler's Pope: And going back to the time before the Concordat: p 110 (Cornwell): In the spring of 1931 a Catholic Reichstag representative, Karl Trossmann, published a best-selling book entitled Hitler and Rome, in which he described the National Socialists as a 'brutal party that would do away with all the rights of the people' Hitler, he declared, was dragging Germany into a new war, a war that "would only end more disastrously than the last.' Not long after, the Catholic author Alfons Wild published a widely distributed essay entitled 'Hitler and Catholicism' in which he proclaimed that 'Hitler's view of the world is not Christianity but the message of race, a message that does not proclaim peace and justice but rather violence and hate.' (to be continued) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Nov 10 - 08:11 AM More from Cornwell, p 110: Meanwhile two Catholic journalists, Fritz Gerlich and Ingbert Naab, excoriated National Socialism in the pages of the Munich-based periodical 'Der Gerade Weg', characterizing the movement as a 'plague'. In the issse dated July 21, 1932, the writers declared that "National Socialism means enmity with neighboring countries, despotism in internal affairs, civil war international war. National Socialism means lies, hatred, fratricide, and unbounded misery. Adolf Hitler preaches the law of lies. You who have fallen victim to the deceptions of one obsessed with despotism, wake up.' So why did Pacelli seek an accommodation with Hitler? Primarily because of other enemies. Cornwell, p 112: "Lenin, and Stalin after him, had never concealed their intentions. They had declared war on religion itself and the Orthodox Church in Russian had suffered widespread murderous persecution at the hands of the Communists since 1917. Bishops and priests were jailed and murdered; churches were despoiled and destroyed or turned into atheist museums; the schools and the press were exploited as a means of vilifying religion. It became a crime to teach children under sixteen about God." "Although Roman Catholics in Russia numbered no more than 1.5 million and offered noo threat to the regime, the Catholic Church was no less a victim of Bolshevik persecution." "By 1930 there were no more than 300 Catholic priests in Soviet Russia (compared with 963 in 1921), of whom 100 were in prison." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Nov 10 - 08:47 AM You will also note that Pacelli was not the only person to ever have balanced one evil against another. Note Churchill's famous quote the night before Operation Barbarossa started: "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons." Nor was Pacelli the only person to think he could negotiate with Hitler and come out of it with a worthwhile outcome: consider, Munich, Chamberlain and "peace in our time." In fact Pacelli was one of the first to try to get a quid pro quo from Hitler. In this case his goal was to assure that Catholicism would not be attacked in Germany. However German Catholics, with a much clearer picture of what was actually going on in Germany, opposed the idea of a Concordat--and remained a strong party in Germany. Cornwell p 133: In the March 1993 elections "....the Catholic Center" (party) "which had conducted a courageous campaign in the face of widespread Nazi intimidation, remained impressively solid at 13.9 percent, actually gaining three more Reichstag seats." Right up until March 1933,, then, German Catholicism, with its 23 million faithful, still comprised an impressive, independent democratic constituency that, together with the Catholic hierarchy, remained steadfast in its condemnation of National Socialism. While the Center Party had no viable allies to form a coalition, and therefore no purchase on power, Hitler feared a reaction from the bastion of political Catholicism as a whole, a group that was naturally much larger than the Center Party vote, with extensive links and associations on many levels throughout the country. Because of his long-standing determination to avoid a new Kulturkampf and the attendant risk of a successful Catholic noncooperation or resistance, Hitler was not inclined to tackle the bishops head-on. Something nevertheless had to be done to neutralize them and it was here that Pacelli's Reich Concordat ambitions came to Hitler's aid.." From Hitler's point of view, the ideal solution to the Catholic threat was precisely a summit agreement with the Vatican in all respects similar to the Lateran Treaty, which had outlawed Catholic political action in Italy and effectively integrated the Church into Fascist Italy." "There could be no Reich Concordat, however, without the bishops reversing their denunciation of National Socialism". more later |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Nov 10 - 08:51 AM Obviously "March 1933 elections" Note also, that despite assertions of some of Mudcat's dear atheists, Soviet Russia was in fact an aggressively atheist state. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Steve Shaw Date: 07 Nov 10 - 09:02 AM *Yawn* They were the wrong kind of atheists, Ron. Get over it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Nov 10 - 09:13 AM My proofreading is not the best. I will endeavor to improve. The story of Nazi-Catholic relations in Germany is long and complex. And it's only one of many topics to be be discussed under the rubric of this thread's title. But at least this thread, being short, is much easier to gain access to than the other, now unwieldy, thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Jeri Date: 07 Nov 10 - 09:13 AM To weigh in on this, I'm an atheist, and I don't give a fuck about this type of thread. I've come to the conclusion that I don't have whatever it takes to argue with people on the internet who take this sort of thing so seriously they can seem obsessed because they say the same things over and over about the same subjects, and they never seem to get tired of it. ...not that there's anything wrong with that. It just ain't my type of music. Perhaps I should express THAT opinion over and over and over, using a nearly infinite combination of words. Nah... not while I have actual things to do. (Not that you don't.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 07 Nov 10 - 09:42 AM "Remember there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" Frank Zappa |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Bill D Date: 07 Nov 10 - 11:02 AM I will make ONE comment, in line with similar comments I have made for 4-5-8-10? years here. I know many will not read or care that I do this. It is not religion (theism) or lack or religion (a-theism) that is responsible for war and bigotry and hate and a dozen other sad conditions... nor are they responsible for, or can take credit for, peace, art, altruism, and a dozen other nice conditions. Then what IS? Ignorance & stupidity (different conditions1), both leading to bad reasoning about life and people and 'how to live life among people. If one starts with fallacious premises, **no matter how they got them**, it is possible to find excuses to accept anything as a basis for interaction with others. Sadly, there is no formal way in all societies to instill any comprehensive concept of what 'good reasoning' would look & feel like. [1]stupidity I use in the sense of actual 'limited capacity to learn', while ignorance denotes not having learned what one could learn...whether intentionally or thru flawed education. It IS possible to use 'mostly' good reasoning and still be religious/theistic, but IF one uses 'good reasoning', he/she will also see the limitations of what they can see/do/prove/defend...etc. within a religious context. It is also possible to use 'bad reasoning' and not be an evil, cruel, hateful, bigoted..etc., person, but this requires applying the bad reasoning in different places. (lots of explication required to clarify that point) Until & unless education begins to instill some comprehension of what it means to think coherently, even though actually DOING that remains difficult, there will be excessive and common strife, conflict, war, bigotry...etc. in society(s). If all this seems like some sort of rambling generalization to you, perhaps I have failed to clarify the 'idea' of good thinking well enough-- or perhaps **grin** you need some of that specialized education stuff I tout so highly. Scholars differ.... It will be obvious to anyone who has followed my ramblings that I TRY to use that "good reasoning" stuff, and that it leads me to a position of skepticism on many topics...including religion/theism. I do NOT claim that I always manage to avoid all the pitfalls in that VERY hard process of 'thinking'(.... there are many, many places where we humans can deceive even ourselves by rationalizing and not quite realizing how & why we are doing it...) but I DO claim and assert and insist that there ARE standards by which basic reasoning and decision making can be evaluated. That doesn't mean all humans should think exactly alike, but it DOES mean there are flawed, unsupportable and thus, 'wrong' ways which lead to many of humanities problems. I doubt that I will see much improvement in my relatively short time, and there are obviously those with a stake in NOT encouraging education which undermines their own power...which is already BASED on flawed reasoning. (See how we get terms like "vicious circle"?) Ok...that's more than most will even bother to read, but this ain't something that fits into short, pithy aphorisms...although there are some which apply. You may now resume your previously scheduled bickering... ☺ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 07 Nov 10 - 01:21 PM Bill, I think these days I would use the word stupidity as failure to realise our own logic and reasoning can be wrong rather than your definition. We do wind up in oddly similar states though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Stringsinger Date: 07 Nov 10 - 01:21 PM In most every war fought, religion is a part of the problem. There has never been a true atheist society. I exempt USSR, Stalinism, Pol Pot, China and other totalitarian regimes because a real atheist would never tolerate them. Atheism is FreeThought which doesn't allow for others to do thinking for them. Jeri, I think you have a point since no one's mind is going to be changed here. There is a lot of repetitive exhortations going on. My attempt is to clarify my position, not to denigrate anyone else's. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 07 Nov 10 - 01:25 PM Yes it sure is true that if you define a "real" Atheist as one who will not tolerate Evil then no "real" Atheist has ever tolerated evil. Then again if an atheist is simply defined conventionally, as one who believes there is no God, then the logic breaks down. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 07 Nov 10 - 01:41 PM I exempt USSR, Stalinism, Pol Pot, China and other totalitarian regimes because a real atheist would never tolerate them. But I could feel the same way about a real Christian. I think both the real Christian and the real atheist could have objections.= to some things that happen in the world. I might think you are wrong in your (I'm reading it that way) atheist belief (ie that there is no deity) but would I want to start a "Holy War" with you over this differences? My answer is no. You are aware of Christianity of Bhuddism, of Islam, of atheism, and probably more belief systems than I know of I can put forward proposals and state my own lead me to wanting to keep trying (and failing) with Christ but I can not make you anything, nor should I. Awareness of the different systems is one thing. Which one you take is yours alone. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Greg F. Date: 07 Nov 10 - 02:02 PM But I don't like the way [Ron] becomes totally snotty and intransigent Ron - the Simple Seeker - is not in the least snotty & intrasigent. Merely omniscient and infallible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Stringsinger Date: 07 Nov 10 - 04:24 PM "Evil" is a Manichean construct which is subject to interpretation. I would say that most atheists I know are ethical people and would not tolerate what some would interpret as "evil". As to what is a real Christian, this too, is a matter of opinion not based on any fact. As long as your assessment of what is truly Christian, I have no problem with you believing that as long as I don't have to accept that. I think that it's OK to reject any system of religion. I don't think it's right to force that rejection on others and in fact that can't be done because arriving at a position of atheism is about thinking and reasoning and this can't be forced on any individual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ron Davies Date: 07 Nov 10 - 11:24 PM As I said, German Catholics in general wanted no accommodation with Hitler. But they knew they were being undercut by Pacelli--and they feared the consequences. Cornwell p 134: "So anxious was Cardinal Faulhaber at the prospects for Catholics under Hitler that on March 10" (1933) " he wrote to President Hindenburg, telling of the 'fear that besets wide circles of the Catholic population." When Kaas (head of the Center Party) eventually faced the members of the parliamentary Center Party in Berlin on March 22-23, before the critical Reichstag vote on the Enabling Act" (granting Hitler dictatorial powers) " he pleaded with them to support a 'yes' vote in order to exert a moral hold over the Fuehrer and his stated promises to the Catholic Church--promises he was confident Hitler would deliver in writing (although the written promises failed to materialize.) In other words, Kaas placed his trust in "a moral hold' over Hitler and promises he felt sure would be delivered in writing. When a minority of the Center Party still did not want to vote for the Enabling Act, Kaas "then pleaded with the minority on the score of the probable threat to their personal safety." He was starting to realize the truth of what Stalin put so bluntly later "How many divisions does the Pope have?" The Catholics in Germany had no chance if Hitler was willing to use force against them. There was no question of "sucking up" to the Church. This is a singularly crass and wrongheaded interpretation of what went on. Hitler lied through his teeth--and kept the option of force always open--and often used. Any Mudcatter naive enough to think that because Hitler claimed in a speech that Christianity would be the basis of the reconstruction of Germany, therefore Hitler was not an atheist who despised Christianity, is gullible enough to swallow anything. Perhaps this is part of the Atheist Delusion. But there's a lot more. As I said on the other thread "by their fruits ye shall know them". And Hitler's actions made his attitude clear. His actual attitude toward Catholicism--and religion in general--is made blazingly obvious in two songs sung by the Hitlerjugend at the 1936 Nuremberg rally. I'm sorry I don't have the original German Translations: No evil priest can prevent us from feeling that we are the children of Hitler. We follow not Christ but Horst Wessel Away with incense and holy water The Church can hang for all we care The Swastika brings salvation on earth Fuehrer, my Fuehrer Thou hast rescued Germany from deepest despair I thank thee for my daily bread Abide thou long with me, forsake me not Fuehrer, my Fuehrer, my faith and my light. A favorite SS song had the refrain: "Hang the Jews and put the priests up against the wall." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Jack the Sailor Date: 08 Nov 10 - 12:13 AM I am really tired of seeing some Atheists on this forum implying that only they had the benefit of thought and reason to choose their spiritual path, or lack of it. I can't imagine a more dogmatic and faith based belief. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Nov 10 - 12:47 AM Ron, I think the Nazis were quite happy to work with any church people who would work with them, because they had a traditionally religious population, and they needed to use religion to motivate that population. They would, of course, have turned viciously on any church people who weren't willing to work with them...as they turned viciously on anyone who wasn't willing to work with them. Compliance was their concern, not whether or not someone was religious. I'm not sure how disingenuous Hitler may have been in making statements in speeches about pursuing a "Christian" cause, but I am by no means convinced that he did not sincerely believe he was defending Christian civilization against atheistic Communism. Why wouldn't he think so? He was quite a traditional man in a lot of ways, and sentimental about traditional values. The Fascist causes generally seem to have worked in concert with the Catholic Church, not against it. This was so in Spain, it was so in Italy, it was so in Croatia, why not in Germany? I don't doubt that many German Catholics feared the Nazis...but not because they were Catholics...rather because they could see that the Nazis were violent extremists who simply couldn't be trusted once they had power. I also don't doubt that some hardcore Nazis despised the Church and wanted to replaced Christian worship with worship of Nazi symbols only. But I doubt that that was true of all Nazis or even a majority of them. It certainly wasn't true of the rank and file of the German Army, Navy, and Air Force. You can cherry pick some Nazi song lyrics that attack "priests", just as I cherrypicked some pro-Christian excerpts from Hitler's speeches...but does either set of cherries ring true across the board and tell the whole story? Probably not. Hitler also wrote about Jesus in Mein Kampf, and praised him for being "a fighter" as he put it. A fighter, he implied, for the things Hitler himself believed in. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 08 Nov 10 - 12:53 AM I might agree with you there in part Jack. Some of us have reached our conclusions through making our best analysis at the time. Personally, before dropping out, I was doing (UK) A levels in physics, chemistry and maths and was would be scientist an a devout atheist. Whether my later interpretations of events are correct or not is a matter of opinion but the sort of brianwashed by a church and have not given matters thought type argument some put forward does not wash with me. Others may seem to feel some calling and I'm not going to argue with that either. The other one some athiest may give is some cop out comfort. I can assure you that personally, I seemed to open floodgates to hells I didn't know of rather than that. Why I personally stick with it (or more accurately bounce back and forth) is that all my reasoning and belief takes me back there. In some ways, I wish I could return to atheism. It would be easier on my mind than my failed attempts at Christianity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Nov 10 - 01:22 AM Why try to be either an athiest or a Christian, Jon? They aren't the only 2 games in town! There are a tremendous number of other possibilities for what you could be... Why not just try to be the best person you can be and leave it at that? I am neither a Christian nor an atheist, and I don't have a problem with that at all. You know what I am? I'm a human being. That's something of great value and unlimited potential, and I'm not going to be told what to believe or not believe by anyone. Any sincere attempt at doing anything is not a failure. It's a step in a chosen direction. You're not here to be perfect, you're here to move forward one step at a time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 08 Nov 10 - 01:27 AM Some things I think are inescapable, LH and it's the way I chose. I have no argument with your beliefs though. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 08 Nov 10 - 03:42 AM I was hoping to read a definition of atheism that was free from catches. You'd have thought in all these posts, never mind the myriad posts on the other thread, that this might have been possible? Oh bugger.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:13 AM "I was hoping to read a definition of atheism that was free from catches." Er... what part of 'No' don't you understand? ... :-P :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:45 AM "I am really tired of seeing some Atheists on this forum implying that only they had the benefit of thought and reason to choose their spiritual path, or lack of it. I can't imagine a more dogmatic and faith based belief." All 'beliefs' are delusion, as indeed the belief that there is something inside us that gives us our 'consciousness'. What we have is a whole bunch of subroutines - with often many other subroutines inside them that each react to external stimului. These are connected across the whole This delusion occurs when we decide that there 'must be something in control' - a common belief among theists. Many people who are deluded that they are 'a-theists' do not understand that real atheists just say 'no' to the magical sky fairy stuff, so they keep on trying to justify WHY (and convince others) they need to say 'no'. I don't. Proponents of any idea are likely to get carried away and try to convince others of their beliefs (delusions). I don't. (Well, mostly...) Proponents of any idea that is used to control others (like most 'religious belief systems') have a need to spread that control, especially if their belief system contains the delusion that it is the only correct one, and can be dangerous, and attempt to exterminate the unbelievers and heretics and apostates. As an extreme, consider such as the Taliban, who easily justify murdering others supposedly of their own 'religion' on the basis that it can be no crime to destroy those who are not 'true believers' - much the same behavior as previously portrayed by medieval Christians, and indeed a fairly common belief expressed to this day by many alleged 'Christians'. When the deluded attempt to control philosophical systems that they don't really understand, such as 'Science', forcing it to comply with their delusions about 'how the world really works', you get such nonsense as dinosaurs and humans living together, certain races of people being superior to other races, and the Grand Canyon being sculpted by water in a matter of hours - they use the faulty logic that if a little over a long time will do a task, then a whole lot more over a very short time will do just the same. In Real Life, many things just do not 'scale' conveniently this way - look at all those old movies where they used scale model boats - the water DOES NOT SCALE EXACTLY, and you can easily tell if you know just what artifacts to look for. Such deluded people must be prevented and removed, sadly forcibly, if necessary, from destroying such systems. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 08 Nov 10 - 04:59 AM "Politicians use any pretext they can to get people in support ..." It all goes back to that old cry "hey, there's a big bad monster over there - everybody get behind me and my big sharp stick and I will keep you all safe" - and works best of the monster is imaginary - real monster may be fatal, and not in the least bothered by the sharp stick ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Date: 08 Nov 10 - 05:04 AM Err.. no. Just can't quite grasp it yet. But thanks for trying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 06:46 AM "All 'beliefs' are delusion, as indeed the belief that there is something inside us that gives us our 'consciousness'. With all that, there is also a possibility that consciousness may also be a delusion? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 07:01 AM There seems to be some here who make underlying suggestions that many, most, if not all, those who believe in a God try to control science in some way or another. Is there evidence to back that up? I suspect most people who believe in a God do no such thing. It is also reasonable that most who have a belief in a God also have a capacity to understand and support science at the same time. Stating the contrary seems to be a red herring often put forward by some in attempts to "belittle" a belief in a God. Yes, there are religious organizations and extremists who have tried to control science in the past, as there are likely some, though much less so, today. But, that does not mean that most who believe in a God are part of or support such nonsense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:11 AM From a personal POV, I can control nothing but God can. As for science, I think there is some tie up with science and God that I simply can not fathom. One does not deny the other but putting it all together and making sense of things which at times can seem to conflict is hard. To give one, the biblical creation, purely evolution or some divine management of evolution? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:50 AM Interestng information, not sure if it has changed over the past few years, though:Public opinion polls |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Steve Shaw Date: 08 Nov 10 - 09:56 AM Science just gets on with being science. In everyday scientific endeavour there is no conflict, nay no contact most of the time, between religion and science. Unfortunately for religion, science (unwittingly) gnaws away constantly at the Big Mysteries that religion likes to have in its armoury (the one it needs in order to continue to control people). Gradually, unexplained phenomena get more and more explained. Galileo didn't exactly do himself many favours by forgetting that you sneak up on religion if you want to get on, not grab it by the throat. Darwin likewise, even though he was careful not to confront religion in his own lifetime. Whilst many believers now, teeth gritted, acknowledge that evolution is true (they simply have to, as the evidence is overwhelming), they try putting on a brave face and look for compatibility between evolution theory and religious belief. My view is that evolution is actually a lethal (but unwitting) attack on religion. Natural selection explains all of life on Earth in all its beauty and complexity and completely does away with the need for a creator. Completely. The best that religion can offer is the risible notion that God kicked it all off and now lets it all run on its own. But just look at the backlash from religion. A third of US citizens believe that evolution is false (and who told them that I wonder?) and we have places in supposedly enlightened countries where creationism is made to sit side by side with evolution in school syllabuses. It took almost 400 years for Galileo to get his apology. Let's hope that Charlie Darwin gets his a bit quicker than that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: John P Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:06 AM Can anyone tell me what we're actually talking about here? After a couple of readings of the opening post, it appears that Ron is saying that atheists are delusional because Hitler killed a lot of people without resorting to religion. Aside from the obvious absurdity of saying that atheism led to the Holocaust, where is the delusion? As one of the "Mudcat Atheists" that Ron is going on about, does that mean he thinks I'm a Nazi and that I support mass killing? By the way, Ron, have you read all the religious quotes from Hitler's speeches on the other thread? Any chance you'd tell us how that fits in with your hypothesis? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:10 AM A lot of quotes and stuff here for all to enjoy or curse (feel free to make it Godly or non Godly) at: |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: GUEST,Jon Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:11 AM Charles Darwin was an agnostic. n 1879 he wrote that "I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. â€" I think that generally ... an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:12 AM Opps, Here it is An Atheist Fairy Tale |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:17 AM Some more reading, if you wish...or not, if you already know it all from every and everyones perspective... (not that any of those folks reside on Mudcat :) In Defense of Evolution (2003, updated 2006) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: The Sandman Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:20 AM believing in GOD, Surely is believing in the spirit of goodness. clearly people have different ideas of what is God. THE JEHOVAHS WINESSES God is quite different from the God that the Quakers believe in. personally I believe God exists, I have no idea how the world started, but i can believe in God[ or the spirit of goodness], without believing or disbelieving the creationist theory. Humanists dont believe in GOD AS A PERSON, but they share the same principles as myself ,they just choose to call them by a different name. it does not matter what a person chooses to call them selves, atheist humanist, christian, what matters is how they behave. there are christians who do not behave in a christian manner. is the church investing in stocks and shares christian? it doesnt seem to correspond with jesus christ oveturning the money lenders tables does it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Ed T Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:21 AM Another interesting information source: Common Sense Atheism |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:21 AM Cogito ergo sum? No way. I think therefore I think I am. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Atheist Delusion From: Dave MacKenzie Date: 08 Nov 10 - 10:22 AM "I think therefore I know I amn't" Harvey |
