Image123:
Go and look for them.

Coward

logicboy:

Coward

Busy body, grow up.

Have you ever heard of a christian apologist win a theological debate with a non-christian before? I haven't and i have seen many a debate. Chrustian apologetics always come out of such debates looking stupid no matter how much they try to defend their faith. And that's because they really don't have much ground and leg to stand on, thus making it easy to find them out. Like i said before, it is the cross they have to carry as defenders of the Christian faith.

Image123:
Lazy and ignorant analysis. Ever heard of christian apologists? Not everybody has the same inclinations and likes. That you know something does not necessarily mean you love to teach it, discuss it or talk about it, especially on a forum. There are very much more important things

^You need more exposure then.

Image123: ^You need more exposure then.

You need more exposure to the truth about your religion but you hide and block your ears

True that.

logicboy:


You need more exposure to the truth about your religion but you hide and block your ears

Why do you say that? I am not the one whose life is being lived within the 4 corners of an ancient scriptural book called the bible.

Image123: ^You need more exposure then.

I'm no religious believer but if I'm being honest, logicboy, a lot of your arguments are premised on flawed logic and you further aggravated this by a lot of factually incorrect postulations to support your points. You have a bit of a problem seperating deeds enacted in the name of religion and those perpetrated by religious folk for their own dark, sinister aims independent of religious belief. Trying to portray the World Wars or the evils of western colonialism as the product of religious bigotry is absurd. I'm a like minded believer but you often push your sentiments a little too far and that taints your credibility somewhat.

Obi1kenobi: I'm no religious believer but if I'm being honest, logicboy, a lot of your arguments are premised on flawed logic and you further aggravated this by a lot of factually incorrect postulations to support your points. You have a bit of a problem seperating deeds enacted in the name of religion and those perpetrated by religious folk for their own dark, sinister aims independent of religious belief. Trying to portray the World Wars or the evils of western colonialism as the product of religious bigotry is absurd. I'm a like minded believer but you often push your sentiments a little too far and that taints your credibility somewhat.

Wow, Mr. Self righteous,calm down.


First and foremost, I did not portray the world war 2 as a purely religious war. Soemeone made the claim that athiests have caused war and mentioned Hitler as an atheist. I mentioned that Hitler was a christian who exterminated Jews.


European enslavement of West Africa has deep roots in christianity and that's a fact. Slavery is what I focused on. Slevery is just one part of the colonialism.

So, please dont come and accuse me of nonsense

logicboy:


Wow, Mr. Self righteous,calm down.


First and foremost, I did not portray the world war 2 as a purely religious war. Soemeone made the claim that athiests have caused war and mentioned Hitler as an atheist. I mentioned that Hitler was a christian who exterminated Jews.


European enslavement of West Africa has deep roots in christianity and that's a fact. Slavery is what I focused on. Slevery is just one part of the colonialism.

So, please dont come and accuse me of nonsense

On this thread, you were the one trying to score points when portraying Hitler as an evil of religion. I'm taking your comments solely on face value. European colonization and enslavement of Africa had purely economic and political motivations and diddly-squat to do with religion which was just a means of mental enslavement and sedation of their new subjects. The fact some Christian orders offered tacit support doesn't mean religion had any real influence.

Obi1kenobi:

On this thread, you were the one trying to score points when portraying Hitler as an evil of religion. I'm taking your comments solely on face value. European colonization and enslavement of Africa had purely economic and political motivations and diddly-squat to do with religion which was just a means of mental enslavement and sedation of their new subjects. The fact some Christian orders offered tacit support doesn't mean religion had any real influence.

1) Read my first comment on this topic. I never mentioned hitler. Someone mentioned that hitler was an athiest and listed atheist leaders. I corrected him and put christian genociadal leaders

2) West AFrican slavery had a lot to do with slavery. You can choose to be ignorant of this fact. I will not waste time explaining again.


Here are my previous comments;

a) First comment with no mention of hitler;

logicboy: Would a world without religion be better?




As an atheist, this question is at the back of my head everyday. I look at the 3 least religious countries (Estonia, Denmark and sweden) and I find that they are countries with strong economies, freedom and a very very very literate population, which are in contrast to the 3 most religious countries, (Egypt, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka). http://dailyatheist..co.uk/2009/02/most-and-least-religious-countries-in.html

So please, I want to hear your differing opinions on this matter.


The good thing about this topic is that it can not be derailed because it can be debated from any angle, be it an atheist v muslim or christian v atheist or religious wars v communist wars etc.


Also think about[b]
-How would the world be if everyone was christian?
-How would the world be if everyone was muslim?
-How would the world be if everyone was atheist[/b]

b) Explanation of west african slavery and religion

logicboy:

You mention sound governance for one of the reason for wealth in Denmark. Denmark's secular governemnt is the reason for sound governance. Nigeria has oil, yet it is not prospering. Also, you cant have sound governance without separation of church and state.


A for religious wars;

European slavery was boosted by religion. Did they enslave fellow british and portuguese christians? No. Even pope Gregory ix put a canon for the enslavement for non christians. Also, churches have apologised for their roles in the Transatlantic slavery.


I also never said that religious wars have cause more deaths than political, economic and tribal wars. I was saying that religious wars have killen more than any atheists murderer or genocidal leader

Obi1kenobi:

On this thread, you were the one trying to score points when portraying Hitler as an evil of religion. I'm taking your comments solely on face value. European colonization and enslavement of Africa had purely economic and political motivations and diddly-squat to do with religion which was just a means of mental enslavement and sedation of their new subjects. The fact some Christian orders offered tacit support doesn't mean religion had any real influence.

Sorry
You are saying that if the Catholic Church and the Christians had not tacitly supported the slave trade, this would have done the same?
You are saying that if the Catholic Church has not declared that blacks and the Indians had souls, had occurred as the slave process?
The most active traders were Portuguese and Holland ... which church respond?.
Excuse me, but I do not agree.
Obviously they had political and economic interests, but not least religious!.
Why were slaves converted to Christianity, to come to America? If (as claimed by the church) blacks had no souls, why were converted?.
Why were banned traditions, cults original and African languages​​? for economic reasons?

logicboy:

1) Read my first comment on this topic. I never mentioned hitler. Someone mentioned that hitler was an athiest and listed atheist leaders. I corrected him and put christian genociadal leaders

2) West AFrican slavery had a lot to do with slavery. You can choose to be ignorant of this fact. I will not waste time explaining again.

1) The person that mentioned Hitler (intelligent poster too) was only pointing out most of the bloodiest conflicts have a political edge to them rather than religion. In your case, you were trying to twist it into a case where those conflicts were somehow spurred by religious belief which was wrong.

2) I suppose in (2) above, you meant "West African slavery had a lot to do with religion"? You wen't on to quote where you addressed the point previously but there's no real substantiation of your position. Just an ambiguous statement that really didn't say much - at least, if we're viewing it academically. Colonialism didn't occur because of christianity, the spread of christianity was a result of colonialism. If you disagree, clearly show the link between slavery/colonialism and religion

[b][/b][i][/iA world without organised religion would be a better place people have killled many people in the name of god .whikch is wrong everyone should worship their god in private because in my view public religion is way to show

Ptolomeus:
Sorry
You are saying that if the Catholic Church and the Christians had not tacitly supported the slave trade, this would have done the same?
You are saying that if the Catholic Church has not declared that blacks and the Indians had souls, had occurred as the slave process?
The most active traders were Portuguese and Holland ... which church respond?.
Excuse me, but I do not agree.
Obviously they had political and economic interests, but not least religious!.
Why were slaves converted to Christianity, to come to America? If (as claimed by the church) blacks had no souls, why were converted?.
Why were banned traditions, cults original and African languages​​? for economic reasons?

The Catholic church's beliefs about the spiritual state of non-white races has nothing to do with Anglo-American colonization of Africa. They had strategic economic and political aims which sought to exploit Africa to support their expanding industries and agricultural plantations in the Western world. Slave conversion to christianity was in line with all the deprivations aimed to rid the slave of any memory of his barbaric home such as changing their names and banning all their customs. You could say they saw it as a way of "taming" us since they saw us as little more than animals.

Obi1kenobi:

1) The person that mentioned Hitler (intelligent poster too) was only pointing out most of the bloodiest conflicts have a political edge to them rather than religion. In your case, you were trying to twist it into a case where those conflicts were somehow spurred by religious belief which was wrong.

2) I suppose in (2) above, you meant "West African slavery had a lot to do with religion"? You wen't on to quote where you addressed the point previously but there's no real substantiation of your position. Just an ambiguous statement that really didn't say much - at least, if we're viewing it academically. Colonialism didn't occur because of christianity, the spread of christianity was a result of colonialism. If you disagree, clearly show the link between slavery/colonialism and religion

You are just idiot1c or just trolling. So, someone who named hitler as an atheist is intelligent?

Also christianity was at the roots of European slave trade. Ptomoleus destroyed you on this point.

logicboy:

You are just idiot1c or just trolling. So, someone who named hitler as an atheist is intelligent?

Also christianity was at the roots of European slave trade. Ptomoleus destroyed you on this point.

Throwing around abuse like that makes you look really immature. The AlvinPlatinga guy is certainly a very intelligent guy and writes with much better aptitude than you do. Missing out on a bit of historical accuracy doesn't make anyone less intelligent, else your perversion of historical events would make you a real simpleton. You still haven't made any real case to support your conclusion about christianity being at the root of the slave trade. If it were an academic exercise, you'd have flopped woefully. And using infantile terms like "destroy" in a debate doesn't make you appear any wiser: quite the contrary.

Pipe down a little with your conceited arrogance. Being atheist hasn't turned you to Isaac Newton or some awesome repository of knowledge. I think you need to learn to argue with a little more respect.

Obi1kenobi:

Throwing around abuse like that makes you look really immature. The AlvinPlatinga guy is certainly a very intelligent guy and writes with much better aptitude than you do. Missing out on a bit of historical accuracy doesn't make anyone less intelligent, else your perversion of historical events would make you a real simpleton. You still haven't made any real case to support your conclusion about christianity being at the root of the slave trade. If it were an academic exercise, you'd have flopped woefully. And using infantile terms like "destroy" in a debate doesn't make you appear any wiser: quite the contrary.

Pipe down a little with your conceited arrogance. Being atheist hasn't turned you to Isaac Newton or some awesome repository of knowledge. I think you need to learn to argue with a little more respect.

You were the one that came in like the new sheriff in town by throwing accusations at me and you got pwned.

1) Only a christian apologist or a troll would state that christianity was not at the root of the tranatlantic slave trade.


You mad?

[img]http://troll.me/images/trololo/you-mad-bro-trololololololololololololol.jpg[/img]

logicboy:
You were the one that came in like the new sheriff in town by throwing accusations at me and you got pwned.

1) Only a christian apologist or a troll would state that christianity was not at the root of the tranatlantic slave trade.
You mad?

You need to chill with this hackneyed argument about christianity and the trans-atlantic slave trade. It's nothing but an emotional argument against religion that makes you look weak.
European mercantilism and imperialism; and African myopia and ignorance are what led to the transatlantic slave trade. Christianity was just a tool and is still a tool for subjugation.

Martian:

You need to chill with this hackneyed argument about christianity and the trans-atlantic slave trade. It's nothing but an emotional argument against religion that makes you look weak.
European mercantilism and imperialism; and African myopia and ignorance are what led to the transatlantic slave trade. Christianity was just a tool and is still a tool for subjugation.

Christianity was just a tool and is still a tool for subjugation.


Why contradict yourself?

What contradiction? Christianity being a tool for imperialism doesn't make it solely responsible for the slave trade like you think.

It was a tool for subjugation during imperialism and colonialism; and it's still a tool today for the prosperity preachers, and corrupt government officials. Capice?

Martian: What contradiction? Christianity being a tool for imperialism doesn't make it solely responsible for the slave trade like you think.

It was a tool for subjugation during imperialism and colonialism; and it's still a tool today for the prosperity preachers, and corrupt government officials. Capice?

-Curse of ham/ mark of Cain. Whites didnt enslave other whites

-Pope gregory ix put canon law not to enslave fellow christians....setting precedent

-The bible did not allow for isrealite slavery- "your slaves may come from other nations... setting precedent

-American and british churches apologised for slavery.



I'll leave you to play in your own ignorance

logicboy:
-Curse of ham/ mark of Cain.

Curse of ham/ mark of Cain, talking snake, talking donkey, tower of babel, jesus . All jewish mythology. What's your point?

logicboy:
Whites didnt enslave other whites

And? Blacks had black slaves before the europeans came. The africans had the supply and the europeans had the demand for labour and they traded before they turned to raids.Blame your ancestors.

logicboy:
Pope gregory ix put canon law not to enslave fellow christians....setting precedent

Africans should have signed a canon law not to sell fellow africans. So cry me a river, build a bridge and get the f#ck over it already.

logicboy:
The bible did not allow for isrealite slavery- "your slaves may come from other nations... setting precedent

More jewish mythology. Anyway, when african tribes fought with other tribes, they took slaves from the vanquished tribe. What makes them different from the jews?

logicboy:
American and british churches apologised for slavery.

Boo hoo! they enslaved us, bla bla bla. Get over it. What has their apologies done to advance the black race while y'all are stuck on playing the victim?

logicboy:
I'll leave you to play in your own ignorance

lol

Martian:

Curse of ham/ mark of Cain, talking snake, talking donkey, tower of babel, jesus . All jewish mythology. What's your point?

Important people believed it and used it to enslave people

Martian:
And? Blacks had black slaves before the europeans came. The africans had the supply and the europeans had the demand for labour and they traded before they turned to raids.Blame your ancestors.

That is a lie......slaves were never a commodity in many west african tribes. I am from delta and my language has no word for slave. They killed enemy tribes but never enslaved. Show me proof of slave trade in Nigeria that predates Arab or European influence.

Martian:
Africans should have signed a canon law not to sell fellow africans. So cry me a river, build a bridge and get the f#ck over it already.

Yes, blame Africans. There were Jews that collaborated with the Nazis. Nobody blames Jews for holocaust. Yet, my fellow black man who hates his own black man will blame blacks. Shameful

Martian:


More jewish mythology. Anyway, when african tribes fought with other tribes, they took slaves from the vanquished tribe. What makes them different from the jews?

That is a lie......slaves were never a commodity in many west african tribes. I am from delta and my language has no word for slave. They killed enemy tribes but never enslaved. Show me proof of slave trade in Nigeria that predates Arab or European influence.


You're a disgrace

logicboy:
Important people believed it and used it to enslave people

It seems you're an abolitionist. After the fact! lol

logicboy:
That is a lie......slaves were never a commodity in many west african tribes. I am from delta and my language has no word for slave. They killed enemy tribes but never enslaved. Show me proof of slave trade in Nigeria that predates Arab or European influence.

If Chinua Achebe is good enough for you, read things fall apart for an example of a slave in african society.(yes,it's fictionl novel) I know there was no thriving slave trade like the Arab and European ones, but stop acting like everything was utopia before the foreigners came.

logicboy:
Yes, blame Africans. There were Jews that collaborated with the Nazis. Nobody blames Jews for holocaust. Yet, my fellow black man who hates his own black man will blame blacks. Shameful

It's about time black people stop complaining about the past. Be proactive not reactive. Ain't nobody ever enslaved you nor are you in danger of being enslaved, so stop crying.I'm not absolving anyone from blame, I'm just saying that blaming christianity for slavery is not a very strong argument. The slave trade would have happened regardless of christianity or any other religion the enslavers came with.

logicboy:
That is a lie......slaves were never a commodity in many west african tribes. I am from delta and my language has no word for slave. They killed enemy tribes but never enslaved. Show me proof of slave trade in Nigeria that predates Arab or European influence.

You're repeating yourself. You're repeating yourself. You're re.......

logicboy:
You're a disgrace

lol. I appreciate the vote of confidence.

Wow... even senior atheists view logicboy as a troll.. amazing...

musKeeto: Wow... even senior atheists view logicboy as a troll.. amazing...

[img]http://www.troll.me/images/obv/seriously-bro-troll-harder-thumb.jpg[/img]

Martian:



It's about time black people stop complaining about the past. Be proactive not reactive. Ain't nobody ever enslaved you nor are you in danger of being enslaved, so stop crying.I'm not absolving anyone from blame, I'm just saying that blaming christianity for slavery is not a very strong argument. The slave trade would have happened regardless of christianity or any other religion the enslavers came with.

The part in bold, purely hypothetical and very wrong.


Blaming christianity for slavery is great. That's what made me an atheist.

Do you know my personla life? Do you see me crying about slavery everyday? Do you see Obama or other blacks shouting about slavery everyday? Remove that foolish stereotype from your head, uncle tom. Fake a$$ negro

logicboy:
The part in bold, purely hypothetical and very wrong.

The arabs didn't use christianity when they enslaved europeans and blacks. so it's not hypothetical, it's a fact. They would have enslaved some africans regardless of what they believed due to the zeitgeist of the time.

logicboy:
Blaming christianity for slavery is great. That's what made me an atheist.

Cry me a river! So your atheism is based on emotions rather than rationality and logic. And he calls himself, "logicboy". More like "emotionalpansy".

logicboy:
Do you know my personla life? Do you see me crying about slavery everyday?

Please remind us, why are you an atheist?

logicboy:
Blaming christianity for slavery is great. That's what made me an atheist.

thanks, logicboy.

logicboy:
Do you see Obama or other blacks shouting about slavery everyday?

What does Obama have to do with anything?

logicboy:
Remove that foolish stereotype from your head, uncle tom. Fake a$$ negro

Whatever you say, Real a$$ negro. Black power!!!! lol

lol, Malcolm X-pired

Obi1kenobi:

The Catholic church's beliefs about the spiritual state of non-white races has nothing to do with Anglo-American colonization of Africa. They had strategic economic and political aims which sought to exploit Africa to support their expanding industries and agricultural plantations in the Western world. Slave conversion to christianity was in line with all the deprivations aimed to rid the slave of any memory of his barbaric home such as changing their names and banning all their customs. You could say they saw it as a way of "taming" us since they saw us as little more than animals.

Exactly.
The Catholic Church saw Africans as animals ... This is the church officially declared.
Then there were some efforts to the contrary, but the responsibility for the crimes and torture can not be denied or redemption.

Martian:

You need to chill with this hackneyed argument about christianity and the trans-atlantic slave trade. It's nothing but an emotional argument against religion that makes you look weak.
European mercantilism and imperialism; and African myopia and ignorance are what led to the transatlantic slave trade. Christianity was just a tool and is still a tool for subjugation.

I can not believe what I'm reading!
You say that responsibility for transatlantic slavery was due to the shortsightedness of Africans?
You say that the Catholic Church had nothing to do with it?
Have you read the thread bodies of writing?
Did you read what I explained? The Catholic Church officially declared that blacks and Indians do not had souls WERE NOT HUMAN!
The priest Bartolome de las Casas, directly suggested using Africans as slaves, rather than Native Americans ... many historical evidence you need to understand?
That meant leaving full freedom to the slave. Africans were piled up like animals in the holds of ships, those who died were thrown into the sea, and arriving patients were abandoned on the beach for dogs to eat ...
That makes sense! Sick people could not be sold ... and the church underwrote ...
The church did not sell slaves, is logical ... but directly and indirectly encouraged slavery.
Only a blind or a fan does not see this!