Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)

It's spelled "Jihad", actually.

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion) There have been wars fought over numerous things. Religion, I do not believe, is the true impetus behind most wars attributed to religion. I believe a ruling body had some reason for wanting the war, and they used religion to get the people to support an otherwise unnecessary war. It is like Bush using possible terrorist threat to validate his war in Iraq. religion doesn't often instigate war, various ruling individuals do. Religion is just an easy method to gain unity among the people, and so various individuals have used it to promote their own agendas.

Originally posted by Impediment
It's spelled "Jihad", actually. And Jihad is not a religion, merely a concept in a religion.

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)

There are no wars over Buddhism.

i think religion is about point of view

Maybe the only reason buddism has not been used to spark a war is because leaders know they wont have the buddists communitys backin

Originally posted by Regret
And Jihad is not a religion, merely a concept in a religion.

It is the concept of a religion gone wrong

but the idea sparked from a religion

Originally posted by don_roberts
Maybe the only reason buddism has not been used to spark a war is because leaders know they wont have the buddists communitys backin

It is also the teachings of Buddhism.

As an atheist I am 100% against all religions, so my vote is yes, religion is bad.

Originally posted by lord xyz
As an atheist I am 100% against all religions, so my vote is yes, religion is bad.

A religion by its self is nothing. The people in the religion are what makes it bad or good. A bad religion filled with good people will change to be a good religion.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A religion by its self is nothing. The people in the religion are what makes it bad or good. A bad religion filled with good people will change to be a good religion. Is that why Islam has a bad reputation?

I think it may be impossible to have a well rounded opinion in youth. It takes years and experience in other cultures to come close to such a thing. Similarly, it is probably impossible to understand properly another belief system without direct exposure to people in that system when it is in a position of majority and oneself is in the position of minority, unless of course you lived the system and studied it thoroughly during that time.

There is good and bad in most religions and the concept of religion in its self but I believe that religion as a whole is creating separations in the human race as much as race and color.

Originally posted by ThePittman
There is good and bad in most religions and the concept of religion in its self but I believe that religion as a whole is creating separations in the human race as much as race and color. Well the problem with modern day religions is that they started no less than 1000 years ago, and back then people died at an early age. Now we have 100 times the science, and we got there without religion. More of Francis Bacon.

There are aspects which inspire goodness in people, but also aspects which inspire the worst sort of atrocities. Religion is at least as much a force for evil and violence as it is for good and peace. But the problems with religion are ultimately problems with human beings.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There are no wars over Buddhism.

No, but they get marched over, occupied and expelled because their philosophy is against it.

religion is just a word, Faith is far more significant.

All labels are arbitrary, to take -hh-'s staement one step further. Religion is only as powerful, weak, good, evil, etc. as the person using it to their ends.

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)

Religion's shit.... The world would be a better place without it but since it's not going a way how about you read up on it before making such a stupid comment.

(I know this post is hypocritical but I'm cool with that.)

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)






Jihad allow to people to defend on their land , right ,its resistance .

but there are people in all religions ,abuse this side to their benefit , no need to say about islam that its (a terrorist religion)

i never said islam woz a terrorist group but has many highlighted misguided believers

Originally posted by don_roberts
i no more than u religion starts wars shush

You're a disgrace to this earth, you really are. It's ignorant morons like you that start wars.

and its dumbass moran like u that fite em

I'd never go off to fight in a war, especially not a religious brawl. You can't simply state "religion starts wars" without backing it up with facts and examples. How about you get off your republican redneck ass and do a bit of research into it. Religion does cause problems but it's not the religion themselves, it's the people who follow them, in no religious scripture does it tell the Catholics to fight the Protestants etc. It's not the religion that is causing the problems it's just the stupid godforsaken fundamentalists that follow what they believe to be right no matter what and if they meet people with opposing beliefs, they'll try and take them down.

Religion was supposed to be a personal matter - it is only when it stopps being so that creates problems.

Besides, having a war over religion is like having a big fight about who has better imaginary friend.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness

Besides, having a war over religion is like having a big fight about who has better imaginary friend.

Charming. Obvoulsy I dont think war over religon is a good thing.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
There are no wars over Buddhism. Perhaps because China, and the surrounding areas, were already preoccupied with war, rulers didn't need to use Buddhism to instigate it. Also, their wars were mainly between people that believed the same, or extraordinarily similar, things, making it difficult for rulers to show differences in religion as being great enough to rationalize war.

Originally posted by Regret
Perhaps because China, and the surrounding areas, were already preoccupied with war, rulers didn't need to use Buddhism to instigate it. Also, their wars were mainly between people that believed the same, or extraordinarily similar, things, making it difficult for rulers to show differences in religion as being great enough to rationalize war.

But the essence of Buddhism is peace. Buddha did want blind following.

Even though Religion have a lot of negatives there is a good reason. It helps to enhance your spiritual and social life. How? spiritual because it depends on how you meditate your thoughts according to the faith. Socially, because it helps people sharing the same faith and connections with themselves or their community.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Even though Religion have a lot of negatives there is a good reason. It helps to enhance your spiritual and social life. How? spiritual because it depends on how you meditate your thoughts according to the faith. Socially, because it helps people sharing the same faith and connections with themselves or their community.


1) There is no proof of the existance of one's spirit. Until it is proven, your first claim cannot be held as fact. It may be truth, but we do not know.


2) Your second statement about social connections to those of the same Faith is good on one end...but horrible on the other. It promotes unity only with the like minded, and disunity with all those who do not share the same view. That, my freind, is dangerous.

Originally posted by Regret
Perhaps because China, and the surrounding areas, were already preoccupied with war, rulers didn't need to use Buddhism to instigate it. Also, their wars were mainly between people that believed the same, or extraordinarily similar, things, making it difficult for rulers to show differences in religion as being great enough to rationalize war.

well sed

Originally posted by lil bitchiness


Besides, having a war over religion is like having a big fight about who has better imaginary friend.

true

Religion gives me entertainment... that's good, right?

wot kind of entertainment?

Originally posted by don_roberts
Im english u stupid trigger happy yank how can tell me about war bush starts wars as a hobby. wot wud u die for oil or religion

Check the location you stupid moron.

And yeah, I'd prefer to fight for Oil rather than Religion, as I'm an Athiest.

Originally posted by don_roberts
wot kind of entertainment?

Comedy of course.

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)

As long as you don't hijack planes and fly them into buildings, your religion is ok in my book.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
As long as you don't hijack planes and fly them into buildings, your religion is ok in my book.

Or persecute and burn people for thinking differently (fortunatly that seems to be in the past.)

Originally posted by Boris
Comedy of course.

U will love christian tv

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Or persecute and burn people for thinking differently (fortunatly that seems to be in the past.)

U ever gone 2 middle east in some countrys doin christian stuff is ounished by death

Originally posted by don_roberts
i think religion is about point of view

well jews say jesus wasn't the messiah
christians do
muslims say mohhamad was the greatest prohet
christians say jesus

stupid jock ur gonna die at 45

Religion is a bunch of crap, and always will be.

The only good Religion is Vinny's Sexiligon.

Originally posted by don_roberts
U ever gone 2 middle east in some countrys doin christian stuff is ounished by death

Only in passing, but since I'm not Christian they had no reason to "ounish" me with death.

Originally posted by Vinny Valentine
Religion is a bunch of crap, and always will be.

The only good Religion is Vinny's Sexiligon.

Your are absolutely right, religion is a bunch of crap. But relationship with God the Father through Jesus Christ is not a religion (except to those who are not discerning enough to understand this). Jesus never once used the word religion to describe His activity or purpose in coming to this earth. Now I already know what urizen is going to say, he is going to dispute what I have just said, but who cares.

"The word religion derives from the Latin word religare, meaning "to join, or link" and classically understood to mean the linking of human and divine." http://www.explainthat.info/re/religion.html

Based on what I have learned from studying the Bible the word "religion" is in the Bible. It is translated from the Greek word "threskeia" and it signifies "religion" in its external aspects. (i.e. many of the "outward" things that you see people doing to curry God's favor without actually confessing Jesus as Lord and coming to him in genuine repentance from sin). You know what I mean? In an ostensible way, without there being any true conversion.

In the Bible, the word religion occurs five times and the word religious twice. In none of these instances is this word associated with or descriptive of what Jesus came to this planet to accomplish or to establish. However, the word religion is used to allude to Judaism. The word religious is purposely used in James 1:26-27 to set in opposition that which is counterfeit and deceitful. In the Bible the word religion is never used (not even once) to refer to nor to characterize Jesus' church, their doctrine, system of beliefs, or relationship with the Father, Son Jesus, and Holy Spirit. The word Christianity is nowhere in Scripture, but I presume that those who employ this term do so for the purpose of differentiating those who follow Jesus from those who do not. That is all.

In conclusion, I am not trying to launch a crusade to abolish and eradicate the term Christianity because it is only a name and it exists for sake of setting believers in contrast to those who do not follow Jesus. This is just another hair-splitting episode in the exciting adventures of hair-splitter extraordinaire, and yours truly, JesusIsAlive!

Originally posted by Vinny Valentine
Religion is a bunch of crap, and always will be.

The only good Religion is Vinny's Sexiligon.

TRUE how cacn preist swear to not have sex?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Your are absolutely right, religion is a bunch of crap. But relationship with God the Father through Jesus Christ is not a religion (except to those who are not discerning enough to understand this). Jesus never once used the word religion to describe His activity or purpose in coming to this earth. Now I already know what urizen is going to say, he is going to dispute what I have just said, but who cares.

"The word religion derives from the Latin word religare, meaning "to join, or link" and classically understood to mean the linking of human and divine." http://www.explainthat.info/re/religion.html

Based on what I have learned from studying the Bible the word "religion" is in the Bible. It is translated from the Greek word "threskeia" and it signifies "religion" in its external aspects. (i.e. many of the "outward" things that you see people doing to curry God's favor without actually confessing Jesus as Lord and coming to him in genuine repentance from sin). You know what I mean? In an ostensible way, without there being any true conversion.

In the Bible, the word religion occurs five times and the word religious twice. In none of these instances is this word associated with or descriptive of what Jesus came to this planet to accomplish or to establish. However, the word religion is used to allude to Judaism. The word religious is purposely used in James 1:26-27 to set in opposition that which is counterfeit and deceitful. In the Bible the word religion is never used (not even once) to refer to nor to characterize Jesus' church, their doctrine, system of beliefs, or relationship with the Father, Son Jesus, and Holy Spirit. The word Christianity is nowhere in Scripture, but I presume that those who employ this term do so for the purpose of differentiating those who follow Jesus from those who do not. That is all.

In conclusion, I am not trying to launch a crusade to abolish and eradicate the term Christianity because it is only a name and it exists for sake of setting believers in contrast to those who do not follow Jesus. This is just another hair-splitting episode in the exciting adventures of hair-splitter extraordinaire, and yours truly, JesusIsAlive!


Religion is changed a tiny bit by the leaders it was a pagan roman emperor who put the bible together sayin that jesus was devine put the peeps who wrote books in the bible saw jesus as the leader of a brotherhood

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
As long as you don't hijack planes and fly them into buildings, your religion is ok in my book.

HAHA...classic over-reaching on your part. I'm sure you forget groups like the IRA and ETA.

ira and eta r not religious terrorist

Originally posted by don_roberts
ira and eta r not religious terrorist

IRA just happens to be CAtholic

Irish are catholoic but the ira mission was not religiously bonded it was a fight for irelands independance

Religion has its ups and its downs.

Religion can bring people together and create a community that will help each other out. It teaches children moral values by using false figures of god and the devil to reward you with heaven or punish you with hell. It is alot easier to raise children when you make them fear god. Don't do this or you will go to hell, don't do that or Santa wont send you presents. Some people couldn't parent without god and religion.

Nobody can say if religion is good or bad. It's all an opinion. Nobody knows ware the world would be if no one invented the bible or any other faith. We could all be united as one or we could all be kill each other with no fear of god. Who knows?

"Pure religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world."
James 1:27

Well said.

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)

It served its purpose, now it's obsolete.

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion) I think that religion is a very important part of every day life because it gives people hope. Whether that hope is false or not, I can not tell, but without religion, without the hope of a better tomorrow, I think that lots of people would be extremely depressed. Granted, religion has started lots of wars, but wars have been started without religion being any part of it. Religion is definitely a good thing.

Perhaps hope is better found in other places?

Originally posted by don_roberts
Many wars are about religion many die though misguided religion e.g Jehad (a terrorist religion)


Religion is only as good as the people who represent it. If the people do bad things in the name of thier religion, then the religion is a bad one. If the people do good things in the name of thier religion, then the religion is a good one.

So far, all religions have shown to be good and bad in one way or another...except for Buddhism. So far, I have yet to hear of a human atrocity occuring out of Buddhism.

However, religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and most other deity-based religions have been responsible for both good and evil throughout history.

Originally posted by Great the Vraya
Religion is definitely a good thing.

How is it a good thing if it has caused wars ?

Religion is both good and evil. Like almost everything else.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
How is it a good thing if it has caused wars ?

Religion is both good and evil. Like almost everything else.

Or maybe..jsut maybe..it is neither...which obviously is the more reasonable conclusion.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Or maybe..jsut maybe..it is neither...which obviously is the more reasonable conclusion.

Religion by itself is neutral, yes.

But religion, by itself does not exist. Religion is only "alive" when people still follow it. When a religion loses all of its followers, it becomes labelled "mythology". Soon Christianity and Islam will fall under that category, as this is the cycle with every past religion.

Religion is best described through the people that represent it. And since both good and bad people represent religion, the religion itself is good and bad

(or...in your terms, beneficial and malevolent)

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Religion by itself is neutral, yes.

But religion, by itself does not exist. Religion is only "alive" when people still follow it. When a religion loses all of its followers, it becomes labelled "mythology". Soon Christianity and Islam will fall under that category, as this is the cycle with every past religion.

Religion is best described through the people that represent it. And since both good and bad people represent religion, the religion itself is good and bad

(or...in your terms, beneficial and malevolent)
However, the Judaic faith (Christianity included) has an interesting lasting power. Christianity is not really shrinking either. Millions of people worldwide become Christian every year. I do not believe Christianity will ever die.

Originally posted by Nellinator
However, the Judaic faith (Christianity included) has an interesting lasting power. Christianity is not really shrinking either. Millions of people worldwide become Christian every year. I do not believe Christianity will ever die.

Well, it has already changed enormously since its conception, split along many fault lines. Christians can't even decide amongst themselves which of them are Christian and which aren't, arguing doctrinal differences cut many out.

So you cut away the groups most often accused of being Non-Christian - Catholics, Mormons, JW, Brethren, those people who fast/self flagellate...

And suddenly Christianity has shrunken considerably. Really the only times the above are classified as Christian by some is when they are needed to make up numbers.

And Christian numbers have been in decline - statistically, and in terms of ratio, less are converting or staying Christian. This can be attribute to aging populous, lower birth rates in "predominantly Christian nations", the increasing attractiveness of new age religions or agnosticism, science, Christian and religion in general controversy....

Christianity will probably hang on for a long time (just like there are still people who claim to be part of the Cult of Isis) but as a major religion? Probably not. Is Christianity as relevant today as it was when it was founded? I don't think so. No matter how many times a person says "The Bible is a book that is always up to date" it doesn't make it so. Christianity will decline like every religion, it will continue to fragment, and one day, 50 to a 1000 years from now it will be unrecognisable.

My argument would by that many Catholics are Christians but a lot aren't. The same is true in most 'Christian' divisions.
Christianity is admittedly dying in a lot of Western nations, but it is spreading very quickly in East Asia and Africa. In Nigeria alone over 3 million people have become Christians last year during a huge missionary trip. Cambodia is on pace to become a Christian nation. Christianity will survive as a major religion for a very long time.

"Christian nation" means that the nation will incorporate Chistian doctrine/mythology into their government.

The International Religious Freedoms Report (US State Dept) puts Christians in Cambodia at 2% of the populaiton in 2006. If that is considered significant, Christianity will indeed soon lose its title of "largest number of adherents"

Chirstianity will always be considered a major religion because of its historical influence.

Originally posted by Nellinator
My argument would by that many Catholics are Christians but a lot aren't. The same is true in most 'Christian' divisions.
Christianity is admittedly dying in a lot of Western nations, but it is spreading very quickly in East Asia and Africa. In Nigeria alone over 3 million people have become Christians last year during a huge missionary trip. Cambodia is on pace to become a Christian nation. Christianity will survive as a major religion for a very long time.

In those places you mentioned, where arguably much of the conversion is based upon the fact the people are living in poverty, famine, warfare, ignorance etc - do you imagine them all staying Christian when they realise that "God's love" isn't manifesting its self in a way that eases the terrible things they face? What are the statistics of those who are doing it only for the things the missionaries bring? Those who change back to traditional beliefs later? Those who will convert to Islam later still?

Arguably Islam is also growing in such areas, and one of its stengths is the fact there is many fundamentalists out there who trade on the discontent and impotant anger of these people and inspire them to become fundamental.

Because in the end I'd have serious concerns about the health of a religion that can't florish in places with high levels of education and with less in terms of physical suffering and has to rely upon converts who are desperate for any promise of a better life - being it through religion or politics. But still, if it makes them happier then it is doing some good.

And predominantly Christian is different from Christian nation. I don't seem any of those areas becoming Christian theocracies.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Because in the end I'd have serious concerns about the health of a religion that can't florish in places with high levels of education and with less in terms of physical suffering and has to rely upon converts who are desperate for any promise of a better life - being it through religion or politics. Religon provides structure, purpose and meaning, but has its serious weaknesses. The modern system of education and philosophy has finally superceeded religion in its effectiveness, hence the decline of religions in cultures that have access to such philosophy.


Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
But still, if it makes them happier then it is doing some good. Unfortunately, ignorance does not solve problems. An easy passing is a passing all the same.

Originally posted by Alliance
Unfortunately, ignorance does not solve problems. An easy passing is a passing all the same.

True, it is a very ancient view - "our lives are terrible, but we have the after life to look forward to" - I don't hold much hope for Christianity helping them fix their nations, overcoming the struggle ahead of them. But if it eases the pain a little until such a time I can forgive it.

However if the religion actually slows progress, the "don't question wher you are, just look forward to the next life" mentality - then it shouldn't be there.



True again, but education and philosophy seem much more sound and reliable. The people who are being converted as they lack this would certainly wonder about the validity of this religion if they had such facts, and wonder about its potential to really improve their lives.

Originally posted by Alliance
"Christian nation" means that the nation will incorporate Chistian doctrine/mythology into their government.

The International Religious Freedoms Report (US State Dept) puts Christians in Cambodia at 2% of the populaiton in 2006. If that is considered significant, Christianity will indeed soon lose its title of "largest number of adherents"

Chirstianity will always be considered a major religion because of its historical influence.
That is not necessarily a fair poll. If you had ever been to Cambodia you might understand why that poll came out that way.Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
In those places you mentioned, where arguably much of the conversion is based upon the fact the people are living in poverty, famine, warfare, ignorance etc - do you imagine them all staying Christian when they realise that "God's love" isn't manifesting its self in a way that eases the terrible things they face? What are the statistics of those who are doing it only for the things the missionaries bring? Those who change back to traditional beliefs later? Those who will convert to Islam later still?

Arguably Islam is also growing in such areas, and one of its stengths is the fact there is many fundamentalists out there who trade on the discontent and impotant anger of these people and inspire them to become fundamental.

Because in the end I'd have serious concerns about the health of a religion that can't florish in places with high levels of education and with less in terms of physical suffering and has to rely upon converts who are desperate for any promise of a better life - being it through religion or politics. But still, if it makes them happier then it is doing some good.

And predominantly Christian is different from Christian nation. I don't seem any of those areas becoming Christian theocracies.
There were no benefits in that particular trip. A stadium where a man preached and 4 million people showed up for no other reason than to hear about Jesus. And then 3 million walk away having professed faith in Christ in a nation not overly supportive of Christianity because of benefits? No, a lot of people were transformed for the better.
Christianity will remain a major religion in Western nations for a long time and it can survive in intellectual nations when it is not represented and presented by ignorant zealots.
Happiness is not a tenant of the Christian faith. Happiness is fairly pointless, as is selfgratification. Christianity is about living a good life in belief of the saving power of Jesus.
Originally posted by Alliance
Religon provides structure, purpose and meaning, but has its serious weaknesses. The modern system of education and philosophy has finally superceeded religion in its effectiveness, hence the decline of religions in cultures that have access to such philosophy.


Unfortunately, ignorance does not solve problems. An easy passing is a passing all the same.
Education may help people, but it can fulfill the spiritual needs of humans. Religion will always exist because of the spirituality of mankind.

Originally posted by Nellinator
That is not necessarily a fair poll. If you had ever been to Cambodia you might understand why that poll came out that way.

There are a lot of people in Cambodia - but 2% of a lot if still 2%, just like 2% of 100 would still be 2%

Unless you are saying it was corruption and it is actually a higher % then the figures give credit for. But if that is the case it would be impossible to argue the figure might be higher either - it would be pointless. It could be a little as 2% or as much as 99%.



I wasn't talking about that in particular - I am talking about conversion rates when missionaries turn up with food or building supplies. And it seems a remarkable feat of polling - did they actually ask 4 million people if they were now Christians? Or did the preacher just say "repeat after me - I take Jesus" - because that is just as much mob rule as actual profession of faith. I don't sing, but in the middle of a groud at a concert, when the performer points at the audience - I sing along with the rest. And to be honest I didn't know there were stadiums that could seat 4 million. Or was it over successive meetings?



One must define ignorant zealot - because if it is someone like Bush American Christians helped elect him.



Well I would wonder what the point of doing that would be if happiness wasn't the goal -

"Dear Mother - I am living a good life in accordance to the Bible. It doesn't make me happy, but happiness is fairly pointless. Thank goodness I found Christianity after my brush with Nihilism. Love Boris.

PS - wait a minute!"

Because a lot of Christian advocates trade on that - joy, happiness, all the attractive emotions Christian brings. Somehow I doubt it would lasted nearly as long if preachers got up and said "happiness - pointless."



A person doesn't need a religion to be spiritual. In fact God gets in the way of true spirituality.

Originally posted by Nellinator
That is not necessarily a fair poll. If you had ever been to Cambodia you might understand why that poll came out that way.

I have not been to Cambodia, however, the US State Department has much more credibility than "Nellinator" does. Instead of simply dismissing it as ignorant (which it clearly is not), why don't you explain its problems. I certainly would give that statistic (it was not a poll) much more credibilty than a "If you were smart like me you might understand."

Originally posted by Nellinator
Education may help people, but it can fulfill the spiritual needs of humans. Religion will always exist because of the spirituality of mankind.

I find both of those statements incorrect. Education exposes you to competing ideas and philosophies. Philosopy can fulfill the spiritual needs of humans. Combinations of philosophies are much better than religions because they are both personal and all encompassing.

Spirituality does not equal religion. Spirituality is a characteristic and a feeling. Religion is an indocrinated system of beliefs centered around supernatural occourances. They may be correlated, but they are far from identical concepts.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
There are a lot of people in Cambodia - but 2% of a lot if still 2%, just like 2% of 100 would still be 2%

Unless you are saying it was corruption and it is actually a higher % then the figures give credit for. But if that is the case it would be impossible to argue the figure might be higher either - it would be pointless. It could be a little as 2% or as much as 99%.

I wasn't talking about that in particular - I am talking about conversion rates when missionaries turn up with food or building supplies. And it seems a remarkable feat of polling - did they actually ask 4 million people if they were now Christians? Or did the preacher just say "repeat after me - I take Jesus" - because that is just as much mob rule as actual profession of faith. I don't sing, but in the middle of a groud at a concert, when the performer points at the audience - I sing along with the rest. And to be honest I didn't know there were stadiums that could seat 4 million. Or was it over successive meetings?

One must define ignorant zealot - because if it is someone like Bush American Christians helped elect him.

Well I would wonder what the point of doing that would be if happiness wasn't the goal -

"Dear Mother - I am living a good life in accordance to the Bible. It doesn't make me happy, but happiness is fairly pointless. Thank goodness I found Christianity after my brush with Nihilism. Love Boris.

PS - wait a minute!"

Because a lot of Christian advocates trade on that - joy, happiness, all the attractive emotions Christian brings. Somehow I doubt it would lasted nearly as long if preachers got up and said "happiness - pointless."

A person doesn't need a religion to be spiritual. In fact God gets in the way of true spirituality.
I am saying that the number is incorrect. A lot more are. Cambodian people generally and culturally identify themselves as Buddhist. There is also a lingering fear of being identified as Christian after the Khmer Rouge. Christianity is very prevalent in Cambodia and is especially common among the unpolled younger population of children and teenagers which will mean a higher dominance in the future. Also there are many Buddhist monks in Cambodia that are Christian that cannot claim to be Christian because they risk being thrown out of home and losing what could be their only chance for an education.

http://cfan.org/_images/pictures/crusades/ogbomosho1102/journal/Day1.jpg
http://cfan.de/_images/pictures/crusades/onitsha0301/journal/day3_b.jpg
http://cfan.de/_images/pictures/crusades/ibadan1101/journal/day1_b.jpg
Stadium may have been misleading... Its more of stage in the middle of a massive field, but whatever.
Actually I believe that it was a two day thing at three different cities with an average of 1 million at each. These pictures will hopefully give you an idea of the magnitude of the turnout. Each one is from a different city visited. The response is huge. Everyone who entered was given a card that was anonymously filled out and 3 million came back with 'decisions for Christ'.

Ignorant zealots a lot of hypocritical door to door goers who tell you that you are going to hell while they disobey God themselves.

Happiness is not our goal. Joy, contentment, peace, and happiness do not equate. The first three are necessary in Christian life however. Happiness is good, but not our goal because selfishness is the cause of many bad things in the world.

Philosophy does not replace our spirituality. Nor does it fulfill it. It avoids, rationalizes and suffucates it. Spirituality cannot be answered by man. Although not all spirituality comes from God, rational, logic, and philosophy are not replacement for it.

Originally posted by Nellinator
However, the Judaic faith (Christianity included) has an interesting lasting power. Christianity is not really shrinking either. Millions of people worldwide become Christian every year. I do not believe Christianity will ever die.

Christianity has lasted two thousand years.

Greek Mythology lasted much longer, and it died out as a religion and converted to pure mythology.

Sadly, in a few centuries from now, this may very well be the case with Christianity. Christianity may gain millions each year, but it also loses millions each year.

Christianity is ever-changing...it evolves with us. You should already know the History of the Churches, both Catholic and Protestant...and you should already know that the Bible has been editted, re-translated, and re-editted numerous times throughout history.

If Christianity does not die out as a religion, it will evolve into a new one.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Spirituality cannot be answered by man. Although not all spirituality comes from God, rational, logic, and philosophy are not replacement for it.



Philosophers throughout history have proven to be more Peaceful than religious figures over all.

I see less anger and hatred in Buddhists than in Christians. Nell, can you please answer this qualm? Why is it that Hatred, Bigotry, and Hypocrisy is so common among the Christian realms? Especially pertaining to Evangelism ?

You know this is true....where has the Love gone ?

There are 30,000 children dying every day, and the Churches are going to focus on Gay Marriage and Abortion, issues that ultamately do not matter in comparison to Global War, Poverty, Starvation, and the like ?

Why not address actual Human and Animal suffering instead of waste time on superficial causes?

According to Time Magazine, 50% of American Citizens who happen to be some form of Christian Faith are anticipating the End of the World, and truly beleive that the Universe is 6000 years old.....what kind of progress can ever stem from such foolishness? You tell me Nell.....

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Philosophers throughout history have proven to be more Peaceful than religious figures over all.

I see less anger and hatred in Buddhists than in Christians. Nell, can you please answer this qualm? Why is it that Hatred, Bigotry, and Hypocrisy is so common among the Christian realms? Especially pertaining to Evangelism ?

You know this is true....where has the Love gone ?

There are 30,000 children dying every day, and the Churches are going to focus on Gay Marriage and Abortion, issues that ultamately do not matter in comparison to Global War, Poverty, Starvation, and the like ?

Why not address actual Human and Animal suffering instead of waste time on superficial causes?

According to Time Magazine, 50% of American Citizens who happen to be some form of Christian Faith are anticipating the End of the World, and truly beleive that the Universe is 6000 years old.....what kind of progress can ever stem from such foolishness? You tell me Nell.....

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Philosophers throughout history have proven to be more Peaceful than religious figures over all.

I see less anger and hatred in Buddhists than in Christians. Nell, can you please answer this qualm? Why is it that Hatred, Bigotry, and Hypocrisy is so common among the Christian realms? Especially pertaining to Evangelism ?

You know this is true....where has the Love gone ?

There are 30,000 children dying every day, and the Churches are going to focus on Gay Marriage and Abortion, issues that ultamately do not matter in comparison to Global War, Poverty, Starvation, and the like ?

Why not address actual Human and Animal suffering instead of waste time on superficial causes?

According to Time Magazine, 50% of American Citizens who happen to be some form of Christian Faith are anticipating the End of the World, and truly beleive that the Universe is 6000 years old.....what kind of progress can ever stem from such foolishness? You tell me Nell.....
Philosophers tend to less violent because they spend too much time thinking and not enough time doing. Philosophers have come up with many stupid ideas that have lead to terrible things.

You likely see less anger in Buddhists for three reasons:
1) They have a less strict moral code than Christians and therefore are not as upset by things they do not classify as sin or bad karma.
2) Buddhists do not generally feel responsible for the actions of others. Christians are called to tell people the truth and lead them away from evil.
3) Many Christians are hypocrits. It is the largest problem facing the church. God knows it. Just look at people such as you and Shaky for example. Both of you were once Christians, but were/are pushed away by hypocrisy. Evangelism is what is happening in Africa and other places around the world. In America, evangelism has deteriorated into threatening and hate speeches. Read the NT and you will see that Jesus spent a lot of his time attacking hypocrits. Jesus knew how terrible hypocrisy can be and I think it was one of the things he came to put right. And yet so many Christians fail to realize how much Jesus himself would hate their hypocrisy...

The love is there, it is just becoming harder to find because too many people are self-righteous.

To be fair Christian organizations do a great deal in these areas, and it is commendable, however, too many Christians fail to help those in their own communities. The homeless, drug addicts, etc. Its just more hypocrisy and apathy. I hate it and it is wrong. It is an error amongst the people, not with God.

However, I believe that abortion is a major issue because abortion has killed more people than Hitler did within the last decade... But, this is not the place to argue about that.

I am anticipating the end of the world myself. I do not think that it slows progress. I have to disagree with you on this point. This belief should not affect how I live my life as God has called us to a life of love. I do not sit around or let it affect how I go about my daily business.

Originally posted by Nellinator
I am saying that the number is incorrect. A lot more are. Cambodian people generally and culturally identify themselves as Buddhist. There is also a lingering fear of being identified as Christian after the Khmer Rouge. Christianity is very prevalent in Cambodia and is especially common among the unpolled younger population of children and teenagers which will mean a higher dominance in the future. Also there are many Buddhist monks in Cambodia that are Christian that cannot claim to be Christian because they risk being thrown out of home and losing what could be their only chance for an education.

Which are all factors that statisticians take into account when making statistics. The fact seems to remain that officially there is not a huge percentage of Christians - and while it sounds like you have been there I can't help but wonder how long it was that enabled you to make such a grand number up if people are hiding the true faith. Because it sounds a lot like evangelical pamphlets I have seen that claim figures that are... well, not fully grounded in reality.

One I saw in Australia recently had to do with a vote in Parliament at the moment over therapeutic cloning (which is going well) - it claimed 7 out of 10 Australians were against it. What they failed to point out that that figure was based on a poll. Taken in a Church. And allowed those being polled to "how do your friends view it?" The among wrong with that isn't funny. So have you questioned millions of Cambodians to back up your claim?



Ok.



In Australia, say you want to convert to Catholicism, or some other Christian church. For Adults there is, quite seriously, a four month preparation process. Once a week, for almost those four months, people go to a nightly meeting, talk, learn discuss - to make sure the religion is right for them. Why?, I once asked. Apparently in this day and age people jump into things and then decide it isn't right for them. As such it is done to give people a chance to come to terms.

There are some who claim those "flashes" that make them see Christianity is right. But there are others who are testing the waters, those doing it for family/marriage reasons, those people who feel they need faith, those people who think they are in the wrong faith. And apparently it is a lot more successful - converts remain converts. A bunch of people go and see a guy in a field and after a couple of hours are converted? I wonder....



Most Christians then (except the door to door bit.)



I'll remember that the next time I visit a Buddhist temple and hear them talking about happiness being what we strive for. Because those happiness seeking Buddhists, well, they are monsters.

And to be honest, I can't imagine joy without happiness, contentment without happiness is an impotent, bland thing, and peace can't prosper by itself - without something to strive for things stagnant. I think happiness is something we strive for, and it is right we do so, as without happiness there is far less reason to live then there is if there is no God. Because joy, peace, contentment and happiness exist without God, and are not dependant on him.



I know plenty of people who would disagree, and who live full, happy, joyful, content lives.

The reality is people don't need God, any gods, in this world to be happy. They don't need them to be successful. They don't need them to be content. However some people find it easier to achieve such things believing in a deity. Good for them. But I don't believe humanity is in a position that fundamentally requires religion.

Do animals have spiritual needs? No. Do humans? We have created a need for ourselves, one of the aspects of our social evolution. And there are many ways to fulfill it. Or ignore it - since plenty don't believe in it. Philosophy is a valid alternative.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Philosophers tend to less violent because they spend too much time thinking and not enough time doing. Philosophers have come up with many stupid ideas that have lead to terrible things.

You likely see less anger in Buddhists for three reasons:
1) They have a less strict moral code than Christians and therefore are not as upset by things they do not classify as sin or bad karma.
2) Buddhists do not generally feel responsible for the actions of others. Christians are called to tell people the truth and lead them away from evil.
3) Many Christians are hypocrits. It is the largest problem facing the church. God knows it. Just look at people such as you and Shaky for example. Both of you were once Christians, but were/are pushed away by hypocrisy. Evangelism is what is happening in Africa and other places around the world. In America, evangelism has deteriorated into threatening and hate speeches. Read the NT and you will see that Jesus spent a lot of his time attacking hypocrits. Jesus knew how terrible hypocrisy can be and I think it was one of the things he came to put right. And yet so many Christians fail to realize how much Jesus himself would hate their hypocrisy...

The love is there, it is just becoming harder to find because too many people are self-righteous.

To be fair Christian organizations do a great deal in these areas, and it is commendable, however, too many Christians fail to help those in their own communities. The homeless, drug addicts, etc. Its just more hypocrisy and apathy. I hate it and it is wrong. It is an error amongst the people, not with God.

However, I believe that abortion is a major issue because abortion has killed more people than Hitler did within the last decade... But, this is not the place to argue about that.

I am anticipating the end of the world myself. I do not think that it slows progress. I have to disagree with you on this point. This belief should not affect how I live my life as God has called us to a life of love. I do not sit around or let it affect how I go about my daily business.

I agree with a lot of what you say Nellinator. Some of the hypocrisy that goes on(and to be quite honest - I am guilty of some myself) I think comes from anger, hurt, rejection - and quite frankly, a feeling that some Christians(and non-Christians) have which could be equated to a sincere longing for God or "Love" within their lives. Not just to have a "feeling" of God in their lives per say - But perhaps..some actually long to be with God more in an intimate sense..like being in a family - with a loving father and mother. I think many see themselves as stuck - in a world which at times is filled with soo much evil, and of many who hate them - as well as openly and proudly admonish this love they have for God.(I'm certain there's quite a few on this forum who are typical examples of this behaviour)

Consequently - those not mature in their faith, immediately lash out at those who hurt them, or to those they believe are attacking God. They believe they are truly helping God by doing this, but as we can see within this forum - as well as out in the real world, sometimes such actions have an adverse effect. Jesus did indeed say it best in using the simple phrase "They'll know us by our love." Something myself and other Christians within this world need to live by.

Still, I think other people project feelings they may have about themselves upon others - be they positive or negative. I do think many of these people truly love God as well - and want to help him spread his word, but unfortunately do not know how to do it. Some of this might have to do with a feeling of inadequacy in the abilities that God has given them, some of it might have to do with the way they were raised.(many come from broken homes, or environments where they have not been taught how to properly communicate with others in a loving but non-judgemental manner.)

And lastly - some I feel, have extreme anger over the condition of the world, and at the current individual who the bible appropriately titles the "God of this Age." I think they are truly angry with this world's condition - the suffering, the hardship, and the evil present within it - and whenever they see evil commited, they feel compelled to lash out against it. They see it as a direct assualt on their loving God, who they consider their "friend" and who they know the turth about - and rather than think things through - they act swiftly(however sometimes ineptly) to proclaim his innocence and maintain his good name.

This is not to say that there are others who fall in different categories out there - but I can only lable the things that I've witnessed, and perhaps have experienced myself. Ultimately all individuals do have to be responsible for themselves at some point, regardless of their circumstances or intentions, I definitely don't deny this -- but at times, I can understand how some of the hypocrisy manifests itself in its initial stages.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
Which are all factors that statisticians take into account when making statistics. The fact seems to remain that officially there is not a huge percentage of Christians - and while it sounds like you have been there I can't help but wonder how long it was that enabled you to make such a grand number up if people are hiding the true faith. Because it sounds a lot like evangelical pamphlets I have seen that claim figures that are... well, not fully grounded in reality.

One I saw in Australia recently had to do with a vote in Parliament at the moment over therapeutic cloning (which is going well) - it claimed 7 out of 10 Australians were against it. What they failed to point out that that figure was based on a poll. Taken in a Church. And allowed those being polled to "how do your friends view it?" The among wrong with that isn't funny. So have you questioned millions of Cambodians to back up your claim?



Ok.



In Australia, say you want to convert to Catholicism, or some other Christian church. For Adults there is, quite seriously, a four month preparation process. Once a week, for almost those four months, people go to a nightly meeting, talk, learn discuss - to make sure the religion is right for them. Why?, I once asked. Apparently in this day and age people jump into things and then decide it isn't right for them. As such it is done to give people a chance to come to terms.

There are some who claim those "flashes" that make them see Christianity is right. But there are others who are testing the waters, those doing it for family/marriage reasons, those people who feel they need faith, those people who think they are in the wrong faith. And apparently it is a lot more successful - converts remain converts. A bunch of people go and see a guy in a field and after a couple of hours are converted? I wonder....



Most Christians then (except the door to door bit.)



I'll remember that the next time I visit a Buddhist temple and hear them talking about happiness being what we strive for. Because those happiness seeking Buddhists, well, they are monsters.

And to be honest, I can't imagine joy without happiness, contentment without happiness is an impotent, bland thing, and peace can't prosper by itself - without something to strive for things stagnant. I think happiness is something we strive for, and it is right we do so, as without happiness there is far less reason to live then there is if there is no God. Because joy, peace, contentment and happiness exist without God, and are not dependant on him.



I know plenty of people who would disagree, and who live full, happy, joyful, content lives.

The reality is people don't need God, any gods, in this world to be happy. They don't need them to be successful. They don't need them to be content. However some people find it easier to achieve such things believing in a deity. Good for them. But I don't believe humanity is in a position that fundamentally requires religion.

Do animals have spiritual needs? No. Do humans? We have created a need for ourselves, one of the aspects of our social evolution. And there are many ways to fulfill it. Or ignore it - since plenty don't believe in it. Philosophy is a valid alternative.
Millions? No, Cambodia does not have a large population. For the people in Phnom Penh and Battambang I can definitely see a conservative estimate being around 10% Christian. Comparing that to the 1% that I would have said 10 years ago and the increasing rate of conversion, I can confidently say that Cambodia is progressing towards becoming a Christian nation.
Seems like a fair poll...

No, but the 'crusades' as they are called provide the groundworks. It is followed up by the building of churches, schools, hospitals, and aid. These people are taught about Christ. If they choose or become interested the existing church is there to meet their spiritual needs and physical (as best as possible). That is the way evangelism is supposed to work (not this horrible threatening idiocy present within the Western world).

Buddhists are not monsters. I never claimed such. Shaky for instance is a very reasonable person. I enjoy him. I have many Buddhist friends. However, I many of my Buddhist friends goals in life to very self centered. It is a theme I find prevalent (but not really dominant) amongst Buddhists. That said, I think a lot of Christians are self centered as well, so...

Originally posted by Nellinator
Millions? No, Cambodia does not have a large population. For the people in Phnom Penh and Battambang I can definitely see a conservative estimate being around 10% Christian. Comparing that to the 1% that I would have said 10 years ago and the increasing rate of conversion, I can confidently say that Cambodia is progressing towards becoming a Christian nation.

And I still point out statisticians take variables into consideration and at this point in time your claim they are progressing towards becoming a predominantly Christian nature is based upon conjecture which is no supported by the statistics.



How exactly? Actual professional polling done by government and researchers showed quite quite different, the pamphlet poll misconstrued the results to give the impression a greater number are against the laws currently passing through Parliament then actually are. Such a poll is not considered factual, nor well done (since it does not provide the views of many, drawing solely from a Church community), even more so as they allowed people to make up results - "yes, my friends are against it."



So, there is physical benefits that follows - aid, schools, hospitals?



And the problem with that is? And from my experience with Buddhist it is very unobtrusive self centredness. If the cost of being happy in life is being a little introverted then it is a good trade - if more people looked at themselves a bit more the world would be a better place. How many Christians, or Muslims or the like have I met who think "I don't need to look at myself, I've got Jesus, that is a sign I am good" - the answer is far to many.

It may be conjecture. But you would have to witness it to believe it I guess. I wonder what that same poll said was the percentage of Buddhists?

I was joking. The poll was very biased and actually pretty retarded from what you told me.

I see where you are trying to go with this. Yes, physical aid follows sometimes. However, the hospitals and schools are open to all, not just the converts.

Yes, they are unobtrusive, however, I find that Buddhism is too apathic most of the time. Also, I agree with you in many ways on the need to improve ourselves before we look at others.
Jesus once said to remove the plank from your own eye first before removing the speck from your friend's.

Originally posted by Nellinator
The love is there, it is just becoming harder to find because too many people are self-righteous.

To be fair Christian organizations do a great deal in these areas, and it is commendable, however, too many Christians fail to help those in their own communities. The homeless, drug addicts, etc. Its just more hypocrisy and apathy. I hate it and it is wrong. It is an error amongst the people, not with God.

The problem is that people dont focus on the love. Read the good stuff, and axe the rest. Christian philosophy could be a great system, but the institution prevents that from happening.

I help more in my community than most Christians I know do. Yet, every time a political issue rolls around, I have to sit and listen to how immoral and dangerous I am because I don't believe in their god, even though they don't believe in anyone elses. They feel apt to force their opinons onto me, yet I fight for the basic right for them to voice their opinions. Its hypocrisay on the highest leve and it NEEDS to stop. Christianity needs to stob being a business and a church. It needs to become a movement again, which is what I interpret Christ wanted it to be.

On a mroe sour note, if your God is all powerful, then he has predestined these Christians to do this. It is his fault. How can you be so sure that God hasn't had an effect, even giving you the undefendable assumption that your God exists in the first place?

Most people use religion as a crutch. They are weak insecure people that are afraid to take responsibilities for their own actions and thoughts blaming them on a god. Many religions play "Pass the buck." It's gods fault, the devils, the sinful lives of another, but oh, not me.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Most people use religion as a crutch. They are weak insecure people that are afraid to take responsibilities for their own actions and thoughts blaming them on a god. Many religions play "Pass the buck." It's gods fault, the devils, the sinful lives of another, but oh, not me.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Most people use religion as a crutch. They are weak insecure people that are afraid to take responsibilities for their own actions and thoughts blaming them on a god. Many religions play "Pass the buck." It's gods fault, the devils, the sinful lives of another, but oh, not me.
Too bad that doesn't apply in almost all cases I know. I am responsible for everything I do and so is everyone else. If they try to use religion as a crutch they are fooling themselves because passing the blame does not lead to repentance.

Apparently you don't examine the role your faith plays in your life.

Sure I do. My faith gives me these things: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, gentleness, faithfulness, goodness, and self-control. Self-control being the most relevant to our argument.

I recieve all those things from elswhere. However, I recieve them from myself. I don't do it to please anyone, I do it because I beleive it makes me a better person. You use these items as a crutch to satisfy your selfish desire to go to Heavan. I do these things because I think they are morally right.

Not to mention I pursue intelligence and knowledge, something MOST relevant to our argument.

Intelligence and knowledge. Something that I possess, have spent most of life attaining, and continue to attain. Selfish desire to go to Heaven? Not so, speak for someone else please. I would follow God even if it lead to the same fate as unbelief.

Well apparently you don't posess enough, since you so far seem unable to use logic to back up your arguments.

Not so huh? Why do you want to go to heavan? Is it just a convience that you get everlasting bliss?

So you do what you're told. Thats not very intelligent of you is it.

Originally posted by Alliance
Well apparently you don't posess enough, since you so far seem unable to use logic to back up your arguments.

Not so huh? Why do you want to go to heavan? Is it just a convience that you get everlasting bliss?

So you do what you're told. Thats not very intelligent of you is it.
Evidence of my lack of logic please.

Yes it is a convience. Hoping to see you there though.

Sure it is, if it makes me do good and help others.

I have been pointing it out all fricking night. If you've missed it, you need ot work on your reading skills.

Convineince my arse. If you do actions out of fear; your selfish desire to live forever and be "happy." If there is a god and he's a good god, I'
ll see you there. If hes not a good god and can't judge based on purpose in this world, I'd rather suffer eternally than help a bastard.

But none of it matters anyway, since the chance of your god being a real god is basically 0.

Originally posted by Alliance
I have been pointing it out all fricking night. If you've missed it, you need ot work on your reading skills.

Convineince my arse. If you do actions out of fear; your selfish desire to live forever and be "happy." If there is a god and he's a good god, I'
ll see you there. If hes not a good god and can't judge based on purpose in this world, I'd rather suffer eternally than help a bastard.

But none of it matters anyway, since the chance of your god being a real god is basically 0.
And you have been wrong about it all night.

Once again, a nice convience.

Good deeds matter whether God is real or not. Proof my God being real, not bad, considering it can't be proven otherwise.

No. Good is a point of view. Its a self-perception.

Nothing you mentioned proves god, let alone your god in the slightest.

Originally posted by Alliance
No. Good is a point of view. Its a self-perception.

Nothing you mentioned proves god, let alone your god in the slightest.
And nothing you mentioned disproves him. Draw. You see you can't win and neither can I...yet...

please...logic disproves god.

Or being more specific, the chance of their being a god is almost zero. The chance of tha t god being yours, is too small to wrap ones brain around.

Originally posted by Alliance
please...logic disproves god.

Or being more specific, the chance of their being a god is almost zero. The chance of tha t god being yours, is too small to wrap ones brain around.
The chance of the universe and matter creating itself...0... Once again its a draw by your own measure.
Logic does not disprove God in any way, or else it would have been done by now.

Perhaps you're just late to the party.

Or the party doesn't exist because logic cannot disprove God.

Originally posted by Nellinator
The chance of the universe and matter creating itself...0... Once again its a draw by your own measure.
Logic does not disprove God in any way, or else it would have been done by now.

I actually agree with you here


The only thing I have to say is that just because there may be a creator for this universe, does not automatically mean that the Christian God is it.

There have been many "gods" in mythos before that, and I am pretty sure beings on other worlds far from here have had thier own versions of who the creator is.


The Christian God strikes me as limitted and immature. Sorry, but i never bought into it.

However, their may be some reflection of truth in Biblical version of God. Perhaps our universal creator leaves remnants of his or her existance in every mythos and psyche possible.

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
I actually agree with you here


The only thing I have to say is that just because there may be a creator for this universe, does not automatically mean that the Christian God is it.

There have been many "gods" in mythos before that, and I am pretty sure beings on other worlds far from here have had thier own versions of who the creator is.


The Christian God strikes me as limitted and immature. Sorry, but i never bought into it.

However, their may be some reflection of truth in Biblical version of God. Perhaps our universal creator leaves remnants of his or her existance in every mythos and psyche possible.
This is called an open mind. Alliance lost his sometime a few months ago.

Originally posted by Nellinator
This is called an open mind. Alliance lost his sometime a few months ago.


Strong Athiests and Literalist Christians are equally closed minded in my opinion. It's kinda sad....this is why we are all at conflict. No one is willing to admit they MIGHT be wrong.

Religion is definately bad even though is has some good things also, but all the good things are available without being religious.
Religion make people not use their common sense and instead follow what the religion tells them to do.
Religion and God(s) are man made just like Santa, Vampires, unicorns, ghost etc - Religion is old and did not developed with the world (a little but not enough - especially Islam). Being religious is a huge mistake - but if people need this then it is okay by me - as long as the religion stay home and is not out in politics and influences other peoples life. And it is okay to criticize religion as with all other things in life.

what good is religon? you will see what gd religon is on judgment day if u dont folo the right religon u will go to hell

Which means your pour soul is at risk as well.

not as much as urs is

Originally posted by Nellinator
The chance of the universe and matter creating itself...0... Once again its a draw by your own measure.
Logic does not disprove God in any way, or else it would have been done by now. No God doesn't mean the universe created itself.

The violance caused by religion is a poor excuse to hate it, like violance isn't done for money, women, power, emotions, are we to smash all those as well?

Learn to be a man and just deal with what life deals you. I find more athiests using a lack of religion to permit them to do whatever they damn well please. Infact, they live in more fear then the religious. Religious people both fear but love God. Like a stern parent.

The athiests simply fear the state. Thier depravity is limited only to the laws of the land. Which is pretty sad. It should be the exact oppisite, an athiest should realize that his actions have infinite consequinces and be more respectful then the religious who believe life is cheapend through reincarnations, an afterlife, and God's forgiveness.

But no, it is instead the athiests who are pro-choice, sexualy promiscuies, and generaly not decent people. Not to say there isn't decent athiests, or that there aren't depraved religious people, but I'm not basing this post on the minority but the majority. And the majority of athiests are very much worse then the majority of religious people. They base thier lives based on "hendonism". Which is an eccentric way of saying someone is greedy, lustful, peverse, and malice.

An athiest's dogma should be that it does not matter what resides on the other side, cause there might not be an other side at all. But to be a good person in this life, and do whatever you can to make this life better for everybody and to improve yourself so you are better equipped to help people. We have to make the most of this life, and treating our life like a dirty dumpster where we throw all our cravings and attachments isn't going to solve anything.

In essence, athiests should be Buddhists, but instead are neo-Satanists.

Originally posted by muslimscholar
not as much as urs is
How is that?

Originally posted by Storm
How is that?


Storm, don't listen to him. He's another zealot who will remain closed to any reasoning you happen to offer.

Originally posted by Green Arrow
The violance caused by religion is a poor excuse to hate it, like violance isn't done for money, women, power, emotions, are we to smash all those as well?




Anything that promotes violence is not deserving of respect.


Religion has been one of the top instigators for nation wide violence. Therefore it gets no respect from myself and many other people.






Originally posted by Green Arrow
Learn to be a man and just deal with what life deals you. I find more athiests using a lack of religion to permit them to do whatever they damn well please. Infact, they live in more fear then the religious. Religious people both fear but love God. Like a stern parent.


You should never fear God. You should never FEAR someone who loves you.


Religious people tend to abuse thier religion, just as much as Atheists tend to abuse thier sense of moral freedom, because many religious people will do bad things to hurt people, and justify it by saying thier religion allows or encourages it.







Originally posted by Green Arrow
The athiests simply fear the state. Thier depravity is limited only to the laws of the land. Which is pretty sad. It should be the exact oppisite, an athiest should realize that his actions have infinite consequinces and be more respectful then the religious who believe life is cheapend through reincarnations, an afterlife, and God's forgiveness.



You really don't know what you are talking about, do you ? Your massive generalizations are alarming.




Originally posted by Green Arrow
But no, it is instead the athiests who are pro-choice, sexualy promiscuies, and generaly not decent people. Not to say there isn't decent athiests, or that there aren't depraved religious people, but I'm not basing this post on the minority but the majority. And the majority of athiests are very much worse then the majority of religious people. They base thier lives based on "hendonism". Which is an eccentric way of saying someone is greedy, lustful, peverse, and malice.


Then how come the most corrupt politicians and people in power, happen to be religious ?






Originally posted by Green Arrow
An athiest's dogma should be that it does not matter what resides on the other side, cause there might not be an other side at all. But to be a good person in this life, and do whatever you can to make this life better for everybody and to improve yourself so you are better equipped to help people. We have to make the most of this life, and treating our life like a dirty dumpster where we throw all our cravings and attachments isn't going to solve anything.




How do you know Atheists don't aim to help other people ? You are sooo deluded........



Originally posted by Green Arrow
In essence, athiests should be Buddhists, but instead are neo-Satanists.








You really killed it with this dumb excuse for an argument !

Originally posted by Green Arrow
The violance caused by religion is a poor excuse to hate it, like violance isn't done for money, women, power, emotions, are we to smash all those as well? Religion encourages and promotes violence. Women do not. Nor does money, power emotions etc.
Originally posted by Green Arrow
Learn to be a man and just deal with what life deals you. I find more athiests using a lack of religion to permit them to do whatever they damn well please. Infact, they live in more fear then the religious. Religious people both fear but love God. Like a stern parent. Your ignorance on atheism is frightening.
Originally posted by Green Arrow
The athiests simply fear the state. Thier depravity is limited only to the laws of the land. Which is pretty sad. It should be the exact oppisite, an athiest should realize that his actions have infinite consequinces and be more respectful then the religious who believe life is cheapend through reincarnations, an afterlife, and God's forgiveness. Why should we be respectful to whom that are deluted? Are you respectful of Scientologists?
Originally posted by Green Arrow
But no, it is instead the athiests who are pro-choice, sexualy promiscuies, and generaly not decent people. . Yes, being liberal is sick. Unlike killing people who have different opinions and choices.
Originally posted by Green Arrow
Not to say there isn't decent athiests, or that there aren't depraved religious people, but I'm not basing this post on the minority but the majority. And the majority of athiests are very much worse then the majority of religious people. They base thier lives based on "hendonism". Which is an eccentric way of saying someone is greedy, lustful, peverse, and malice. I don't even know, and I bet not many atheists here do, what hendonism is. I thought you're against atheists, sounds like you're against liberals instead.
Originally posted by Green Arrow
An athiest's dogma should be that it does not matter what resides on the other side, cause there might not be an other side at all. But to be a good person in this life, and do whatever you can to make this life better for everybody and to improve yourself so you are better equipped to help people. We have to make the most of this life, and treating our life like a dirty dumpster where we throw all our cravings and attachments isn't going to solve anything. First, learn what dogma means, second, take a few english classes, third, we already think that. It's the religious people that waste their lives. If you don't see that, you're an idiot.
Originally posted by Green Arrow
In essence, athiests should be Buddhists, but instead are neo-Satanists. How is an atheist a "neo-satanist"? And why?

Lord xyz, don't bother with him.

Green Arrow is obviously brainwashed already, since his understanding of non-religious people is SOOOOO warped and bias, it will be YEARS before he even considers the fact he may be wrong.

It's been said that religion appeared as prehistoric man's way of explaining things. It was how primitive human beings understood their universe, including those parts unseen, like any existence after death.

But religion was more than just an explanation. It brought comfort and hope. More than anything else, religion--even if there really is no God--is our way of attaching to the loftiest and noblest ideals the mind can imagine, that people can aspire to, ideals so heartwarming and uplifting that we've often done the opposite.

Eh, humans.

Religion is only as good as the people who stand behind it. It has absolutely no power on its own.

Or if you change your religion they will show their true colors, well at least many protestants........Funny though, Catholics don't seem to do that..........wonder why??

Originally posted by Mindship
It's been said that religion appeared as prehistoric man's way of explaining things. It was how primitive human beings understood their universe, including those parts unseen, like any existence after death.

But religion was more than just an explanation. It brought comfort and hope. More than anything else, religion--even if there really is no God--is our way of attaching to the loftiest and noblest ideals the mind can imagine, that people can aspire to, ideals so heartwarming and uplifting that we've often done the opposite.

Eh, humans.

I blame Aristotle, though honestly, someone else would have had the problem.

The Anicent Greek science was about description. Then Aristotle came along and thought evertyhing had to have some sort of divine meaning, pushing humankind into a mental rut that the majority have still have been unable to pull out of.

Religion gives a meaning. Even though its based on nothing, people will clamor for meaning like one dollar bills with three extra zeros scribbled on them. They don't care to analyze the history if thier line of thought or the validity of thier evidence. They're jsut happy "knowing."

religion is the cause of all wars

Originally posted by M.T. STYLE
religion is the cause of all wars

I find that to be false.

Originally posted by Alliance
I blame Aristotle, though honestly, someone else would have had the problem.

The Anicent Greek science was about description. Then Aristotle came along and thought evertyhing had to have some sort of divine meaning, pushing humankind into a mental rut that the majority have still have been unable to pull out of.

Religion gives a meaning. Even though its based on nothing, people will clamor for meaning like one dollar bills with three extra zeros scribbled on them. They don't care to analyze the history if thier line of thought or the validity of thier evidence. They're jsut happy "knowing."

Indeed.

Originally posted by M.T. STYLE
religion is the cause of all wars
Factors such as ethnicity, identity, power struggles, resources, inequality and oppression are.

Originally posted by Storm
Factors such as ethnicity, identity, power struggles, resources, inequality and oppression are.

As well. Religion can be one of the factors though.

Originally posted by M.T. STYLE
religion is the cause of all wars hum

As I said before, although religion sometimes plays an important role, so do a variety of cultural, political and historical factors. Leaders use differences over faith as a way of sowing hatred and mobilising support for political wars. Religion sometimes is a cause for conflict, sometimes it simply helps sustain conflict, and other times it is used as a pretext for conflicts that have deeper roots in other issues.

Stating that religion is the cause of all wars is simply inaccurate.

Originally posted by Storm
As I said before, although religion sometimes plays an important role, so do a variety of cultural, political and historical factors. Leaders use differences over faith as a way of sowing hatred and mobilising support for political wars. Religion sometimes is a cause for conflict, sometimes it simply helps sustain conflict, and other times it is used as a pretext for conflicts that have deeper roots in other issues.

Stating that religion is the cause of all wars is simply inaccurate.

Yes, this is what I meant to say.

Originally posted by Storm
As I said before, although religion sometimes plays an important role, so do a variety of cultural, political and historical factors. Leaders use differences over faith as a way of sowing hatred and mobilising support for political wars. Religion sometimes is a cause for conflict, sometimes it simply helps sustain conflict, and other times it is used as a pretext for conflicts that have deeper roots in other issues.

Stating that religion is the cause of all wars is simply inaccurate.

A much better phrase would be: Religion does not contribute to the stability of the world.

Originally posted by M.T. STYLE
religion is the cause of all wars

world war 1 wasnt

religion is not the cause of all wars it is Merrily used as an excuse to gain power and land

Originally posted by Alliance
A much better phrase would be: Religion does not contribute to the stability of the world.

edit

How so? Politics is an incredibly stabilizing force within nations. I feel it does more good than harm.

Originally posted by Alliance
How so? Politics is an incredibly stabilizing force within nations. I feel it does more good than harm.

Well WW1 and WW2 were about Politics. Vietnam war was about Politics. Atrocities commited by America in S.America was about Politics. The Cold War was about Politics. The Chinese Government is oppressing its own people becuase of Politics.

how is that politics?

Originally posted by Alliance
how is that politics?

Well communism is a Political system right? Politics is about governing people right?

Communism has never really been achieved, socialism is an econimic system.

Politics is about governing people....I'd agree with that. Its simple, but works.

Originally posted by Alliance
Communism has never really been achieved, socialism is an econimic system

You did say its never really been achieved but doesnt the Chinese Government call itself Communist. Didnt the Vietnamese call themselves Politics. In the Cold War weren't the Russians communist?

As far as I know there is no such thing as 100 percent Capitalist system but America is still Capitalist.

Originally posted by Alliance

Politics is about governing people....I'd agree with that. Its simple, but works.

Right and communism comes under Politics.

I can call myself the Queen of England. It doesn't actually make me the Queen of England.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You did say its never really been achieved but doesnt the Chinese Government call itself Communist. Didnt the Vietnamese call themselves Politics. In the Cold War weren't the Russians communist?

As far as I know there is no such thing as 100 percent Capitalist system but America is still Capitalist.

Right and communism comes under Politics.

What is this the Cold War? Overdramatization comes to mind. Governments mislabel themselves because they're trying to be things that they are not. Communism is a rather clearly defined endgoal of society, one without government. I don't see anything close to that at all. Socialst might be the word you are looking for.

Secondly, it seems as if you dont really find fault with politics, but communism. If that is the case, then what you're doing is like saying all mammals are violent because you see a lion maul an antelope.

I'm pretty sure that CIA source you like so much called them Communist...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I'm pretty sure that CIA source you like so much called them Communist...

You know what I mean....but now we have to start nitpicking. Obvoulsy some people have a different defintion of what Communism is.



Originally posted by Alliance
What is this the Cold War? Overdramatization comes to mind.

Well it could have led to a nuclear war.

Originally posted by Alliance

Governments mislabel themselves because they're trying to be things that they are not. Communism is a rather clearly defined endgoal of society, one without government. I don't see anything close to that at all. Socialst might be the word you are looking for.

No I am not. You dont think maybe they might have a different defintion of what Communism is? Anyway regardless of what you want to call them they use a political system.

Originally posted by Alliance

Secondly, it seems as if you dont really find fault with politics, but communism. If that is the case, then what you're doing is like saying all mammals are violent because you see a lion maul an antelope.

No I am saying that Politics can be bad as well. Its just that most of the examples of conflict I can remember are between Capitalism and Communism.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I'm pretty sure that CIA source you like so much called them Communist...

Why would I trust an American souce that would clearly be biased in this instance? The US called everyone they didn't like communist. They were too busy clutching fear to actually use their heads.

Originally posted by Alfheim
No I am not. You dont think maybe they might have a different defintion of what Communism is? Anyway regardless of what you want to call them they use a political system.

Then name something that doesn't use politics and show me why this is such a special case.

Originally posted by Alfheim
No I am saying that Politics can be bad as well. Its just that most of the examples of conflict I can remember are between Capitalism and Communism.

Well, then I'd say thats a myopic view. If all you can reduce this conflict too, then saying politics is a destabilizing factor is over-reaching. (not even commenting on its correctness of course)

Originally posted by Alfheim
You did say its never really been achieved but doesnt the Chinese Government call itself Communist. Didnt the Vietnamese call themselves Politics. In the Cold War weren't the Russians communist?



well, if you look at the steps Marx envisioned neccesary for the transformation of society into a communist system, there was the need for a "dictatorship of the proletariat" on a temporary basis. It's arguable that communist governments never got hung up on the part where the government seizes private property and businesses, resulting in an autocratic dictatorship, and thus failing to fulfill Marx's vision of societal transformation.

Originally posted by Alliance
Why would I trust an American souce that would clearly be biased in this instance? The US called everyone they didn't like communist. They were too busy clutching fear to actually use their heads.

Well as far as I knwo they call themselves Communist as well.


Originally posted by Alliance

Then name something that doesn't use politics and show me why this is such a special case.

Well if you think about what im talking about I am talking about secular politics even if I have not used the phrase. If you also think about what I said and maybe im not making myself clear....politics can be just as bad as religon. Im not saying its like that all the time im saying it can be.



Originally posted by Alliance

Well, then I'd say thats a myopic view. If all you can reduce this conflict too, then saying politics is a destabilizing factor is over-reaching. (not even commenting on its correctness of course)

Well how many other political systems do you want or examples of conflict.

Theres the oppression of Communism by Stalin.

Theres the oppression of Hitler with facism.

Theres the conflict bet ween facism and communism.

Theres the example of the American Government presecuting people who they thought were Communist.

Theres the Vietnam war where the Americans invaded Vitenam because they didnt want them to become Communist.

Theres the Cold War which could have turned into a nuclear war.

Theres WW1

Theres the Jacobins of the French Revolution.