RE: Why the religious will never admit you won the argument (and why they don't care)
June 21, 2016 at 12:57 pm
(June 18, 2016 at 1:47 pm)Veritas_Vincit Wrote:(June 18, 2016 at 9:03 am)SteveII Wrote: 6. Your problems are with people. The NT is the basis for Christianity (which is the only religion I will defend). Anything not in there was added by men. And regarding those teachings, they might very well bring conflict of opinion (abortion, gay marriage, etc.) but they don't, in themselves, bring suffering. If suffering results, it is because of men's actions and/or a failure to apply the other teachings of the NT properly.On the other hand, the good Christianity has done in the last two millennium is incalculable.
I completely disagree. This is what I've recently learned is the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy. You can't tell me that those thing had nothing to do with Christianity, because who are you to say that they aren't 'real Christians'? They would disagree with you. The Bible instructs all of those things that I listed, it is the literal word of God. Are you saying you know better than your God? They aren't doing this in the name of religion, they are doing it as a doctrinal teaching mandated by the holy scriptures of the religion.
The God in your Bible explicitly instructs human beings to commit genocide, to commit murder, that they can enslave other people and own them as property [Leviticus 25:44-46, Exodus 21:2-6 & 20-21] that they should kill gay men [Leviticus 20:13], witches, wizards, adulterers [Leviticus 20:10], unbelievers [2 Chronicles 15:12-13. The same God wipes out most of the world's population [Noah's flood]. This is EVIL.
To qualify as a 'no true Scotsman' fallacy, the definition of Christian has to be vague or non-existent. That is not the case here. The criteria for Christian action is very clearly laid out.
Regarding your list "The Bible instructs all of those things that I listed, it is the literal word of God." (which I reposted so you can be reminded what you claim) :
Quote:6. Concrete examples of harm caused by religion I assume you mean? Excluding Islamic Jihad? Ok:
- The Catholic Church - sheltering pedophile priests from legal justice; allying with the Nazi party and fascism in the 20th Century - the Konkordat; their stance on abortion and contraception in AIDs riddled Africa saying condoms are worse than AIDs or that they help spread it.
- The Archbishop of Cantebury, the Pope and other religious leaders world wide who, when people were murdered on the streets of Paris, said the problem was with Blasphemy - for SHAME.
- Christians in the USA trying to teach Intelligent Design psydoscientific creationist garbage to children in schools
- The forced genital mutilation of children in Jewish and Muslim communities
- Homophobia of the kind that inspires a repressed homosexual to shoot up a gay club, of which religion is the main source...
I don't even know where to begin pointing out the absurdity of your first point. I am not aware the NT has a chapter on contraception.
Regarding the Pope and Archbishop--they can justify their own remarks. I can say however that this concept is not found in the NT.
Besides the fact that ID and Creationism are not the same thing, you got me there. Well, except the harm part. If a science class describes other theories that are believed by literally billions, I can't quite connect how additional knowledge harms.
NT does not teach circumcision. Certainly not female mutilation.
The NT quite clearly states that we are to love everyone. Can't see how the NT causes people to shoot gay people.
