Why do Atheists care? Here is one scary reason:
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Anyone else watch "The Family" docementary? It wasn't all that mind blowing, but it might be that the family has "Christian nation" as its goal. They are secretive about the goals. |
Anonymous
Uhhh.. yes it does. Are you saying any idea that is also in the bible that the bible gets credit for? Sorry, that's not how ideas work. Those ideas existed for centuries, they are not "christian principles". They are "human principles". You can't just claim them because you want to and ignore the earlier sources.
Do you ever get tired of resorting to ad hominem when you don't have a salient point? I can get how that must be frustrating.
Yes, that is generally how debates work.
Yes I am, and despite your ad hominems, I am doing exactly that. You lost the argument, atheist. |
Anonymous
You're kidding, right? Did you pass 8th grade history? America was founded on the idea that individual rights come from God and not the state. That concept had never before been expressed, let alone implemented in a form of government. This is inherently the concept of Judeo/ Christian values - that we each, as individuals, are children of God and that we are created by Him. |
Anonymous
Yes I did, and in my history classes I learned about the concept of secularism and its origins in ancient greece. That's why I posted the link at 09/26/2022 16:40 that you didn't read. Secularism in practice has existed since ancient times. In societies such as Ancient Greece, a limited secularism was practiced in which religion was not involved in governance, though it was still prevalent in public life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism#History
Then isn't it funny that the US constitution doesn't mention God, and even the oft-quoted Declaration of Independence refers to "their creator" - which could be either any god or any force such as naturalist ones. It was also written by Thomas Jefferson, who was not a Christian but a deist While Jefferson was a firm theist, the God in which he believed was not the traditional Christian divinity. Jefferson rejected the notion of the Trinity and Jesus’ divinity. He rejected Biblical miracles, the resurrection, the atonement, and original sin (believing that God could not fault or condemn all humanity for the sins of others, a gross injustice) https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/jeffersons-religious-beliefs/ He also said "There is not one redeeming feature in our superstition of Christianity. It has made one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites." and "Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man" Some other founding fathers thoughts: “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.” –James Madison, letter to William Bradford, April 1, 1774 "I have found Christian dogma unintelligible...Some books on Deism fell into my hands...It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared much stronger than the refutations; in short I soon became a thorough deist." -Benjamin Franklin, "Toward the Mystery "This would be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it"- John Adams "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."- Thomas Paine Still want to challenge my knowledge of history? Because there is lots more of this stuff. I didn't want to post the treaty of Tripoli thing again but will if you need me to. |
Anonymous
|
Thomas Jefferson kept a Bible, he just removed all the miracles from his copy. He didn’t throw the whole thing out. Read Margaret Bayard Smith’s correspondence. She lived where Catholic University is today.
Adams was a Unitarian, not an atheist. He wrote things like this: “Statesmen my dear Sir, may plan and speculate for Liberty, but it is Religion and Morality alone, which can establish the Principles upon which Freedom can securely stand....” And so on. When you cherry pick from biased sources you lose credibility. |
Anonymous
Uhhh.. yes it does. Are you saying any idea that is also in the bible that the bible gets credit for? Sorry, that's not how ideas work. Those ideas existed for centuries, they are not "christian principles". They are "human principles". You can't just claim them because you want to and ignore the earlier sources.
Do you ever get tired of resorting to ad hominem when you don't have a salient point? I can get how that must be frustrating.
Yes, that is generally how debates work.
Yes I am, and despite your ad hominems, I am doing exactly that. The sleazy logic here would be embarrassing for you if you had any self-awareness. - the separation of church and state may have existed in Ancient Greece but that takes nothing away from it being a Christian principle too. It’s like arguing, the ancient Greeks wore white, therefore white wedding gowns aren’t a modern custom. Very strange and patently dishonest argumentation. - people don’t reply to you because you’re obnoxious and you argue in bad faith. Not because you’re right. You can’t even see that your claim that “silence means I win” proves this exact point about your dishonest rhetorical style. |
Anonymous
|
Yeah. Still not a “Christian nation”. Even if some of the founders were Christian.
|
Anonymous
The sleazy logic here would be embarrassing for you if you had any self-awareness. - the separation of church and state may have existed in Ancient Greece but that takes nothing away from it being a Christian principle too. It’s like arguing, the ancient Greeks wore white, therefore white wedding gowns aren’t a modern custom. Very strange and patently dishonest argumentation. - people don’t reply to you because you’re obnoxious and you argue in bad faith. Not because you’re right. You can’t even see that your claim that “silence means I win” proves this exact point about your dishonest rhetorical style. To other posters: immediate pp has no knowledge of why people don't reply to people, but likes to call people names like 'obnoxious' and 'dishonest'. They present themselves as being religious, but it's doubtful that there is any religion - certainly not Christianity - that condones such behavior. They are attention seeking and while they are receiving additional attention here, it's only in the hopes that this post will discourage further interaction. |
Anonymous
Again with the ad hominem. If you could address the logic with logic you would. You can't, so you go the insult route.
This is just a lie. If your logic works I could publish a book with the Pythagorean formula in it and claim it is my principle. Make NO sense, sorry. Not how it works. Pythagoras gets the credit, no matter how many mathematicians post it again.
You don't want to engage thoughtfully, but then here you are responding again and again and again with nothing but insults. If you had a good response you would give it. But you don't, you give only ad homs and insults. THAT'S why I win. And here is a piece of sincere advice with good intent: learn to use the codes and the preview button, people are missing your posts because you don't. |
Anonymous
To other posters: immediate pp has no knowledge of why people don't reply to people, but likes to call people names like 'obnoxious' and 'dishonest'. They present themselves as being religious, but it's doubtful that there is any religion - certainly not Christianity - that condones such behavior. They are attention seeking and while they are receiving additional attention here, it's only in the hopes that this post will discourage further interaction. DP. If separation of church and state is a Christian principle, why did it take 1600 years of Christianity for Christians to figure that out? I'm a Christian and I believe in freedom of religion, but it's not inherent in Christianity. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
So that’s what this is about. You get your self worth from “winning” on an anonymous parents’ board. No, people have responded to you with multiple arguments. Some of them you just blew past (you had no good answer?). Others you respond to with nonsensical counter-arguments, like separation of church and state can’t be part of Christianity because somebody in Ancient Greece had the same idea. Posters read this bilge and decide you’re not worth their time. Many of us have jobs and families, and in the hierarchy of things to get done in a day, tussling with a single anonymous poster who makes arguments that are silly on their face (your argument about the Greeks) and has a pathological need to win at the cost of rhetorical honesty is way down on the list. There are several of us replying to you. |
Anonymous
“Render unto Caesar what is due Caesar and unto God what is due God.” (Matthew 22:15-22, Mark 12:14-17 and Luke 20:29-26). Separation of church and state is definitely part of Christianity. Whether or not the ancient Greeks had it too. (The claim that it can’t exist in Christianity because somebody else had the same thought is a little silly—did the Greeks have a patent on that idea?) Whether or not Europe went through centuries of the “divine right of kings,” and BTW the whole idea of anointing kings is more an OT thing anyway. |
Anonymous
If you can't see the incredible irony of your post - where you claim the Greeks don't get credit for an idea they had centuries before the birth of Christ but somehow that same idea can be claimed as a uniquely "judeo christian value" -- well, wow, you should see that irony. Because it is really ironic. |
Anonymous
Please. Nobody here ever said - the Greeks don’t get credit, or - the idea is “uniquely” Judeo-Christian. You made that up. What several of us ARE saying is that (1) nobody has a patent on ideas, and also that (2) the same ideas can arise at different times and in different contexts. Separation of church and state IS a Christian idea, even if it’s not exclusively Christian. Perhaps if you drew a Venn diagram that would help. Also, where is your answer to the point about Thomas Jefferson’s modified New Testament? By your own logic, who “won” that one? |