We are the gods..

So, if you did not believe in your particular religious view you would try to kill and get away with it and act in a sociopathic manner and if oppressed you would not resist? And all that prevents you from commiting all sorts of mayhem is fear of retribution from some mythical higher being or fear of punishment from said mythical being? Your religion does not sound particularly appealing the way you have framed it...it actually sounds rather feeble.

So in effect you are at heart a completely immoral person who is only constrained from running amok in society because of 1) fear of reprisal from your god 2) anticipation of a reward from said god in a hypothetical afterlife as I asked before? I am an atheist and find your worldview to be far more "immoral" than my own if this is the case.As to your "sermon" on those refusing to "bend their knees" to your God...many a dictator has used this type of logic to slaughter anyone who opposes them.You also seem to consider atheism an origanized religion which illustrates just how little you understand about other worldviews...I guess you would, by the logic of your post, consider all Hindus to be evil as well.As to the advantage of living in the US versus China...it has nothing to do with your religion...it has to do with the freedom to not be forced to practice your religion as you have the freedom not to share my worldview.You also avoid any mention of the countless atrocities committed in the name of various religions including christianity.Your post to Quetzal has very little to do with religion or a "loving god" and everything to do with power and control and the wish for both.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tokyojim:
[B]Thanks Mammuthus for your reply. First let me say, I'm not trying to rile your feathers. If you find my views offensive, I'm sorry, but I am not at all ashamed of what I believe.I respond:You make a lot assumptions without any basis.Tokyojim continues:
Hinduism evil? In some ways, any worldview that leads people away from true God is evil, but rather than evil, I just believe it is wrong. I'm sure we are agreed on that point.I say:
No I don't agree that Hindu's are evil because of their worldview...maybe they are right and you are wrong and evil.I said:
As to the advantage of living in the US versus China...it has nothing to do with your religion...it has to do with the freedom to not be forced to practice your religion as you have the freedom not to share my worldview.Tokyojim answers:
I consider all humans to be sinful at heart because that is what the Bible says and as you look around, it is hard to disagree with that. Why does evil abound so much in this world?I respond:
What does that have to do with my statement about the relative issues of living in America versus China? Maybe there is so much evil in the world because religious fundamentalist bigots try to foist their worldview on others by violence.Tokyojim asks:
By the way, when you use the word evil in the above question, how do you define evil and good as an atheist?I reply: That which does harm....oh and religious fundamentalism **************************************************************
I said:
MAMMUTHUS continues:
You also avoid any mention of the countless atrocities committed in the name of various religions including christianity.Tokyojim replies:
You are right that Christians have made big mistakes in the past. I freely admit that. No one is perfect and they will make mistakes again in the future. I am ashamed at some of the terrible things that have been done in the name of Jesus. However, not to belittle those atrocities or excuse them in any way, but the atrocities committed by Christians pale in comparison to those committed by atheists. (That is not a personal attack against you, just a statement of fact.)I say:
Would you care to back that statement up with some facts Tokyojim?Tokyojim says:
And the big difference between the two is that a Christian is violating his worldview when he commits sins like that, but an atheist is not. It is not inconsistent with an atheistic worldview to do such things since there is no standard of morality.I say: How would you know? You have no concept of what my worldview is much less anyone elses. You are in absolutely no position to claim what is consistent or inconsistent in anybody's worlview outside of your own...no wonder gene90 did not want to interact with you...you are arrogant beyond belief.
**********************************************
I said:
MAMMUTHUS continues:
Your post to Quetzal has very little to do with religion or a "loving god" and everything to do with power and control and the wish for both.**************************************************************Tokyojim's REPLY:
My comments with regards to power were made upon the assumption that the evolutionary atheistic worldview is correct. If it is, then power and control becomes very important doesn't it?I say: Why?Tokyojim asks:
Mammuthus, perhaps this is a personal question, but what was it that so turned you off to Christianity in the past? There must have been some deep hurts that you experienced in the past or something that greatly influenced you against Christianity to warrant your disdain. If that is too personal, I'm sorry. Just ignore it.I reply: No it is not too personal. Nothing hurtful...I just never saw any reason to believe what I heard in church (catholic by the way before I stopped going when I was 9). Some reasons of the top of my head though the list is not exhaustive
1) The arrogance of other people telling me what their version of god wants is no plus...and perhaps it is your desire to paint me as anti-christian but I have specifically stated fundamentalism. Are you protestant? Catholic? Unitarian? Branch Davidian? which one is right or are they all wrong .)
2) I decided to get an education and not follow others blindly
3) naturalistic explanations i.e. science has better explained the world we live in for every circumstance I have encountered.
4) I never was much into mythsTokyojim, you did not "rile me up". I have seen this type of arrogance coupled with prejudice, lack of any kind of insight into other views, and boatloads of assumptions stated by fundamentalists such as you over and over. You will never convince me you are right just as I will most likely never convince you my worldview is correct....the conversation was actually pointless come to think of it...doh!Cheers
Mammuthus

Let us see the wonderful things Tokyojim has to say about people who disagree with him shall we:"Mammuthus, many people think that Christianity is for people who are weak who cannot handle life for themselves. They view dependence on God as a crutch. I call it honesty. "Aha..so I am dishonest?"I think it takes strength to be willing to own up to your weaknesses rather than to pretend that nothing is wrong."Hmmm...so I don't own up to my own weaknesses and am not introspective?"You claim there is no such standard so if you are true to your world view, -right and wrong- are words which you can not honestly use."Ah...again I am dishonest?"Sounds like Hitler. "Nice choice of comparison. A thinly veiled attempt to give your position any credibility by implying my worldview connects me to a mass murderer....I could use the arguement against you as well Jim...Hitler was a catholic...the SS and nazi troups were largely catholics and protestants...should I therefore conclude that all christians are mass murderers? You do realize this is what you are trying to imply about me? From your previous post regarding the benefits of dictatorship when you "know you are right" I would say the comparison fits your worldview better than mine."SO let's say that everyone has the freedom to decide on morality based on his own character and choices. If that would work, we shouldn't even have to have laws in society because we would all make good choices."Um..what planet are you on? Everyone does make their choices based on their own character and beliefs...Christians shoot up abortion clinics sometimes based on their beliefs...secular laws punish them for doing that. I really don't get your point."Then let me point out that you do believe in some kind of a standard even though you may not be able to explain it or clarify it. "And again, assumption that you understand my worldview......"Evidently you do have a conscience and you do have a God-given sense of right and wrong even though it may be distorted. No one can honestly believe that -Anything goes.- At least you were honest about that. "Again...I am dishonest...and no I do not have a god given anything. I, just like you, am a primate, a member of a species that evolved a group structure conducive to altruism. Animals don't have a god either and appear to not be obsessing about it to much yet they don't seem to mass murder themselves very often...come to think of it...the only species that commits mass murder is the one that has religion...go figure.."But then again, why is it necessary to be honest in your worldview? I'm not calling you dishonest.Unless English is not your first language you have called me dishonest multiple times in your post...and compared me to Hitler to boot...you are on a roll."There are parts of your worldview that you place your faith in and live by - such as - There is no god.- -There is no judgment after death.- -Mankind is totally free.- -There is no ultimate morality.- etc. Those are some of the tenets of your faith. Unproven ideas that you have chosen to believe in. That is what I mean by a religion. Everyone has faith in something even if it is in the non-existence of god."Oh isnt it just so charming and cute and cuddly when someone tells you what you believe "I meant that you probably agree with me that the Hindu worldview is wrong. If you believe the Hindu worldview is right, (quite an illogical worldview, by the way) I assume you would become Hindu.
I'm not saying that Hindu's themselves are evil, but that their worldview is not right. "And you are a bigot...I am sure the world Hindus will promptly dismiss your view if any ever read this lovely conversation we are having."I understand what you are saying here. When we resort to our own personal version of God and stray from what the Bible says, then we get into big problems. My standard is the Bible. I have found no better explanation for things than what it offers."And arrogant...why is your version of christianity or religion in general more correct than anyone elses? Maybe I have found a better explanation."I think it is very interesting that you are only anti-fundamentalist. Why is that? I assume you will talk about arrogance or something like that. But let me say that your views would certainly have to qualify as arrogant as well. But isn't truth narrow after all? Are you claiming to be right? Don't you believe that your worldview is right and that others are wrong? Stand up for your convictions! Say what you believe."And obtuse...ok I believe you are totally way off base in your worldview..that is what I believe. Second, I am anti fundamentalist specifically because that worldview tries to forcefully impose itself on others. I am not trying to "convert" you to atheism..I could not care less if you worship a hand puppet named Binky...but as you stated as an evangalist you feel it is your duty to interfere in the lives of others by forcing your misguided worldview on them and that is what I object to...why not live in your worldview and leave others to theirs? If you think your god is so great why the heck does he need YOU to bother everyone else...why doesnt him/her/it do its own dirty work? I think fundies are to arrogant and scared to live in a multicultural pluralistic society so they attempt to force everyone to live in a monolithic world...which of course does not work and causes a huge amount of grief and death."There are a lot of peripherals that different church groups disagree on, but those are not so important."More arrogance...maybe they think the differences are important..maybe those "peripherals" are huge contradictions."Many Christian groups are in agreement when it comes to the essentials of the faith. Although I do believe there are many people who claim to be Christians who don't really know God. They are Christian by name only and don't live out their faith. They don't take the commands of God seriously and still try to be -Christian-. This is hypocritical. "Wow...good thing you came along to set ALL christians straight! I begin to think you believe you are the god of your religion...You might want to consider that they feel exactly the same way about you."I never thought of myself as prejudiced."I am not particularly surprised by this"Americans are more valuable or better than Koreans. etc. I don't see the prejudice. "Hmmm from your last post you don't seem to be very fond of the Chinese...but since you consider anyone who does not think exactly as you do evil then I guess you don't really have much respect for humanity in general...not racist but certainly misanthropic."If you mean that I am prejudice because I think my beliefs are correct, then aren't you as well? "No I think you are prejudiced and arrogant because you believe you have the right to impose your beliefs on others as an evangelical christian...and yes, I see fundamentalist-(insert religion) as a negative...I'm not singling christians out. And I believe you have every right to hold your beliefs and opinions...but not to force others to subscibe to them."Perhaps you believe that any view is permissable."Now your cooking Jim! Exactly, you think what you want to and I will think what I want to!"How do you know? It is only your personal belief, your personal faith? How do we differ here?"Oh yeah!..score another one for Jim...exactly, since we don't know then it would be silly to force each other to agree to one worldview!
How can you see this and still be an evangelical? Although this has been fun jim I rather not continue this conversation. I find it rather pointless. I say you go right ahead believing what you want. You seem to feel nobody should be allowed to hold different views from you and can not be left in peace. You resort to calling me dishonest and trying to associate my view as somehow connected to Hitler. Since you will never convince me your worldview is correct and I doubt I will sway you I find it pointless to continue..I rather talk about evolution.Cheers,
Mammuthus

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tokyojim:
Mammuthus wrote:

​

I consider your religion weak if your so called right or wrong are based on punishment and reward from a mythical being.

​

*******************************************************

​

Tokyojim replies:

​

Mammuthus, many people think that Christianity is for people who are weak who cannot handle life for themselves. They view dependence on God as a crutch. I call it honesty. I know I am not perfect. When I think about standing in front of a holy GOd who can see everything about me, I know that I need a Savior. I need to be forgiven of many sins. Call it weakness if you will, but I'm not a fool to think that I am good enough to get to heaven. I think it takes strength to be willing to own up to your weaknesses rather than to pretend that nothing is wrong. Anyway, I know that I cannot cleanse my own heart. And, I believe that if I do not accept God's forgiveness, I will have to pay for my sins myself for all of eternity. I prefer to receive God's forgiveness. But in order to receive God's forgiveness, I must honestly admit my sin, repent of it, and ask for His forgiveness. He then promises to cleanse me. For an alcoholice to begin to get better, the first step is to honestly face the problem. I believe that is what I am doing. If admitting sin and imperfection to see how to solve the problem is weakness, then I qualify as a weakling in your sight and again I am unashamed of it.

​

My so called right and wrong are not based on punishment and reward from a mythical being. Obviously I do not believe that God is a mythical being. Although, if He is, I certainly understand why you think my faith is foolish. I would agree with you. However, I am living a fulfilled life so in the end it wouldn't matter, would it? Why not live a fulfilled life during my short life here on this planet? Is there anything wrong with that? If I must be deceived, I prefer that sort of deception to a deception that results in eternal harm to me. So I don't care if I am deceived. Although if I were to come to believe that I am deceived, I would give up some of my religious practices because they would be meaningless.

​

I guess I haven't explained where my morality comes from clearly enough. It is not based on fear of retribution and the promise of some reward. Mammuthus, I'm sure you can understand that in order to be able to talk about right and wrong, there must be an absolute standard by which to judge a particular action, otherwise the terms become meaningless. You claim there is no such standard so if you are true to your world view, -right and wrong- are words which you can not honestly use.

​

Right and wrong, as I understand the Bible, are determined by nothing other than the character of God. God is perfect and His character is the determining factor in human morality since we have been created in His image. For example, because God is love, unloving acts are sin. The Bible says -God is love. Therefore, love one another.- And -Love one another as I have loved you.- It is all based on who God is and what He does. Or, because God is the Creator and giver of life, life has value and it is wrong to take another persons life. This would be extended to include the life of elderly people and the unborn as well. The principle is that life has value and this principle comes from the character of God, who you call a mythical being. The character of God becomes the standard from which we derive principles that we apply to our lives to determine right and wrong. And the Bible delineates many of these principles and applies them to our lives in a concrete way. However, when it comes to current day problems that did not exist in Biblical times, we take principles from the Bible and apply them to the issue.
********************************************************

​

Mammuthus says:
I rather know that my actions and decisions are based on my own character and choice.

​

*******************************************************

​

Jim Replies:
Sounds like Hitler. I'm glad you are not like Hitler because we'd all be in trouble then. But if you take that kind of a stand, you cannot say that Hitler and other despots were wrong! And I say that that if everyone lived like that, this society would be a shambles. Everyone will have different standards and make different choices and that is their right. Is that OK with you? - even if another person's choices infringe on your freedom?
SO let's say that everyone has the freedom to decide on morality based on his own character and choices. If that would work, we shouldn't even have to have laws in society because we would all make good choices.
Plus, even if we all made moral choices like you do, no one would ever faithfully follow their own standards anyway. Case in point - Have you ever gone against your own moral principles? I don't even have to ask to know the answer. That way of living leads to moral chaos, lawlessness, and disorder in society.

​

Mammuthus, what happens when someone else's view of morality goes against your view? How about at school? Your kid chooses not to cheat, but his neighbor chooses to cheat. After all, it is just a matter of choice. Or let's take the issue of human rights for example. What if your government doesn't think that human rights are important? But you do. Who is right? How do you determine whose values get taught in school? How do you decide whose values get enforced in society? Does majority rule? Or does power rule? Or do the intellectually elite get together and decide? The point is you cannot come up with any set of rules that everyone will agree to. Sure we have a set of laws that the government has instituted, but is that all there is to morality? Besides, do you think we are morally bound to follow those laws? I think we are as long as they do not go against the law of God. But I would imagine in your worldview that you cannot say that. You might think it best to follow them, or that you will follow them as long as it benefits you, but in the end, it is only your personal opinion. Who is to say that your opinion is better than the next guys? In the end, no one can tell anyone what to do unless you have some kind of authority or power in society - like government, teacher in a school, parent over a kid, policeman, etc.

​

************************************************************

​

Mammuthus says:
I don't believe in an absolute standard and I DON'T believe that anything goes either.

​

************************************************************

​

Tokyojim relpies:
Then let me point out that you do believe in some kind of a standard even though you may not be able to explain it or clarify it. Otherwise, truly anything goes. Explain to me the logic of your statement. You must have some kind of rule or law that you measure your deeds by because you say there are some restrictions on our actions. What are they? What are your absolute standards for morality? Spell them out for me.
For instance:
1) case by case, as you feel led
2) anything is OK as long as I don't hurt someone else
3) anything is OK as long as it is for the good of society
4) etc. What is your standard that you use to say that not everything is permissable?

​

Oh, I see in a later post you mentioned that you define evil as that which does harm. Now let me see, I guess you would go along with maybe number 2 in the above statements? or maybe a combo of #2 & #3.
Have you ever caused someone harm? If so, you have done wrong, right? Would that mean that divorce is right or wrong? Let's see, how about pre-marital sex and adultery? Hmm. How about lying? Let's think a bit further. What about getting drunk? - think about harm to society, families, innocent people, etc. What about watching porn? harm to wife, bad example to kids, encouragement of porn industry, etc. Cheating in school? (ruins the bell curve for honest students) etc. I'm not accusing you of any of these here, just trying to see what you mean by harm. Does divorce cause harm? Can you tell me what you think about these particular behviors? Right or wrong? Or is it depends on how I'm feeling at the time?

​

I once had a guy come to our church who told me a similar thing about his life ethic. But he freely admitted that he was a terrible father and he laughed about it. He was causing his kids harm and was totally unconcerned about it. His ethic didn't stop him from causing others harm. I'm sure his wife wasn't very pleased with him either.

​

Now let me ask you another question. If causing harm is your absolute standard for morality, what happens if you do not live by it? What does it matter in the long run? Why is it important that you follow your own code of ethics? There is no god who will punish you. Just have to ignore your conscience and everything is OK, right? Why not divorce your wife or cheat on her, leave your family, if the urge arises? Evidently you do have a conscience and you do have a God-given sense of right and wrong even though it may be distorted. No one can honestly believe that -Anything goes.- At least you were honest about that. But then again, why is it necessary to be honest in your worldview? I'm not calling you dishonest.

​

**************************************************************

​

Mammuthus says:
I say: A lot of assumptions on your part there. Are you then claiming I am a co-signer? I think I have only met about 10 other atheists before and we don't hold meetings
You make a lot assumptions without any basis.

​

**************************************************************

​

Tokyojim replies:
Sorry. No I'm not implying that you are even aware of it, but I was saying that there are some who view it like a religion. And although there are no official meetings that you may attend, still it is a worldview that dictates how you live. There are parts of your worldview that you place your faith in and live by - such as - There is no god.- -There is no judgment after death.- -Mankind is totally free.- -There is no ultimate morality.- etc. Those are some of the tenets of your faith. Unproven ideas that you have chosen to believe in. That is what I mean by a religion. Everyone has faith in something even if it is in the non-existence of god.

​

***************************************************

​

Tokyojim continues:
Hinduism evil? In some ways, any worldview that leads people away from true God is evil, but rather than evil, I just believe it is wrong. I'm sure we are agreed on that point.

​

Mammethus says:
No I don't agree that Hindu's are evil because of their worldview...maybe they are right and you are wrong and evil.

​

*********************************************************

​

Tokyojim replies:
I meant that you probably agree with me that the Hindu worldview is wrong. If you believe the Hindu worldview is right, (quite an illogical worldview, by the way) I assume you would become Hindu.
I'm not saying that Hindu's themselves are evil, but that their worldview is not right. They like every other human being including me are sinners in God's sight, and if you want to describe a sinner as evil, then we all qualify for that description. The amazing thing is that in spite of our sin and rebellion against God, He still loves us and offers us salvation.

​

******************************************************

​

Mammethus says:
I never saw any reason to believe what I heard in church (catholic by the way before I stopped going when I was 9). Some reasons off the top of my head though the list is not exhaustive
1) The arrogance of other people telling me what their version of god wants is no plus...and perhaps it is your desire to paint me as anti-christian but I have specifically stated fundamentalism. Are you protestant? Catholic? Unitarian? Branch Davidian? which one is right or are they all wrong .)

​

********************************************************8
Tokyojim replies:
I understand what you are saying here. When we resort to our own personal version of God and stray from what the Bible says, then we get into big problems. My standard is the Bible. I have found no better explanation for things than what it offers.
I think it is very interesting that you are only anti-fundamentalist. Why is that? I assume you will talk about arrogance or something like that. But let me say that your views would certainly have to qualify as arrogant as well. But isn't truth narrow after all? Are you claiming to be right? Don't you believe that your worldview is right and that others are wrong? Stand up for your convictions! Say what you believe.

​

By the way, I belong to an independent evangelical church. Evangelical means in this context that we believe in the importance of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ and take worl missions seriously. In other words, we try to actually live out our faith. There are a lot of peripherals that different church groups disagree on, but those are not so important. Many Christian groups are in agreement when it comes to the essentials of the faith. Although I do believe there are many people who claim to be Christians who don't really know God. They are Christian by name only and don't live out their faith. They don't take the commands of God seriously and still try to be -Christian-. This is hypocritical. I am not perfect either of course and there are times when I am a hypocrite too, but I know that is wrong and God is still in the process of deveolping me into the kind of person He wants me to be.
***********************************************************

​

Mammethus says:
I have seen this type of arrogance coupled with prejudice, lack of any kind of insight into other views, and boatloads of assumptions stated by fundamentalists such as you over and over.
********************************************************

​

Mammethus, you use the term fundamentalist is quite a derogatory way as if there is ultimate truth or something. Don't tell me you believe that there is right and wrong when it comes to worldviews? By the way, how do you define a fundamentalist?
I never thought of myself as prejudiced. I believe we are all sinners. That we all have fundamental human God-given rights, that we are all created equal and have equal value and worth in God's sight - so we should treat each other in that manner. I don't believe the white man is more valuable than a black man or vice versa or that Americans are more valuable or better than Koreans. etc. I don't see the prejudice.
If you mean that I am prejudice because I think my beliefs are correct, then aren't you as well? Don't you, doesn't everyone think their own views are correct? Isn't that why we believe them in the first place? I'm a bit confused here. Perhaps you believe that any view is permissable. You believe that that statement is true. All other views are wrong. So because I don't agree with that statement, you call me arrogant. But I think you are arrogant for believeing that that statement is true. How do you know? It is only your personal belief, your personal faith? How do we differ here?

​

Good night,

​

Tokyojim

---

I see you are still perpetuating this lie...I thought in your worldview to lie is to sin? Obviously lack of knowledge and truth distortion are not.Tokyojim says:
However, I will disagree with you on your last statement. You said: - As far as "killing each other like animals", there has been just as much unjustifiable slaughter in the name of religion as there has (some would argue more) in the name of any other ideology.- I won’t speak for Islam, but the numbers of murders committee by Christians - Crusades, Inquisition(30,000 killed), etc. literally pales in comparison with that committed by especially communist states. I understand that the Church to them was an enemy because believers looked to a higher authority than the State and that idea couldn't be tolerated. So the State proclaimed there is no god. It taught an atheistic worldview to it's subjects and that gave them full reign. There was no higher power to whom they had to give an account and so their consciences were freed up to treat people like animals.
To prove my point, we only need to consider the slaughters of atheists/communists of this century alone. Let me just name a few of the communist leaders involved: Stalin is said to have killed 40 million people! Hitler killed 9 -10 million. Mao Tse Tung, a dedicated atheist and communist killed more than 70 million people! Plus there is really no way to count all the number of people who were killed in other Communist revolutions and wars. Khmer ROuge in Cambodia, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Hungar, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Philippines, etc.I say:
Quetzal eloquently stated why the religious backgrounds of Hitler (who was a catholic i.e. christian whether you like it or not), Stalin or Mao are irrelevant. Let's take Nazi Germany as an example (especially since you connected me to Hitler earlier in a post so I guess the example fits). What do you think the religion of the Germans who supported Hilter was? Most were Catholic or Protestant as they are today. If you declare yourself to be christian in applying for a visa in Germany you have to pay a tax to the church...you know what the origin of this tax was? It was the Third Reich's payoff to the Vatican to aid in and/or ignore the slaughtering of Europes jews.
The nice little innocent church managed to squeek that tax through the reconstruction of the German Republic. Point being, Hitler's, Stalin's, etc. atrocities were not caused by an atheist worldview as you would like to believe as it gives you some false sense of superiority...religion in no way prevents the killing of others because of fear of some mythical higher morality/god/Binky the hand Puppet. Plenty of christian SS officers gassed millions of innocent jews without fear their biblical principles being compromised.Just because you seem to have no morals outside of what a book of myths tells you in no way places you in a position to judge anyone else.

I am pretty sure he will disagree as it appears from his posts that one part of the foundation of his worldview is that atheist = mass murderer without obstruction and christian (his own brand of course..not the others..those "wrong" christians)= mass murderer constrained by the bible. I think the logic of your statement will not penetrate his zealotry...but I could be wrong ...guess I am agnostic after all cheers,
Mammuthus

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzal:
Ohh, heck!!. You're right, I did say Stalin wasn't an atheist. That wasn't what I meant (teach me to not to use my own version of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy in an argument.) I was trying to draw your attention to the erroneous correlation between Stalin-Atheist by contrasting it with the equally invalid correlation Hitler-Christian. I'm sure you won't disagree that simply because Hitler self-identified as a Christian doesn't mean that all Christians are genocidal maniacs. By the same token, just because Stalin self-identified as an atheist (meaning he was adamantly opposed to religion because of the threat it posed), doesn't mean atheists are stalinists.

---

Hi John,
Yes, I think you read it right.Here is another one from him:"Fundamentalist Christianity is only restrictive to those who are not willing to bow the knee to God because they feel like their freedoms are restricted. For the most part — of course there are exceptions - those who do bow their knee to God, find Him to be their joy and satisfaction, even if following Him does involve denying self at times."

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tokyojim:
Using power to impose Islam on others seems to be OK since it is commonly done, but Christianity is different.

---

​

Did I read this right?

​

---

TOKYOJIM REPLIES:
Quetzal, of course I agree with you 100% on both points. I never stated such. You mentioned people masquerading in religious cloaks and anyone who genuinely thinks that Hitler was a Christian has some grave misunderstandings or perhaps they are wilfull misunderstandings. I agree to about what you say about Stalin, but I still say both were at heart atheists. And I think that because they feel there is no god they need to answer to and no absolute standard of morality, they are more likely to end up perpetrating atrocities than others. You can't say dogmatically that acting like that is wrong or immoral since there is no absolute standard to appeal to. You can say you don't think it is good or that you don't like that, etc. but appealing to a standard that doesn't exist seems contradictory. Just my opinion.
____________________________________________________________________And again you show yourself to be a hateful bigot Tokyojim. You say they were both "at heart atheists" (wonder how you know them at heart in the first place) and that Hitler was not a christian only to make yourself feel better and to deny that christianity is fully as capable of committing the worst atrocities and any other religion or lack thereof. The one with the wilful misunderstandings is you. Considering your constant distortion of the facts you should at least come forward and admit you are a prejudiced person....to quote you..stand up for what you believe! You hate people that don't "bend their knees" to your god or at the very least feel superiorTokyojim:
"but appealing to a standard that doesn't exist seems contradictory."You mean like preventing yourself from running amok because of a god for which there is no evidence..great morality there jim...

I wish you luck with that. I would get out of the way of your attempts but I find it difficult to let his lies about atheists being the root of all evil crap slide by unchallenged. That he does not know what memetic evolution also bodes ill for any further conversations on the topic you want to engage him on assuming you can get past his anyone who disagrees with him is philisophically phylogenetically linked to Hitler and Stalin trip.cheers
Mammuthus

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzal:
No doubt, my friend. I'm trying to get past all this fluff so we can get to the heart of the argument. I want to challenge him on the psychological/physiological basis of belief, memetic evolution, and the evolution of altruism. But I can't seem to get him past the philosophical chaff - which I'm not really qualified to argue in the first place.

​

Sigh.

---

Hello Tokyojim,I am not ignoring your posts but I am a bit busy this weekend. I will respond to your posts this week. Hope you stick around for a continued debate.Cheers,
Mammuthus

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tokyojim:
OK Mammuthus, what is your definition of a Christian? I think we are using these terms in two different ways if you think Hitler was a Christian. Enlighten me on what a Christian is.
TJ

---

I am surprised you want my definition of christian. Anyway, anyone who proposes that they believe in the bible (both literalists and non-literalists) and in jesus christ. By definition you have to believe in jesus to be a "christian". I include Hitler because he was a catholic, never excommunicated, and in his own view a christian.Though I could be wrong, I am assuming you are asking me this as a typical introduction of the fundie argument that anyone who does anything wrong is not a "real" christian i.e. Hitler said he was catholic but murdered millions of people so he cannot be a christian type of argument. Correct me if I am wrong in this assumption.

Tokyojim says:
Did I claim that you are a co-signer? Forgive me for making any assumptions. I was just trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were aware of and had read the Humanist Manifesto. If you have read it, you prefer to make me look stupid by accusing me of making assumptions. If you haven't read it, then I guess you were too embarrassed to admit it. You always keep things so vague in your messages that one never knows. Have you or haven't you read it? Regardless, it doesn't matter. Here is what the leading atheists are saying about atheism:I say:
"actually I have not read it and I am not being vague in my posts...you constantly make assumptions about what my position really is and then claim I am dishonest when I tell you otherwise.Tokyojim says:
You may not agree with your fellow atheists on this, but believe me they are organized and they have an agenda. Read the Humanist Magazine if you donft believe me. Herefs one quote from there:
***********************************************I have no reason to beleive you on this because you have shown absolutely no knowledge about other worldviews beyond your own personal beliefs. And by the way, your relgion has its own rather nasty agenda i.e. forced theocracy.Citation of Tokyojim's:
"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being.>I for one find this part of the paragraph to be bullshit much like you do I guess.These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level--preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new--the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism."
John Dunphy, A Religion for a New Age, Humanist, Jan.-Feb. 1983, p.> This guy is over the top...your point..that all atheists agree with this? You must be truly incapable of logical thought if that is the case.<Herefs another one from the now deceased Madelyn Murray OfHair: "The atheist realizes that there must not only be an acceptance of his right to hold his opinion,

TJ replies:
OK so you don't believe in an absolute standard, but for you personally that doesn't mean that anything goes. However, if someone else does believe that anything goes, that would be OK? If you answer no to that question, then you are appealing to an ultimate standard of morality which you just said doesn't exist. Or at least to a standard which you think is better than the others.
***********************************Exactly, I appeal to my own standard. And I have news for you...you do exactly the same...regardless of what your religious background, you make your own decisions...you may believe you are a remote controlled automaton where some other being makes your choices for you but if you decide that murder is compatible with christianity then you will murder without hesitation. I actually find your standards lack...you merely say "I am a sinner" go out and "sin" and then say "oops sorry god...I am a bad boy" and then feel like everything is ok...I have to face myself and cannot get off the hook so easily.Tokyojim asks:
By the way, when you use the word evil in the above question, how do you define evil and good as an atheist?I reply: That which does harm....oh and religious fundamentalism **************************************************************
TJ REPLIES:
Aha. So here is the standard which you are appealing to. Anything that does harm is wrong. Evil. Is that just physical harm or does that include emotional harm? Are you saying here that this standard applies to everyone in the world or is that just your personal view?I say:
It includes both physical and emotional harm. It is my own standard but I think many people of different backgrounds would agree with some parts of it....but not all.Mammuthus, I'm curious. Please answer me on this. Don't just make some sarcastic mark and avoid my question! Would you say that any of the following actions cause harm to others?Divorce....It depends, if a marriage is really miserable then divorce can provide immense relief.abortion....Again, it depends...I think the conditions both physical and emotional of the person who is pregnant outweigh the needs of a clump of cells.marital spats....again, it depends...a good argument can actually resolve conflicts between partners and lead to a more harmonious marriage...two people will never agree on everything so assuming constant "wedded bliss" is sheer stupidity.pre-marital sex...nope, I had plenty...saw no problem with it.adultery.....sure, it damages the trust in a relationship though I do know couples that have survived it...but it causes a huge amount of emotional harmalcoholism....earlier you asked about getting drunk...drinkin is moderate I see no problem...alcoholism is a mentally and physically destructive disease so it obviously does harm.lying.....depends...if you stick a gun in my ear and say "do you believe in the bible and if you answer no I will kill you" then I would have no problem lying at that moment.disrespect for people...could you qualify this?...I am not really sure how you are defining this.making fun of others.....not really, I rib my friends and they rib me back...it keeps us from taking ourselves too seriously. If you mean making fun of say a physically disabled person I would say it could very well cause them emotional harm and is wrong.refusing to forgive others....It does the person who refuses to forgive more harm than anything else.using abusive speech, swearing....depends on the context.watching porn movies(ask your wife if that would cause her harm if you were to watch them if you want to know the answer to that? OK, I know, I'm assuming you are a male and that you are married. Forgive me.).........no problem...you are correct on both counts, I am male and married....the only possible harm I see with watching porn is that the dialogue is so bad it makes my head hurt...and after about 15 minutes it gets boring...German tv has an immense amount of porn on late at night...my wife laughs at me if I watch it.How do you apply your standard to your every day life?.....I am not sure how this fits in with the rest of your list. Please elaborate...othewise my answer is by living every day.And finally, what does it matter in the end if you were married, found someone you liked better, ditched your wife and family, and went after personal happiness?.....that is a risk everyone takes whether married, dating, religious, atheist, whatever. And again, it is not a black and white issue. You would have to weigh staying together with someone you do not love and the associated stress on you and that person as a result versus the harm caused by leaving one person for another. This happens every day to people of all different backgrounds.So you caused harm to a few peopel? So what? There is nobody who will hold you accountable for that trespass of your personal behavior code. What is your motivation to follow it?"To sum up my answer in one word.."bullshit"!!! I am accountable to myself. So are you. In some cases my behavior could trespass secular laws in which case I have the added accountability to society.jim askes:
I'm curious to see how your personal behavior code applies to your every day life.I say: It applies quite nicely thank you.
Cheers,
Mammuthus

In this conversation you have actually answered something we were debating. So people who do horrible things can be christian you admit. This negates your argument that an atheist is more likely to exhibit anti-social tendencies (for which you have no evidence anyway). And how do you know that any of the people or groups are going against their worldview? Relgion is frequently used to justify horrible acts...you seem to exclude the consideration that those people are fervent believers who interpret christianity in a different way from you...who is correct? [QUOTE]Originally posted by Tokyojim:
[B]

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tokyojim:
OK Mammuthus, what is your definition of a Christian? I think we are using these terms in two different ways if you think Hitler was a Christian. Enlighten me on what a Christian is.
TJ

---

​

Are the following people or institutions Christian, TJ?;

​

Timothy McVeigh

​

The Ku Klux Klan

​

Randal Terry

​

The Catholic priests who protected criminal child molesors because they were also priests

​

TJ REPLIES:
I'm not excusing what they did, but so what if they are?

​

Your point is what?

​

Because some Christians struggle with sin Christianity is bad? Is that your point? That same thing can be turned on you as well.

​

Atheism has some pretty dark spots in its history. And as I mentioned in another post before, when a Christian does evil, he is going against his worldview. It is inconsistent with his beliefs.

​

Regards,

​

TJ

​

---

....................I guess I left everyone speechless