Viewing Single Post From: Christians

Viewing Single Post From: Christians
+Reaver	Dec 4 2008, 06:57 AM
Troll Posts: 8,613 Group: Advisor Member #47 Joined: June 9, 2005	Moonlight Knight Dec 3 2008, 08:41 PM Y'all aren't in disagreement. >_> Which is why I told him what he had said makes sense? Wind Sword To say that religion is a tool in every case, one has to necessarily believe that none of the existing religions are true. If the Bible is true after all, religion isn't a tool, its just believing something that's true. The answer to "Why am I religious" essentially boils down to "It's true". In our world, it is naive to objectively look at every religion and claim that one in particular has all of the answers and worships an existing god in the proper fashion. Obviously if you are religious, you see your religion as true: but that's exactly why it can be used as a tool for whatever purposes one desires. For example, even if Hitler didn't believe his anti-semitism I would assume that he used the religious argument to appeal to those of the faith with a religious argument because some people legitimately thought they were doing the Christian (I want to say Protestant) thing. Wind Sword Not to engage in a pointless "Who Killed More" debate, but Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot killed roughly 37 million in the name of state sponsored atheism and collectivism. I'd be willing to guess that's a higher number than Christianity managed in two millennia. Atheism tends to be the religion for the arrogant. Don't ask me how it happens, but it seems like you get atheists that more often than not act like they're decision not to believe in God is perfectly logical [it isn't]. No religion has the 100% guarantee: not Christianity, not Atheism, not Jainism, etc. I would be inclined to agree with you, although I don't care about body count. Wind Sword And of course, being the excuse and the cause are entirely separate. I'd venture that many of the Christian atrocities would have occurred in the absence of Christianity. I 100% agree. WInd Sword You've effectively proved that some secular motive played a part. The quote you provide says zero about the Dar-al Islam, trade, commerce, or anything like that. And isn't gaining material wealth one of the largest secular motives? If the crusades have a secular edge to them, what part of attacking a rich trade network does not fit this definition? Wind Sword That's still only circumstantial. Yes, there was financial gain from controlling the Muslim trade routes. That doesn't mean it was the reason. O. J. Simpson saw financial gain from the interest generated when his wife died. I'd hardly call that his motive. In the end, the obvious, self-preservation and OJ being a wife-beating bastard, outweigh the less likely, trade routes and money. Primary motive? Maybe not. Although you severely underestimate the power of money if you think that in the case of the Crusades and your example money wasn't on the forefront of their mind.
	Neon,June 8 2005 07:34 PM @Reaver: Me grammer is better than ur post count newbie. HJ, December 30 2008 06:20 PM You gave Inui his first (and last?) sexual experience, didn't you? That's historic. Favorite Staffer Summer 2008 -- Send me a Personal Message

Christians · Debate Forum