David,
>>The perpetuation of myth, especially the myth that Christianity created democracy, needs challenging as it is a powerful weapon used by religious folk, accepted by some atheists, and is plainly wrong.<<
Christian fundamentalists (runner?) will also tell you what is “plainly wrong” without being able to look at the facts from another perspective. (Besides, I never heard anybody claiming that democracy, that formally originated in Ancient Greece, was “created by Christians”.)

>>It is the bad parts of Christianity that needs addressing, not necessarily Christians.<<
Agree, also that it is the bad parts of atheism that needs addressing, not necessarily atheists.

>>There have been good people throughout history despite religion. Most people are good.<<
Again agree, and that there have been good people also throughout recent history despite atheism.

George,

Ancient Greece first brought forth a very imperfect and basic idea of democracy but it is touted endlessly that we are a Christian nation, surely you have heard that. We are also a country that has respect for the democratic ideal. The assumption is that Christianity brought that about. By the way, this is hardly worth talking about.

Can you point out the bad parts of atheism and not the dictatorial ideologies that come in all shapes and forms for reasons which are not relevant today? If you are intending to go down the Hitler/Stalin road, then do it with someone who can’t think for themselves.

Atheism is the lack of having a god in one’s life. This is not an ideology and if you think it is, then again, speak with someone whose mind has been removed by others to suit an argument ad desperatum.

What are the bad parts of atheism? Can you spell them out thanks?

David

David,

Sorry, I did not want to enter into argument with you, but I apparently managed to. As to the questions you ask, I have answered them in detail many times, see e.g. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10176#165874 and the sequel.

I had to accept that my personal testimony was not acceptable to some atheists here, and neither was that of the thousands and more who suffered and perished on the hands of those who called themselves atheists; nevetheless, they testify … the same as others who suffered and perished throughout history on the hands of those who called themselves Christians.

Whether you or I think that the persecutors should not have called themselves atheists or Christians (or that they were actually acting not as atheists but as ideologists, not as Christians but as fanatics or what) respectively, is irrelevant.

So please leave it at that and accept that there is a variety of atheist views - interpretations of history, understandings of science, etc - as there is a variety of Christian views, and than one is allowed to prefer one over the other without having to enter into tit-for-tat arguments.

George,

Do you not notice that atheism today of the kind that has hit the popular mindset in the west has no ideological baggage with it and it is not a part of other ideological baggage?

That is why I asked, “What are the bad parts of atheism? Can you spell them out thanks?”

I honestly don’t expect you to answer but surely it is worth thinking about.

I also do not want to argue with you about this.

Peace

David

David,
>>That is why I asked, “What are the bad parts of atheism? Can you spell them out thanks?”<<
Atheism is not a a replacement for religion but rather the absence of traditional religion. If you want a replacement, perhaps secular humanism would be a name for it on the social level, or scientism on the personal level.

You cannot speak of “bad parts” of the absence of something, only of its bad or good effects on the “organism”, i.e. society as a whole.

One such effect in Europe would be the religious vacuum being gradually filled by Islam. Whether this replacement in Europe of Christianity by Islam, as a partner of secular humanism will last, and whether it is good or bad for the whole of society, only time will tell. I shall certainly not live to see the final outcome of this.

The Communist version of atheism, as a would-be viable replacement of Christianity, collapsed in 72 years. Probably even more so with this “ideology-free” version of atheism: We are talking about time spans that go beyond the life of one individual before one would be able to evaluate the aftereffects of attempts, successful or not, to suppress - or even eradicate - Christianity in the West.

So you see, in spite of not wanting to argue, I tried to answer your question.

George,

Of course atheism is not a replacement for religion and who is asking for one? Atheism is the lack of a god in one’s life. Which makes your statement about Islam filling a void a mistaken idea? Islam is on the increase not because of atheism or the lack of Christianity but migration and fecundity.

There is no evidence that atheism will increase Islam. All atheism will do is increase atheists. The increase of Islam in the west is also because a dying Christianity exists but still props up the idea of the supernatural. To Muslims and their children from countries of strict Islamic culture it bolsters the supernatural idea and is just seen as the wrong idea. If Australia was exclusively atheist, Islam would lose any effect real or imagined very quickly as there would be no support for its ideas.

I asked about the bad parts of atheism because it is an idea. Ideas can be bad or good. Afairyism is an idea. A Stupid idea but it is still an idea. It is an anti-idea and I would postulate that anyone who took their time to identify with such a name should possibly be wearing a tight white coat. It would be a bad effect on the person and possibly society.

Communism was not a replacement for Christianity, it was an ideology that offered but did not deliver that we could be a fairer society. It went pear shaped through lack of overall representativeness and not taking into account the benefits of a free market system.

It would be better not using words such as ‘eradicate’ or ‘suppress’ Christianity. People are choosing atheism and freethinking in ever growing numbers. If you could demonstrate where it is eradicating or suppressing Christianity - that would help.

David