|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
| |
How does one get a pleasant immortality? Strictly speaking, for those who believe in the christian bible, the following must be done to get a pleasant immortality and to relieve oneself of the worry that by not abiding by *all* of the following -22- re- quirements, one might place their pleasant immortality at risk. (source for the following listed near the end of this post, and the following is not complete, as other biblical passages would have to be adhered to in order to insure that one was not in violation of any bibli- cal statement that might place one's plea- sant immortality ticket at risk) 1. believe that the Jesus of the New Testament was a reality 2. be baptized 3. be part of a house in which belief that the Jesus of the New Testament was a reality is present (by the head of the house?) 4. be just 5. have faith 6. be righteous, and be so righteous that you exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (not sure how the righteousness of a group of people would be determined, as certainly, any group of people have many acts which wouldn't be considered righteous) 7. confess, orally or, I assume, if one can't talk, one could confess by com- municating the following in some other way, that the Jesus of the New Testament was a reality, and that God raised him from the dead 8. be worthy of the grace of God 9. be worthy of mercy, be washed of regeneration (not sure what that means), be renewed by the Holy Ghost (not sure what that means) 10. have worthy works 11. have worthy ways, worthy doings 12. do what is lawful and right 13. have worthy words 14. keep the commandments 15. feed the hungry, provide drink for the thirsty, take in the strangers, clothe the naked, visit the sick, visit the imprisoned 16. love the Lord thy God (not sure who that refers to, as the word 'lord' has multiple meanings, from God to Jesus to one having power and authority over others, to one that has achieved mastery, to man of high rank or position, so to be safe, love all those guys) with all your soul and all your strength and all your mind 17. love your neighbor as yourself (difficult to do if your neighbor is acting in a manner harmful to your own welfare, like sleeping with your wife or girlfriend, or threatening your life or welfare, but just to be on the safe side, love is required) 18. do good 19. do good deeds 20. be a doer of the law 21. when it comes to salvation, par- tipate in that endeavor with fear and trembling 22. have faith and have works that are worthy, for faith without works is dead - - - http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/faithalone.html - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Now, for those who think they've played it as safe as possible by doing their best to adhere to the above, well, the follow- ing contradicts that notion, at least the left-hand side does, placing one in a 'no win' situation -if- one is attempting to avoid risk by following ancient religious instructions: http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/contra/christians_hell.html - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Also in play, Anti-Pascal's Wager: http://tinyurl.com/6ynve9 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - As for hoping for a pleasant immortality, however unlikely that is, viewing that as a possibility in an entirely naturalistic domain, regardless of beliefs or acts, regardless of myths or religions, simply reflecting one's natural desire to have a better and everlasting existence? Easy to do -if- one disbelieves in the contradictory and irreconcilable nature of religions, -if- one accepts the totality of naturalism, and -if- one rejects the religious arguments that without the 'right' religious faith, hope is futile. - - - In response to a poster who wrote: > Not to contribute [...], but most Christian groups > simply require acceptance of Christ as savior [...] Exactly, you're starting to get it, how religions will say in the bible is the 'holy' word of God, and in the next breath, they'll select a par- ticular bible passage or passages, and ignore or spin the ones that are inconsistent with the chosen emphasis. All religions and religious leaders with their ancient foundational texts, simply pick and choose passages to promote whatever agenda they're into at the time. Witch trials? Need I remind you of the biblical passage that prompted that? Crusades, tortures and imprison- ments of 'infidels', the bible is loaded with passages that the advocates of those policies used to promote such things. Anti-Judaism, religious leaders for centuries used bible passages to pro- mote that. And so on and so forth. All the seductions, all the threats, everyone asked to just follow based on blind faith. How to follow? Not to worry, your religious leaders will show you the way, and we all know how reliable those religious leaders have been in the past, so how could they ever go wrong? In my opinion, blind faith, whether it be the blind faith of the men who mass murdered close to 3,000 Ameri- icans, or the blind faith of the millions who suffered horrendous deaths in the black plague, or the blind faith of the millions who killed, tortured, or impri- soned their fellow men based on what religious leaders and the christian bible led them to do ... ... not the ideal way to live, and indeed, is a futile and enslaving endeavor at its best, and opens the door to anti-human endeavors at its worst. - - - In response to someone who wrote: > I don't consider it playing it safe or scared. > I consider it living in harmony when I serve > my fellow man and my God. > If I am right and you are wrong, then I get > one heck of a reward and I wouldn't want > to be you. > If you are right and I am wrong, we both rot > in the ground and my ancestors will always > have the memories of the good I did, while > yours will speak of what a selfish bastard > you were. Religious myth, the seduction of "do this, and get a pleasant immortality" combined with the threat of "don't do this, and lose out on the pleasant immortality and (per your particular perspective) be thought of as a "selfish bastard". Some of the time, the threat side consists of "eternal torment". As for the anti-human aspect of reli- gious faith following, obvious in your reply unless you wish to attribute your shared oblivion -and- "selfish bastard" comments to sin, ask forgiveness, and go back to trying to seduce us to follow based on blind faith, but when you do, do try to avoid the anti-humanism. What, you've ruled out a naturalistic pleasant continuance? Interesting, your faith in a religious pleasant continuance, your admission that such a continuance might not be in the cards, and your cer- tainty that naturalism and a pleasant con- tinuance are 100% impossible. Do tell, share with us your logic, reason, and scientific analysis that have ruled out a naturalistic pleasant continuance, as I'd be very interested in that, if you can prove it. As for your "selfish bastard" comment: Being a type 1 diabetic, there is one per- son on the face of the planet in charge of my being on the planet (well, not in- cluding those involved in the manufac- ture and distribution of insulin), and that's me. I suspect that selfish and type 1 diabetic management go hand-in-hand, but if a type 1 diabetic can find a life partner willing to participate in the pro- cess, on a 24x7x365 (366 every leap year) basis, good for them. I suspect few are able to do so. As for being pro-human, apparently you don't care about that as you perceive religion as the only way to be pro-human. That's unfortunate, and is but one of many views that the religious have instilled within them, resulting from their expo- sure to religious faith from childhood in most cases. - - - In response to someone who wrote, in reply to another poster who made the "selfish bastard" assertion above: > Excuse me, but what proof do you have > that PHF is a "selfish bastard." > He may have done a lot of good in his life. Just one of billions living 'neath the constraints of the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune (particularly, those we've been subjected to by religions and by disease, and by the way in which the natural risky realm we exist in harms [some more than others] and kills all of us, sooner or later) ... ... simply opposing them via the Pro- Humanist FREELOVER stances I've advanced in this newsgroup (and others) from time to time, and via support for Pro-Human scientific research and advancement which frequently differs from positions taken by religions -and- by the reli- gious. Those views transferred to a website (through March, 2007, and I've not yet taken the time to update that web- site since then). I understand that to believers who've adopted the "believe and get a plea- sant immortality" stance, the stance of pray and worship and fear and love an all-powerful entity that will listen to you and, possibly, answer your prayer in a positive way, that any position doubting or differing with that one cuts to the core of what they've invested their time, money (most often), and hopes in, from a very young age in most cases. The positions of doubt and disbelief most often register in believer minds in the way they've been taught to per- ceive them by religions, as threaten- ing, as sin, as damnable acts, as untruths, not simply as differences of opinion regarding the import / impact of an- cient oft-time anti-human myths. Even though my position surpasses that of religions in many areas, among them Pro-Humanism, hope for *all* based not on ancient superstition, but instead based on what we know and can discover about the naturalistic world ... ... most have been taught to ignore or dismiss or oppose or spin or diminish or disparage doubt and disbelief in the 'right' religion, and to treat it as the 'ulti- mate sin', as 'immoral', as 'wrong'. Most have been taught to have and to promote blind faith in the 'right' religion, with that taught as the ultimate 'good', in a society / culture with "In God We Trust" on its money, with Presidents most often espousing God as the an- swer (the current one probably the most God-promoting in U.S. history). Most receive their news from a secular media which oft-times buddies up to religion in a promotive way. Many are at first, surprised, and some are opposed and aghast at a Pro-Human- ist FREELOVER position opposing what many have been raised to believe about religion, and not surprisingly, many are hesitant at first to consider stances which place their life-long hopes (in immortal- ity from a prayer-answering, sometimes, maybe, God) at risk. Many are at first not open to Pro-Human- ist FREELOVER stances, as they're so different from what they've been taught by religions/religious followers/religious leaders, as they encourage doubt and dis- belief and skepticism, as they place the immortal hopes of the religious into an area of suspicion. The fact that Pro-Humanist FREELOVER stances are presented from a position of morality, strength, logic, reason, 'good', and hope, that's difficult for those with religious exposure to accept, at first. Why? See above, and see below. All this, and more, understandable as every last one of us is a result of the totality of that which preceded us, the totality of the environment each of us is surrounded by, and all that can hap- pen, all that transpires, simply physics, results, outcomes, consequences, the nature of being. To the extent that my positions provide a stimuli that, over time, helps to bring about more Pro-Humanism, less reli- gious devotion, more 'good', less 'hate', less violence, more 'open-mindedness', less reliance on ancient supernaturalistic notions, more reliance on Pro-Human scientific advancements which increase the odds that humanity's future will be safer, better, and more free than was humanity's past ... ... I will have considered my time on this planet to have been a worthwhile endeavor (although it has, at times, been a very difficult one, especially so during the 'recovery from divorce' period, especially so during the bat- tling chronic depression period [which lasted from about age 8 to the time in which a couple of prescription anti- depressants 'cured' me when I was barely surviving a suicidal despair, said 'cure' still working even though I've been off the meds for quite some time now], and especially as a result of suffering from 47 years of having type 1 diabetes). In any case, I am proud to have taken advantage of this window of oppor- tunity to openly communicate my opinions, and am hopeful that they will some day (the sooner, the better) help to result in improvements to this one and only *certain* life experience we all share. - - - In response to someone who wrote, regarding how to get a pleasant immor- tality: > Accept Jesus Christ as his/her Lord and > Savior. While there are some denominations > that "want more", the vast majority of Chris- > tian faiths believe that nothing more than > acceptance of Christ is required. The multi- > tude of other "requirements" you listed may > be expected when it comes to proper behav- > ior, they're not necessary to the the ticket to > heaven. > Sorry to invalidate your posting, but it sure > was a good rant. Well, the posting addressed that belief angle, revealing the the christian bible has much in the way of contradictory instructions for getting the claimed 'heaven', and for avoiding the claimed 'hell'. As for belief, I believed at the age of -8-, satisfying the belief requirement, was baptized shortly thereafter, satis- fying the baptized requirement (bap- tists believe in baptism upon conver- sion, while some faiths, like Catholics, believe in baptism of babies), have done very little in the way of the re- quired items listed in Matthew 25 (be- low) -but- am part of a nation that is as likely as is any nation to be placed on the 'right' as indicated in Matthew 25, -but- I disbelieved later in life, so ... ... got any bible verses to cite which identify what happens to believers who later stop believing? Would it have been better, immortality-wise, for me to have died at the age of -8-, or would (unbeknownst to me) my conversion at age -8- have been judged to be false since, had I lived, I later would've dis- believed? -If- not only belief, at any time, is re- quired, but belief for one's entire life is required, does that place a believer's immortality at risk, life's continuation, since doubts and disbelief can only be ruled out -if- one stops thinking freely about the possibilities of error / myth present throughout the bible? -If- one objects to anti-humanism, isn't the presence of so much of that through- out the bible predisposed to engendering doubt and disbelief by pro-human indi- viduals? Isn't the only way for a believer to stay strong in their belief is to close their mind to doubt and disbelief and free- thought immediately upon conversion, -or- to simply become a believer at all cost, even if that cost is open-minded search for the truth? Brings up another point, about belief, is not one simply destined to believe or disbelieve based on what their genetic make-up is combined with what influ- ences they've been exposed to? Obviously, the likelihood of being Mus- lim in a Muslim country is high, the like- lihood of being Hindu in India is high (for children of Hindus) or Buddhist in India is high (for children of Buddhists), the likelihood of being into one of the ancestral religions in China is high (for children whose parents follow ancestral religions), and so forth and so on, as most children tend to believe whatever is instilled in them at a very young age. Aren't present-day humans at a distinct disadvantage relative to folks around way back then, -if- the Jesus of the New Testament actually existed -and- belief in the Jesus of the New Testament is required, what with so much time pass- ing since then, what with so much evi- dence regarding history and naturalism countering the views of New Testament writers, what with nothing evidential substantiating the New Testament claims and much evidence to cast doubt on the claims? - - - Speaking of Matthew 25, how do you interpret the following, a passage which appears to threaten entire nations (placed on "the left", the way in which that critical decision is arrived at, unspecified) who failed to feed the hungry, provide drink for the thirsty, provide clothes for the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned? Put another way, doesn't Matthew 25:41 contradict the passages which state that salvation is by belief in the Jesus of the New Testament? Further, do contradictions of this type lead you to worry about the claims that by belief, alone, you've done all that is required to insure (or maximize the odds) of your getting the pleasant immortality ticket? Another question, oblivion for disbelief, if disbelievers are terminated in hell, as a particular poster in here (and many others) believes, why would the fire men- tioned in Matthew 25:41 be everlasting? Of course, 'dunno' or 'cause God wants it to be' would suffice for believers, per- haps to remind those in heaven what would happen to them were God to change his mind about them being there, -but- when it comes to religion, interpre- tation (what I, at times, call spin) is both required -and- critical to those interested in knowing what's going on in there, or at least in knowing what religious folks say about what's going in there, oft-times disagreeing about it. Matthew 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 25:33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 25:35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 25:36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 25:37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 25:38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 25:39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: 25:42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: 25:43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. 25:44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hun- gred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? 25:45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. - - - In response to someone who wrote: > Typical doubletalk from you - NOTHING [...] You, obviously, would be well-served to concede the manner in which chris- tian anti-humanism adversely impacted Europe, ever since Constantine, and how religion has had an adverse impact on human welfare from its inception, with all its anti-humanism, with its "us versus them" tribal warfare mentality. Failing that, your attempt at apologies for religion are futile. What, by the way, are you saved from, God? What makes God disposed to hurt- ing you, or killing you, or harming you or anyone, original sin? Why would you have to pay for what some myth did in the fictitious Garden of Eden, in the myths of the bible and quran and torah? Why, in the name of all that is truly pro- human, would God 'murder for eternity' or 'torture for eternity', you or any human for their biology, totally a reflection of their genes (which you and most religious types think God designed) and what they are taught (which is a result of their being alive and being exposed to stimuli they have absolutely no control over) and what their current situation is (dramatically im- pacted by the -2- factors mentioned, plus by actions of others which are totally out- side one's control)? Why, in the name of all that is truly pro- human, do you worship what, per your religion, is an anti-human God who, per your religion, will only save you from his disposition to 'murder' or 'torture' you -if- you have the 'right' 'blind faith' in a vast array of unprovable unevidenced contradictory -and- anti-human claims? - - - In response to someone who wrote in opposition to religion, and to posts sup- porting or opposed to religion, I replied: Actually, this thread was started by yours truly, and it was specifically oriented to ask believers to consider the -22- examples of biblical directions which they'd be best served to follow -if- they really believe in the christian bible. That probably was a bit of news to most who, as mentioned by a couple of replies, had been taught that the way to heaven was by belief in the Jesus of the New Testament, and that's all that is required. So, that places Pascal's Wager in an entirely different light, -if- the only so-called 'safe way' to escape 'hell' is to thoroughly read and study *all* the bible, and do *every- thing* that's suggested to achieve more righteousness than the scribes and Phari- sees, to be outside the nations put on the 'left', to be worthy based on (see original post for all the instructions in that brief list), to avoid unpardonable sin (itself, con- tradicted in the scriptures), and so on and so forth. In my view, christians have, over time, sim- ply simplified the message to try to induce people to follow, and are simply 'in denial' if they think that by doing so, they elimin- ate the risk of being 'offed' or 'tortured' by the God they believe in. Furthermore, when faced with the fact, per their scriptures and their belief that most disbelieve in christianity, that billions and billions of humans will be 'murdered' or 'tortured' (religious views vary on that one) by God, that cannot be reassuring to religious types who want their God to be perceived as worthy of love because He saved _____ (insert qualifiers here, see list for details, noting that per christians, christianity is a supreme requirement) from his own propensity to kill or torture most humans for eternity. Put another way, eternity with a mass mur- dering or mass torturing God? Not a pleasant picture. Now, a naturalistic pleasant continuance, that's an entirely separate matter. Even though I know that's merely a hope reflec- ting, in large degree, a dream, a wish, -if- one acknowledges the high probability of an eternal number of space-time contin- uums, a large number of dimensions far beyond the -4- in our particular space- time continuum, the possibility of multi- dimensional multi-universal nature in which connectivity is in play (really, a reach, and probably highly unlikely if not impossible), perhaps one might see reason for naturalistic hope in the fol- lowing articles. On the other hand, one might read the fol- lowing and come to the conclusion that a naturalistic (and pleasant) continuation is a futile hope, merely a dream and a wish without any realistic chance of being true. In any case, the nature of nature is truly mysterious, and much remains to be dis- covered regarding it, and until we do, it's likely that my hope will reside in the naturalistic areas that remain mysterious, although I remain open to being talked out of hope of a pleasant continuance (after death in this particular space-time continuum / dimensions) nature, if some- one can make a convincing case that there really is no naturalistic hope, at all, and that one's naturalistic fate solely resides in this particular dimension / space-time continuum. Even so, even if one constrains their hope to this dimension, a very long life far be- yond anything possible 'til now, that re- sides on the horizon, if pro-human scien- tific advances are manifested in this real- ity, and if it doesn't happen in time for me to get it, at least I have hope that my daughter or (if she has children) one of my grandchildren will get it, and in that, my hope in being a part of a long-lived and better future, at least if not for me, for my children and potential grand- children and humankind, would reside. Really, disbelievers, in my view, should open our minds to a much grander natural world of possibilities, and stop buying into the "believe or else" mindset of reli- gionists, and start turning our backs on their attempt to blackmail folks into believing that without 'blind faith', with- out a God who, per their own beliefs, will torture or murder most humans for forever, hope is futile. Multiverse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse Many-worlds interpretation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation Are There Other Universes? space.com http://tinyurl.com/douv Particle Accelerator May Reveal Shape Of Alternate Dimensions Science Daily -- February 04, 2008 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080131161812.htm When the world's most powerful particle accelerator starts up later this year, exotic new particles may offer a glimpse of the existence and shapes of extra dimensions. Researchers from the University of Wis- consin-Madison and the University of California-Berkeley say that the telltale signatures left by a new class of particles could distinguish between possible shapes of the extra spatial dimensions predicted by string theory. Could a hole in space save man from extinction? -- Michio Kaku -- Telegraph -- January 05, 2005 http://tinyurl.com/holeinspace-savefromextinction Michio Kaku argues that new space probes will provide critical new information on parallel universes, cosmology, and worm- holes that humanity will need to survive in the long-term. Zillions of Universes? Or Did Ours Get Lucky? -- New York Times -- October 28, 2003 http://tinyurl.com/zillionsofuniverses Cosmologists debate the anthropic principle and the existence of multiple universes at a recent conference. Parallel Universes -- Scientific American -- April 14, 2003 http://www.uboeschenstein.ch/boe/themes/multiversum.html The frontiers of physics have gradually expanded to incorporate ever more abstract (and once metaphysical) concepts such as a round Earth, invisible electromagnetic fields, time slowdown at high speeds, quantum superpositions, curved space, and black holes. Over the past several years the concept of a multiverse has joined this list. It is grounded in well-tested theories such as relativity and quantum mechanics, and it fulfills both of the basic criteria of an empirical science: it makes pre- dictions, and it can be falsified. Scientists have discussed as many as four distinct types of parallel universes. The key question is not whether the multi- verse exists but rather how many levels it has. - - - In response to someone who wrote: > [...] Hitler and his ilk paid lip service to > the Church, because they couldn't rise > to power in opposition to it. So, Hitler, raised a Catholic, your assertion is that any pro-God or pro-Church support for "the Church" prior to gaining power is mere "lip service", or is it just pro-Church stuff you're referring to? Of interest, your absence of addressing the multitude of evidence regarding anti-Semi- tism of Catholicism, how that impacted Luther, himself born and raised a Catholic, and all the plethora of European Christian anti-Semitism which preceded -and- directly contributed to the German substantially Christian mindset that led up to the Holo- caust: Anti-Judaism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Judaism Luther and antisemitism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther_and_antisemitism Spanish Inquisition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition Portuguese Inquisition http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Inquisition Blood curse http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_curse Blood libel against Jews http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews Host desecration http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host_desecration Judensau http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judensau Witch-hunt -- Antiquity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials#Antiquity Witch-hunt -- Middle Ages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials#Middle_Ages Witch-hunt -- Early Modern Europe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials#Early_Modern_Europe In response to someone who wrote, regarding Hitler: > Once IN power, the religious gladhanding and appeals > to God disappeared. So, once in power, your assertion is that Hitler stopped "religious gladhanding and appeals to God." So, I take it that you view the following as what, disingenuous again? When, exactly, do you perceive that Hitler was "IN power", as historical records state that occurred early in 1933? Most of the following website documents his pro-God pro-religion anti-atheist statements *after* he came "IN power", a plethora of them, so I suppose you are forced to use your Giant disingenuous eraser for much longer than you mentioned in your "Once IN power, the religious gladhanding and appeals to God disappeared" statement, up to just a few months before he died: The Christianity of Hitler revealed in his speeches and proclamations http://www.nobeliefs.com/speeches.htm One excerpt, from a radio address Hitler gave on January 30, 1945: God the Almighty has made our nation. By defending its existence we are defending His work.... Only He can relieve me of this duty Who called me to it. It was in the hand of Provi- dence to snuff me out by the bomb that exploded only one and a half meters from me on July 20, and thus to terminate my life's work. That the Almighty protected me on that day I consider a renewed affir- mation of the task entrusted to me.... Therefore, it is all the more necessary on this twelfth anniversary of the rise to power to strengthen the heart more than ever before and to steel ourselves in the holy determina- tion to wield the sword, no-matter where and under what circumstances, until final victory crowns our efforts.... In the years to come I shall continue on this road, uncompromisingly safeguarding my people's interests, oblivious to all misery and danger, and filled with the holy convic- tion that God the Almighty will not abandon him who, during all his life, had no desire but to save his people from a fate it had never deserved, neither by virtue of its number nor by way of its importance.... In vowing ourselves to one another, we are entitled to stand before the Almighty and ask Him for His grace and His blessing. No peo- ple can do more than that everybody who can fight, fights, and that everybody who can work, works, and that they all sacrifice in common, filled with but one thought: to safeguard freedom and national honor and thus the future of life. -Adolf Hitler, in a radio address, 30 Jan. 1945 - - - In response to someone who wrote, regarding Hitler: > All that was left is what you get when amoral, > godless statists [...] Godless? It appears that your anti-atheism and the anti-atheism of Hitler has much in common, with you (on multiple times in here) calling for my death, but then again, I suppose that Christian apologists will whip on their disingenuous eraser and try to make all that disappear, were a Christian such as youself to be impli- cated in a premature ending to the life of yours truly. - - - In response to someone who wrote: > [...] humanism - nothing is quite as dehumanizing. Humanism is humankind's greatest hope. Religion, and all the anti-humanism it has caused over time, is humankind's greatest failure. - - - In response to a poster who objected to another poster claiming supporters of reli- gion initiated this particular post: > [...] You said it was the "believers" who > are bringing it into this group. Clearly, > and easily provable, it is not. Of course, the 'sin' of discussing religion is only considered 'sin' when someone discusses it in a way that fellow religious folks might object to, and even then, in here, few (if any) folks bring themselves to object when a fellow christian is in debate, even when a fellow christian de- cides to threaten a disbeliever with death. Telling. I suspect that says a lot more about reli- gious faith than the faithful are willing to admit, the manner in which they seem to lose their voices to object to likeminded believers calling for the death of a dis- believer. I suspect that's because their religious documents are loaded with threats against disbelief, and as such, they tend to empa- thize with the threats, rather than taking a stance against them. Of course, also at play, in a particular religious poster's case, is the manner in which he viciously attacks others, so one suspects not only likeminded reli- gion underlying the lack of objections, but also fear of what that poster might say to anyone who objects to his admir- ation of death for a disbeliever. Oh well, many were silent when the Jews were rounded up in Germany, too, and most of the silence came from Chris- tians, so it appears that the "silence is golden" principle has a very dark side that the silentists would rather ignore. - - - |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
