Stratovarius Community

Everyone has&cherishes their own beliefs as part of a free world. Even tolerant athetists think people have a right to belive in God if they want.
Howver, what would happen--realisticly--if it were proved without a doubt(no guesswork, no faith but PROOF)that there is no God? Never has been.

IMO, that would spark off chaos in the world on a grand scale. People who have been followers at the least would be devastated&hurt at being taken advantage of. Think of the ministers who had God&spreading his word as their livelihood.
Laugh if you dare, but ths scenario is not funny at all!

There are billions of people whose hope, good behavior, even sanity rest in the idea that there is something better when this life is over. Jerk that hope away from them&its not going to be a pretty thing to even imagine! For example, I have heard a few peope joke&say, "If ever there is proof there is no God, Heaven, or Hell I know a couple persons I'll murder!" oking or not, without God many people would have no conscience at all.
I would not laugh at this!
I tink the whole fabric of society would start to unravel if it were proved there is no God.
If yo cannot fathom this, I think you are very naive!

Our framework of Society is based on freedom of religion, or non-religion-a choice! And when that choice is shattered--totally&irreversibly--the whole backbone&conscience of the majority of mankind will be destroyed forever,

Even in atheistc&agnostic countries there is a thread of God belief which seems to elp old civilization intact---without this thread, it is unthinkable.

Laugh if you must, but this has never happened&lets hope it does not! Definite PROOF there is NO God would sent this earth's people into turmoil.
Since the beginning of time there has been a choice--God or not&most are satisfied.
Let's hope that choice is always open for all of us, whether we like it or not, believe or not.

I won't go too deep in this matter as I don't have much time now, but just want to express some thoughts, that are, of course, my own opinions.

I think that since ancient times, when mankind started to get "civilized", religion was a way to keep people under control using fear, and as BEG said, even nowadays certain people maybe act in some way just because they still fear a "divine punishment".

We, as a society, should start teaching our children to behave good and to have good feelings based on rational thinking, and not because "God says so".

But I think that even such a proof of the non existance of god is revealed, people won't accept that easily. Believers will still believe on their gods no matter what science says about it. At least not in 1 or 2 generation.

I don't mean to be offensive, but I think that many of the comments in the first post are ridiculous.
I'm too tired to make long comments, but I think there's no need to prove God doesn't exist; if anything, someone should prove God does exist! This is the way many people reason: "there's no proof that God exists; however, there's no proof he doesn't exist, so I'll assume he exists". Believing just in case does not make any sense to me. Furthermore, I don't see what difference would it make if someone could prove that God doesn't exist... Even if he exists (and I'm convinced he doesn't), his mere existence does not prove he is good and caring. There is concrete evidence on this planet that if he does exist, he's either not almighty or a criminal and a bad "guy" who doesn't care about anyone. In other words, I wouldn't respect him, and I would even consider myself more ethical and loving than him, not because I'm arrogant, but because he has done a horrible job (this is all hypothetical, as I really don't believe in God).

I agree somewhat with Stealth, in that if someone claims there is a god, the burden of proof would be on that person making that claim, not the other way round. Faith is by definition irrational. If we had evidence there is a god, it would be called knowledge, not faith.

That said, how exactly would one go about unequivocally proving the non-existence of God? And even if you managed to come up with some sort of proof, how could you be sure God isn't merely deceiving us, for reasons we mere mortals can not understand (the lord, as you may know, does walk in mysterious ways)? Either you're eventually going to find some way to plug in God into our understanding of the physical world, at which point it stops being supernatural and becomes...well...natural, or you'll remain at where we are now: there is no evidence to suggest there are any supernatural entities, and a belief in such things is just that: a belief.
Besides, if there's anything human beings are good at, it's believing in things, facts to the contrary. Inconvenient facts are easily ignored or disputed.

I take issue with the suggestion that man cannot be moral without God or other supernatural entities. I certainly don't go around killing people, just because the fifth or sixth commandment tells me not to (and I don't care what God says, I'll covet my neighbour's wife if I want to!). In fact, as we should all be well aware on this date, September 11th, according to some people's twisted interpretation of religion, killing people is perfectly justifiable.
If a person's actions are wholly controlled by a fear of going to Hell, rather than by a more rational desire to function in a society composed of other human beings, that person is a psychopath.

Considering that in practical terms god is nothing more than a notion of mankind, I would be happy if it were common knowledge that there CANT be a god. but people will always have self denial if they WANT to believe so. But I do realize it would mean chaos on a massive scale in many parts of the world.

I never once said that people who do not believe in God would be the ones that would/might go berserk--I said it was the people who have given hope to a belief&then, if it is proven nonexistent, some would have no reason to hold it together any longer.
A guy at work&I were discussing this issue last week&he said, "If it were proven that God does not exist, this world would probably fall apart." And I replied, "The Atheists would probably hold the world together because the "believers" would be the ones to fall apart." When you do not believe in something to start with, why should it disappoint you, or bother you if it crumbles?

So, this was actually a rhetorical question, yet I stand by my opinion, because Christianity, as "young" a belief as it is compared to older faiths, is very strong&there is no denying the overwhelming faith millons have in it.

Considering Islam isn't even 1500 years old, Christianity is not so young...

But let's be realistic, human beings need certain constants and guides to hold their life together, and while athiests (yay me ) don't need religion or have an equivalent for it MOST people do. So while atheists may rejoice and whatnot, many wouldn't be too thrilled about it.

Unfortunately, it seems that the mere mention of God's name causes the smug factor to go through the roof with some atheists.

Atheists typically "evangelize" that Christianity itself is "based on fear and control", which in and of itself, shows a remarkable lack of knowledge of that particular religion; not to mention new frontiers in self-righteous assumptions based on parroting the latest anti-christian soundbites that are currently being propogated by the left wing media and academia.

This would make a fascinating topic for a PhD candidate's thesis. Just plagarize Shelly (God is already dead!), turn it in, and the instructor will give you an "A" with no questions asked, no debate, and no need to really elaborate.

We get it- the seminaries and cathedrals of Europe are happily empty (while the Mosques, no doubt are bursting at the seams), and will stay that way from here on out. Congratulations! You've actually outgrown your need for God! The creation has eclipsed the Creator in terms of importance. Things are going so well now that to think that the world actually needs God is downright- primitive.

You've become far too sophisticated for such fairy tales! 75 years of state sponsored atheism did wonders for the Soviet Union, so perhaps it's safe to assume that it will be equally useful for western Europe. Only toothless, tobacco chewing rednecks from the American South even believe in God anymore, oui?

Why not stage your next protest outside of the local Mosque? Draw some more cartoons perhaps? Stand by idly while hooligans are torching every car in sight or snatching innocent women off of the street? Wring your hands over "racial profiling" at the airport? Celebrate the "diversity" and and call for "tolerance" of those that have sworn to destroy you and your way of life?

Okay European atheists- let's hear your plans and contingencies for saving the world. We're waiting.

miditek wrote:Unfortunately, it seems that the mere mention of God's name causes the smug factor to go through the roof with some atheists.

Not to mention with some Christians.

Atheists typically "evangelize" that Christianity itself is "based on fear and control", which in and of itself, shows a remarkable lack of knowledge of that particular religion;

I suppose it's that whole concept of "fear of God" and the hierarchy of the Catholic church tend to fool a lot of those godless sodomites...I mean atheists.
True Christianity, of course, is based not on fear, but on hope, love and faith. But those who actually practice it does seem to be far and few between. Unfortunately.
And, of course, love and respect for one another can certainly be, and is, practiced outside of the Christian faith.

not to mention new frontiers in self-righteous assumptions based on parroting the latest anti-christian soundbites that are currently being propogated by the left wing media and academia.

Self-righteous indeed.
Just last night I was watching the Satanic News Network (SNN), and man! Talk about anti-Christian! I just couldn't sit through that night's edition of Goat Sacrificing with Wolf Blitzer. I just couldn't.

This would make a fascinating topic for a PhD candidate's thesis. Just plagarize Shelly (God is already dead!), turn it in, and the instructor will give you an "A" with no questions asked, no debate, and no need to really elaborate.

While it certainly is regrettable if the quality of American universities has declined to such levels (which I sincerely doubt), the process for obtaining a doctoral degree at a Finnish university, at least, is a bit more elaborate than that.

We get it- the seminaries and cathedrals of Europe are happily empty (while the Mosques, no doubt are bursting at the seams), and will stay that way from here on out. Congratulations! You've actually outgrown your need for God! The creation has eclipsed the Creator in terms of importance.

While this sermon of yours is most amusing, you're not so much preaching to the choir as you're preaching to the straw men. Christianity is quite alive and well, no need to worry. 2 billion Christians, many of them European, is a pretty decent number, wouldn't you say?

Things are going so well now that to think that the world actually needs God is downright- primitive.

Or, rather, things are going so bloody well right now that it would be hard not to assume we've been abandoned by our creator, if there was one to begin with.

You've become far too sophisticated for such fairy tales!

We have? Even in the allegedly übersecular Scandinavia, well over 75% of the population in all Nordic countries are Christian. In fact, if I'm not entirely mistaken, Sweden is the sole Nordic country with less than 80% of the population being Christian.

years of state sponsored atheism did wonders for the Soviet Union, so perhaps it's safe to assume that it will be equally useful for western Europe.

As far as I know, there's no current legislation pending that would make atheism mandatory in any western European country.

Only toothless, tobacco chewing rednecks from the American South even believe in God anymore, oui?

How do you chew tobacco if you don't have any teeth, is what I want to know. Although I admittedly tend to avoid nicotine-based products, so I may be misunderstanding the concept of chewing tobacco. But I applaud your extensive knowledge of the French language!

Why not stage your next protest outside of the local Mosque? Draw some more cartoons perhaps? Stand by idly while hooligans are torching every car in sight or snatching innocent women off of the street? Wring your hands over "racial profiling" at the airport? Celebrate the "diversity" and and call for "tolerance" of those that have sworn to destroy you and your way of life?

Aah, I see. So this whole tirade is not about Europe not being sufficiently Christian, it's about Europe not being sufficiently anti-Muslim. If your understanding of European Muslims (and Islam in general) truly is limited to hooliganism and extremism, conveniently ignoring that many Muslims do assimilate and function in society, you're as misinformed as your atheist boogeymen and would do well not to chastise people for their alleged ignorance.

There are certainly several European countries, France for example, who have their share of difficulties (although hardly to the extent some people would like to believe) with predominantly Muslim immigrants, who haven't properly assimilated into society. But that is not a function of Islam or any religion at all, that is a function of a shitty French immigration policy. And God willing (pun intended), there will be some sane people put in office next year, who actually genuinely want to work towards finding solutions, rather than the hacks currently in office who'd rather have a Muslim boogeyman around to scare the population into acquiescence while pretending to be "tough on crime."
But to make it out to somehow be the bane of Europe is pure unmitigated hysteria. Or maybe it's wishful thinking.

Besides, if there's anything Christianity is supposed to be about, it's love and tolerance. I seem to recall loving thy neighbour and turning the other cheek being rather important concepts in the Bible.
Although, no one is actually calling for "tolerance of those who have sworn to destroy us and our way of life," given that that is but a small fraction of Muslims, and given that several European organisations on various levels of government are working towards preventing attacks by terrorists, and given that numerous arrests have occured with regards to Muslim extremism, and given that many a European media outlet discuss quite freely and openly the dilemmas that modern European society faces, such as religious extremism and immigration. To suggest otherwise is patently absurd.

Okay European atheists- let's hear your plans and contingencies for saving the world. We're waiting.

Yeah, I'd like to hear from these European atheists of yours as well. In the mean time, I would be interested to hear about that plan for saving the world the religious people allegedly have then. Would be ample time to roll it out too. We're waiting.

Christianity is not just a belief that you answer a survey or a census form with an "X". Christianity is a lifestyle&even though it is said 80% of a country signs on to Christianity on form, it does not mean they are Christians in the true sense of the word!

Its like all this hoopla over "DaVinci Code." This book is purely a fictional story based on a couple true organizations, and a theory. A good book, but fictional. Many Anti-Christians as well as some Christians are grasping this book as factual! Anti-Christians do not realize it but there is Christianity all though this book, just in a non-traditional sense. Some people seem to be getting thrills that this book seems to be taking swipes at traditional Christianity, when actually it makes Christianity in any form more solid!
Many people cannot fathom in their mind that there is a possibility Jesus just may be the divine son of God, so they have to grasp this theory that Jesus was just a human who lived like the rest of us----I mean to say Jesus was pure, and above the sins of the rest of us in a way is a scary thought to some people, I guess.
But, all that is just my opinion&I am not speaking for the world----thats obvious!

OMG if God would not exist, what would I do?! ARFGH! Oh well, I would probably live my life on, and there would not be any religion classes in school about christianity, if someone would also prove that no other gods exist we would probably turn the religion classes into history classes

life is not possible without God. Existence is not possible without God.

NordicStorm wrote:I suppose it's that whole concept of "fear of God" and the hierarchy of the Catholic church tend to fool a lot of those godless sodomites...I mean atheists. True Christianity, of course, is based not on fear, but on hope, love and faith. But those who actually practice it does seem to be far and few between. Unfortunately.
And, of course, love and respect for one another can certainly be, and is, practiced outside of the Christian faith.

Fear of God (meaning respect and awe for the Creator) is certainly part of it, as is love towards one another. There are, of course, plenty of hypocrites in the church, no question about it. However, there are plenty of Christians that put their money where there mouth is, so to speak. My neighbor's niece just got back from a mission trip to Malawi, an everyone is amazed that such a young kid would go there to work.

Worldwide mission activities are at an all time high- and these missions are not just about proselytizing, but are also about showing God's love through acts of kindess and charity- such as building schools, clinics, and other public works.

NordicStorm wrote:Self-righteous indeed. Just last night I was watching the Satanic News Network (SNN), and man! Talk about anti-Christian! I just couldn't sit through that night's edition of Goat Sacrificing with Wolf Blitzer. I just couldn't.

Perhaps you're not familiar with the ACLU, but they are doing everything possible to get rid of any reference to God in this country. They are allied with the NEA and their media allies to teach kids the exact opposite of what most parents want their kids to believe.

You don't mention Jesus in school now (unless you want to be sued), although mentioning Allah or Mohammed or any number of pagan gods is perfectly acceptable. Teaching pre-teen kids that homosexuality, infidelity, and promiscuity are perfectly acceptable behaviors is going a bit far, don't you think? Parental authority is now being superseded by the State.

If you had young kids at home, is this what you would want them to be taught? My neighbors continuously complain about the propoganda in schools, and I've suggested that they jerk their kids out of public schools and send them either to a parochial school, or simply home school them. I have non-religious friends that are even sick of it, and now home school their kids.

NordicStorm wrote:While this sermon of yours is most amusing, you're not so much preaching to the choir as you're preaching to the straw men. Christianity is quite alive and well, no need to worry. 2 billion Christians, many of them European, is a pretty decent number, wouldn't you say?

I would say that Christians in Europe are a very small minority, and largely comprised of the elderly population- not young people. Having the words European and Christian in the same sentence almost seems like a contradiction in terms. With the exception of a few pockets of faith, such as Rome, I believe that Christianity has largely ran its course in Europe. Welcome to the caliphates of Franco Arabia and Londonistan.

Things are going so well now that to think that the world actually needs God is downright- primitive.

NordicStorm wrote:Or, rather, things are going so bloody well right now that it would be hard not to assume we've been abandoned by our creator, if there was one to begin with.

The Bible is filled with descriptions of what to expect in the last days, and I can assure you, it was not illustrated as a paradise. It was much more like what is happening now. Perhaps, it is mankind that has abandoned God, as opposed to the other way around.

You've become far too sophisticated for such fairy tales!

NordicStorm wrote:We have? Even in the allegedly übersecular Scandinavia, well over 75% of the population in all Nordic countries are Christian. In fact, if I'm not entirely mistaken, Sweden is the sole Nordic country with less than 80% of the population being Christian.

Christian in name only. Just how can übersecular Scandinavia still be 75% Christian? Doesn't that statement appear to contradict itself?

years of state sponsored atheism did wonders for the Soviet Union, so perhaps it's safe to assume that it will be equally useful for western Europe.

NordicStorm wrote:As far as I know, there's no current legislation pending that would make atheism mandatory in any western European country.

Have you read the EU charter? It is an aboslute masterpiece of secular humanism, with absolutely no reference whatsoever to God. I'd almost thought it had been authored by Wiccans and Pagans, which it probably was anyway. Perhaps not Soviet style compulsory atheism, but it is certainly and strongly implied.

Only toothless, tobacco chewing rednecks from the American South even believe in God anymore, oui?

NordicStorm wrote:How do you chew tobacco if you don't have any teeth, is what I want to know. Although I admittedly tend to avoid nicotine-based products, so I may be misunderstanding the concept of chewing tobacco. But I applaud your extensive knowledge of the French language!

If you've lost your natural teeth, and then misplaced your wooden ones, one can always switch from Levi Garrett to Bruton's Scotch snuff. It was a favorite of my grandfather and his sisters. My knowledge of the French language is mercifully limited, although my contempt for Chirac and DeVillepin is not.

Why not stage your next protest outside of the local Mosque? Draw some more cartoons perhaps? Stand by idly while hooligans are torching every car in sight or snatching innocent women off of the street? Wring your hands over "racial profiling" at the airport? Celebrate the "diversity" and and call for "tolerance" of those that have sworn to destroy you and your way of life?

NordicStorm wrote:Aah, I see. So this whole tirade is not about Europe not being sufficiently Christian, it's about Europe not being sufficiently anti-Muslim. If your understanding of European Muslims (and Islam in general) truly is limited to hooliganism and extremism, conveniently ignoring that many Muslims do assimilate and function in society, you're as misinformed as your atheist boogeymen and would do well not to chastise people for their alleged ignorance.

Why tell only Christians that God does not exist? Why not buy a billboard and declare God's passing at the neighborhood mosque? Jesus was a fairy tale, and Mohammed was not? Of course, I am sure that a minority of Muslims are productive citizens, but I would daresay that they are the exception, rather than the rule. Muslim MP's (Members of Parliment) in the UK are constantly complaining about the alleged campaigns of terror and discrimination of Muslims in their adopted country. It's the same old song and dance that they sing in every euro-state. If they don't like it, they should leave and go back to the desert from whence they came.

NordicStorm wrote:There are certainly several European countries, France for example, who have their share of difficulties (although hardly to the extent some people would like to believe) with predominantly Muslim immigrants, who haven't properly assimilated into society. But that is not a function of Islam or any religion at all, that is a function of a shitty French immigration policy. And God willing (pun intended), there will be some sane people put in office next year, who actually genuinely want to work towards finding solutions, rather than the hacks currently in office who'd rather have a Muslim boogeyman around to scare the population into acquiescence while pretending to be "tough on crime."
But to make it out to somehow be the bane of Europe is pure unmitigated hysteria. Or maybe it's wishful thinking.

There are some French people that I correspond with in another forum(a rancorous anti-french forum at that); and they mention that their government has completely lost it. Although I would not blame jihadistic tendencies on French immigration policies-
no one forces people to torch cars, synagogues, vandalize Jewish cemetaries or murder French citizens that just happen to be Jewish.

In their own words, the French that I know are contemptous of what's going on there, and lament the fact that people from its old colonies continue to pour in and cause problems. At the very least, France is now deporting many of the troublemakers. A good start, but still insufficient.

Europe does not need to cater to every single Muslim whim and complaint. Europe can choose to participate in the war on terror, or it can elect to sit on the sidelines. But it is its own choice, and the key point is that Tehran and Damascus need not dictate terms to the EU. If more euro-forces were to engage in combat against these animals, they would find it is not so bad, and that the jihadists can indeed be defeated. Pacifism and cowardice, although keywords to many, will not provide your continent with any real security.

NordicStorm wrote:Besides, if there's anything Christianity is supposed to be about, it's love and tolerance. I seem to recall loving thy neighbour and turning the other cheek being rather important concepts in the Bible.

The United States has been a good friend to many nations. Turning the other cheek implies interpersonal relationships, not submission to Islam and Dhimmism. Christianity is not about tolerance of sin, either. Christians can and should condemn sin, but unlike others, we do not decapitate those with which we do not agree.

NordicStorm wrote:Although, no one is actually calling for "tolerance of those who have sworn to destroy us and our way of life," given that that is but a small fraction of Muslims, and given that several European organisations on various levels of government are working towards preventing attacks by terrorists, and given that numerous arrests have occured with regards to Muslim extremism, and given that many a European media outlet discuss quite freely and openly the dilemmas that modern European society faces, such as religious extremism and immigration. To suggest otherwise is patently absurd.

Chirac indicated that Iran was a great nation and a stabilizing force in the Middle East. Iran has sworn to destroy Israel. What part of that is so difficult to understand? Hundreds of thousands of protestors in Beirut chanting "death to America" and "death to Israel" do not sound like a small majority to me, nor do the worldwide riots after the Mohammed cartoons- not to mention mass boycotts of Danish products.

The euro security forces that are making arrests are doing this because the continent's survival depends on it. If it did not, the raids would not be happening now. Did you not hear about the mosque that was raided in Germany? The nine year old girl that came forward to her German teacher and produced a copy of "Jihad 101" that the kids at the mosque were being taught?

You cannot reason with madmen. They do not respect you, they do not respect your secular culture. They will not assimilate, and they will not stop with their plans.

Okay European atheists- let's hear your plans and contingencies for saving the world. We're waiting.

NordicStorm wrote:Yeah, I'd like to hear from these European atheists of yours as well. In the mean time, I would be interested to hear about that plan for saving the world the religious people allegedly have then. Would be ample time to roll it out too. We're waiting.

Most Christians, if you'll recall, believe what the Book of Revelation has to say about the world's problems. This is not to say that Christians are not supposed to help people- not at all, but we do believe that some problems are so great that they will never be resolved without the direct intervention of God himself. A good Christian will admit their shortcomings, their eccentricities, their failures, and will admit that they need God now more than ever in their lives.

If there is no god...there is no...And if there i...There is.....That is mine opinion...Noone CAN'T tell Is he real...

It would be a chaos and and collapse of society. Yes, you maybe think 'Not in hell!', but think further. People believe in God, they trust in God with all their heart and then he ceases to exist. Chaos.

miditek wrote:Why tell only Christians that God does not exist? Why not buy a billboard and declare God's passing at the neighborhood mosque? Jesus was a fairy tale, and Mohammed was not?

Of course, you're well aware Jesus is considered a very important prophet and a messenger of God in Islam.

If you had young kids at home, is this what you would want them to be taught?

I would want my kids to be taught respect and tolerance for other people. Oh, and math. It's a sad state of affairs indeed if the American educational system is in such terrible condition as you make it out to be. Although, if that is the case, maybe you should be more concerned about your own continent than ours, given that in the so called secular Scandinavia we have no problems teaching religion in school. One of my closest friends is studying to become a teacher in that very subject, in fact.

Just how can übersecular Scandinavia still be 75% Christian? Doesn't that statement appear to contradict itself?

Well, I said allegedly übersecular, and as it turns out, it's not a true allegation. Finland in particular has a reputation for its fair share of radical Christians.
Miditek, of course, has been appointed by the Pope to define just who qualifies as a Christian, and can with certitude dismiss entire nations as "Christian in name only."

I would say that Christians in Europe are a very small minority, and largely comprised of the elderly population- not young people.

And I would say you're misinformed. But you would just dole out your "Christian in name only" trump card.

It is an aboslute masterpiece of secular humanism, with absolutely no reference whatsoever to God.

As it should be. It's not supposed to be a religious text. Freedom of religion is very explicitly stated as a right, however. As it should be. If I wanted to live in a theocracy, I'd move to Iran.

although my contempt for Chirac and DeVillepin is not.

And I share your contempt. Although probably for different reasons altogether.

vandalize Jewish cemetaries or murder French citizens that just happen to be Jewish

Such behaviour is to be condemned by all reasonable people and punished to the full extent of the law. It doesn't give you carte blanche to spew bigotry, though.

In their own words, the French that I know are contemptous of what's going on there, and lament the fact that people from its old colonies continue to pour in and cause problems.

So, in other words, they essentially agree with my assessment that those problems are function of a shitty French immigration policy. Glad to hear it.

Europe does not need to cater to every single Muslim whim and complaint. Europe can choose to participate in the war on terror. But it is its own choice, and the key point is that Tehran and Damascus need not dictate terms to the EU.

a) Which it doesn't; b) Which it has; c) which they don't.

If more euro-forces were to engage in combat against these animals, they would find it is not so bad, and that the jihadists can indeed be defeated.

I would certainly hope the euro-forces have a better understanding of what we're up against than you do, though. If we followed the miditek plan for fighting Muslim terrorism, we'd probably end up arresting Sikhs and Hindus instead.

Pacifism and cowardice, although keywords to many, will not provide your continent with any real security.

Nor will declaring war on 1.4 billion Muslims, which apart from being blatant bigotry, is pure stupidity. As for cowardice, I'm not the one cowering in fear by the sheer thought that there may be Muslims living among us. I'm infinitely more likely to die from a heart attack or cancer or a car accident than a terrorist attack perpetrated by Muslim terrorists. As are you, btw. Hard as the fear mongerers among us may try to spin it otherwise.

Christians can and should condemn sin, but unlike others, we do not decapitate those with which we do not agree.

No, we good Christians only kill abortion doctors and rape choir boys. Let's not play that game, it's just stupid.

Chirac indicated that Iran was a great nation and a stabilizing force in the Middle East. Iran has sworn to destroy Israel. What part of that is so difficult to understand?

The part where you are seemingly unable to tell Muslims apart. We've already been through discussing bolstering the moderates in Iran in another thread. You want your world war, we get that already.

Hundreds of thousands of protestors in Beirut chanting "death to America" and "death to Israel" do not sound like a small majority to me,

Which is very disturbing indeed, although less so when you realize that Muslisms are as perceptible to hate propaganda as the rest of us. As evidenced by some people's posts in this very thread. It won't be easy countering that propaganda, true, but then no one has pretended this would be a cakewalk.

nor do the worldwide riots after the Mohammed cartoons- not to mention mass boycotts of Danish products.

Waah? Boycotting Danish products after a Danish magazine ridicules your faith? Man, those motherfuckers are evil!

The euro security forces that are making arrests are doing this because the continent's survival depends on it. If it did not, the raids would not be happening now.

Fear mongering again.

Did you not hear about the mosque that was raided in Germany? The nine year old girl that came forward to her German teacher and produced a copy of "Jihad 101" that the kids at the mosque were being taught?

But I thought we had already established that there are, in fact, extremist factions within Islam, which are cause for grave concern, so I'm not sure what your point is.

They do not respect you, they do not respect your secular culture.

Yeah, I've noticed that too. Oh, you were talking about the Muslims. Right.

They will not assimilate, and they will not stop with their plans.

Well, I'll let you know when I'm decapitated, so you'll know when it's time to hide under your bed.

A good Christian will admit their shortcomings, their eccentricities, their failures,

The question is, will you?


Also, I'd like to apologize to browneyedgirl for straying so far from the original topic. Kinda' went off on a tangent there.

No need to apologize On the contrary I think its finally time we got back to deep discussions like this on this forum. Even good clean arguments like this! No name calling&no personal bashing, just giving&taking of opinions, facts, etc.
I think this kind of discussion can relieve tension&get our thoughts out into the open. Just keep it civil&good-natured and arguing is fine!

I hate it whenever people use stereotypes to sarcasticly bash someone personally in a discussion, but that has not happened here in this topic--hopefully that is a thing long past in this forum!

I will maybe add some more fonder later.

Carry on!

Well this kind of debates are never really helpful in the sense where both parties come together. They just kind get pisst off at each other and nothing comes of it. Though I quite enjoy them!

stratoplayer wrote:Well this kind of debates are never really helpful in the sense where both parties come together. They just kind get pisst off at each other and nothing comes of it. Though I quite enjoy them!

Agreed.

IF there was no God, it would be fair to argue about it...no point in arguing over if's

I don't know if I believe there's a God or not. I'm in a confusing stage of my life.

One thing that saddens me however, is that Jesus was obviously an extraordinary individual, who had some truly revolutionary concepts. Unfortunately, most 'Christians' totally overlook what he actually said, and listen to what the Church tells them.

If it were proved there was no God (which will never, ever happen), that wouldn't take away from what Jesus did for the world, in my opinion.

I really would've liked to meet the guy.

@NeonVomit, if the Bible is true you will get your chance. We all will.

browneyedgirl wrote:@NeonVomit, if the Bible is true you will get your chance. We all will.

I think most of it is rubbish though.

Miditek, why do you hate Europe so much?

Is this why?

Have you read the EU charter? It is an aboslute masterpiece of secular humanism, with absolutely no reference whatsoever to God. I'd almost thought it had been authored by Wiccans and Pagans, which it probably was anyway. Perhaps not Soviet style compulsory atheism, but it is certainly and strongly implied.

As an EU citizen, I would have expected nothing less than a masterpiece of secular humanism as the charter. Religion has absolutely no place in politics, at all whatsoever and we have the French Revolution to thank for that. (Perhaps that helps to fuel your hatred of everything French? France, the birthplace of secularism...) It is a personal decision one makes for themselves and therefore total religious freedom is declared in the charter. The freedom to believe and to not believe.

There are quite a few European troops in Afghanistan now, last I checked (including *gasp!* some from France!) EU troops number around the 15,000 area with more on the way. I'd think they're doing a lot more for The War On Terror there than anyone could do in Iraq. Perhaps no other EU countries wanted anything to do with Iraq because they realised from the start it would end up as a farce? Whereas in Afghanistan something can actually be done... I guess that whole airliner-bombing-plot-being-foiled thing a month ago is also a sign of no one here taking terrorism seriously.

Anyway, food for thought. Europe is a lovely place, you really should come visit sometime. Art, culture, gorgeous scenery, fantastic beaches, interesting people, fascinating local customs, outstanding food, fabulous wine, great music and a long, complex history make this continent a place everyone should visit sometime. [/EU tourism commissioner]

I don't think miditek is saying Europe is a culturally, or socially bad place. I think most of us agree that Europe is the fun&sun&swinging place of the world. Great food, great landmarks, fun-loving friendly folks who like to have a great time! He is just discussing the political&religious tone there which I agree is like the USA--far from perfect. And for all we know, he may have been there--many times. If not, so what?

But, lets get back to the topic at hand. I think if it was proven there was no God, after I got over the disappointment I think I would host the wildest, funnest, longest orgy that ever hit the scene since Roman times You know---like those live orgies they show on porn that really go on in SA, Europe, Scandinavia, and USA! Nobody in the world are angels after all--God or not!

I whole-heartedly agree with NeonVomit. The teachings of Jesus, to be kind and loving to one another, to be humble and recognise one's own imperfections and to be charitable, does not require the existence of a God to be true.
The Buddhists have a notion that everyone, regardless of religion, are climbing the same mountain. We're only using different paths. But ultimately, we will all meet at the point. It really stuck with me when I first heard of it ten or so years ago.
Because to me, that is what religion ought to be. Not flying planes into buildings, or beheading people, or telling people who they can or cannot marry, or killing people who perform medical procedures or protesting the teachings of fact solely because it contradicts your literal interpretation of a passage of text that was written thousands of years ago. That's bigotry disguised as religion.

As for miditek's "anti-European" rants, it's on par with some "anti-American" sentiments. Just run-of-the-mill "my country is better than your country" rants, which we all are guilty of doing, to one degree or another. Which isn't to say there aren't legitimate criticims of both Europe and the US, of course.
I've made the point before, but it deserves to be made again, but critiquing the policies of a government, is not, I repeat NOT, being anti-anything. If I criticize the Bush administration, it's not anti-American at all, and likewise when I criticize Chirac, it's not anti-French. I would sincerely hope most people understand that. Not that anyone in this topic has said otherwise, but it seems to come up from time to time.


Not to rag too much on miditek, but I'm somewhat disturbed by some of the things he has written in this topic. I hesitated for a couple of days as to whether I should post this, but I feel this really needs to be addressed. I try to avoid singling people out, and hijacking topics for that matter, but I feel compelled to make an exception.
Take a look at some of these comments he's made in this topic:

My knowledge of the French language is mercifully limited

It is an aboslute masterpiece of secular humanism, with absolutely no reference whatsoever to God. I'd almost thought it had been authored by Wiccans and Pagans, which it probably was anyway. Perhaps not Soviet style compulsory atheism, but it is certainly and strongly implied

Welcome to the caliphates of Franco Arabia and Londonistan.

Why tell only Christians that God does not exist? Why not buy a billboard and declare God's passing at the neighborhood mosque? Jesus was a fairy tale, and Mohammed was not?

Of course, I am sure that a minority of Muslims are productive citizens, but I would daresay that they are the exception, rather than the rule.

If they don't like it, they should leave and go back to the desert from whence they came.

Everyone read those carefully, that last comment in particular. I think these comments are very telling of where miditek is coming from. He doesn't understand the basic difference between atheism and Paganism. A majority of Muslims in his world view are not productive citizens, and if they bitch too much, they ought to move back to the desert (as if they all came from the desert?). He prides himself in being unable to speak a foreign language. Unless I'm completely misreading what he's saying, he seems unaware that Jesus figures prominently in the Muslim faith. So he criticises Islam, while seemingly only having a partial, at best, understanding of what it is he's criticising.

I find this all to be very troublesome. The quotes above are all very bigoted statements. What he's left with is hiding behind the fact that other forms of bigotry, such as anti-Semitism, also very much exist in our society today. The fact that there are more extreme, violent, forms of it does not, however, in any way excuse his own bigotry. It always starts with "only" words.
Some forms of bigotry are more vile than others, but none of it should be a given a free pass. We had a problem with a nazi troll in this very forum (and no moderators!), and just about everyone in this forum went to great lengths to counter the bullshit coming out of that fucktard's mouth...or keyboard. I don't mean to suggest that any of miditek's writings are on par with that troll, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm merely pointing out that he's not being singled out for his particular brand of bigotry. I don't like any of it. I don't like anti-semitism. I don't like homophobia. I don't like racism. I don't like anti-christianity. And, thus, I don't like miditek's statements either.
Far be it from me to suggest that miditek isn't entitled to his beliefs. But let's call a spade a spade, and call them what they are. Bigotry.
Let's get one thing absolutely clear here. This is not about censorship or "political correctness". This is merely to ensure that bigotted and misinformed statements don't remain uncountered.

The fact that there are very disturbing forces within Islam that ought to be dealt with doesn't make his comments any more excusable. If I were to make comments on Christianity as a whole, based only on the actions of a few Catholic priests, I would be called an anti-Christian bigot, and rightly so. On the contrary, however, if I were to condemn those priest who had committed those horrible acts and demanded that the Catholic church would do more to cleanse itself of such priests, that would be a legitimate argument. And if I were to say that the Muslim community must do more to condemn and counter terrorism, that would be a very legitimate point as well. And if I were to say that the widespread protests that broke out following the cartoon controversy is a threat to free speech and cause for grave concern, that would certainly be a fair argument.
But painting broad strokes and condemning an entire religion as miditek has done is pure bigotry. It has no foundation in reality, only in fear.
So blinded by fear is he that he would be willing to declare war on 1.4 billion Muslims, including moderates and perfectly ordinary American and European citizens alike, hoping that all of that evil that has gotten him so frightened is eradicated.

Which is not to say his fear isn't perfectly understandable. I do understand. In the early 90s, a few years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a wacko Russian politician named Vladimir Zhirinovsky was receiving a lot of media coverage as a potential future presidential candidate, and he scared the living daylights out of me. He made statements to the effect that Germany ought to be nuked and Finland re-annexed, along with other delightful statements. My worst nightmare at the time was him seizing power of Russia and starting World War III. Of course, I was about ten years old at the time, but the central point remains.

Letting yourself be controlled by fear and hysteria is doing an enormous disservice to winning the actual war on terror and defeating Islamic extremism. We're supposed to be fighting the ideologies of hate and intolerance, not implementing watered-down parodies of them. That is not the way to honour the memory of those 3000 of us who were murdered five years ago.

Yes, Nordic, but not all posters in this forum are as polite as you. There have been people from many countries, even USA, who have been guilty of personal attacks&sarcasm for people's "ancestery"(calling people inbred, etc, saying "stupid Americans" thats NOT criticizing policy)in to regard of religion&politics. IMO, if people want to sling shit like that at others, there are political&religious forums out there that do allow that sort of thing,so they should join those if they enjoy that kind of mud-slinging!

I think in the final analysis, though, I don't think it will be proven one way or another if God does or does not exist. This is one of the mysteries of mankind that is not meant to be solved, like where the Ark of the Covenant is, or where does our soul go after death.

Man, I wish I had more time to read these posts

You said it... I've been ignoring the whole site for a while again..

@Neorave, I think your opinion would be appreiciated on this topic!
Balance, is the key I think!

browneyedgirl wrote:@Neorave, I think your opinion would be appreiciated on this topic!
Balance, is the key I think!

Yeah, I've been hoping to get into this thread, but I don't have the time to read all these long posts. Possibly tonight, I'll get back to you guys.

NordicStorm wrote:As for miditek's "anti-European" rants, it's on par with some "anti-American" sentiments. Just run-of-the-mill "my country is better than your country" rants, which we all are guilty of doing, to one degree or another. Which isn't to say there aren't legitimate criticims of both Europe and the US, of course.

"Whistling through the graveyard" is apparently a favorite pastime in many parts of the world these days, particularly in Europe. Stalin did this even as he signed off on the Nazi-Soviet pact, and only to be engaged in ferocious combat not long thereafter.

NordicStorm wrote:I've made the point before, but it deserves to be made again, but critiquing the policies of a government, is not, I repeat NOT, being anti-anything. If I criticize the Bush administration, it's not anti-American at all, and likewise when I criticize Chirac, it's not anti-French. I would sincerely hope most people understand that. Not that anyone in this topic has said otherwise, but it seems to come up from time to time.

Perfect. Now that we have the standard and obligatory diversity and sensitivity- God forbid that anyone on planet Earth should ever become disgruntled by someone else's opinion- disclaimers out of the way, we can now at last, proceed.

NordicStorm wrote:Not to rag too much on miditek, but I'm somewhat disturbed by some of the things he has written in this topic. I hesitated for a couple of days as to whether I should post this, but I feel this really needs to be addressed. I try to avoid singling people out, and hijacking topics for that matter, but I feel compelled to make an exception.
Take a look at some of these comments he's made in this topic:

My knowledge of the French language is mercifully limited

That was self-deprecating humor, wrapped in a thin cloak of irony. My initial invocation of the word oui was simple sarcasm. You didn't pick up on it, I guess.

NordicStorm wrote:He doesn't understand the basic difference between atheism and Paganism.

It is unfortunate, perhaps, that e-mail does not always translate or provide an effective way to express the tone of sarcasm in one's voice. This was not intended (as your assessment would seem to indicate)- as some sort of academic "pole vaulting", but was simple satire of the EU, as well as their atheist and Pagan allies. I'm well aware of atheists non-beliefs, as well as Pagan leanings. Moreover, public acknowledgement of God certainly does not constitute a theocracy.

NordicStorm wrote:A majority of Muslims in his world view are not productive citizens, and if they bitch too much, they ought to move back to the desert (as if they all came from the desert?).

When Muslims start demanding that their host countries change to their whims, then yes, it is way past time to send them home. The desert thing basically is a generality- how about I include the artillery craters and bombed out tenaments in Bosnia?

NordicStorm wrote:He prides himself in being unable to speak a foreign language.

Speaking French is something I would never have pride in. You assume too much about my having no knowledge of foreign languages though. Spanish was an elective that I took in school.

NordicStorm wrote:Unless I'm completely misreading what he's saying, he seems unaware that Jesus figures prominently in the Muslim faith. So he criticises Islam, while seemingly only having a partial, at best, understanding of what it is he's criticising.

Muslim Jesus: Returns with Mohammed at Armageddon to destroy the Antichrist, break the cross, tosses all Jews and Christians into hell, marries, has a family, and then dies of old age.

Christian Jesus: Returns at Armageddon, destroys the Antichrist, judges mankind, rewards all believers with eternal life, sets up the Millennial Kingdom, reigns at God's right hand for eternity.

Really, we are talking about two dramatically different concepts here. The Muslim Jesus is not accorded the status of Deity, unlike the Christian version. That is a significant theological difference. In fact, it is "replacement theology" from a Christian viewpoint. The bulk of what is written about Jesus in the Koran directly contradicts what Jesus Himself claimed to be, which is the Son of God.

Muslims also believe that the Old and New Testaments of the Bible came from God, but again, the Koran is intended to function as a vehicle of replacement theology because the former testaments were somehow 'corrupted'. So which is it? Old and New are legitimate scripture or corrupt and misguided epistles and allegories?

Christ Himself claimed to be the Son of God, so does this suggest that he was a liar or lunatic? or Lord? This was one of the great arguements presented by the late theologian and author, C.S. Lewis- who also happened to be the author of the Chronicles of Narnia.

How many times have you heard about Jesus in any sermon at the local Mosque, or even in polite conversation among your Muslim friends? If you were to hear anything at all, you would hear that the concept of the Holy Trinity is polythesim, and that all adherents thereof are infidels.

Sura 4 157 claims that the crucifixion itself was a falsehood or a lie; yet you will see many moderm imams and clerics criticizing the Jews for killing Christ. Well, which part of that story is true? Did the Jews kill Christ, or did they not?

My Muslim friends often say, "Sorry, no offense man, but this business about Jesus being able to forgive your sins is complete bullshit." I then hear about how he was an important prophet, yet they cannot recite anything important that He was supposed to have said.

If casting doubt on my own theological and eschatological knowledge and experience provides you with some sense of moral or intellectual superiority, than by all means, please do so. You are really starting to sound a lot like Baghdad Bob.

How much do you know about Islam? How many Muslims do you know and interact with on a daily basis? When does Ramandan start? When does it end? What must a good Muslim do during this period? How frequently do the Muslims you know discuss Jesus? Just what is this Sunni vs. Shiite thing all about? What is a Dhmmmi?

What are the five pillars of Islam? Who is the Mahdi? Read the Koran lately? How many times a day must a Muslim pray? What day of the week is the Muslim Sabbath? What determines if food complies with Halal guidelines?

NordicStorm wrote:I find this all to be very troublesome. The quotes above are all very bigoted statements. What he's left with is hiding behind the fact that other forms of bigotry, such as anti-Semitism, also very much exist in our society today. The fact that there are more extreme, violent, forms of it does not, however, in any way excuse his own bigotry. It always starts with "only" words.

It's great that the world has you to assist in policing the thoughts of others, and not to mention to tell other people how or what to think about the opinions or comments of others. Great. Everyone now knows you successfully passed your PC-101 course at university.

But I thought I was cowering under the bed with fear; and now I'm ready to launch the Fourth Reich, or at least, the Second Crusade? I'll call former Lord Mayor Manfred Rommel in Stuttgart tonight to check on the progress of our battle plans for tomorrow's world domination.

NordicStorm wrote:Some forms of bigotry are more vile than others, but none of it should be a given a free pass. We had a problem with a nazi troll in this very forum (and no moderators!), and just about everyone in this forum went to great lengths to counter the bullshit coming out of that fucktard's mouth...or keyboard.

Nazi trolls certainly weren't the only problem that this forum was having at that time, if you'll recall.

NordicStorm wrote:I don't mean to suggest that any of miditek's writings are on par with that troll, that's not what I'm saying at all.I'm merely pointing out that he's not being singled out for his particular brand of bigotry.

Nothing like stepping forward and slaying the fascist dragon, as it were! For your efforts, you are hereby awarded with an honorary Pour le Mérite. I'd have put you in for the Iron Cross- with Oak Leaf Clusters and Diamonds, but then again, that wouldn't have been politically correct.

NordicStorm wrote:I don't like any of it. I don't like anti-semitism. I don't like homophobia. I don't like racism. I don't like anti-christianity. And, thus, I don't like miditek's statements either.

There's so much evil in the world- that we don't even have time to worry about what's going on in the other hot spots- such as the Congo or Ivory Coast. Darfur- no, not important, at least not right now; we first must stop homophobia!

NordicStorm wrote:Far be it from me to suggest that miditek isn't entitled to his beliefs.

No, not at all. I wouldn't accuse you of that, although there are actually some other people that need no introduction that do come to mind, and would have no problem with that idea.

NordicStorm wrote:But let's call a spade a spade, and call them what they are. Bigotry.Let's get one thing absolutely clear here. This is not about censorship or "political correctness". This is merely to ensure that bigotted and misinformed statements don't remain uncountered.

Thank you, St. Nord, I am sure that world is a much better place now. Besides, if you were to try and counter every bigoted statement that had ever been made on this forum, you would be typing well into your retirement years.

NordicStorm wrote:The fact that there are very disturbing forces within Islam that ought to be dealt with doesn't make his comments any more excusable.

So essentially, my alleged bigotry is worse than that of a radical jihadist. Morality is so much clearer when it gets routed through your filter. al-Jazeera must have placed a satellite dish too close to your house, and its radiation is affecting what you type!

Taking Tehran and Damascus to task for their activities and holding them accountable now is apparently is a far worse notion than Israel being blown off of the map.

NordicStorm wrote:If I were to make comments on Christianity as a whole, based only on the actions of a few Catholic priests, I would be called an anti-Christian bigot, and rightly so.

For all the talk of the horrors of bigotry, I'd love to see your government nominate a foreign minister of African descent, or perhaps a defense minister of Asian extraction.

NordicStorm wrote:On the contrary, however, if I were to condemn those priest who had committed those horrible acts and demanded that the Catholic church would do more to cleanse itself of such priests, that would be a legitimate argument.

Thanks for setting the parameters of polite conversation, as well as the reminder and tips on what it takes to be PC. I'm sure that all of the altar boys that have been abused are jumping for joy.

NordicStorm wrote:And if I were to say that the Muslim community must do more to condemn and counter terrorism, that would be a very legitimate point as well. And if I were to say that the widespread protests that broke out following the cartoon controversy is a threat to free speech and cause for grave concern, that would certainly be a fair argument.

While you are waxing philosophical about fairness, there are at least a thousand or more imams at this very moment that are reminding the faithful of Muhammed's words; "Negotiate with your enemy until you are strong enough to destroy him."

NordicStorm wrote:But painting broad strokes and condemning an entire religion as miditek has done is pure bigotry. It has no foundation in reality, only in fear.

Sounds like an al-Qaida recruting infommercial, if there ever was one. The only real fear that I have is running out of ammunition when the shit finally does hit the fan over here. Should I standardize on 5.56mm NATO, 7.62mm Warsaw Pact, or 5.45mm Warsaw Pact? Decisions, decisions.

NordicStorm wrote:So blinded by fear is he that he would be willing to declare war on 1.4 billion Muslims, including moderates and perfectly ordinary American and European citizens alike, hoping that all of that evil that has gotten him so frightened is eradicated.

Again, holding Tehran and Damascus accountable now does not constitute a declaration of war against 1.4 billion Muslims. The imams have already declared that the war on terror is a war on Islam itself. My Muslim friends have also said; "what is this war on terror? That's a stupid assessment. This is a religious war, anyway. How can Bush be so stupid as to label it otherwise?"

Christians also live with the belief of the ultimate victory of good over evil in the end. That is something that a Christian looks forward to. If I were afraid of Muslims in general, I certainly would not work with them (as well as have others for clients) on an almost daily basis. I would not answer their questions about Christianity, either. I would not steeply discount my normal fees to my Muslim business partners, either.

Moreover, we are a nation of armed citizenry. The state issues concealed weapon permits to any citizen that passes a background check and weapons qualification test. Why would someone hide under the bed when there's an AK-47 there?

NordicStorm wrote:Which is not to say his fear isn't perfectly understandable. I do understand. In the early 90s, a few years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, a wacko Russian politician named Vladimir Zhirinovsky was receiving a lot of media coverage as a potential future presidential candidate, and he scared the living daylights out of me.

"Mad Vlad" was, politically speaking, a buffoon. Although I found some of his sentiments to be amusing, (in the fact that they got press coverage at all in Russia), I never did take him seriously, as he never was more than the equivalent of David Duke in the United States, and had no mass support.

NordicStorm wrote:He made statements to the effect that Germany ought to be nuked and Finland re-annexed, along with other delightful statements. My worst nightmare at the time was him seizing power of Russia and starting World War III. Of course, I was about ten years old at the time, but the central point remains.

German-Russian animosity goes back a long way, and his comments must be put into the proper context- in short, the guy was an attention whore. Regarding Finland, it may not have won the Winter War against Russia per se, but it's also safe to assume that the conflict didn't exactly help bolster the martial image of the Red Army either. The Finns humiliated Stalin in the war's early stages. It was enough to convince Hitler that the Red Army was a paper tiger. History has shown that the Russians were anything but.

NordicStorm wrote:Letting yourself be controlled by fear and hysteria is doing an enormous disservice to winning the actual war on terror and defeating Islamic extremism. We're supposed to be fighting the ideologies of hate and intolerance, not implementing watered-down parodies of them. That is not the way to honour the memory of those 3000 of us who were murdered five years ago.

I'm glad to see that someone knows what's controlling my life. Post some comments critical about radical Islam? Now I'm a bigot. Too many Euros think that they have a monopoly on PC speech- to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, "goodness gracious me! I guess they've never heard of Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid!"