Atheists destroy churches, attack the faithful

sackett said:
Well said.

Years ago, the forum pretty much agreed that religion has one genuine use: as a comfort for the dying.
Click to expand...

It's not just when people are dying that they experience that sort of existential misery, terror, and hopelessness, tho.
 
sackett said:
Years ago, the forum pretty much agreed that religion has one genuine use: as a comfort for the dying.
Click to expand...


No, not really. Not even that. At least, not according to Phil Zuckerman. In his book about the secularization in Denmark and Sweden (2010), he interviews a hospice worker who tells him that irreligious people don't seem to miss religion when they are dying. On the contrary, religious people tend to have doubts about their religious beliefs and therefore become anxious.
I found it kind of contra intuitive, and, of course, it's only anecdotal evidence, but on the other hand, there's also a certain logic to it that makes me think that it's probably true.

I found a quotation that I posted in another thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=12307718#post12307718


ETA: A short excerpt:
- We have some of the old people, they are very Christian.
- Okay.
- And I see it's very difficult for them to die. They are afraid of dying. They are afraid that God doesn't take them to heaven, and they are thinking of their life and have they done something wrong ...
- Feeling guilty?
- Feeling guilty, yes.
- And do people that aren't very Christian or aren't very religious ...?
- No, it's the Christians who have problems.
Click to expand...


It's weird that it might actually be an act of mercy to persuade dying Christians that there is no vengeful god who will punish them for their sins (real or imagined) after they die.
 
Last edited:
dann said:
It's weird that it might actually be an act of mercy to persuade dying Christians that there is no vengeful god who will punish them for their sins (real or imagined) after they die.
Click to expand...

Well maybe the Chinese can announce that on loudspeakers as they crush religious believers with tanks?
 
As you already know since it's been pointed out to you and documented several times: Xi doesn't appear to have anything at all against believers as long as they also adapt not only to their religious leadership but also to the current Chinese way. Ask your pope if you doubt me.
What Xi is going to do when Chinese factory workers rebel against the conditions in Chinese factories is a very different question. That will be the kind of sin that he probably won't tolerate. The allegedly staunch atheist doesn't seem to have any problems with religions that accept his rule, and your friends in the Vatican don't seem to have any problems with him - you know, WWJD?

And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.
Click to expand...
 
dann said:
No, not really. Not even that. At least, not according to Phil Zuckerman. In his book about the secularization in Denmark and Sweden (2010), he interviews a hospice worker who tells him that irreligious people don't seem to miss religion when they are dying. On the contrary, religious people tend to have doubts about their religious beliefs and therefore become anxious.
I found it kind of contra intuitive, and, of course, it's only anecdotal evidence, but on the other hand, there's also a certain logic to it that makes me think that it's probably true.

I found a quotation that I posted in another thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=12307718#post12307718


ETA: A short excerpt:



It's weird that it might actually be an act of mercy to persuade dying Christians that there is no vengeful god who will punish them for their sins (real or imagined) after they die.
Click to expand...


WOW!
Yeah, it does make sense. That is exceedingly interesting.
 
dann said:
As you already know since it's been pointed out to you and documented several times: Xi doesn't appear to have anything at all against believers as long as they also adapt not only to their religious leadership but also to the current Chinese way.
Click to expand...

As I have pointed out a half dozen times, he in fact does and enacted internet crackdowns on every single religious person in China.

Which i supported with citations to third party sources.

Folks, when you going to learn that your argument by bare assertion does not impress anyone but the atheist apologists that have been running interference or outright cheer-leading his Unyielding Marxist Atheism.
 
The Big Dog said:
As I have pointed out a half dozen times, he in fact does and enacted internet crackdowns on every single religious person in China.

Which i supported with citations to third party sources.

Folks, when you going to learn that your argument by bare assertion does not impress anyone but the atheist apologists that have been running interference or outright cheer-leading his Unyielding Marxist Atheism.
Click to expand...

But not because he's an atheist. He wants to control the media in China because he's an authoritarian.

Just as Henry VIII split from Rome for political not theological reasons.
 
jimbob said:
But not because he's an atheist. He wants to control the media in China because he's an authoritarian.

Just as Henry VIII split from Rome for political not theological reasons.
Click to expand...

"the media.' Come on ....

And the Crusades were because the rulers in Europe were authoritarian too right? I mean, right? Just using your thinking here.

authoritarian and atheist are not mutually exclusive, I have explained this a dozen times. In fact authoritarian is the condition on which they use to exploit their enmity toward religious and religious faith.
 
dann said:
Very interesting article! (The beginning sounds a little like Simulacron 3)
So that's why the Christian right-wingers want Trump to bring about the environmental apocalypse ...
But what do you mean with your reference to the Chinese elites?
Click to expand...

Yes about the "religious right" in the US.


About the Chinese elites, to retain total power, to keep the masses in anti-democracy, Chinese government-worship mode, they hit all the buttons described here:

existential security (you have enough money and food), personal freedom (you’re free to choose whether to believe or not), pluralism (you have a welcoming attitude to diversity), and education (you’ve got some training in the sciences and humanities). If even one of these factors is absent, the whole secularization process slows down.
Click to expand...
 
The Big Dog said:
"the media.' Come on ....

And the Crusades were because the rulers in Europe were authoritarian too right? I mean, right? Just using your thinking here.

authoritarian and atheist are not mutually exclusive, I have explained this a dozen times. In fact authoritarian is the condition on which they use to exploit their enmity toward religious and religious faith.
Click to expand...

Yes, dude, the leadership in imperial Spain was a tad authoritarian. People hellbent on world domination tend to be authoritarians.

Have you ever read Christoper Colombus' diary, or about what he did at the behest of the Catholic Monarchy in the Americas?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus#Slavery_and_serfdom

From his diary:
https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/18080/did-christopher-columbus-ever-make-this-statement

"As soon as I arrived in the Indies, on the first Island which I found, I took some of the natives by force in order that they might learn and might give me information of whatever there is in these parts. [...] They do not bear arms, and do not know them, for I shoed them a sword, they took it by the edge and cut themselves out of ignorance. They have no iron. Their spears are made of cane[...] They would have make fine servants[...] With fifty men we could subjugate them all and make them do whatever we want." - Christopher Columbus Captain's Log, 1492
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
kellyb said:
Yes, dude, the leadership in imperial Spain was a tad authoritarian. People hellbent on world domination tend to be authoritarians.

Have you ever read Christoper Colombus' diary, or about what he did at the behest of the Catholic Monarchy in the Americas?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus#Slavery_and_serfdom

From his diary:
https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/18080/did-christopher-columbus-ever-make-this-statement
Click to expand...

Cool, totally unrelated to religion then.

That is a bit of a load off their shoulders then.
 
The Big Dog said:
Cool, totally unrelated to religion then.

That is a bit of a load off their shoulders then.
Click to expand...

Oh, forcing Catholicism upon them was very much part of the agenda.

It appears to me, that the people are ingenious, and would be good servants and I am of opinion that they would very readily become Christians, as they appear to have no religion.
Click to expand...
 
The Big Dog said:
Cool, totally unrelated to religion then.

That is a bit of a load off their shoulders then.
Click to expand...

It's not religion as such, it's absolutist ideologies that brook no competing worldviews.

A lot of religions have instructions to deal harshly with supposed heretics. I believe that the Catholic Church had that as official policy for many years.


Maoism, Stalinism and Nazism, are trying to take the place of religions and have many of their trappings as well as their own eschatological ideas - particularly Nazism.
 
kellyb said:
Oh, forcing Catholicism upon them was very much part of the agenda.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, it would appear then that we have shown that the Chinese anti-religion agenda is not simply due to "they are authoritarian."

Just like I have been painstakingly explained time after time after time in this very thread.
 
kellyb said:
WOW!
Yeah, it does make sense. That is exceedingly interesting.
Click to expand...

I spent a lot of time with my 80 year old god believing neighbor at the end of his life. He was terrified that he hadn't done the right things and would end up in hell.

Not what I would call "comforting"
 
The Big Dog said:
Oh dear, it would appear then that we have shown that the Chinese anti-religion agenda is not simply due to "they are authoritarian."

Just like I have been painstakingly explained time after time after time in this very thread.
Click to expand...

Two very problematic words here. Unless you are using the Royal “we”, which wouldn’t surprise. Nothing right about “shown” though.
 
lionking said:
Two very problematic words here. Unless you are using the Royal “we”, which wouldn’t surprise. Nothing right about “shown” though.
Click to expand...

Oh no, you see i just used the same reasoning supplied by someone else to destroy their arguments. I know you will not agree or certainly not conjure up a good counterpoint.

It is fine. Someday maybe?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom