What evidence would you accept?

Aupmanyav said:
Judaism is concerned with itself, but Christianity and Islam are exclusivists. They are persecutors and predators in all history. All religions are wrong unless Jesus or Muhammad are not accepted.
Click to expand...
More empty statements.

You still haven't provided evidence for your claims. Either provide the evidence for your original claims or just admit you have none.
 
Aupmanyav said:
but exclusivist religions use men for persecution of people who do not agree to their views. They are egged on by priests and clerics.
Click to expand...
sadly
moralorel said:
More empty statements.

You still haven't provided evidence for your claims. Either provide the evidence for your original claims or just admit you have none.
Click to expand...
Doesn't what he said sound a bit like Middle Eastern and European history? And in the Americas to a fair extent.
 
TheLightWithin said:
sadly

Doesn't what he said sound a bit like Middle Eastern and European history? And in the Americas to a fair extent.
Click to expand...
I'm waiting for his evidence of his original claims. He likes to criticize other people's beliefs and claim they have no evidence. Every time I point out that he doesn't have evidence for his claims he resorts to deflections. I'm not playing that game. The thread is about evidence. I'm not going to get distracted by his other empty claims. Let's deal with one erroneous claim at a time shall we?
 
Aupmanyav said:
Christians and Muslims have behaved very badly all through the history all over the world. Why should I not blame their religions?
Click to expand...
You can throw blame around as much as you like, but you need to show what aspect of religion
causes people to behave badly.
eg. superiority complex

I would argue that you are just as likely to suffer from a superiority complex than anybody else.
Abrahamic religion teaches humility, but mankind is often weak.
 
Aupmanyav said:
Christians and Muslims have behaved very badly all through the history all over the world. Why should I not blame their religions?
Click to expand...

Chairman Mao Zedong was an atheist. Guess I will place the blame on atheism for his followers very, very bad behavior.
 
Aupmanyav said:
The religious have killed a thousand times more people than the three or four communists atheists that you are referring to. Your point does not stand.
Do you mean that atheists of the current age (there are a lot on the forum) are murderers?
Click to expand...
1. Nobody murdered more people than Mao did.
2. You are blaming religion for war. But the worst murderer in history was an atheist. So the point has been made. Your logic fails.
3. You still can't provide a shred of proof for your claim about the Middle East being the cause of all wars. Not one shred of evidence. I've been waiting months for your "evidence". None. Not one bit. And now the biggest murderer in history, an atheist who was not from the Middle East, is the dagger in your "argument".

Give it a rest. You made a false claim. Admit it and move on.
 
Don't forget Hitler and Stalin. Those are the usual subjects when it comes to arguing that atheism is worse than religion. :)

Really, though, the argument completely misses the point - that any ideology can be used to serve any nefarious purpose. Genocide doesn't belong to any single belief system on how the univers operates.
 
Blaming religion for the world's ills is a common and popular meme, but as ever, the reality is more nuanced.

Scholars across various disciplines widely regard wars and violence as driven by secular motives in pursuit of political power, territorial control and/or economic resources. Religion is often used as a justification to rally people to a cause, but it's just a way of winding up the masses, as is the argument that religion is the cause of all the world's ills.
 
Thomas said:
Religion is often used as a justification to rally people to a cause, but it's just a way of winding up the masses, as is the argument that religion is the cause of all the world's ills.
Click to expand...
That is one reason against religion. All for something which has no evidence.
 
Aupmanyav said:
That is one reason against religion. All for something which has no evidence.
Click to expand...
One false reason against religion, and your 'evidence' argument is another, so two false logic statements do not qualify as a rational argument.
 
Aupmanyav said:
He was a communist first and then an atheist. In that era and later some communist leaders did not value life over their ideology.
Click to expand...

Here is a mirror:

Hassan Nasrallah was a Lebanese politician and anti-occupation militant first, and then a Muslim. In that era and later, some political and militant leaders did not value life over their ideology.
 
Ahanu said:
Hassan Nasrallah was a Lebanese politician and anti-occupation militant first, and then a Muslim. In that era and later, some political and militant leaders did not value life over their ideology.
Click to expand...
Muslim ire against Israel is understandable. However Hamas attack against Israel as they did it, was militarily a foolish step. Were they not aware of Isrel's power?
 
Anyway, let's draw a line under that as we don't discuss politics here. :)

Ahanu said:
Here is a mirror:

Hassan Nasrallah was a Lebanese politician and anti-occupation militant first, and then a Muslim. In that era and later, some political and militant leaders did not value life over their ideology.
Click to expand...
Aupmanyav said:
Muslim ire against Israel is understandable. However Hamas attack against Israel as they did it, was militarily a foolish step. Were they not aware of Isrel's power?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top