If faith works how every religion says it works......

[The Omnissiunt One]

That seems rather subjective. Special pleading perhaps? Jefferson, who called Jesus' teachings "the most sublime BTW, seems to disagree.

What seems subjective? What's special pleading? Undoubtedly, most people were theists in the past. Plus, Jefferson was most likely a deist, not a Christian, though he liked Jesus' teachings.

Um, they also had a leader who was completely paranoid, refused anything resembling fair trials if he had any at all, and who said Darwin "changed everything." Stalin made the Inquistors look fair minded. Would you agree?

Clearly Stalin was a nutter. Whether he was worse than the Inquisitors or not, or worse than the persecution of Catholics and Protestants in Tudor England, or worse than the crusades, or the religiously motivated anti-semites throughout world history is, of course, an open question. My point was that more might have been killed in these circumstances had the religious fanatics had modern technology.

Also is it possible that people who read the sermon on the Mount, and actually think Jesus will judge them accordingly, (whether it is true or not) might think twice about committing wholesale murder?

It's possible, but it hasn't stopped millions of religious people from doing so.

OK except that atheists like Emma Goldman flocked to watch the working people take over the world, as if they were holier and more just than the rest of us sinners. I guess not.

So? She was atheist, but also an anarchist. Stalin was atheist, but also a paranoid nutter. You can't equate atheism with such atrocities unless you demonstrate that such acts are inevitable, or much more likely, given atheism alone, taking other factors like political beliefs into account.

That's a rather hackneyed, rhetorical argument itself, which requires us to discuss whether Flew's NTS fallacy came out of thin air and why it doesn't appear in any classic logic book. That said, Luther's writings were used to justify anti-semitism.

So, are you denying that Christian Nazis were true Christians? Or have I misunderstood you? If that's what you mean, then I can just deny that the Communists were true atheists. In fact, I'd argue that they weren't true secular humanists or rationalists, as they adhered to an irrational pseudo-scientific theory (Marxism) and followed it blindly, without evaluating it rationally.

Yet it does matter what Jesus said and whether Christians followed it. Obviously Hitler never read Paul's warnings about persecuting Jews, or what Jesus said about his "brethren". And it is simple-minded IMO to just burn all the Christians at the stake, ignore the amazing social contributions of Protestants who hate to brag, and say it doesn't really matter what Jesus siad or who followed it. If Marx wasn't followed by one claiming to be a Communist, then I would say s/he was no true Communist, or an ignorant one. I don't believe everybody who tells me they are a true patriot. Do you?

I'm not denying that Christians have done good things. Probably the ones who do outweigh those who don't. It's just that blowing up an abortion clinic is more significant than running a church fete. And clearly the Nazis didn't follow Jesus' teachings. However, some of Jesus' actions were less than wonderful (Matthew 15:26; he refuses to help a non-Jewish woman). Plus, the OT is positively riddled with horrific examples of ethical guidance.

---

Way behind the Christians, eg in Paine's case, about 70 years behind the Quakers and 30 years behind the Methodists on slavery. Four Quaker men came out against slavery in 1680, with a Quaker woman objecting about 1670. And then we have Fox, accused of sounding like a walking NT, arguing for whomen's rights in court. BTW Voltaire was justifying slavery about the time Wesley called it "the scourge of the earth."

I wasn't talking about slavery, but the Enlightenment in general. Prominent figures in the Enlightenment were largely skeptics, either deists, agnostics, or sometimes atheists. If we're talking about things like women's rights, then we must consider the contributions of people like the utilitarian John Stuart-Mill. Of course, religious people did argue for women's and slaves' rights before non-believers, but that was likely given that were no, or hardly any, non-believers around for most of history. Until recently, religion's hold has been only negative in terms of liberties, which is understandable given Biblical teachings on such matters. Exodus 21:21 allows the beating of slaves, while Paul says that women must be silent in church. Jesus, meanwhile, says nothing on such matters, when surely a little guidance would have helped.

As for Jefferson, any idea why he called three Christians "the greatest," leaders "in the moral sciences."?

Nope. Who cares? Jefferson doesn't speak for me.

Fine. But other theories of the universe, dark matter, particle theory don't work without 11 dimensions, which means you can understand less, not more, than you did before. No?

I'm not a scientist, but, as I understand it, dark matter isn't really an explanation, just a name for whatever makes up most of the universe. If by 'particle theory' you mean string theory, then this is far from universally accepted.