Why can't we do both?

Alphadude007 · 2012-05-25T00:01:16.705613+00:00

I'm sure you can. For example, the designer of this poster.

Alphadude007 · 2012-05-25T00:00:13.557805+00:00

Prayer is a way to ponder on ourselves and others, and still together as a Christian community. Therefore, the prayer, even from a non-spiritual view, is useful... more useful than a stupid poster with a false dilemma.

DivineMaster · 2012-05-24T23:50:08.994444+00:00

It's persecuting Galileo for speaking against the Pope/Church just as immoral?

Maybe, but atheists cannot say he was a scientific martyr. :-)

Gallileo was a devout catholic, anyway. He just criticized the Church's perspective on heliocentrism, although the church didn't have a consistent opinion of heliocentrism.

DivineMaster · 2012-05-24T23:46:51.288512+00:00

Yes, he was convicted of heresy, but almost the same would happend in the Scientific Community is we prove the ancient alien visitors theory. However, the Church didn't use theological arguments against heliocentrism, as atheists believe.

Theories cannot be accepted from a day to another (specially if all book you have on astronomy are on geocentrism)... some theories take years to be accepted.

DivineMaster · 2012-05-24T23:43:32.226497+00:00

Yes and no. The Church just had the general perspective. However, the Bible practically lacks cosmology.

I wrote about that here.

DivineMaster · 2012-05-24T23:40:18.874840+00:00

On Galileo's heliocentric theory and the Catholic Church, it is noted that the strongest opponents were other scientists and intellectuals who held to the classical theories (yes, the age that atheists love), rather than the Church's perspective of astronomy. In fact, the Church didn't had a consistent view of heliocentrism: it was confused.

Moreover, heliocentrism was questionable for obvious reasons: it was a radical theory that left behind many classical and medieval books. It is therefore obvious that this theory was not accepted immediately... the same would occur if we find an alien bacteria, for example.

However, it's easier to blame religion of all evil.

siriusgrey · 2012-05-24T23:33:32.972467+00:00

I believe an unborn child is a person, but I cannot have moral objections in those cases.

siriusgrey · 1 day

I'm pro-life, but not anti-abortist. I mean, I believe that in some cases abortion is tolerable: incest, rape, health or child pregnacy, for example.

However, I don't believe in abortion as a choice or right. I think there are many way to avoid pregnacy or parenthood, and abortion should not be promoted as one of them.

Large_Black · 1 day

You can write a sentence (or two) summarizing the last chapter you've read.

I think it's a nice way to remember very long texts.

theholyprepuce · 1 day

Let's remember that climate can affect Church attendence.

theholyprepuce · 1 day

Most of them believe in a non-personal (Christian deism?) or personal God. Atheists still a minority.

theholyprepuce · 1 day

I think there are many hypocresy in that country. They use church for marriage, baptism and tradition, but they don't believe in Christianity (although most of them still believing in a personal or impersonal for of God).

Also, it's difficult to go to church in that climate.

I'd like church and state seperated. I don't want hypocritical citizens using church services. It's inmoral.

j93walters · 1 day

Want you to be a moderator? I think we can make this forum a better place.

amazinglyanonymous · 2 days

I don't know, however that's not a judgment, but a consequence of our decisions.

funny_original_name · 3 days

I think baptist churches are about to change their names.

ahora · 3 days

Peace and harmony certainly can't be said to be promoted by religion. If that were true, the Christian population in prisons should be lower, and the Christian offenders in criminal cases should be less represented. Instead, what we find is that atheists are the minority, including in countries which are dominantly secular.

Let's suppose your affirmation (based on no sources) is accurate and updated (most of these affirmations came from old sources).

A lot of assistence and reintegration comes from religious intitutions, so in fact, those statistics about Christians in jail would prove my point: religion is useful to give peace to people who need it.

Also, those statistics probably reflect the belief, not the practice, of the prisioners.

Personally I can't think of any war fought in the name of rationality and reason.

Of course not, we are not robots to be totally rational, or just animals to be irrational. Both are part of our nature.

However, those statistics prove that secularism is not rational in most cases.

You reasoning is very flawed. Assuming for the moment that "godandscience.org" is at all an unbiased and reasonable source for that statistic (I certainly can't find the book it cites anywhere)

Well, the website is irrelevant as longer as it has good references. Those references to academic books, however, are unbiased and the site has good arguments anyway.

You can find other similar references in other more academic websites, but for some reason atheist websites lack them.

War itself is irrational. To kill in the name of any country because of the fact I was born there is as irrational as to kill for my own religion. In fact, however, both sides have rational arguments to own the thing they are fighting for, but againt, the conflict itself is irrational and they are very common in

In fact, to kill in the name of religion is even more rational because they don't fight just for their beliefs but also for a philosophy, a culture and community, contrasting nationalist wars. However, again, both are irrational.

God himself has ordered the deaths of women and children within the Bible, and such action has been carried out by those considered pious by it.

In fact, they believe only God has authority to give and remove life because He created us, however we don't, therefore religion can't be officially a reason to make any war.

Most religious wars have an economical or cultural background, like the Crusades.

Peace and harmony certainly can't be said to be promoted by religion

Religion do promotes harmony and peace in most cases, but that doesn't mean that those religious people are doing what they believe.

Almost everyone believes in universal concepts like peace, but that doesn't mean we usually are full of peace. The same with religion.

worlddestroyer18 · 3 days

And yet, if we remove all of the links most likely to be from atheists, we get...just you.

Of course! It's a little subreddit. :-P

Also, the fact this subreddit is a circlejerk is not offensive for me.

partofaplan2 · 3 days

Why asking atheists in a Christian forum?

WigglySausage · 3 days

When you believe your kids are in danger of being burnt alive for eternity, it's hard to act rational and loving. The insane belief in eternal torment ruins just about everything.

If I would be an atheist parent, and my Child is a believer in something irrational and dangerous, then it would be OK to beat him?

Sorry, but that logic can be applicable in the other direction.

WigglySausage · 3 days

Trolling and fakes are also very common.

ahora · 3 days

So your reason for putting this here is on the notion of good-without-god?

Of course you can be good without belief! I didn't want to say the otherwise.

However, atheism has nothing to do with morality, while religion has a moral perspective. Therefore, they both are not comparable in that level: religion have moral faults, but atheism don't, not because it's better, but because it lacks morality. Of course, atheists can have a moral system, but atheism alone is not part of it.

I think religion has motivated or mislead millions to commit such acts throughout history, whilst atheism has nothing to mislead with.

No, religion usually promotes peace and armony. You are talking about fanaticism, not religion; and fanaticism is also in other ideologies like atheism.

Atheism is part of the ideology of many regimes, like North Korea and China, so in fact -al least in part- atheism is related with many massive crimes. Not for atheist reasons? Then why they used to persecute religious leaders?

To counter your citation of the USSR, what of the Holy Roman Empire? Or Anglo-Spanish War? Or the Crusades?

Actually, only 7% of wars have something to do with religion. Therefore, secularism is even more dangerous than religion.

WigglySausage · 3 days

I haven't observed that to be the case.

Well, I have.

heidavey · 3 days

I love humanity because God first loved it. However, it's your decision, so I don't care about lack of belief (it's irrelevant for me). However, I do care of you as a human being, but I respect your decisions.

ahora · 3 days

Why would they kill Christians for being Christians.

Ask terrorist atheist anarchists.

ahora · 3 days

That's the issue: Atheism tells nothing about what is good or bad, so in SOME cases it lacks morality.

For example: the atheist regime of the URSS.

Of course, Atheists can have a moral system, but again, atheism doesn't care about, and that's the issue.

That Klebold and Harris were atheists is irrelevant to their actions.

Well, if fact almost all our actions are oriented to our ideological perspectives.

ahora

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login