Atheism | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Atheism

Djevv said:
I acknowledge that much evil has been done in Christs name. You have got to realise that some organisation, acting in Christ's name, is not nessecarily doing Gods will. Jesus didn't come to Earth to start a religion.

However, I think if you are going to be fair, you must acknowledge that in European history, Christianity has been a civilising influence. Also that the Church often stood up to the worst excesses of tyrannical governments.

On the first point, I thought the Catholic church uses the Bible (don't know exact) to show that their church (as the church of Peter) has a mandate from Jesus.  Don't know the precise details, just recall reading it previously.

On the second, to some extent.  That "civilization" only came at a pretty high price for the masses (church demanded its tithe, and their fuedal master got the rest.  Also if you study papal history, you will find they ironically tended to support the tyrannical leaders, and were usually one themselves.  They tended to support whoever looked after them best financially, and the number of wars the Vatican razed it actually quite funny.  Since the modern area, especially when the Papal States lost most of their territory to the newly created Kingdom of Italy, I agree things have changed a lot.

Djevv said:
OK, agreed, but while Atheism avoids the worst excesses of religion, it has, of itself, no moral imperative. This is why the Athiest governments (and I include Hitler in this), when they became tyrannies, had nothing to restrain them.

Hitler was a very proud Christian, and had a degree of Papal support.  He was a madman, but you cannot consider him an athiest.


**EDIT***

Just been doing some Googling. Seems while Hitler was "an admirer of Jesus" he had a number of rants against Christianity. A lot of the sites carry agendas one way or the other, so trying to look through them with the bias removed is a tad painful. Having had only a cursory glace, I would say Hitler considered himself a Christian, but hated the powerbase Christianity provided the churches - he was a meglomaniac after all.

I should also not one thing I forgot in the original post. Even if he was acting as a Christian, its absurd to say his acts were in line with any fair teaching of Christ.
 
Tiger74 said:
I should also not one thing I forgot in the original post. Even if he was acting as a Christian, its absurd to say his acts were in line with any fair teaching of Christ.

In fact one of the seeds of Hitler's anti-Semitism was his Catholic upbringing which was intertwined with the strong anti-semitism in parts of Europe at that time. The Nazis used religion to promote their ideologies just as they did with other aspects of society, but it would be very hard to argue that Hitler was like he was because of religion. Religion was just another ideology he could use for his own purposes.
 
antman said:
In fact one of the seeds of Hitler's anti-Semitism was his Catholic upbringing which was intertwined with the strong anti-semitism in parts of Europe at that time. The Nazis used religion to promote their ideologies just as they did with other aspects of society, but it would be very hard to argue that Hitler was like he was because of religion. Religion was just another ideology he could use for his own purposes.
Sam Harris puts it best.

Religion per se' isn't the problem.It's organised and violent dogmatism.
 
Tiger74 said:
On the first point, I thought the Catholic church uses the Bible (don't know exact) to show that their church (as the church of Peter) has a mandate from Jesus. Don't know the precise details, just recall reading it previously.

On the second, to some extent. That "civilization" only came at a pretty high price for the masses (church demanded its tithe, and their fuedal master got the rest. Also if you study papal history, you will find they ironically tended to support the tyrannical leaders, and were usually one themselves. They tended to support whoever looked after them best financially, and the number of wars the Vatican razed it actually quite funny. Since the modern area, especially when the Papal States lost most of their territory to the newly created Kingdom of Italy, I agree things have changed a lot.

Hitler was a very proud Christian, and had a degree of Papal support. He was a madman, but you cannot consider him an athiest.


**EDIT***

Just been doing some Googling. Seems while Hitler was "an admirer of Jesus" he had a number of rants against Christianity. A lot of the sites carry agendas one way or the other, so trying to look through them with the bias removed is a tad painful. Having had only a cursory glace, I would say Hitler considered himself a Christian, but hated the powerbase Christianity provided the churches - he was a meglomaniac after all.

I should also not one thing I forgot in the original post. Even if he was acting as a Christian, its absurd to say his acts were in line with any fair teaching of Christ.

Okay. On all of this Hitler was a Christian stuff, I think it is obvious to everyone, except possibly himself, that he wasn't. Having said that I haven't read anywhere that he actually considered himself a Christian. Regardless, God should not be held accountable for any atrocities that Hitler, or any other misguided fool for that matter, caused if what they did is in clear violation of God's law. Clearly Jesus taught us to love one other, turn the other cheek, love your neighbour as yourself, do unto others as you would have them do unto you etc. People who have done bad things in God's name have done much damage to the reputation of God and Christians over the centuries. God will judge these people just like he will everyone else and you can be sure that they will not get away with these atrocities just because they 'claimed' to be a Christian whilst here on Earth. The Bible actually speaks of such people in Matthew 7:15-23 -

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' 23Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Finally, as for these people who say that Christians hate the Jews, I would suggest that any true Christian certainly shouldn't hate them and moreso should have an attachment and warmth for the Jews. I know I do. They are the chosen people of God and Jesus, God in human form, was a Jew. Yes, they rejected and mistreated him but that doesn't make the Jews much different to any other race on Earth.
 
jayfox said:
Finally, as for these people who say that Christians hate the Jews, I would suggest that any true Christian certainly shouldn't hate them and moreso should have an attachment and warmth for the Jews. I know I do. They are the chosen people of God and Jesus, God in human form, was a Jew. Yes, they rejected and mistreated him but that doesn't make the Jews much different to any other race on Earth.

While your perspective is a fair one, it actually doesn't match what church policies have been up until recently. At certain times in history the Catholic church openly encouraged persecution of Jews, running the usual cliches about them that Hilter later ran with. It is also a disgrace how the church stood by and did sweet fa while Jews from all over Europe were shoved into concentration camps. Even if they were unaware of the death camps, the fact that Rome let this rubbish go on without a peep is a shame they will wear for a long time.

Even now, I can still guarantee you google the right words and you will get far right USA preachers still proclaiming the Jews being responsible for the death of Jesus.

Again, not saying this is right, or fair, or for that matter even Christian, but it has been an endorsed viewpoint that has been taught for a long time.
 
Tiger74 said:
While your perspective is a fair one, it actually doesn't match what church policies have been up until recently. At certain times in history the Catholic church openly encouraged persecution of Jews, running the usual cliches about them that Hilter later ran with. It is also a disgrace how the church stood by and did sweet fa while Jews from all over Europe were shoved into concentration camps. Even if they were unaware of the death camps, the fact that Rome let this rubbish go on without a peep is a shame they will wear for a long time.

Even now, I can still guarantee you google the right words and you will get far right USA preachers still proclaiming the Jews being responsible for the death of Jesus.

Again, not saying this is right, or fair, or for that matter even Christian, but it has been an endorsed viewpoint that has been taught for a long time.

I seem to remember Hitler being pretty caught up in the occult too. Am I correct in saying that?

As for the right wing preachers, yes the Jews mistreated Jesus and had him killed, but He was a Jew and He had to die for us to be saved for our sins. What would they have rathered - Jesus not die and for us to have no hope of salvation?
 
jayfox said:
I seem to remember Hitler being pretty caught up in the occult too. Am I correct in saying that?

As for the right wing preachers, yes the Jews mistreated Jesus and had him killed, but He was a Jew and He had to die for us to be saved for our sins. What would they have rathered - Jesus not die and for us to have no hope of salvation?

Its been a long while since I read on him in detail (and as I mentioned, the net reeks with pro and con propagandha on this), but memory is anything "pro-aryan" got him excited. As such, a lot of the Viking and Saxon legends and so forth were of interest. As for the ancient stuff, I know there was interest, but I think this was more about looking for proof of Aryan superiority.

On the second point, don't you know Jesus was a Christian and not a Jew :rofl I still laugh when you hear some ignorant people say that. Especially as he calls himself a Jew :hihi
 
jayfox said:
As for the right wing preachers, yes the Jews mistreated Jesus and had him killed, but He was a Jew and He had to die for us to be saved for our sins.

But why? If people 'Living Without The Law" are saved, why did he have to be sacrificed at all?
 
Azza said:
But why? If people 'Living Without The Law" are saved, why did he have to be sacrificed at all?

The Bible tells us that the wages of sin are death, i.e. if you sin you are separated from God (as He is a perfect being.) So in order to pay the penalty of our sin and the price for our salvation, Jesus needed to sacrifice His life so that ours could be saved. Because of His death, when Christians face God in judgement, Jesus intercedes as he has paid our penalty and so we are once again pure in the eyes of God.

As for those living without the law, they are not just automatically saved. A study on this issue is listed below -

‘For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without the law, and as many as have sinned under the law will be judged by the law, for it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but it is the doers of the law who will be justified --- in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.’

It will make no difference in that day whether men have had the Law or not. Those who have not had the Law will perish outside the Law. They will be judged by the law written in their consciences. Those who have had the Law will be judged under it, and they too will perish. For in both cases it is not those who are aware of what their particular law says who are accounted righteous, it is those who fully and without exception do what that law says. Only they will be able to be accounted righteous in the Day when God judges the secrets of men by Jesus Christ. That is what Paul’s Good News of the Gospel confirms. But as he has already pointed out, no one does in fact keep their particular conception of the law. Thus all will perish.

‘For when Gentiles who do not have the law, do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law to themselves, in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to it, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, by Jesus Christ .’

Not having the Law does not give the Gentiles any excuse. For all men have written in their hearts the principles of God’s law, the principles of moral right and wrong, and their consciences bear witness to it. Those principles may be distorted by them, but they are there. And thus they have a responsibility to live wholly according to those principles. If they do their conscience will excuse them. If they do not it will accuse them. But either way they are bound to live by it, and will be judged by it. And they too will be judged accordingly in the Day when God judges the secrets of men. And there too they will perish because they have failed to live fully in accordance with their conscience (verse 12).

It must be recognised in all this that Paul is demonstrating logically that all without exception have sinned and are therefore guilty before God. He is not speaking of mercy but of justice. It is not to deny that some can repent and find mercy, whether they be Jew or Gentile. And it may well be that these words are indicating that God does work in the hearts of some people, even among those who have ‘never heard’, bringing them in repentance to receive forgiveness through the cross (even though they have not heard of it), and to walk in a way that is pleasing to Him. Missionaries have testified to meeting such people when they have gone to ‘unreached’ peoples. And such people have immediately responded to the Gospel, declaring that this was the message that they had been waiting for. But such people are few, and had turned away from the false gods of their people. We must not put a straitjacket on God’s mercy, but nor must we treat it with laxity. What is, however, sure, is that without repentance towards God and faith in His mercy there can be no salvation.
 
jayfox said:
The Bible tells us that the wages of sin are death, i.e. if you sin you are separated from God (as He is a perfect being.) So in order to pay the penalty of our sin and the price for our salvation, Jesus needed to sacrifice His life so that ours could be saved. Because of His death, when Christians face God in judgement, Jesus intercedes as he has paid our penalty and so we are once again pure in the eyes of God.

So all the people who lived before Jesus, or after him and never heard his teachings, have less chance of salvation than those who had a chance to hear his word?
 
Azza said:
So all the people who lived before Jesus, or after him and never heard his teachings, have less chance of salvation than those who had a chance to hear his word?

No, not less they will just be judged in a different way.
 
jayfox said:
No, not less they will just be judged in a different way.

Again then, why was Jesus' death necessary? Why couldn't everyone keep being judged as "Living Without the Law"?
 
Azza said:
Again then, why was Jesus' death necessary? Why couldn't everyone keep being judged as "Living Without the Law"?

Because Jesus' death still saves those living without the law they just didn't know that it was Jesus specifically who was saving them and that they were living good and pure lives for (but their conscience's told them that it was someone). Without Jesus' death no-one would be saved, not those living with or without the law.
 
jayfox said:
Because Jesus' death still saves those living without the law they just didn't know that it was Jesus specifically who was saving them and that they were living good and pure lives for (but their conscience's told them that it was someone). Without Jesus' death no-one would be saved, not those living with or without the law.

Ah, I get it now.

You'd have to think that it would be easier for people to live good and pure lives who were exposed to Jesus' word though, wouldn't you?
 
Azza said:
Ah, I get it now.

You'd have to think that it would be easier for people to live good and pure lives who were exposed to Jesus' word though, wouldn't you?

Hard to say. I guess it does seem that way but who knows? Maybe God touches the conscience's of those living without the law more than that of those living with it? I also think that those living without the law in remote locations (tribes in Africa or the Amazon for example) have less to distract them away from living pure lives though. In that I am talking about bad influence from TV, Movies, Porn, The Internet, Access to Alcohol and Drugs etc. These are potential evils that they do not have to deal with in their lives which would make it easier to be pure I guess?
 
Six Pack said:
Jay when this end of days stuff gonna happen?

No man knows, only God. Those who put dates on it are fools and false prophets as the Bible clearly tells us.
 
I thought u indicated somewhere that it wasnt that far off, Jay? Or was that other prophecy?