Religion: Real or Fake

[Elok]

I'm not touchy, I'm amused by your blatant inconsistency. In any case, for an unbeliever to decide who's the "true Christian church" is beyond silly. If atheists get to decide who's a real Christian, the reverse also applies--it's only fair. With that in mind, I'm gonna go ahead and declare that the only true atheists are Maoists. Followers of Mao Tse-Tung Thought, however nominal, must be by far the largest group of atheists on earth, and therefore the "real" ones. And frankly, you folks have a lot of nerve calling us out over the crusades and such, after that ugly business at Tiananmen Square. Do I even need to mention the Red Guards?

[rah]

In all honesty, I don't see any of the atheists here claiming their version of atheism it the one true and only version. We really don't care who's is real, and actually by definition we really don't care about much of anything in regards to god.

[Ming]

I'm not touchy, I'm amused by your blatant inconsistency.

Again... there is no BLATANT inconsistencies between the RCC's bad handling of their scandal and the claim that they are Jesus's true church.

In any case, for an unbeliever to decide who's the "true Christian church" is beyond silly. If atheists get to decide who's a real Christian, the reverse also applies--it's only fair.

Interesting... please point out where I have ever said that I'm an atheist, or even posted my personal beliefs beyond the statement that I'm a lapsed Catholic. And if you look at it by the numbers, The RCC is the largest Christian relgion... are they unbelievers?

With that in mind, I'm gonna go ahead and declare that the only true atheists are Maoists. Followers of Mao Tse-Tung Thought, however nominal, must be by far the largest group of atheists on earth, and therefore the "real" ones. And frankly, you folks have a lot of nerve calling us out over the crusades and such, after that ugly business at Tiananmen Square. Do I even need to mention the Red Guards?

Thank you for pointing out how bad you are at rational thought.

[MOBIUS]

In any case, for an unbeliever to decide who's the "true Christian church" is beyond silly.

Actually, the 'beyond silly' is the fact that the believer has to do that - it exposes the sham that even the supposed followers of god can't even agree what to believe in!!!

Also, who is 'us' Elok, why are you so touchy about your brand of religion that you've never ever admitted which church you belong to?

[Elok]

Elok is touchy because he seems to be an undercover religious orthodox follower of some flavour or other, but he's never ever actually admitted who exactly he follows for some reason - perhaps he's embarrassed about it?

How am I "undercover?" Because I don't proselytize on these boards to people who don't want to hear it? In any case, whom we follow is a complex question depending on what you mean by it--the answer could be "Christ," "The Ecumenical Patriarch," or in my case "The Holy Synod of Antioch." No, actually, we have provisional autonomy now and we're working on American unification, so the answer might be "Metropolitan Philip" or "The Episcopal Assembly." The answer is complicated due to our lengthy history, so just pick one if you like.

If I were an orthodox guy, I'd be touchy about someone saying that catholicism has the best claim, as the orthodox guys certainly have a better claim.

That's what we say, but mostly I just think it's absurd for Ming to be supporting them at all, in any way, shape or form, after relentlessly bashing them, and them specifically, for years.

[MOBIUS]

In all honesty, I don't see any of the atheists here claiming their version of atheism it the one true and only version. We really don't care who's is real, and actually by definition we really don't care about much of anything in regards to god.

Exactly! Atheism is a lack of belief, not a unifying belief of not believing in things. Perhaps that's why religious people can't get their heads around atheism - it's a completely alien concept.

[Ming]

That's what we say, but mostly I just think it's absurd for Ming to be supporting them at all, in any way, shape or form, after relentlessly bashing them, and them specifically, for years.

Supporting them... how exactly am I doing that? Just pointing out some simple facts. It doesn't mean I support them.
If I posted that many jews died in the holocaust... which is a fact, does that mean that I support the holocaust?

[Elok]

In all honesty, I don't see any of the atheists here claiming their version of atheism it the one true and only version. We really don't care who's is real, and actually by definition we really don't care about much of anything in regards to god.

Yes, I know, but if you're going to deny the legitimacy of religion in the first place, you have no business declaring any religion superior to any other. Ming doesn't seem to have a horse in this race to begin with, is all I'm saying. I'm not going to go claiming that Sunni Islam is the "correct" form of Islam, because I don't believe in Islam at all.

[Elok]

Exactly! Atheism is a lack of belief, not a unifying belief of not believing in things. Perhaps that's why religious people can't get their heads around atheism - it's a completely alien concept.

My father's an agnostic--I understand it reasonably well, I think. Better than you seem to understand religion, at any rate.

[MOBIUS]

That's what we say, but mostly I just think it's absurd for Ming to be supporting them at all, in any way, shape or form, after relentlessly bashing them, and them specifically, for years.

Why is that absurd? He is bashing the physical manifestation of the RCC on Earth, that isn't directly God's fault. Just because you are sickened by the way that the RCC is managed doesn't mean you can or should change your beliefs - I can even believe that you, as a religious person, can even countenance that idea!!?

[rah]

Yes, I know, but if you're going to deny the legitimacy of religion in the first place, you have no business declaring any religion superior to any other. Ming doesn't seem to have a horse in this race to begin with, is all I'm saying. I'm not going to go claiming that Sunni Islam is the "correct" form of Islam, because I don't believe in Islam at all.

I don't have to declare which religion is superior to any other since they do a good job doing it themselves. I don't have to agree with the Sunni as they kill ****es to prove it.
Like Ming, I was a catholic who has ceased to believe but can still laugh at the church for believing that their's is the "ONE" true belief. I figure I'm owed that after thousands of hours of Catholic indoctrination and the thousands of ceremonies that I participated in as an alter boy. (at least I got paid for the weddings)

[MOBIUS]

My father's an agnostic--I understand it reasonably well, I think. Better than you seem to understand religion, at any rate.

An agnostic and an atheist are two completely different beasts. Just from that point alone, I think you need to be going back to the drawing board WRT your 'understanding'.

As for mine, I'd say mine is very well developed for a non believer. It is such an important subject that you need to know where you stand and why, and for that reason I have invested significant time finding out about religion. You may be an expert in YOUR religion, but I'm willing to bet that your knowledge about other religions is no better than mine. I'm also willing to bet that I've visited more religious buildings of more religions in more countries than you have - or probably ever will!

In fact, compared to me, I'm willing to bet that you know **** all about world religion...

[Elok]

Again... there is no BLATANT inconsistencies between the RCC's bad handling of their scandal and the claim that they are Jesus's true church.

The inconsistency I referred to was yours, not theirs.

Interesting... please point out where I have ever said that I'm an atheist, or even posted my personal beliefs beyond the statement that I'm a lapsed Catholic. And if you look at it by the numbers, The RCC is the largest Christian relgion... are they unbelievers?

You're a "lapsed Catholic" who just spent like ten pages on the atheist side of a Christian/atheist slapfest. I called it like I saw it. Whatever you are, you don't seem to be a devout Christian. The legitimacy of their claim is a complex one; my church rejects it on the grounds that they have not preserved ancient doctrine, practice or hierarchical structure. We also reject the claim that Peter had personal and unconditional supremacy over the other disciples, or that said supremacy would automatically transfer specifically to his heirs if it did exist...bottom line, it's not that cut and dried, and the POV you endorsed depends largely on (Catholic) assumptions about what it means to be a Christian. Expecting a Protestant or non-denominational like Kid to accept RCC supremacy is a bit unrealistic, to put it mildly. Not that anyone's likely to be convinced one way or another here.

Thank you for pointing out how bad you are at rational thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

[MOBIUS]

In fact, just from purely the Orthodox Church (in its many guises!), I'd say there is a significant chance that I've visited more churches, monasteries and cathredrals, of more flavours, in more countries than you have.

I probably PWN you on Orthodoxy alone!

[rah]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

Mentions the use of wit.