Christian and Atheism Worldwide Demographics: Current Realities and Future Trends.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

@Nishant Xavier

Not following, Brian. Where did I say that and what do you mean? Please elaborate. 

Nothing you said, specifically. I was getting at the difference between literal and metaphorical passages in the Bible. Many Christians are perfectly happy to accept things like the Garden of Eden, Noah’s Ark, Balaam’s talking donkey, and so on as literal stories.

However, a Christian lender who finances a 30-year mortgage is unlikely to forgive the balance of the loan after just seven years of payments, even though the Bible commands him to do exactly that.

Boru

[Deesse23]

Deese, you should read Nobel Laureate and Award-Winning Russian Historian Alexander Solzhenitsyn on Marxism/Communism. Btw, you know Marx was a "devout"[/sarcasm] Atheist, and said "Religion is the Opium of the Masses", right? He was an Anti-Religious Militant Atheist and one of the Most Famous Atheists ever. Own it. Here is Solzhenitsyn: "“Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.”

Which part of "if anyone thinks that atheism informs him of anything ELSE than disbelief in a deity is wrong" did you fail to understand?

No need to lecture me about Marx. Marx was wrong in many things, like we all are. Not so much in the analysis of the society back then, but horribly so about the consequences to take. I read some of his stuff in our common native language and visited his birthplace just a few months ago. Want some pics? It really looks lovely. Solzhenitsyn, well guess what, he also was wrong.

[Bucky Ball]

To Deese the Militant Atheist: Right back at you, liar. You're the liar and I'm going to ignore your future posts from now on if you keep up the insults. If you think Communism and Atheism have nothing to do with each other, that's willful blindness on your part. While it's true that not every Atheist is a Communist, it's also true that almost all Communists are Atheists, and Communists have arguably done more than Non-Communist Atheists for the spread of Atheism, especially Militant Atheism that falsely claims religion or religious people are evil. Whether you're a Communist Atheist or a Darwinist Atheist is like whether you're an Evangelical Christian or a Catholic Christian. Most Marxists/Communists are Atheists, period, and all your No True Scotsman Fallacies will avail nothing. Here are some facts for you: "Throughout the history of the Soviet Union (1917–1991), there were periods when Soviet authorities suppressed and persecuted various forms of Christianity to different extents depending on State interests.[1] Soviet Marxist-Leninist policy consistently advocated the control, suppression, and ultimately, the elimination of religious beliefs, and it actively encouraged the propagation of Marxist-Leninist atheism in the Soviet Union ... According to some sources, the total number of Christian victims under the Soviet regime has been estimated to range around 12 to 20 million.[131][132] At least 106,300 Russian clergymen were executed between 1937 and 1941.[133]"

Your Communist Atheists caused some 20 MN of us Christians to be killed, an Eastern Christian Holocaust about 3 times worse than the western Holocaust in Europe under Nazism. That your western education system does not teach you these things shows the Communist influence still in it. If people knew Atheists killed/martyred/murdered some 20 MN Christians in just the last century, Militant Atheism would not spread in the West.

GN, I said, abstinence from sin, not "absence". You know, like fasting etc during Lent, and throughout the year, to prevail over gluttony, and even much more than just that. Abstinence from sin, all sin, and persistence in good works, especially Alms-Giving or Charity as commanded in Mat 25 by Jesus Christ hte Lord, is required to go to Heaven, according to Jesus Christ and His Church. there are some preachers who misguidedly and mistakenly attack good works, but Catholic Doctrine is that they are mistaken; this is also the clear teaching of Jesus Christ, as I proved from Mat 25, where He says only those who do good works, like love Him in the Poor, feed Him in the hungry, etc, only, in a word, those who love God and love their neighbor, will be blessed and enter the Kingdom of Heaven. This is also how St. Augustine, St. Basil etc understood the passage: 

St. Augustine: "Be particularly mindful of the poor, so that what you take from yourself by living sparingly you may lay away in heavenly treasures.
Let the needy Christ [i.e. the needy Poor Person] receive that of which the fasting Christian deprives himself.
Let the self-restraint of the willing soul be the sustenance of the one in need.
Let the voluntary neediness of the one possessing an abundance become the necessary abundance of the one in need."

St. Basil the Great: "The bread in your cupboard belongs to the hungry man; the coat hanging unused in your closet belongs to the man who needs it; the shoes rotting in your closet belong to the man who has no shoes; the money which you put in the bank belongs to the poor. You do wrong to everyone you could help, but fail to help.”

Since the 16th Century, the Absolute and Indispensable Necessity of Good Works for Attaining Salvation has been attacked on the false pretext of Grace, as though True Grace were an excuse for Miserliness and Licentiousness. The Church Fathers unanimously reject such a grotesque falsehood, and the Catholic Church teaches no one can interpret Scripture contrary to the unanimous teaching of the Church Fathers. Yet, many Christians, of all denominations, especially those who frequently read the teaching of Christ in the Gospel, know Goods Works are needed and practice them. Jesus Christ most plainly said to store up Treasure in Heaven by Good Works like giving Alms to the Poor.

Regards,
Xavier.

The Church Fathers were liars. 
Then there is the general problem of the general acceptance of deception in the early church. They were liars, and they admitted it.
They thought there was nothing wrong with lying if the lie promoted what various leaders thought was good. Even Paul admitted to lying.
"For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?" – St. Paul, Romans 3.7.
St. Jerome said Paul was a liar. "I will only mention the Apostle Paul. ... He, then, if anyone, ought to be calumniated; we should speak thus to him: ‘The proofs which you have used against the Jews and against other heretics bear a different meaning in their own contexts to that which they bear in your Epistles. Jerome, Epistle to Pammachus.

"We see passages taken captive by your pen and pressed into service to win you a victory, which in volumes from which they are taken have no controversial bearing at all ... the line so often adopted by strong men in controversy – of justifying the means by the result."
– St. Jerome, Epistle to Pammachus (xlviii, 13; N&PNF. vi, 72-73)

Eusebius, entitles the 32nd Chapter of his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation
"How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."

Eusebius is notoriously the author of a great many falsehoods – but then he does warn us in his infamous history:
"We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity."
– Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2.

Clement of Alexandria was one of the earliest of the Church Fathers to draw a distinction between "mere human truth" and the higher truth of faith: "Not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith." – Clement (quoted by M. Smith, Clement of Alexandria, p446)

John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople, is another:
"Do you see the advantage of deceit? ... "For great is the value of deceit, provided it be not introduced with a mischievous intention. In fact action of this kind ought not to be called deceit, but rather a kind of good management, cleverness and skill, capable of finding out ways where resources fail, and making up for the defects of the mind ... And often it is necessary to deceive, and to do the greatest benefits by means of this device, whereas he who has gone by a straight course has done great mischief to the person whom he has not deceived."
– Chrysostom, Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1.

John (above) is notable for his extensive commentaries on the Bible which emphasized a literal understanding of the stories; the style popular at Alexandria until then was to acknowledge an allegorical meaning of the text. Thus eminent ‘believers’ added falsehood to the beliefs of later generations. ‘For the best of reasons’ they ‘clarified’ obscure points, conjured up characters to speak dialogue that could have been said, invented scenarios that could have happened, borrowed extensively from a wider culture. And this all before they became the custodians of power and had real reasons for lies, inventions and counterfeits.

The 5th and 6th centuries was the 'golden age' of Christian forgery. In a moment of shocking candour, the Manichean bishop (and opponent of Augustine) Faustus said: "Many things have been inserted by our ancestors in the speeches of our Lord which, though put forth under his name, agree not with his faith; especially since – as already it has been often proved – these things were written not by Christ, nor [by] his apostles, but a long while after their as'sumption, by I know not what sort of half Jews, not even agreeing with themselves, who made up their tale out of reports and opinions merely, and yet, fathering the whole upon the names of the apostles of the Lord or on those who were supposed to follow the apostles, they maliciously pretended that they had written their lies and conceits according to them."

In the ferocious battle for adherents, the propagandists sought to outdo each other at every turn. One example: by the 5th century, four very different endings existed to Mark's gospel. Codex Bobiensis ends Mark at verse 16:8, without any post-crucifixion appearances; it lacks both the 'short conclusion' (of Jesus sending followers to 'east and west') or the 'long conclusion' – the fabulous post-death apparitions, where Jesus promises his disciples that they will be immune to snake bites and poison.

[Astreja]

What I find amusing about all this Argument from Popularity silliness is that even if literally everyone on earth believed something, it could still be 100% false.

What I find tragic about it is that there are people who are currently living according to restrictive religious dogma, denying themselves perfectly reasonable things that would make their lives substantially better, and they won't even get the heavenly reward that's motivating them to live substandard lives.

[The Grand Nudger]

Our new friend knows this, I suspect that's why I never got an answer to whether or not he'd abandon his god if some other god ended up with better representation. I'm not sure why he believes that we would find this line compelling when he knows he doesn't.

[no one]

Be honest nishy, when mommy was playing peek-a-boo with you, she would hold your head under water until you passed out, right?

Then, like magic, mommy appeared again.