The progressive war on Christmas/Christianity

[koshergrl]

"....it was not agriculture which created civilization, but religion. The June issue of National Geographic offers a brief and provocative story from a place in Turkey known as Göbekli Tepe, site of the world's oldest example of monumental architecture i.e. a temple.
"While the interpretation of archeological remains is often as much art as it is science, there is plenty of reason to believe that in Gobekli Tepe people's need/desire to gather for worship is what created civilization, not the reverse, as was previously assumed. The Temple existed without a city."

"religion needs to be taken a whole lot more seriously by many of the people who read this section, especially those among them who constantly insult the religious impulse. It also means that those who assume that religion belongs to one group, one understanding of God or Gods or one particular scripture, would do well to practice more modesty about such claims.
The evidence from Gobekli Tepe suggests that religion is both more real, and more human, than is often admitted. The ultra-orthodox in both camps in the ongoing debate about what religion "really is," where it came from and what purposes it serves may find this difficult to accept."





Brad Hirschfield: Did Religion Create Civilization?#

 

[Mustang]

Religion didn't negatively affect governance in Europe. Quite the opposite. Governance negatively affected religion...

And now they have tossed it out, look how great they're doing!

Oh wait, they still have Islam. Thank goodness!

You ninny, the official state religion of a new king or queen could mean the difference between peace and war in Europe as alliances changed as a result.

For crying out loud, read a book or something because there's no excuse for such an ignorant comment like that.

European wars of religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Compared to the millions killed by atheist communist regimes...it pales in comparison.

I suggest you read books, and get your nose out of wiki. It's not a good place from which to amass a wealth of historical knowledge.

One does not negate the other. In fact, they're similar in many ways. It's based on the dream of some kind of new utopia that the adherents will usher in while the old order (and the old believers) are swept away out of necessity. Read Chris Hedges 2008 book "I Don't Believe in Atheists" also published under the better title of "When Atheism Becomes Religion." Perhaps you'll gain some insight.

 

[koshergrl]

No, they aren't comparable.

Not even close.

"
Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation:
“ Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' [9]

Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

 

[koshergrl]

Vox Day notes concerning atheism and mass murder:
“ Apparently it was just an amazing coincidence that every Communist of historical note publicly declared his atheism … .there have been twenty-eight countries in world history that can be confirmed to have been ruled by regimes with avowed atheists at the helm … These twenty-eight historical regimes have been ruled by eighty-nine atheists, of whom more than half have engaged in democidal162 acts of the sort committed by Stalin and Mao … The total body count for the ninety years between 1917 and 2007 is approximately 148 million dead at the bloody hands of fifty-two atheists, three times more than all the human beings killed by war, civil war, and individual crime in the entire twentieth century combined.
The historical record of collective atheism is thus 182,716 times worse on an annual basis than Christianity’s worst and most infamous misdeed, the Spanish Inquisition. It is not only Stalin and Mao who were so murderously inclined, they were merely the worst of the whole Hell-bound lot. For every Pol Pot whose infamous name is still spoken with horror today, there was a Mengistu, a Bierut, and a Choibalsan, godless men whose names are now forgotten everywhere but in the lands they once ruled with a red hand.


Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

 

[Mustang]

No, they aren't comparable.

Not even close.

"
Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation:
“ Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' [9]

Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

Of course they're comparable. And you know why? Because we can compare them.

With all due respect to AS, from a historical perspective, he doesn't really know what he's talking about since his point doesn't make any sense. If his point made sense, religious people would not kill for an ideology or in pursuit of a change in the social order. But they clearly have, time and time again.

That's the point. People who consider themselves to be visionaries who are prepared to remake the world to fit their idea of what is a more ideal social and/or economic order (or a more Godly one, for that matter) are quite prepared to spill blood on a massive scale to achieve their goals. They think that the end justifies the means, and the religious people think that they're doing God's work. There's not as much difference between dedicated idealogues as you might think, regardless of whether they're atheists or religious; they very often employ the same brutal methods to attain similar goals even if those goals are anathema to each other.

 

[koshergrl]

No, they aren't comparable.

Not even close.

"
Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation:
“ Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' [9]

Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

Of course they're comparable. And you know why? Because we can compare them.

With all due respect to AS, from a historical perspective, he doesn't really know what he's talking about since his point doesn't make any sense. If his point made sense, religious people would not kill for an ideology or in pursuit of a change in the social order. But they clearly have, time and time again.

That's the point. People who consider themselves to be visionaries who are prepared to remake the world to fit their idea of what is a more ideal social and/or economic order (or a more Godly one, for that matter) are quite prepared to spill blood on a massive scale to achieve their goals. They think that the end justifies the means, and the religious people think that they're doing God's work. There's not as much difference between dedicated idealogues as you might think, regardless of whether they're atheists or religious; they very often employ the same brutal methods to attain similar goals even if those goals are anathema to each other.

They do if they're atheists, for sure.

"Is a 58 percent chance that an atheist leader will murder a noticeable percentage of the population over which he rules sufficient evidence that atheism does, in fact, provide a systematic influence to do bad things? If that is not deemed to be conclusive, how about the fact that the average atheist crime against humanity is 18.3 million percent worse than the very worst depredation committed by Christians, even though atheists have had less than one-twentieth the number of opportunities with which to commit them. If one considers the statistically significant size of the historical atheist set and contrasts it with the fact that not one in a thousand religious leaders have committed similarly large-scale atrocities, it is impossible to conclude otherwise, even if we do not yet understand exactly why this should be the case. Once might be an accident, even twice could be coincidence, but fifty-two incidents in ninety years reeks of causation!["
http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism_and_Mass_Murder

 

[HUGGY]

The progressive war on Christmas/Christianity

Ya what's not to like about Christmas...???

How about lying to your children for one thing and eventually having to tell your kids you have been lying to them since they were born.

Equating true family values to payoffs once a year. Ya good thinking...tell your kids if they are good they will get presents. Don't be good just because it's the right thing to do.

And what about the poor kids that won't get anything for Christmas... they might as well be bad because it won't make any difference in thier Christmas outcomes.

How can you tell your kids that Christmas is good but lying is bad?

 

[Mustang]

No, they aren't comparable.

Not even close.

"
Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn offered the following explanation:
“ Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: 'Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.' [9]

Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

Of course they're comparable. And you know why? Because we can compare them.

With all due respect to AS, from a historical perspective, he doesn't really know what he's talking about since his point doesn't make any sense. If his point made sense, religious people would not kill for an ideology or in pursuit of a change in the social order. But they clearly have, time and time again.

That's the point. People who consider themselves to be visionaries who are prepared to remake the world to fit their idea of what is a more ideal social and/or economic order (or a more Godly one, for that matter) are quite prepared to spill blood on a massive scale to achieve their goals. They think that the end justifies the means, and the religious people think that they're doing God's work. There's not as much difference between dedicated idealogues as you might think, regardless of whether they're atheists or religious; they very often employ the same brutal methods to attain similar goals even if those goals are anathema to each other.

They do if they're atheists, for sure.

"Is a 58 percent chance that an atheist leader will murder a noticeable percentage of the population over which he rules sufficient evidence that atheism does, in fact, provide a systematic influence to do bad things? If that is not deemed to be conclusive, how about the fact that the average atheist crime against humanity is 18.3 million percent worse than the very worst depredation committed by Christians, even though atheists have had less than one-twentieth the number of opportunities with which to commit them. If one considers the statistically significant size of the historical atheist set and contrasts it with the fact that not one in a thousand religious leaders have committed similarly large-scale atrocities, it is impossible to conclude otherwise, even if we do not yet understand exactly why this should be the case. Once might be an accident, even twice could be coincidence, but fifty-two incidents in ninety years reeks of causation!["
Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

First things first, there are plenty of atheist leaders who don't engage in murder.

Secondly, not all people who profess faith are truly religious. Take America for example. Politicians, especially in the South, KNOW that they have to profess faith in order to be elected. It doesn't mean that they believe in God any more than it means that they believe in family values or that they really like country music.

Thirdly, Conservapedia has an agenda to project people of faith in a generally favorable way. So, they want to minimize the historical negative impact of religious extremism because they THEMSELVES are very religious.

But it's also true to say that it's more difficult in today's world of secular governance (thanks to the founding fathers, I must add) for religous groups or religious people to attain power as a group as opposed to people who get elected or rise to power without trying to do so as the tip of a spear of a religious movement. So, naturally today there will be fewer examples of religious mass murders or terrorism on a massive scale. But it still happens in the world in cultures that are older than ours but less advanced than ours in terms of the existence of liberal public institutions.

But people are deluding themselves if they think it couldn't happen again. There have been plenty of times in world history where advances in science and the humanities were lost and a more barbarous time arose. The Dark Ages come to mind. It lasted hundreds of years, and most of the advancements made during the times of Ancient Rome (which was also a brutal time) were lost to antiquity. As a result, supersition reigned for centuries.

Finally, even today in America, there are groups who want to turn this country into a Christian-centered state, and they're actively working toward that goal a little bit at a time. Many people think that would be a good thing. I don't think it would be good at all to have any person or group to be in a position to tell the rest of us what is and is not acceptable and have the power to enforce their views on everyone else. And over time that is EXACTLY what could eventually happen in a Christian America in much the same way that it evolved over time in a Christian Europe or in an Islamic Saudi Arabia.

 

[American_Jihad]

I know, atheist & liberals are going to SSSSSssssss, so happy winter solstice...
​

...

 

[American_Jihad]

Prince Charles Speaks Up for Persecuted Christians

December 20, 2013 by Majid Rafizadeh

Dubbed by the media as an “Arab Spring” or “Arab Awakening”, these events in the Middle East must be reexamined, as they more closely represent a “Tragedy for Minorities” rather than the democratic rebirth that the former names seem to describe.

This campaign to persecute minorities— particularly Christians in Muslim countries that have gone through uprisings or revolution like Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, and Yemen— have increased in the Middle East. Currently, Islamist parties are ruling the state, or are operating separately from the government, to implement their ideology throughout the region, serving their materialistic and political goals.

The number of Christian is shrinking significantly in the predominantly Muslim societies of the region, to almost a mere 4 percent of the population. Even though Christianity was born in this region, many Christians who see these nations as their homeland are being forced to leave. This raises the question as to whether the Islamist agenda is to wipe out all the minorities in this region, making an Islamic world with Christians disappearing, leaving a unified Muslim region under the rule of Allah, and gaining geopolitical and materialistic interests.

...

Though President Obama criticizes and condemns these kind of persecutions against Christians, reports show that Obama is increasingly looking to form an alliance with the Islamists in Syria— as he did with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The American administration believes that moderates, or the Free Syrian Army, are not a powerful enough force in Syria. Nevertheless, forming such alliances with the Islamists will prompt unbearable consequences for the minorities of the region. President Obama’s moves to get politically closer to the Islamists, and particularly in Syria, Egypt and Tunisia, will further empower and embolden these Islamist groups, legitimizing them and allowing the groups to continue their systematic campaigns against minorities and Christians.

Prince Charles Speaks Up for Persecuted Christians | FrontPage Magazine

 

[American_Jihad]

Slaughter of Christian Women and Children in Muslim Lands

December 19, 2013 by Raymond Ibrahim

Two of the most tragic Islamic attacks on Christians, killing several women and children, took place in the month of October, one in Syria another in Egypt.

On October 21 in Syria, the U.S.-supported Islamic rebels invaded and occupied the ancient Christian settlement of Sadad for over a week, till ousted by the military. During that week, “the largest massacre of Christians in Syria,” in the words of Orthodox Archbishop Alnemeh, took place. Among other things, 45 Christians—including women and children—were killed, several tortured to death; mass graves were discovered; all of Sadad’s 14 churches, some ancient, were ransacked and destroyed; the bodies of six people from one family, ranging from ages 16 to 90, were found buried at the bottom of a well (an increasingly common fate for “subhuman” Christians).

The jihadis even made a graphic video (with English subtitles) of those whom they massacred, while shouting Islam’s victory-cry, “Allahu Akbar” (or “Allah is greater,” which John McCain equated to a Christian saying “thank God”). Another video, made after Sadad was liberated, shows more graphic atrocities.

The day before rebels invaded Sadad, on Sunday, October 20, the Church of the Virgin Mary in Warraq near Cairo, Egypt, was attacked during a wedding ceremony, leaving four dead and nearly two dozen wounded. According to a report issued by forensics, two of those murdered were young girls, each named Mary: 12-year-old Mary Nabil Fahmy, who took five shots in the chest, and 8-year-old Mary Ashraf Masih (“Masih” meaning “Christ”), who took a bullet in the back which burst from the front.

...

Slaughter of Christian Women and Children in Muslim Lands | FrontPage Magazine

 

[HUGGY]

The thing is...is... That the Christians cannot invoke some BS gift giving "ceremony" to represent the wise men giving the baby Jesus gifts as part of Christian religious culture and not be responsible for the out of hand orgy of gift buying and giving that is now Christmas.

Number one.. Christian hierarchy needs to come out publicly and forcefully and debunk Santa.

Number two... The Pope should publicly and loudly protest the current highjacking of the baby Jesus and associations to all the gift giving ritual.

Christians should restore the manger scene and it's religious significance to it's proper place in Christian mythology.

In short Christianity needs to separate it's self from the disgusting comercialism that is Christmas. At the very least Christianity should do everything in it's power to get the name of Christ out of the equation.

I doubt comercial interest would attempt to stop the gift giving tradition but the "tree" and Santa Claus need to be whatever it would be without involving Christianity or any reference to Christ.

 

[Mustang]

Slaughter of Christian Women and Children in Muslim Lands

December 19, 2013 by Raymond Ibrahim

Two of the most tragic Islamic attacks on Christians, killing several women and children, took place in the month of October, one in Syria another in Egypt.

On October 21 in Syria, the U.S.-supported Islamic rebels invaded and occupied the ancient Christian settlement of Sadad for over a week, till ousted by the military. During that week, “the largest massacre of Christians in Syria,” in the words of Orthodox Archbishop Alnemeh, took place. Among other things, 45 Christians—including women and children—were killed, several tortured to death; mass graves were discovered; all of Sadad’s 14 churches, some ancient, were ransacked and destroyed; the bodies of six people from one family, ranging from ages 16 to 90, were found buried at the bottom of a well (an increasingly common fate for “subhuman” Christians).

The jihadis even made a graphic video (with English subtitles) of those whom they massacred, while shouting Islam’s victory-cry, “Allahu Akbar” (or “Allah is greater,” which John McCain equated to a Christian saying “thank God&#8221. Another video, made after Sadad was liberated, shows more graphic atrocities.

The day before rebels invaded Sadad, on Sunday, October 20, the Church of the Virgin Mary in Warraq near Cairo, Egypt, was attacked during a wedding ceremony, leaving four dead and nearly two dozen wounded. According to a report issued by forensics, two of those murdered were young girls, each named Mary: 12-year-old Mary Nabil Fahmy, who took five shots in the chest, and 8-year-old Mary Ashraf Masih (“Masih” meaning “Christ&#8221, who took a bullet in the back which burst from the front.

...

Slaughter of Christian Women and Children in Muslim Lands | FrontPage Magazine

Let me know when American Christians speak up (and criticize) instead of turning a blind eye to how Israelis engage in the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian Muslims.

 

[koshergrl]

There is no "indiscriminate" killing, and it in no way comes close.

 

[Mustang]

There is no "indiscriminate" killing, and it in no way comes close.

And you think there's no indiscriminate killing because why? Because you don't ever read about it?

 

[bendog]

There is no "indiscriminate" killing, and it in no way comes close.

Well, even if you conclude the pales won't really give up the aim to eliminate Israel, Israel is engaged in ethnic cleansing if not outright apartheid. But, it's not like "some" christians have a lock on hypocrisy. Nevertheless, looking at western europe, I think any notion that christian leaders are less likely to murder millions is just wrong. The reason those govts are so secular is directly because christianity was used to justify genocide.

 

[koshergrl]

I think it is completely irrelevant to the topic....which is about the war on Christians.

Not about how they deserve it.

 

[bendog]

I think it is completely irrelevant to the topic....which is about the war on Christians.

Not about how they deserve it.

Well, I agree any hypocrisy by some christians toward actions taken by Israel is not really pertinent, because Muslims and Hindus and athiests also are capable of hypocrisy.

However, I thought you were arguing that christian govts are less likely to engage in mass murder than athiest govts, but that is simply not historically accurate, and i'm not even talking about Crusades or the Inquisition. And not just the nazis who based their holocaust of religion, but also Argentina and Chile in the latter half of last century. The reason western europe embraced secularism was a direct result of a misuse of christianity. And I as hear the current Pope, he's very attuned to christianity being used to justify social inequity enforced by electrodes and mass graves. And none of that is a war on christianity but rather is limiting its misuse because christian leaders, including the former two Popes, chose to remain silent in the face of torture and mass killing.

 

[koshergrl]

Yes, it is historically accurate. The worst mass killings have been undertaken by atheist regimes.

Sorry.

 

[bendog]

Jesus fcking Christ, now you're actually an apolgist for the Turks, the Serbs, Hitler, the Dirty War and Pinochet. SHAME ON YOU