Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Philosophy, in all its guises. => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on August 10, 2020, 10:42:44 AM
-
At the risk of answering my own question...........I have stated at length why I am a leprechaunist is there any atheist here with the cohones to state why they are........
-
I know many atheists are a leprechaunist for the same reason that they are atheists which is the same reason they are a leprechaunist which is the same reason they are atheist which is the same reason they are a leprechaunist which etc.
-
Are you plugged in to a random thread generator?
-
Vlad,
At the risk of answering my own question...........I have stated at length why I am a leprechaunist is there any atheist here with the cohones to state why they are........
I had no idea you were a leprechaunist. How do you worship the little fellas? Do you have to dress in green robes and dance a jig or something? What special chats with them in your head do you have?
More to the point, do you have any arguments to justify your belief "leprechauns" that aren't as shit as the arguments you reference to justify your belief "God"?
-
Of course leprechauns exist, one would have to be very silly not to believe in them, in a previous existence I was one called Padeen. ;D ;D ;D
-
Vlad,
I had no idea you were a leprechaunist. How do you worship the little fellas? Do you have to dress in green robes and dance a jig or something? What special chats with them in your head do you have?
More to the point, do you have any arguments to justify your claim "leprechauns" that aren't as shit as the arguments you reference to justify your belief "God"?
I’m just asking why you are an a-leprechaunist Hillside. You don’t immediately have to electrify the fences and send the henchmen out. Why are you a-leprechaunist Hillside?
-
Of course leprechauns exist, one would have to be very silly not to believe in them, in a previous existence I was one called Padeen. ;D ;D ;D
Is that Irish Gaelic for axegrinder?
-
And why does Dawkins not have to know any leprochology?
-
Captain Pigeon,
I’m just asking why you are an a-leprechaunist Hillside. You don’t immediately have to electrify the fences and send the henchmen out. Why are you a-leprechaunist Hillside?
Surely the more interesting question is why you are a leprechaunist isn't it?
-
Captain Pigeon,
Surely the more interesting question is why you are a leprechaunist isn't it?
However interesting it is it has been answered. Why are you an a leprechaunist?.......and you know what... I might even pitch that over to the Richard Dawkins foundation.
-
I’ll kick off because it is impossible to be invisible and pink.
-
Captain Pigeon,
However interesting it is it has been answered. Why are you an a leprechaunist........and you know what... I might even pitch that over to the Richard Dawkins foundation.
It certainly hasn't been answered! So far as I recall your OP is the fist time you've ever told us that you're a leprechaunist. This is quite a revelation you know. What form does your leprechaunism take? Are you a traditionalist or a member of the more liberal reformed brotherhood of leprechaunists? Do you dance special jigs on full moons or something? Where do you find all that gold to leave at the ends of rainbows?
And dammit man, why have you kept your leprechaunism such a secret for all this time?
I really think we should be told...
-
I’ll kick off because it is impossible to be invisible and pink.
Just like it's not possible to be fully human and fully god
-
I have pink unicorns on my duvet cover. The point of this thread is? ::) You really must take a lot more water with your favourite tipple and stop imbibing it so early in the day.
-
Just like it's not possible to be fully human and fully god
It is though since a better analogy is being fully freemasons and fully trainspotter. Invisible pink is just asking for trouble.
-
I have pink unicorns on my duvet cover.
That's just where you spilled your Nesquik.
-
I’ll kick off because it is impossible to be invisible and pink.
Q: What's red and invisible?
A: No tomatoes.
-
Captain Pigeon,
It certainly hasn't been answered! So far as I recall your OP is the fist time you've ever told us that you're a leprechaunist. This is quite a revelation you know. What form does your leprechaunism take? Are you a traditionalist or a member of the more liberal reformed brotherhood of leprechaunists? Do you dance special jigs on full moons or something? Where do you find all that gold to leave at the ends of rainbows?
And dammit man, why have you kept your leprechaunism such a secret for all this time?
I really think we should be told...
Fucking hell, I am for the umpteenth time a leprechaunist because what should be eminently empirically detectable in a Leprechaun hasn't been. HONESTLY HILLSIDE your esteem of the shit that comes off your finger even extends to you even taking your jokey schtick seriously.How trumpian
-
Captain Pigeon,
It certainly hasn't been answered! So far as I recall your OP is the fist time you've ever told us that you're a leprechaunist. This is quite a revelation you know. What form does your leprechaunism take? Are you a traditionalist or a member of the more liberal reformed brotherhood of leprechaunists? Do you dance special jigs on full moons or something? Where do you find all that gold to leave at the ends of rainbows?
And dammit man, why have you kept your leprechaunism such a secret for all this time?
I really think we should be told...
It would mean common ground with you Hillsideand I'd rather slam my dick in a door.
-
Captain Pigeon,
Fucking hell, I am for the umpteenth time a leprechaunist because what should be eminently empirically detectable in a Leprechaun hasn't been. HONESTLY HILLSIDE your esteem of the shit that comes off your finger even extends to you even taking your jokey schtick seriously.How trumpian
You're not making any sense. If you're "a leprechaunist" then you believe in leprechauns. And I know that you are a leprechaunist because you said so in your OP, and again just now.
Given this remarkable breaking news, I just wondered whether you'd like to share some details about what your leprechaunism entails?
Of course, if you'd rather keep it a secret (as you do any arguments you may have for your theism) that's a matter for you I guess, but in that case why did you announce your leprechaunism at all?
-
Captain Pigeon,
You're not making any sense. If you're "a leprechaunist" then you believe in leprechauns. And I know that you are a leprechaunist because you said so in your OP, and again just now.
Given this remarkable breaking news, I just wondered whether you'd like to share some details about what your leprechaunism entails?
Of course, if you'd rather keep it a secret (as you do any arguments you may have for your theism) that's a matter for you I guess, but in that case why did you announce your leprechaunism at all?
Hillside......the world is waiting......why are you an a -Leprechaunist?
-
Q: What's red and invisible?
A: No tomatoes.
What's grey and invisible?
Your brain.
-
Captain Pigeon,
Hillside......the world is waiting......why are you an a -Leprechaunist?
FFS! What's wrong with you? You've just announced that you're a leprechaunist, and repeated it in subsequent posts. Never mind about my a-leprechaunism, surely "the world" is much more interested in you leprechaunism I'd have thought. How did this sudden conversion come about
– did you see a rainbow and find your lost car keys just after that? Did you hear Irish jigs in your head? Has a patch of four-leaf clovers suddenly appeared in your garden?
DAMMIT MAN - WHY WON'T YOU SHARE SOME DETAILS?
-
So there we have it gentlemen. Three threads opened for them to volunteer answers to the questions they ask, giggle about and whack off to.......and not one answer. It looks as though we've found the lair of THE LEAGUE OF EVASIVE BASTARDS....Dun dun Dunnnnnnnnnnnn.
-
In my very 'humble' opinion, Vlad should have a board all to himself, the name of which should be DRIVEL. He should not be permitted to pollute the other boards with his wind up threads.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
So there we have it gentlemen. Three threads opened for them to volunteer answers to the questions they ask, giggle about and whack off to.......and not one answer. It looks as though we've found the lair of THE LEAGUE OF EVASIVE BASTARDS....Dun dun Dunnnnnnnnnnnn.
Surely the only "EVASIVE BASTARD" here is the person who announces that he's a leprechaunist and then refuses to tell us a thing about his leprechaunism despite being asked being asked politely several times to do so. You've got form for this of course what with never managing a coherent argument for your theism either, but I have to say it's very disappointing - I was looking forward to the story of your conversion. Has it not occurred to you that if you did share, maybe you'd encourage others down the true path of leprechaunism you've apparently discovered all by yourself? Don't you owe it to them at least?
Oh well. As for why folks aren't biting at your denial of service-type tactic of flooding this mb with near identical trolling OPs, I'll leave you to work that out for yourself. Here's a clue though: you've been sussed old son.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Surely the only "EVASIVE BASTARD" here is ........
You?
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Surely the only "EVASIVE BASTARD" here is the person who announces that he's a leprechaunist and then refuses to tell us a thing about his leprechaunism despite being asked being asked politely several times to do so. You've got form for this of course what with never managing a coherent argument for your theism either, but I have to say it's very disappointing - I was looking forward to the story of your conversion. Has it not occurred to you that if you did share, maybe you'd encourage others down the true path of leprechaunism you've apparently discovered all by yourself? Don't you owe it to them at least?
Oh well. As for why folks aren't biting at your denial of service-type tactic of flooding this mb with near identical trolling OPs, I'll leave you to work that out for yourself. Here's a clue though: you've been sussed old son.
Shitfinger.....hes the man, with the khaki plan and pale white van
He loves only white......onleeeeeeee shiiiiiiiite.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
You?
As you're the one who won't tell us why he's a leprechaunist, clearly not. Shall I start a thread on your new-found leprechaunism, or will you just ignore that too?
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Shitfinger.....hes the man, with the khaki plan and pale white van
He loves only white......onleeeeeeee shiiiiiiiite.
Tantrum over? OK then, so about your recent conversion to leprechaunism...
... or have you alway secretly been a leprechaunist but only today have plucked up the courage to announce it here?
DAMMIT MAN, WHY BE COY ABOUT IT?
-
Moderator:
This thread combines two threads of Vlad's, as the amended title notes, in order to avoid duplication regarding this important and compelling question.
Over to you guys.
-
Hi Gordon,
Moderator:
This thread combines two threads of Vlad's, as the amended title notes, in order to avoid duplication regarding this important and compelling question.
Over to you guys.
Thanks for this. I fear you've made a mistake in the title though - the Cap'n has told us repeatedly that he's a leprechaunist, not an a-leprechaunist. Sadly he won't tell us anything about his leprechaunism, but we should get the details right on this (as you note) important and compelling question.
-
Hi Gordon,
Thanks for this. I fear you've made a mistake in the title though - the Cap'n has told us repeatedly that he's a leprechaunist, not an a-leprechaunist. Sadly he won't tell us anything about his leprechaunism, but we should get the details right on this (as you note) important and compelling question.
Moderator:
The 'a-leprechaunist' bit of the thread title is exactly as Vlad wrote it - it is in the OP that he concedes he is a leprechaunist, and as you say we await his clarification with interest.
-
Hi Gordon,
Thanks for this. I fear you've made a mistake in the title though - the Cap'n has told us repeatedly that he's a leprechaunist, not an a-leprechaunist. Sadly he won't tell us anything about his leprechaunism, but we should get the details right on this (as you note) important and compelling question.
For the record I am both Aleprochaunist and an Aleprechaunist. Hillside will have to see if he can get anymore ill out of my earlier type.
Any body care to answer the question "Why are you an aleprochaunist?" Or apinkinvisibleunicornist or whether they admit donning the colander and attending the meetings to ensure the continuation of the ilk. ?
-
I’ll kick off because it is impossible to be invisible and pink.
Surely it's invisible because you can't see it, but what you can't see is that it's pink? I thought this was well-established 'serious unicornology' by now?
O.
-
Surely it's invisible because you can't see it, but what you can't see is that it's pink? I thought this was well-established 'serious unicornology' by now?
O.
There are some ramifications of this, Descarte's " I'm Pink therefore I'm spam" for instance.
-
There are some ramifications of this, Descarte's " I'm Pink therefore I'm spam" for instance.
But wasn't Archbishop Puce McLilac (latterly Pope Fuchsia II 1/2) who observed that if he only thought he thought, then he might be?
O.
-
But wasn't Archbishop Puce McLilac (latterly Pope Fuchsia II 1/2) who observed that if he only thought he thought, then he might be?
O.
I suppose your going to propose the universe is looped in time. That it's possible to go back to the fuschia.
-
Of course the leading philosopher on this is Stephen Pinker.
-
Of course, As far as the unicorn was concerned Lane Craig was able to see right through it.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
For the record I am both Aleprochaunist...
Nope, no idea. You've invented the word though, so perhaps you'd better tell us what you want it to mean.
...and an Aleprechaunist. Hillside will have to see if he can get anymore ill out of my earlier type.
Wait, hang on – what happened to you being a "leprechaunist" though as you told us you were several times? Did you change your mind? Was there some kind of de-conversion therapy or intervention to drag you back to a-leprehaunism? I'd be careful if I were you - you know how murderous the leprechaunists can be when they think they have an apostate in their midst - even worse that some Christians I hear. Perhaps you should tool up before you leave the house for your next game of pigeon chess in the park or something, just in case?
Any body care to answer the question "Why are you an aleprochaunist?" Or apinkinvisibleunicornist or whether they admit donning the colander and attending the meetings to ensure the continuation of the ilk. ?
As you're just spewing random collections of letters now how do you expect anyone to answer that question?
If however what you're trying to say is your intended original troll of "why are people a-leprechaunists?" you know the answer already - I'm an a-leprechaunist for exactly the same reasons that you're an a-leprechaunist (welcome back by the way). They are also exactly the same reasons I'm am atheist by the way, but your thinking hasn't developed that far yet.
Maybe one day eh?
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Nope, no idea. You've invented the word though, so perhaps you'd better tell us what you want it to mean.
Wait, hang on – what happened to you being a "leprechaunist" though as you told us you were several times? Did you change your mind? Was there some kind of de-conversion therapy or intervention to drag you back to a-leprehaunism? I'd be careful if I were you - you know how murderous the leprechaunists can be when they think they have an apostate in their midst - even worse that some Christians I hear. Perhaps you should tool up before you leave the house for your next game of pigeon chess in the park or something?
As you're just spewing random collections of letters now how do you expect anyone to answer that question?
If however what you're trying to say is your intended original troll of "why are people a-leprechaunists?" you know the answer already - I'm an a-leprechaunist for exactly the same reason that you're an a-leprechaunist (welcome back by the way). They are also exactly the same reasons I'm am atheist by the way, but your thinking hasn't developed that far yet.
.......that's all very well ......but WTF are they?
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
.......that's all very well ......but WTF are they?
You don't know your own reasons for being an a-leprechaunist? Seriously though? Doesn't that trouble you at all?
What if one day you're fluttering through Trafalgar Square say and someone lures you down with some bread crumbs, and before you know it they grab you by the throat and demand to know why you have no belief that leprechauns are real? Don't you think you should have some answers lined up just in case?
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
You don't know your own reasons for being an a-leprechaunist? Seriously though? Doesn't that trouble you at all?
What if one day you're fluttering through Trafalgar Square say and someone lures you down with some bread crumbs, and before you know it they grab you by the throat and demand to know why you have no belief that leprechauns are real? Don't you think you should have some answers lined up just in case?
I know my reasons for not believing in Leprechauns and so do you.
Leprechauns are small irishmen dressed in green they are to be located at the ends of rainbows with pots of gold.All those things are empirical. There are no reports of these empirical features being located.
Now that leaves you with a little problem doesn't it.
Either these are your reasons too in which they are not applicable to God or they are not your reasons for non belief in Leprechauns.
Either solution exposes you to the charge of trouser talk. Ha ha.
-
I’ll kick off because it is impossible to be invisible and pink.
It's no more impossible to be invisible and pink than it is to be both human and god.
Edit: Ninja'd!
-
No Jeremy ........it really is.
No, really it isn't. In fact since pinkness and invisibility both definitely exist, it's more possible to be invisible and pink than human and god.
-
It's no more impossible to be invisible and pink than it is to be both human and god.
Show then how it is possible to be human and God.
-
Show then how it is possible to be human and God.
Why should I? You're the one who claims it is.
-
No, really it isn't. In fact since pinkness and invisibility both definitely exist, it's more possible than to be invisible and pink than human and god.
Can any of those wonderful clever fallacy spotters, dedicated heroes and lovers of truth and sound argument that Gordon keeps praising sort Jeremy out on Invisible Pink here?.........Looks like your in the clear Jeremy.
-
Why should I? You're the one who claims it is.
Sorry. Show how it is impossible to be human and God.
-
Sorry. Show how it is impossible to be human and God.
God is immortal. Humans are mortal.
QED.
-
God is immortal. Humans are mortal.
QED.
Arent human souls immortal?
Isnt Abraham Lincoln one of the most significant presidents in history?
Look, I used to be in the Tufty club but I got too old for it. I'm still here Jez.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
I know my reasons for not believing in Leprechauns and so do you.
In that case why are you asking for them?
Leprechauns are small irishmen dressed in green they are to be located at the ends of rainbows with pots of gold...
...and able to materialise and dematerialise at will, their leprechaunal works to perform. So?
All those things are empirical.
Only when they're in material form though - and the same presumably applies to your faith belief "God". So?
There are no reports of these empirical features being located.
There are lots of reports. Just read the literature.
Now that leaves you with a little problem doesn't it.
Not that I can see, no.
Either these are your reasons too in which they are not applicable to God or they are not your reasons for non belief in Leprechauns.
Er, my reason is that I've never heard a persuasive enough argument to make me think that leprechauns or "God" equally are real.
Either solution exposes you to the charge of trouser talk. Ha ha.
And once again the pigeon knocks the pieces over, craps of on the board a flies away claiming his "victory".
As your reasons for being an a-leprechaunist have just collapsed in a heap again though, perhaps I can help...
...so, just to be clear – for most of your life you were an a-leprechaunist, then for a few hours today you became a leprechaunist, and now you've de-converted back to a-leprechaunism, only you don't know why you were an a-leprechaunist before (let's call that your Phase I a-leprechaunism), and nor do you know why you're an a-leprechaunist again now (henceforth known as your Phase II a-leprechaunism). So now you've come to this mb seeking answers as to why you are were previously an a-leprechaunist (Phase I) and to why you're an a-leprechaunist again now (Phase II).
Have I got that right?
Do you really think an anonymous mb is the right place though to come for answers to what are clearly some deep-seated epistemological and possibly existential concerns of this kind?
-
Can any of those wonderful clever fallacy spotters, dedicated heroes and lovers of truth and sound argument that Gordon keeps praising sort Jeremy out on Invisible Pink here?.........Looks like your in the clear Jeremy.
Maybe you are confused?
The Supreme Unicorn , chooses who shall see his Pinkness, to everyone else he is invisible.
Thus his Invisibleness and his Pinkness are both part of the whole.
That's according to the Bitarians.
Other sects are available.
I'm not sure if you might be able to draw a comparison of other deities working vaguely along a similar game plan?
-
Either these are your reasons too in which they are not applicable to God or they are not your reasons for non belief in Leprechauns.
You really do struggle with very, very simple concepts, don't you? The details are totally irrelevant, the only reason needed to not believe in some claim is that you have not encountered any good reason to believe it.
If it makes solid, falsifiable predictions (which neither leprechauns nor most of the multitudinous versions of god(s) actually do) you can directly test them, otherwise you can't.
And yet again, the word "God", without qualification, is utterly meaningless. I'm ignostic about "God", without further definition, because it simply doesn't mean anything specific.
-
To never talk and Hillside
Keep it coming boys, keep it coming.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
To never talk and Hillside
Keep it coming boys, keep it coming.
Does being shown to be wrong over and over again excite you in some way? Wouldn't it be simpler just to post "beat me Daddy" and wait for the chaps in leather caps and biker 'taches to show up?
PS On the bright side, I very much enjoyed the one chart hit you had by the way:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aO5GWJJP3FM
Such a pity you never managed a second. Ah well.
-
Maybe you are confused?
The Supreme Unicorn , chooses who shall see his Pinkness,
Innuendo......Good ploy.
-
Maybe you are confused?
The Supreme Unicorn , chooses who shall see his Pinkness, to everyone else he is invisible.
Thus his Invisibleness and his Pinkness are both part of the whole.
I thought his whole was brown.
-
I thought his whole was brown.
You will only know if you are allowed to gaze upon it in wonderment.
-
You will only know if you are allowed to gaze upon it in wonderment.
Ah, I see. One ring to rule them all.
-
Arent human souls immortal?
Are they? Evidence please.
God can create universes. Human's can't.
Your god is omnipresent. Humans aren't.
-
Maybe you are confused?
The Supreme Unicorn , chooses who shall see his Pinkness, to everyone else he is invisible.
Thus his Invisibleness and his Pinkness are both part of the whole.
That's according to the Bitarians.
Other sects are available.
I'm not sure if you might be able to draw a comparison of other deities working vaguely along a similar game plan?
The Invisible Pink Unicorn (bbhhh) is female.
-
Are they? Evidence please.
God can create universes. Human's can't.
Your god is omnipresent. Humans aren't.
Jesus’ full humanity was not required to create universes or be omnipresent because his full divinity was taking care of that.
-
The Invisible Pink Unicorn (bbhhh) is female.
Heretic!
-
Jesus’ full humanity was not required to create universes or be omnipresent because his full divinity was taking care of that.
Tell that to a Unitarian!
-
I am a Pagan because I reject Christianity in all its guises.
-
I suppose your going to propose the universe is looped in time. That it's possible to go back to the fuschia.
Pfff... heretic. It's obviously a spiral, just like that invisibly pink unicorn horn...
O.
-
Pfff... heretic. It's obviously a spiral, just like that invisibly pink unicorn horn...
O.
I suppose you are going to claim we wouldn’t have discovered nuclear fuschian without the IPU.
-
Jesus’ full humanity was not required to create universes or be omnipresent because his full divinity was taking care of that.
If Jesus was fully divine, he wasn't a human being. Humans are characterised by not being divine.
-
Heretic!
The Invisible Pink Unicorn (IPU) is the goddess of a ... religion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
-
If Jesus was fully divine, he wasn't a human being. Humans are characterised by not being divine.
Well this is very interesting theology Jeremy......I approve.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
This article is just further evidence that atheist humour emanates from the neurological cruelty centre of the human brain. Both in terms of deliberately setting out to laugh at people and inflict appallingly unfunny material on the other hand.
Invisible and pink........contradictory.
Atheist Humour.........similarly contradictory
-
This article is just further evidence that atheist humour emanates from the neurological cruelty centre of the human brain. Both in terms of deliberately setting out to laugh at people and inflict appallingly unfunny material on the other hand.
Invisible and pink........contradictory.
Atheist Humour.........similarly contradictory
Ooh, ooh, sir, please sir, can I play sir... ooh, ooh...
Monotheism and Satan...
Abrahamic religions and love...
Fully human and fully divine...
Old Testament God and New Testament God...
O.
-
This article is just further evidence that atheist humour emanates from the neurological cruelty centre of the human brain. Both in terms of deliberately setting out to laugh at people and inflict appallingly unfunny material on the other hand.
Invisible and pink........contradictory.
Atheist Humour.........similarly contradictory
The pernicious nature of many religions is far from a laughing matter. People have died for pointing out the contradictions in Christianity.
-
The pernicious nature of many religions is far from a laughing matter. People have died for pointing out the contradictions in Christianity.
And scores more because Stalin and Pol pot morally unfettered themselves from the oversight of the divine.
The reduction of your enemies and your people to nought is largely an atheist invention.
-
And scores more because Stalin and Pol pot morally unfettered themselves from the oversight of the divine.
Ooh, Cap'n Pigeon's trolling game is strong with this one.
Anyway, now we know that the Cap'n thinks believing in a god able to materialise and dematerialise at will his works to perform is all fine and dandy, but believing in leprechauns able to materialise and dematerialise at will their different works to perform is daft all he has to do now is to explain why without collapsing immediately into fallacy, abuse, diversionary tactics etc.
Now there's a challenge!
-
And scores more because Stalin and Pol pot morally unfettered themselves from the oversight of the divine.
The reduction of your enemies and your people to nought is largely an atheist invention.
Nice bit of whataboutery there.
Also completely irrelevant to the point: I would be extraordinarily surprised if either of those two dictators killed anybody for pointing out that Jesus couldn't have been a god and a human at the same time.
Edited to add: well, I guess it's possible that Stalin might have given that he trained in a Russian Orthodox spiritual seminary.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_Pink_Unicorn
Fake heretic news!
-
And scores more because Stalin and Pol pot morally unfettered themselves from the oversight of the divine.
...which totally excuses those who believed that they were unfettered because they had the backing of their god, when they murdered and maimed and burnt thier victims?
-
Edited to add: well, I guess it's possible that Stalin might have given that he trained in a Russian Orthodox spiritual seminary.
Maybe he should have stuck with it.
-
And scores more because Stalin and Pol pot morally unfettered themselves from the oversight of the divine.
If it's already well-established that Christian (and other overtly religious) regimes deployed their religion in the pursuit of various massacres and wars, it can hardly be claimed that Stalin and Pot's actions occurred because they dropped religion - despite, perhaps, but not because.
The reduction of your enemies and your people to nought is largely an atheist invention.
I'd suggest that the Holocaust - the reduction of the disposition of a religiously-identified group by a different religiously-identified group to an industrial recycling process long before atheism became a significant movement would give the indication that's just absolute bullshit.
If only there were, say, multiple passages of the Old Testament where a vengeful deity sees fit to dispose of humanity in virtually its entirety, or encourages its chosen people to entirely eradicate or exterminate a rival tribe...
O.
-
If it's already well-established that Christian (and other overtly religious) regimes deployed their religion in the pursuit of various massacres and wars, it can hardly be claimed that Stalin and Pot's actions occurred because they dropped religion - despite, perhaps, but not because.
I'd suggest that the Holocaust - the reduction of the disposition of a religiously-identified group by a different religiously-identified group to an industrial recycling process long before atheism became a significant movement would give the indication that's just absolute bullshit.
If only there were, say, multiple passages of the Old Testament where a vengeful deity sees fit to dispose of humanity in virtually its entirety, or encourages its chosen people to entirely eradicate or exterminate a rival tribe...
O.
The identification of Nazism as a christian sect or even catholic sect is wrong. The sources of Nazism are in no particular order, racism, aryanism, German myth, romanticism, Neitszchism, Galtonism, Lutheranism
Many nations of a christian leaning fought against him How you expect apology for Nazism from christians and not germans is part of the Guff and humbug you have imbued this issue with.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
The identification of Nazism as a christian sect or even catholic sect is wrong. The sources of Nazism are in no particular order, racism, aryanism, German myth, romanticism, Neitszchism, Galtonism, Lutheranism
Many nations of a christian leaning fought against him How you expect apology for Nazism from christians and not germans is part of the Guff and humbug you have imbued this issue with.
Actually the nazi ideology was substantially a "catholic sect", though Hitler himself diluted his Christian beliefs in his later years. It was reciprocated too – the catholic church decreed that its members should celebrate Hitler's birthday for example. Either way though it doesn't matter a great deal unless you can show a logical path from either Christianity or atheism to genocide. The case is easier to make for the former ("the Jews killed Jesus" etc), but there's no path from "your arguments to justify the claim "God" are wrong" to "let's kill some people".
Oh, and just for the record we leprechaunists have never killed anyone. Think on...
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Actually the nazi ideology was substantially a "catholic sect", though Hitler himself diluted his Christian beliefs in his later years. It was reciprocated too – the catholic church decreed that its members should celebrate Hitler's birthday for example. Either way though it doesn't matter a great deal unless you can show a logical path from either Christianity or atheism to genocide. The case is easier to make for the former ("the Jews killed Jesus" etc), but there's no path from "your arguments to justify the claim "God" are wrong" to "let's kill some people".
Oh, and just for the record we leprechaunists have never killed anyone. Think on...
Wrong, and typical of the historical revisionism that blights New Atheism. That you feel free to shit all over history is just indicative in how lacking in intellectual oversight this board is.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Wrong, and typical of the historical revisionism that blights New Atheism. That you feel free to shit all over history is just indicative in how lacking in intellectual oversight this board is.
I suppose "wrong" is as close as we're likely to get to an actual argument from you. Here's quite a detailed Wiki article about Hitler's religious views to put you straight:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler#:~:text=Hitler%20was%20baptised%20as%20a,was%20a%20devout%20practising%20Catholic.
-
The identification of Nazism as a christian sect or even catholic sect is wrong.
Because of all the explicitly Christian people in it, and it's appeal to religious differentiation in the implementation of the Holocaust?
The sources of Nazism are in no particular order, racism, aryanism, German myth, romanticism, Neitszchism, Galtonism, Lutheranism with Neitszchianism and Galtonism informing todays New atheism and it's evolved atheist Homo Dawkinsiens.
I see, so no input from the Christianity of the millions of Christians at all levels of the Reich, but the church-going rank and file were all up to speed on their Neitszche and Galton?
Many nations of a christian leaning fought against him.
And many of a non-Christian leaning, too.
How you expect apology for Nazism from christians and not germans is part of the Guff and humbug you have imbued this issue with.
Who said I did? I don't expect an apology from Christians, I just expect people to realise what Christianity is capable of and hopefully gradually just ditch it along with the other mythologies as a bad idea.
It seems to me that you keep up with this idea that Christianity is your perfect vision from your interpretation of one of the books of the set: Christianity is the sum of the expressions of Christians based upon their understanding and belief, even when it doesn't jibe with yours. Even if you presume that Nazi senior leadership had forgone any genuine belief in the Christian god and Christianity by the time of World War II, they still used the ritual and belief to motivate the German people, and their expression of their Christianity was, amongst other things, strongly anti-Semitic.
O.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
I suppose "wrong" is as close as we're likely to get to an actual argument from you. Here's quite a detailed Wiki article about Hitler's religious views to put you straight:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Adolf_Hitler#:~:text=Hitler%20was%20baptised%20as%20a,was%20a%20devout%20practising%20Catholic.
Being wrong is bad enough....should we add turdpolishing racism, Aryanism, German mythology, Galtonism and Neitszchism out of the picture as well?
-
Being wrong is bad enough....should we add turdpolishing racism, Aryanism, German mythology, Galtonism and Neitszchism out of the picture as well?
Can't help noticing that 'Lutheranism' appears to have dropped out of this version of the list versus that which was presented earlier...
O.
-
And scores more because Stalin and Pol pot morally unfettered themselves from the oversight of the divine.
Yet those who didn't have, and continue to commit atrocities explicitly in the name of their various versions of "the divine". What's more, we've had people on this forum (and they are plentiful elsewhere) who, while apparently not being homicidal psychopaths in any other respect, are perfectly happy to try to justify genocide and other crimes against humanity if they are ordained by "God" and described in the bible.
Does that not bother you?
-
If it's already well-established that Christian (and other overtly religious) regimes deployed their religion in the pursuit of various massacres and wars, it can hardly be claimed that Stalin and Pot's actions occurred because they dropped religion - despite, perhaps, but not because.
I'd suggest that the Holocaust - the reduction of the disposition of a religiously-identified group by a different religiously-identified group to an industrial recycling process long before atheism became a significant movement would give the indication that's just absolute bullshit.
If only there were, say, multiple passages of the Old Testament where a vengeful deity sees fit to dispose of humanity in virtually its entirety, or encourages its chosen people to entirely eradicate or exterminate a rival tribe...
O.
Most of the acts of genocide in the Hebrew Bible are fictional and the Holocaust is fairly recent. However, there are plenty of other religiously inspired acts of genocide (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albigensian_Crusade) that give the lie to Vlad's assertion.
-
Cap'n Pigeon,
Being wrong is bad enough....should we add turdpolishing racism, Aryanism, German mythology, Galtonism and Neitszchism out of the picture as well?
So now you've spat the dummy again, which part of the carefully researched Wiki article containing direct quotes from Hitler and from other members of the nazi high command do you think is wrong, and why?