How to attack Christianity

[Trout]

Gerbil - 1
Toasty - 0
Did I get the math right?

[Meh Gerbil]

But, when some nutcase who, even in a very round-about manner, can be even remotely tied to Christianity (he was a Catholic when he was a kid) it's "yeah, look at those murderous Christians...."

I've seen atheists claim that we're all born atheists.
Whoops, looks like that line of reasoning is a big bag of fail.

Maybe our atheists friends should spend less time digging mass graves and more time reading?

[Secular Liberation]

More of a Lenin fan?
The point is that your attack of his belief system, based on the Templars, is ridiculous whether or not you wear Stalin print footy pajamas.

The only way to force atheists off that ridiculous argument is to show that when it comes to tallying a body count they lose.
Bad.

You've completely misconstrued my argument. Where did I try to justify the anti-Christian persecution under the Soviet Union (which for the record, wasn't everywhere in the Soviet Union as noted by the famous Soviet soldier kissing a cross)? Looking at seer's avatar, he's perfectly fine with Crusaders committing acts as vile as cannibalism, either that or he's been drinking Neo-Nazi koolaid.

[Secular Liberation]

I've seen atheists claim that we're all born atheists.
Whoops, looks like that line of reasoning is a big bag of fail.

Maybe our atheists friends should spend less time digging mass graves and more time reading?

Maybe Christians should stop threatening violence against their political opponents.
Maybe Christians should stop shooting up abortion clinics
Maybe Christians should stop believing the earth is 6000 years old and making Americans. look stupid.

[rogue06]

Gerbil - 1
Toasty - 0
Did I get the math right?

While math is of da debil, AFAICT

giphy.gif

your calculations are correct

[rogue06]

You've completely misconstrued my argument. Where did I try to justify the anti-Christian persecution under the Soviet Union (which for the record, wasn't everywhere in the Soviet Union as noted by the famous Soviet soldier kissing a cross)? Looking at seer's avatar, he's perfectly fine with Crusaders committing acts as vile as cannibalism, either that or he's been drinking Neo-Nazi koolaid.

During WWII Stalin's persecution of Christians was put on the back burner for obvious reasons.


As for cannibalism... Let's compare being driven by starvation into acts of desperation (as the Crusaders are alleged to have done at the siege of Ma'arra during the First Crusade) with the acts of the communist Chinese (which even today must affirm they are atheists) where the Red Guard are known to have committed ritual cannibalism with some of the bodies of those they executed. Likewise, in the Guangxi Autonomous Region (borders Viet Nam in southeastern China) local communist leaders incited followers to kill those they termed "class enemies" like land owners and the like and then eat parts of them in public ceremonies during the Cultural Revolution.

[Trout]

You've completely misconstrued my argument.

Here's the extent of your "argument":

What? It's what the Crusaders and Templars did.

1) Gerbil's comments toward you directly spoke to the above statement (or "argument" as you've incorrectly called it.) Should you decide to disagree, please refer again to 1.

Where did I try to justify the anti-Christian persecution under the Soviet Union

In your signature.

Looking at seer's avatar, he's perfectly fine with Crusaders committing acts as vile as cannibalism, either that or he's been drinking Neo-Nazi koolaid.

Something tells me you really don't care to engage the material at hand. I don't blame you for steering clear of it having read your"argument". You've already been steamrolled pretty badly, you should regroup, meditate and choose your"arguments" more carefully. You're really looking stupid.

[Trout]

Maybe Christians should stop threatening violence against their political opponents.

You're probably right.

Maybe atheists should stop killing their political opponents by the hundreds of millions.

Maybe Christians should stop shooting up abortion clinics

You're probably right.

Maybe atheists should stop trying to wipe out entire races of people.

Maybe Christians should stop believing the earth is 6000 years old and making Americans. look stupid.

You're doing enough to make yourself look stupid for all of us.

[One Bad Pig]

His understanding of Christianity was fair enough, not that Job would be much good for judging. Despite the religious-sounding title, there's not so much as a parody of religion in the novel.

I would have understood a parody, done well. It's that he couldn't have been much more off the mark in getting inside the head of a fundamentalist preacher (and the ideas of heaven aren't close either). I had to force myself to finish it, and I don't think that's been the case with any of his other writings. I quite enjoyed SiaSL. I Will Fear No Evil was good, though creepy.

The most telling critique of religion, both positive and negative, is in Stranger.

The clearest reference to Christianity is in Friday, in the creation of the Asa Hunter Bread Upon the Waters Fund she started on the colony planet, Botany Bay, in Asa's memory.

"Mr. Hunter, I wish there were some way I could repay you and Mrs. Hunter."
"You can."
"Yes?" (Was he going to ask for money? *No*!)
"Someday you'll find somebody needs a hand. So give him a hand and think of us."
"Oh! I shall! I surely shall!"
"But don't bother to write to us about it. People who get mail get noticed. We don't crave to be noticed."
"I see. But I'll do it and think about you, not once but more than once."
"That's best. Bread cast upon the waters always comes back, miss."

It's been too long since I read that. Perhaps I should track down a copy.

[lilpixieofterror]

What? It's what the Crusaders and Templars did.

Which you conveniently ignore that the crusades was a response to Islamic aggression. Got to love how fundy atheist try to re-write history to ignore historical events in their own crusade to try to make Christians look bad.

[lilpixieofterror]

If you'd like to evaluate a system based on it's adherent's misguided actions we can certainly pursue that course.
Be forewarned, atheist rulers killed more people in the 20th century than all of Christianity in the previous 2,000 years combined.

So you have to ask yourself this: How bad do I want to lose today?

In the event you don't want to pursue a body count as a means of truth detection then stop brining it up like it means something.
Thanks.

Not only that, but most Christian aggression was due to a response to something or to do something else. The Crusades was a response to Islamic aggression and the inquisition was a response to the fact that the church was the only real legal authority of the mid middle ages (and it's later years, it was used as a convenient way for governments to lock up and rid themselves of those who would challenge their rule).

[lilpixieofterror]

Let's rip off that Band-Aid, shall we?
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persec...e_Soviet_Union

Do you ever actually look stuff up or do you make it up as you go along?

What I love about this article is that using only the 20th century the misguided faith-system of atheism, in the name of atheism, has killed more Christians than Christians have killed of anyone else for any reason.

This despite the fact they're a tiny minority.

Despite the easy win I still consider this a weak line of reasoning.

You're forgetting the number one rule of fundy atheism:

If you can blame a Christian for killing people, it's the fault of Christianity, no matter how much political factors can be held responsible. However; if you can blame atheism for killing people, you blame political factors.

It should be pretty obvious, they have a double standard when it comes to their logic because their hatred of Christians/Christianity is their guiding light. Not logic or reason.

[Meh Gerbil]

LilPixieOfTerror:
Thank you for bayonetting the wounded.
It creeps me out that you whistle while you work, but you do get the job done.

-Meh Gerbil

[Meh Gerbil]

Taoist invoked a fallacious argument involving population density.
Let's set aside that path's obvious flaws and assume that it is valid.

Running the numbers of deaths vs. population:

Inquisition
Duration: 500 years
Deaths: ~200,000 (I'll use 500,000 in the calculation, just to be generous)
Population in 1500 AD: 425,000,000
Chance of being caught unexpectedly by the Inquisition: .001

Stalin's Atheist Utopia
Duration: ~50 years
Deaths: 50,000,000
Population in 1950 AD: 2,500,000,000
Chance of being caught and executed by Rationalists: .02

Just for giggles I nearly tripled the number of deaths attributed to the Inquisition which spanned 500 years.
Just for giggles I left out in the neighborhood of 100,000,000 other victims of atheism in the 20th century thanks to Mao, Pol Pot, etc.

Even with those generous adjustments a person was 20X more likely to be killed by atheists in the 20th century than by the Inquisition in 1500.

[Meh Gerbil]

Even though the actual numbers make atheism out to be little more than a cult of blood thirsty hedonists I still firmly believe this sort of argumentation is misguided.
I'd really rather not think about it as I want to be able to hang out with my atheist friends without bringing my own body guards.