History's Greatest Holocaust Via Atheistic Ideology

I thought maybe no one had responded to my question about the girl with AIDS. But you did.I see how she can bond with other people going through what she is going through.But, I guess I have been the other girl that found that nothing in this life could satisfy me.As for Buddhism. Buddhism is very misinterpreted in the US. Buddhism teaches that you should not feel at all. In fact, the goal of Buddhism is to feel nothing and to think about nothing in meditation.The difference between Christ and Buddha is this:Buddha's eyes are closed and they look inward. He feels no joy and no pain because he loves no one and is attached to nothing. He does not suffer.This is how he rid himself of suffering - by making himself numb.Christ eyes are open and they look outward. His love of His people overwhelms Him to the point of death on a cross. His body is beaten so that he does not even look human anymore. He suffers much for the love of humanity - he is the opposite of numb - he feels EVERY emotion intensly.Prayer is much different from meditation. THe point of prayer is to focus so much on your own emotions that you fall on your face crying before God or that you raise your hands in great praise to God. Prayer involves all emotion. ANd rather than being detached from people the point is to ask God to so connect you to others' emotions - their suffering and their joy that you can have compassion and empathy for them and not just pray that God will do good for them, but that He will love them deeply.And meditation in the US anyway is something people do in a section of their day to bring themselves this inner numbness. But the Bible teaches us to pray without ceasing - yes, this involves more suffering, but suffering brings perserverance and perserverance builds character.Christ definitely endured more suffering, but Buddah's life to me seems more like a living hell.

quote:

---

Christ eyes are open and they look outward. His love of His people overwhelms Him to the point of death on a cross. His body is beaten so that he does not even look human anymore. He suffers much for the love of humanity - he is the opposite of numb - he feels EVERY emotion intensly.

---

This has to be one of the most repellant descriptions of personal belief I have come across. I would never tell any child this story, especially to alleviate their suffering. I don't see how it could, except in some pretty twisted fashion.

quote:

---

Christ definitely endured more suffering, but Buddah's life to me seems more like a living hell.

---

Your question was based on a person that was suffering due to their pursuit of material or cultural (ie external) desires. That's why I mentioned Buddhism. I could easily have mentioned other alternatives if I knew you were going to shift the goal posts or had predispositions against anything but Xianity as a religion.Frankly though unless you are trying to identify youself with Christ I am uncertain how his quantity of suffering alleviates your own? Why not just meet with others in this life that share your concern, or suffer more than you, and find a purpose in this alone?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

As for Buddhism. Buddhism is very misinterpreted in the US.

---

I would agree that Buddhism is often misinterpreted in the US.

quote:

---

Buddhism teaches that you should not feel at all.

---

Um, this is exactly the kind of misinterpretation that often happens in the US.Buddhism doesn't teach what you say it does.

quote:

---

In fact, the goal of Buddhism is to feel nothing and to think about nothing in meditation.

---

No, Buddhists believe that the root of all suffering and pain is attachment, so through the practice of their religion, they become less desireous to posess and control things.The following is one of the four Noble Truths in Buddhism. Notice that it specifically lists the desire to avoid unpleasant feelings as incompatible with correct Buddhist practice:Buddhism's core beliefs"Samudaya: The cause of suffering is a desire to have and control things. It can take many forms: craving of sensual pleasures; the desire for fame; the desire to avoid unpleasant sensations, like fear, anger or jealousy."

quote:

---

The difference between Christ and Buddha is this:

​

Buddha's eyes are closed and they look inward. He feels no joy and no pain because he loves no one and is attached to nothing. He does not suffer.

---

As you can read above, your characterization of Buddhism as avoiding suffering is wrong.

quote:

---

This is how he rid himself of suffering - by making himself numb.

---

Incorrect. Buddhism is not at all about nubmness. Buddhism is about living in the moment and about releasing oneself from the desire to have and control things. It does not promote numbing the emotions at all.

It's easier to sacrifice your life when you believe that
physical death is not the end, yes.It's harder, as an athiest, to sacrifice one's life
for one's fellows, knowing that that's your lot, but every
day around the western world their are athiests who do --
in the fire services and police forces. They don't do it
because of a god, they do it becuase they believe it is
the right thing to do -- perhaps you think there are no
athiest firepersons or police officers?And how is being killed for a belief a sensible thing?
Could one not do more wordly good by continuing to live and
do good in the world?

quote:

---

You really don't think that you will only have your own selfish intersts in mind?

---

I can't speak for anyone else, believer or not, but for me
the answer to the above is no.I find comments like this vaguely offensive in fact.What makes you think that, simply because I do not believe
that there is a good, or eternal reward in some heaven or
other, that I would be self-serving?If I see someone struggling, I offer help, and am constantly
amazed by the number of people who walk by -- and by the
suspicion that the struggler often feels. I have no expectation
of reward for this, I just don't think it's right to watch
someone struggle when you can help -- provided that it is the
right kind of help.

quote:

---

Christ most definitely is my crutch.

---

And you feel that this is a healthy attitude?

quote:

---

I keep thinking that I don't need Him -that's how deep my sinful nature runs (and I've been a Christian from 10 years!)

---

So the only reason you don't sin is because of Christ?I don't sin, because I don't believe that it's right -- course
when I say 'sin' I mean act in a way contrary to my
ethical beliefs (which being from the UK are heavily
influenced by christianity in any case).

I am amazed to the extent to which Christians just plain lie about other religions. Is this practice common to all religions speaking about others or is it just a Christian thing?

quote:

---

I am amazed to the extent to which Christians just plain lie about other religions. Is this practice common to all religions speaking about others or is it just a Christian thing?

---

I think it is a human thing, actually."In group" thinking; "We are better than them", "We are right and everyone else is wrong", "We are good, all others who are different are bad, and the more different others are, the 'badder' they are".You see this with political, ethnic, regional, national, and familial groups, too.It is often taken to the extreme WRT religion, of course, becoming, "We are right, so anyone who isn't with us is against us.", "We are right, so all heatherns/infidels must convert or die."

Hmmm... Fair point, I think you're right.

.........and educational, especially scientific educational classroom secularist groups who think the spiritual dimension in the universe is impossible in spite of the evidence. You are speaking of Islam? What other religions are believing/practicing this in our time?

Btw, in China today the secularist government there is still killing Christians and imprisoning ones caught preaching outside of the government churches or distributing Bibles. So it's not just the Muslims today who kill for what others believe.

quote:

---

.........and educational, especially scientific educational classroom secularist groups

---

What groups would those be, buz?

quote:

---

who think the spiritual dimension in the universe is impossible in spite of the evidence.

---

What evidence would that be, buz?Even though you've been told this about a zillion times, I'm going to repeat it in the hope that you will learn it and stop repeating your lies. (What, do you think that if you just tell us your lies and errors enough times that they will become the truth eventually?)Science ignores the supernatural.It neither confirms nor denies it's existence.It does not state that the supernatural is impossible.It just works with what can be verified by anyone, regardless of religion.It cannot offer support for your religious belief in the supernatural because it is not set up to do so.This is commonly known, as you are well-aware, "methodological naturalism".Do not confuse this with "ontological naturalism", which is the philosophical idea that "nature is all there is", which is NOT required to be adhered to by any scientist. Remember, 40% of all scientists believe in God.Finally, can you please explain how letting the supernatural be used in science will benefit inquiry and the progression of scientific knowledge? Be specific.

quote:

---

It is often taken to the extreme WRT religion, of course, becoming, "We are right, so anyone who isn't with us is against us.", "We are right, so all heatherns/infidels must convert or die."

---

quote:

---

You are speaking of Islam? What other religions are believing/practicing this in our time?

---

Extremest religious groups have always been a part of religion, buz. Yes, there are Islamic extremist groups, and there was the group in Tokyo which released the serin gas into the subway. There are also Christian extremist groups in Ireland and the Balkans. In the US in recent times thay have taken the form of the KKK and other White Supremecist groups, mlilitia movements, and anti-abortion terrorist organizations.I find it interesting that you want to qualify my statement about religions being sometimes prone to extreme "in group" thinking in your question. My statement was not era-specific, yet you only want to talk about recent times. Could it be that you wish to distance yourself from the atrocities done by those Christians who came before you such as the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Salem witch hunt, etc.?Those who do not learn their history and what it was about their religious group that made it possible for terrible wars to be waged and terrible acts to be justified are much more likely to repeat those deeds.

bump

Dear Buzzsaw and ALL:I know that you took your 100 million people lost their lives because of atheistic communism because of the book that was published called "The Black Book of Communism." I would say, however, that the figures are disputed and the authors I believe have admitted that the figures should be downscaled. If you search the internet under the Black Book of Communism you will discover this. I know that this was an honest mistake on your part and the book was published by 11 scholars and was published by the Harvard University Press. So there definitely was some scholarship that went into the book.At the same time, however, I do not believe that most professed atheist know the horrors and religious persecution that went on under these regimes. I believe the liberal Universities downplay these facts.In addition, I would say that it is hard to know how many were killed since these were closed tyranical societies that often did not keep records. There also was a lot of chaos and confusion in these societies. As a result, it is hard to say how many people were killed. I will say though that without a doubt the atheist controlled societies that have had no strong Bibical Christianity foundation before them have the bloodiest chapters in history.I will also say that the longest existing democracy on earth resides in a Christianized country and it had a Christian foundation (the UK). At the same time, I do know that often power corrupts and eventually Great Britain's world wide empire fell. So far though all the most productive and freest countries have been Christian or they have greatly been exposed to Christianized countries.Sincerely,Ken[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-13-2004]

quote:

---

I will say though that without a doubt the atheist controlled societies that have had no strong Bibical Christianity foundation before them have the bloodiest chapters in history.

---

You can say whatever you want, but what can you show? I say the opposite... but then admit everything is relative to what you consider a society and bloodiest.Is society a single country with a single constitution? Or is it the collection of societies that have theism as their cultural basis (remember this is atheism vs theism not just Xianity)? Or shall we confine ourselves (move the goal post) to monotheism, or just Xian monotheism?Since the only "athiest" nations have been in recent times and had the advantage of greater weapons of destruction it might not be odd to find that when a dictator gets a hold of such a country the numbers of deaths are large. The most though? Hmmmm, still not sure about that.And is bloodiest based on numbers or percentages? There have certainly been more successful genocides (meaning 100% wiped out) commited by theists, and monotheists at that (including Xians) than by any "athiest" nation.In fact, let's look at Xians. Let's talk about the numbers of aztecs, incas, native americans, and polynesians wiped out during Xian cleansing of the world. Got some figures for the numbers killed? And after that we can move onto the religious based wars on each other, as well as purges internal to their own country.Given that Vlad the impaler and the Inquisition both utilized the heights of torture and atrocities in the name of God, I am uncertain how you can even consider others more barbaric much less more bloody.

quote:

---

I will also say that the longest existing democracy on earth resides in a Christianized country and it had a Christian foundation (the UK)... So far though all the most productive and freest countries have been Christian or they have greatly been exposed to Christianized countries.

---

Teeheehee... The longest running democracy was ancient Greece (pagan). The longest running Republic was Rome (pagan, then Xian right before it went belly up). The longest running nation on earth, and quite productive (though it is not free at this point in time) is China or India (though India was supressed for a while by Britain).If you are referring to "in existence today" then you are right. I'm not sure what that means though other than existing as a demographic curiosity. We can look to the past and see things change. 400 years from now the longest running and most prosperous and free nation may be majority Hindu. Muslim, or Buddhist.I'd love to say athiest, but I have a feeling that won't happen for a while.The other interesting fact you failed to mention is that the nations with the greatest freedom (at least for citizens of its own state) are the ones that renounced Xian religion influence in government and formed secular governments instead.Currently the longest existing democratic-republican government is the US, and it clearly gained power and freedom once its founders abandoned its Xian foundation (the UK) to create our secular system.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

And what about the girl at Columbine High School that said she believed in God? What happened to her? Well, they were all killed for their faith. NOt exactly what I like to call a reward.

---

Um, the reward is eternal life in heaven, if I'm not mistaken. Isn't that what is promised if one accepts Christ?Oh, and the girl at Columbine was not killed because she was christian. That's a myth:http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/hellhaus.htm"Emily Wyant, the young woman who was with Bernall when she died, denies that it happened and tells a much different story. Craig Scott, who started this whole tale, was asked to show where he heard the conversation take place; he pointed to under a table where Valeen Schnurr -- not Cassie Bernall -- had been. Meanwhile, Schnurr says the gunman heard her praying loudly and asked her if she believed in God. Valeen Schnurr said yes. The gunman then spared her life, rather than take it. Nobody at Columbine was shot for being a Christian."

quote:

---

Also, my salvation has nothing to do with my good works - nothing!

---

So, the athiest who leads a loving, productive life in which she positively impacts everyone she comes into contact with is going to hell, but the mass murderer who has a death-row conversion and is "saved" a few minutes before his execution will go to heaven?What kind of justice is that?