Why do/don't you believe in a higher power? (Any HP)

[Hanafuridake]

So did the daughter of Jephthah and Issac. What's your point?

It's not murder, it's sacrifice.

Killing a defenseless human being is murder.

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

So did the daughter of Jephthah and Issac. What's your point?

It's not murder, it's sacrifice.

Either way, it's filicide.
And anyway, I thought God disapproved of human sacrifices?

[Tarsonis]

It's not murder, it's sacrifice.

Either way, it's filicide.
And anyway, I thought God disapproved of human sacrifices?

I expanded on it in an edit. God disapproves of humans sacrificing humans. I.e Aztec style. Christ willingly sacrificed himself, laying his own life down for the sake of all humanity. That's a big difference.

[Tarsonis]

It's not murder, it's sacrifice.

Killing a defenseless human being is murder.

A human being willingly dying for others however, is not. Humans murdered Christ, tis true, but God did not.

[Hanafuridake]

Killing a defenseless human being is murder.

A human being willingly dying for others however, is not. Humans murdered Christ, tis true, but God did not.

No, it's suicide, and in most jurisdictions, assisting suicide is at best manslaughter. Human beings wouldn't have murdered Jesus if God hadn't designed it so.

[Tarsonis]

A human being willingly dying for others however, is not. Humans murdered Christ, tis true, but God did not.

No, it's suicide, and in most jurisdictions, assisting suicide is at best manslaughter. Human beings wouldn't have murdered Jesus if God hadn't designed it so.

No it isn't. A man diving on a grenade to save others is not committing suicide. Christ giving up his own life to save the entire world is not committing suicide. No reasonable person would equate the two under any moral or legal framework.

[New Legland]

There's not a shred of evidence that supports the existence of any sort of theistic or deistic power. I'll take, reason, evidence and skepticism to shape my world, thanks.

What about the miracles of Christ, which were witnessed by thousands and recorded by dozens? Are eye-witness accounts of supernatural powers 'not a shred of evidence?'

Not when shit like this happens.

[Celritannia]

Either way, it's filicide.
And anyway, I thought God disapproved of human sacrifices?

I expanded on it in an edit. God disapproves of humans sacrificing humans. I.e Aztec style. Christ willingly sacrificed himself, laying his own life down for the sake of all humanity. That's a big difference.

It's a good job the Aztecs never believed in the Abrahamic God then.

I mean, compared to flooding the entire world or killing every first born Egyptian, that is also sacrifice.

[Celritannia]

No, it's suicide, and in most jurisdictions, assisting suicide is at best manslaughter. Human beings wouldn't have murdered Jesus if God hadn't designed it so.

No it isn't. A man diving on a grenade to save others is not committing suicide. Christ giving up his own life to save the entire world is not committing suicide. No reasonable person would equate the two under any moral or legal framework.

John Coffey wished to die in the Green Mile, shall we worship him now?

Also, not everyone in the world knew who Christ was, only in the Eastern Mediterranean. No-one else really cared.

[Celritannia]

And yet, compared to that, we see the Baghdad house of Wisdom which was able to save a lot of the great works of Greek philosophers when the Ottoman Empire took over the rest of the Eastern roman Empire.

But remember, the Dark Ages paved the way for further superstition and the downgrading of a once great culture when local warlords, through the authority of the Church, were able to kill any who did not follow the Abrahamic God.

Your knowledge of history is abysmal, suffice to say.

The House of Wisdom began somewhere in the 7-8th centuries, under the Abbasid Caliphate which conquered large parts of the Roman Middle East, existing from 750-1258 AD. They didn't conquer the entirety of the Eastern Roman Empire, which existed and daresay thrived for several centuries, only to begin degrading due to Turkic conquerors, the Latin crusaders and Ottomans, culminating in the fall of Constantinople in 1453. So comparing Arabic scholars and Christian scholars is ridiculous. The Christian monks saved what they could after a complete collapse of the Western Roman Empire. For the time of the library's existence, the Abbasid Caliphate rubbed shoulders with the Byzantines. As you can see, the Eastern Roman Empire outlived the House of Wisdom and Abbasid Caliphate.

You can only argue that if you hold some notion that Roman culture was vastly superior to Western Christian culture, which I find ridiculous. Any study of medieval history will uncover a vibrant and fascinating culture, with beautiful art, architecture, literature and conventions. Yes it was violent, unjust and hierarchical but no more so than Rome.

Considering I typed that when I was extremely drunk, yes I am rather embarrassed by it.

But I stand by that Christianity, and the increase in superstitions helped fuel the dark ages.
Yes, there may have been colour etc, but the great artisans, public works, constructions, and engineering of the classical period were long gone.
You can see the decline in work from the great sculpture and mosaics of the Roman Republic and Empire, and the almost cartoonist stick-figure like style of the Bayeux tapestry.
Even the knowledge of medicine in the classical period was more understood. History of medicine in the dark ages was just an aspect of the devil in someway or another.

[Celritannia]

It's not murder, it's sacrifice.

Killing a defenseless human being is murder.

Would it not technically be an execution by the Roman State? After all, to the Roman Empire, he would be considered a nuisance, or so far as to call him a terrorist in the modern era.

Lets look at this here.

Criminal or martyr?

This outburst enraged religious leaders and threatened to destroy the fragile peace imposed by Rome. Jesus was arrested on a charge of treason and was crucified, a common form of execution for condemned criminals. To the Romans, Jesus was a troublemaker who had got his just desserts.

The Romans did what they thought was best to maintain peace within the borders of Judea. And Jesus, in their eyes, steered up trouble with other religious leaders and politicians.

Heck, the British Raj called Gandhi a terrorist.

Trouble in Jerusalem

In around 33 AD, Jesus traveled to the city of Jerusalem for the Jewish ceremony of Passover. There were thousands of pilgrims from around the world and the temple provided services for them to change their foreign money or buy animals to sacrifice.

Jesus was furious. He believed that trade like this corrupted the holy site. According to the Gospel of St John, he wrecked the stalls of the moneylenders and drove them all out of the temple.

Even this bit, it shows Jesus was committing vandalism and terrorising local merchants because he hated trade being committed on a holy site (sounds very SJW doesn't it?).
Or perhaps Jesus was a socialist disrupting the ideals of capitalism of the day.

[Tarsonis]

No it isn't. A man diving on a grenade to save others is not committing suicide. Christ giving up his own life to save the entire world is not committing suicide. No reasonable person would equate the two under any moral or legal framework.

John Coffey wished to die in the Green Mile, shall we worship him now?

Did he die so others could live? No he died because he was tired.

Also, not everyone in the world knew who Christ was, only in the Eastern Mediterranean. No-one else really cared.

Irrelevant point is irrelevant.

[Tarsonis]

I expanded on it in an edit. God disapproves of humans sacrificing humans. I.e Aztec style. Christ willingly sacrificed himself, laying his own life down for the sake of all humanity. That's a big difference.

It's a good job the Aztecs never believed in the Abrahamic God then.

I mean, compared to flooding the entire world or killing every first born Egyptian, that is also sacrifice.

Nope, that's wrath.

[Celritannia]

John Coffey wished to die in the Green Mile, shall we worship him now?

Did he die so others could live? No he died because he was tired.

Also, not everyone in the world knew who Christ was, only in the Eastern Mediterranean. No-one else really cared.

Irrelevant point is irrelevant.

Oh, praise Thor, here we go again.

I was joking, considering he is a fictional character *cough cough*.

It is relevant, because you are basing what your religion states on another culture that never heard of your God.

[Celritannia]

It's a good job the Aztecs never believed in the Abrahamic God then.

I mean, compared to flooding the entire world or killing every first born Egyptian, that is also sacrifice.

Nope, that's wrath.

It's genocide.
(although, neither never happened, so we are A-Okay).
And I thought God hated the 7 deadly sins, seems like he/she/them does not seem to care of his/her/their own lectures.

[Coruscanti Nations]

So did the daughter of Jephthah and Issac. What's your point?

Probably that he's right and everyone else is wrong because *mumble mumble*. That's usually what Korhal's point is, anyway.

Look at who’s subtly calling someone else dumb.

Someone summoning a shield to protect others and dying in the process is different from someone who was sacrificed on top of an Aztec temple.

Nope, that's wrath.

It's genocide.
(although, neither never happened, so we are A-Okay).
And I thought God hated the 7 deadly sins, seems like he/she/them does not seem to care of his/her/their own lectures.

Righteous wrath/indignation over sin is different from being angry because your sister wouldn’t let you borrow her doll.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Considering I typed that when I was extremely drunk, yes I am rather embarrassed by it.

But I stand by that Christianity, and the increase in superstitions helped fuel the dark ages.
Yes, there may have been colour etc, but the great artisans, public works, constructions, and engineering of the classical period were long gone.
You can see the decline in work from the great sculpture and mosaics of the Roman Republic and Empire, and the almost cartoonist stick-figure like style of the Bayeux tapestry.
Even the knowledge of medicine in the classical period was more understood. History of medicine in the dark ages was just an aspect of the devil in someway or another.

Fair enough.

As I've said before, patently ridiculous. Christianity did not fuel the dark ages, it must be said again that the "dark ages" is a questionable term to describe the period, the influx of barbarian & pagan tribes into Western Europe did. Christianity saved what Roman civilisation it could, and ultimately helped civilise the Germanic and Celtic tribes. And if you think constructions were gone, I recommend you look at early medieval Cathedrals and Churches, up to the grand Cathedrals of later times (11-15th centuries). The problem with this argument is that it is inherently subjective. As much as I respect Roman art, I personally adore the beautiful insular art of the 7-10th centuries. Even the brooches and clasps of the Germanic tribes during the Migration era are beautiful, and they weren't necessarily made by Christians.

Too simplistic. Medicine back then was primitive by our standards, and mixed Christian spirituality with Pagan superstition. But medieval medicine also involved Roman ideas and the use of healing herbs. Monasteries and Christian hospitals became centers of healing throughout most of medieval times.

My point is that its wrong to blame the "dark ages" on Christianity, which in my opinion saved Europe instead.

[Celritannia]

Probably that he's right and everyone else is wrong because *mumble mumble*. That's usually what Korhal's point is, anyway.

Look at who’s subtly calling someone else dumb.

Someone summoning a shield to protect others and dying in the process is different from someone who was sacrificed on top of an Aztec temple.

It's genocide.
(although, neither never happened, so we are A-Okay).
And I thought God hated the 7 deadly sins, seems like he/she/them does not seem to care of his/her/their own lectures.

Righteous wrath/indignation over sin is different from being angry because your sister wouldn’t let you borrow her doll.

No wrath is righteous.

[Auze]

Your knowledge of history is abysmal, suffice to say.

The House of Wisdom began somewhere in the 7-8th centuries, under the Abbasid Caliphate which conquered large parts of the Roman Middle East, existing from 750-1258 AD. They didn't conquer the entirety of the Eastern Roman Empire, which existed and daresay thrived for several centuries, only to begin degrading due to Turkic conquerors, the Latin crusaders and Ottomans, culminating in the fall of Constantinople in 1453. So comparing Arabic scholars and Christian scholars is ridiculous. The Christian monks saved what they could after a complete collapse of the Western Roman Empire. For the time of the library's existence, the Abbasid Caliphate rubbed shoulders with the Byzantines. As you can see, the Eastern Roman Empire outlived the House of Wisdom and Abbasid Caliphate.

You can only argue that if you hold some notion that Roman culture was vastly superior to Western Christian culture, which I find ridiculous. Any study of medieval history will uncover a vibrant and fascinating culture, with beautiful art, architecture, literature and conventions. Yes it was violent, unjust and hierarchical but no more so than Rome.

Considering I typed that when I was extremely drunk, yes I am rather embarrassed by it.

But I stand by that Christianity, and the increase in superstitions helped fuel the dark ages.
Yes, there may have been colour etc, but the great artisans, public works, constructions, and engineering of the classical period were long gone.
You can see the decline in work from the great sculpture and mosaics of the Roman Republic and Empire, and the almost cartoonist stick-figure like style of the Bayeux tapestry.

If anything, Christianity was what prevented the dark ages from being worse. And besides, the decline was mostly from war and infighting leaving not much time to build things. The Romano-British collapsed to the point they were worse off than before the Romans. The society was just too interdependent after 3 centuries, when many of the farming and shipping regions such as Carthage fell to invaders, millions starve of died from other causes. Besides, much of the abilities in art and architecture remained known in the Byzantine Empire, after all, the Hagia Sophia easily matches many of the great Roman buildings.

[Thermodolia]

Since I haven't and never will use prostitutes then methinks that is unlikely.

Regardless, salty God didn’t give whatever you wanted.

It’s kinda hard to be salty at something you don’t believe in/exists

[Beggnig]

What is it with atheists and completely forgetting that there was an entire Christian Roman Empire in the East with perfectly good and scientifically advanced society this whole "Dark Age" time?
The Eastern Romans had no Dark Ages, yet they were about as Christian as you can get.
Edit: Missed out some words.

[Beggnig]

Look at who’s subtly calling someone else dumb.

Someone summoning a shield to protect others and dying in the process is different from someone who was sacrificed on top of an Aztec temple.


Righteous wrath/indignation over sin is different from being angry because your sister wouldn’t let you borrow her doll.

No wrath is righteous.

By what objective standard do you determine that?

[Coruscanti Nations]

Look at who’s subtly calling someone else dumb.

Someone summoning a shield to protect others and dying in the process is different from someone who was sacrificed on top of an Aztec temple.


Righteous wrath/indignation over sin is different from being angry because your sister wouldn’t let you borrow her doll.

No wrath is righteous.

If I became outraged at someone sending Jews to Auschwitz, that is righteous.

[Coruscanti Nations]

Your knowledge of history is abysmal, suffice to say.

The House of Wisdom began somewhere in the 7-8th centuries, under the Abbasid Caliphate which conquered large parts of the Roman Middle East, existing from 750-1258 AD. They didn't conquer the entirety of the Eastern Roman Empire, which existed and daresay thrived for several centuries, only to begin degrading due to Turkic conquerors, the Latin crusaders and Ottomans, culminating in the fall of Constantinople in 1453. So comparing Arabic scholars and Christian scholars is ridiculous. The Christian monks saved what they could after a complete collapse of the Western Roman Empire. For the time of the library's existence, the Abbasid Caliphate rubbed shoulders with the Byzantines. As you can see, the Eastern Roman Empire outlived the House of Wisdom and Abbasid Caliphate.

You can only argue that if you hold some notion that Roman culture was vastly superior to Western Christian culture, which I find ridiculous. Any study of medieval history will uncover a vibrant and fascinating culture, with beautiful art, architecture, literature and conventions. Yes it was violent, unjust and hierarchical but no more so than Rome.

Considering I typed that when I was extremely drunk, yes I am rather embarrassed by it.

But I stand by that Christianity, and the increase in superstitions helped fuel the dark ages.
Yes, there may have been colour etc, but the great artisans, public works, constructions, and engineering of the classical period were long gone.
You can see the decline in work from the great sculpture and mosaics of the Roman Republic and Empire, and the almost cartoonist stick-figure like style of the Bayeux tapestry.
Even the knowledge of medicine in the classical period was more understood. History of medicine in the dark ages was just an aspect of the devil in someway or another.

*points at the Byzantine Empire and Armenia*

Blame the barbarian tribes, not Christianity.

[Celritannia]

No wrath is righteous.

If I became outraged at someone sending Jews to Auschwitz, that is righteous.

Yes, but the difference is, your not going to kill everyone, are you? You will allow the courts to sort it out.