WHY DO ATHEISTS & LIBERALS WORSHIP THE GRECO-ROMAN PHILOSOPHERS & ISLAM BUT NOT CHRIST?

RickeyD

You are demonically obsessed with your genitalia and your narcissism and you exist in hopeless...a fine example of the futility of atheism.

 

RickeyD

You are obsessed with your genitalia and your narcissism and you exist in hopeless...a find example of the futility of atheism.

 

RickeyD

You are obsessed with your genitalia and you exist in hopeless...a find example of the futility of atheism.

 

RickeyD

You exist in hopelessness...a fine example of the futility of atheism.

 

Dee

@RickeyD

Grafix

@piloteer - You wrote ...

Why would anyone want to waste their time discussing the philosophical aspects of Christianity? There are none. It would be like discussing the philosophical essence of Harry Potter. Nothing more than a complete waste of time. When it comes to discussions regarding mental illness and brain injuries, obviously Christianity is of great value there, but not when it comes to intellectual discussion.     

LOL!  Well at least you have stayed on topic, which I give you full kudos for, unlike the spammer in chief, which she just loves to endlessly prove that she is, aka Dee.  

Are you seriously willing to debate that Christianity is not a full-blown philosophy?  Are you seriously willing to debate that it wasn't Christianity which civilized half the world and gave us our Western identity?  Are you seriously willing to debate that there is no Judeo-Christian ethos, which is so very famous and which ruled the world, under Catholic Monarchs and still rules the Vatican State today and is still the mandatory denomination of the English monarchy?  Are you seriously willing to debate that the Judeo-Christian ethos is not the ethos which Christianity relies upon?

Select any one of those and I'll debate it with you.  

RickeyD

@Dee ; Without Jesus Christ as your Lord to mediate your sin, Dee, you will die in sin and Hell without hope.

Grafix

@RickeyD - As much as we see eye to eye on many things, I really do NOT appreciate spam.  It derails the topic and the flow of the discussions.  I have already Dee for doing this.  As much as I would hate to flag a fellow believer, I really can't flag Dee for the same kind of spam that you are now engaging in, without also flagging your posts.  So, how to get rid of all of those duplicate posts?  As we cannot delete posts in here, the merit for which I understand, could you kindly overwrite the duplicate posts with something like the words "Duplicate post deleted"  ??  Would be much appreciated, otherwise I am compelled to be fair and report your spam in the same way I reported Dee's. 

As well, your posts are not on topic, as are none of Dee's, another reason why I all of her off-topic repetitive posts. Unless, you overwrite the repetitive posts, I will be compelled to do the same to yours, in the interests of fairness, and report them as spam.  Hope you understand.

Dee

@RickeyD

Dee

@Grafix

*****  unlike the spammer in chief, which she just loves to endlessly prove that she is, aka Dee.  

Translation from Grafix to English .......you couldn’t defend biblical slavery and you couldn’t defend the Christian destruction of the classical world so you went off running and bawling to Aaron to give you a big hug and put your toys back in your pram.......

I see you’ve chickened out of another debate Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 

RickeyD

@Grafix Not intended to be SPAM...if it's that personal, I'll mute you. Have a good day.

Dee

@RickeyD

BTW @Grafix is a Catholic ....you love them don’t you ?

Grafix

@RickeyD - Hi Rickey.

I don't disagree with the message in your posts at all.  I disagree with repetitively posting exactly the same post saying exactly the same thing and hijacking a topic's pages, which is what Dee does with her long childishly set out posts that necessitate endless scrolling to get past them.  I don't even read the majority of them, maybe the first couple of lines, just to check  if it warrants a reply.  Mostly they don't.

What I am saying is this.  When commenters come to a site like this with a view to conducting some intelligent debate, then repetitive and off-topic posts, not following the discussion, which are totally unrelated to it and are lobbed bang in the middle of a discussion, become disruptive and derail the flow of the discussion.  If they go the full length of several screens, people can't even find the last post relevant to the discussion, because it is lost way back in the order.  Consequently, the entire discussion that was, is completely whacked out of view and anyone opening the page does not even know that there is a discussion in progress.  It just makes the topic look like a playground for disconnected posts - no flow, no discussion..  That is precisely what has happened now to this topic, thanks to you and Dee.  

My best advice is to not respond to her, don't react to her, just ignore her, because what she does has all the hallmarks of a paid troll from a professional troll farm.  Paid trolls are paid to disrupt, destroy and derail discussions on politics and religion.   They are planted everywhere on chat boards which discuss these subjects.  You'll never find them on chat boards which discuss graphic design or animation, or art or music, etc.  because those subjects don't fall within the purview of those with a political and religious Agenda designed to influence.  There is a massive budget behind the propaganda which props up the anti-Christian, anti-American, anti-Western Agenda.  It is all certainly  connected to a Satanic spiritual influence.  I understand that, but the only way to combat it is by solid exposure of the Agenda and not by spamming. 

What this spamming has done is derail the final nail in the coffin that I had on the page, which none of these heathen atheists could answer and it staring back at them with no response.  It was beautiful and what you have done, I realize not intentionally, is very effectively wiped it completely out of view, which is exactly what Dee was wanting and working very hard to do.  I almost had her nailed down, too, until you came along and you put fuel on her dying embers.  So, mate, would really appreciate it, if you can overwrite your duplicate posts and only post on topic.  Thanks.  Hope you understand.

RickeyD

@Dee I love the Catholic, I have disdain for the Catholic Church and its deception...much like I do for atheism.

Dee

@RickeyD

Spoken like a true  Westboro Baptist 

RickeyD

@Grafix The repetitive nature of the posting was not intentional. The AI that censors these forums rather routinely blocks me from posting so I attempt to manipulate the comment/narrative to conform to the AI's wishes concerning subjective civility but in certain scenarios the AI will permit the comment to be published "unaware" even though the warning in the lower-left corner states that my comment is not acceptable. I cannot know when the AI will publish the comment and when it will not...there is no differentiating this on the original posting because it does not show having been accepted until I refresh the page and then discover that all of my attempts to modify my comment for "civil" acceptability have been posted as well...then...I attempt to erase the repetitive postings but I'm not provided that option. Repetitive comments are NOT intentional.

Grafix

@RickeyD - Dee has no idea what denomination I am.  No-one does.  I have deliberately refrained from revealing it on this forum, because it is a seething cess pit of atheists and I know what they do to you, when they discover what your denomination is - they find every possible means and ways of discrediting it, no matter which Christian denomination one belongs to.  Don't listen to her.  She is full of crap.

Grafix

@RickeyD - Yes.  I know what you are talking about.  When you see that notification in the bottom left of your screen, try to remember not to click on post again.  Instead just click on the refresh the page button and you will see your post has already been published on the page.  My post immediately above this one generated the same response from the AI, so I did not try to post it again.  I just hit the refresh the page button and there it is, already on the page.  You can tell when it is activated because the "Post" button does not fade in colour.  Whenever you see that, just refresh the page instead.

OK.  I understand about the repetitive posts, now.  Would still appreciate it if you only post on topic in my OPs and if you could delete the duplicate images in the text box and overwrite the duplicate posts with a simple text message, saying something like, "Duplicate deleted" or similar. Thanks, mate.

Dee

@Grafix

You’re a Catholic out and out as you dismiss ever bible except the one most favoured by Catholics , you’re terrified of @RickeyD ’s wrath so understandably you won’t even defend your faith .....No surprise really ...........

RickeyD

@Dee ; If you were not ignorant of God and the Scriptures, you would know that I have no affiliation with WBC nor do I agree with their fanaticism. If you were aware of history as opposed to existing in the lies of naturalism, you would know the truth concerning Nero - his successors, Constantine, Roman Catholicism...but you "choose" to exist in ignorance and I cannot help you with that, Dee. 

Catholicism has never been Christian. Catholicism was founded by Constantine in 312-313AD via the Edict of Milan by merging Babylonian Paganism/Roman Paganism with elements of Christian and non-Christian (Apocrypha) doctrine in order to make the pagan cult more palatable to the masses.

The Mass; The Sacraments; Transubstantiation; Purgatory; The Rosary; Statues in Worship; The Perpetual Virginity of Mary as the Goddess of Heaven; The Idolatry of Mary Worship; calling Catholic Leadership as "Father"; Confessing sin to a Priest; The Magisterium; Indulgences; these are NOT Scriptural and undermine the purity and simplicity of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ as Lord; thereby, leading the innocent millions/billions in the way of deception and hopelessness. http://www.eaec.org/cults/romancatholic.htm

Grafix

@Dee - LOL!  The hopeless sleuth way off beam.  I go to the most authentic texts for all scholarship.  I care not what denomination it is.  The most important fact in all history, whether it be religious, scientific, political, social, whatever, is that it is authentic, genuine as close to the original as possible.  That is all that matters.  The denomination matters not and I am damned sure that all of the stoopid arguments between the Churches, God has no time for.  I love many, different and varied preachers online and not one of them is a Catholic preacher.  Work that one out, Einstein.

RickeyD

@Grafix ; @Dee I pity Dee...and she's a foolish, vulgar, naive, atheist...it's been discussed whether or not she should be banned from this forum...I voted to allow her to stay...that was my error.

Grafix

Deleted 

Grafix

@RickeyD - LOL!  Well, you are more generous of spirit than I am.  I see Dee's work as deliberate and "schooled".  Also the RATE at which she and Happy_K post is the dead giveaway - they are obviously paid.  Trolls are paid per post, so the more posts they put on the board, the more money they make.  I only respond to them when I can use them as the vehicle through which to get information on the page.

Dee

@RickeyD


Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzx

Dee

@RickeyD

**** ..it's been discussed whether or not she should be banned from this forum...I voted to allow her to stay...that was my error. 

Hilarious .....discussed by you who’s been warned over 40 times about you hate posts Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha 

Dee

@Grafix

Spoken like a true Catholic I can see the children running .........

RickeyD

@Dee ; I'm going to mute/ignore you Dee...enough. Have a nice life.

MayCaesar

Grafix said:

@MayCaesar - You wrote ....

Me, steering the debate in that direction? You literally opened your thread up with the claim that Christian atrocities are exaggerated and/or are not attributable to religion. How am I steering the debate anywhere, when I am addressing the exact statement the thread was created around?

You deliberately take that statement out of context.  It was to illustrate the behaviour of atheism in debate, how atheism focuses on Christian atrocities, and even takes the liberty of fabricating them in the same breath, while refusing to debate the philosophy  of Christianity.  The topic requests that atheism debate the Christian philosophy without mentioning those atrocities, in the same way that atheism loves to debates the Greco-Roman and Islamic philosophers and great thinkers, without mentioning their  atrocities.  It wasn't a request to introduce atrocities to the discussion.  It was the opposite  - a request to   L E A V E   T H E M    O U T    O F    I T  and treat any discussion on Christianity's philosophy with the same even-handedness that atheism gives to the other two cultures.  But what do you do?  Defy that request and jump right into continuing with the same bigoted focus on Christian atrocities, while ignoring the philosophy itself.      Your post    V I N D I C A T E S   my allegations.  Thank you.  Then you wrote ...

Acknowledging historical atrocities connected to some ideologies is not "bigotry", it is simply being truthful. There were atheists who committed atrocities as well, and I have never denied that. Why do you have a problem with acknowledging the same with regards to Christianity? Human history is a brutal thing, and there is no reason to whitewash anything; you can still proudly believe in Christianity, while admitting that not all Christians have been stellar human beings.

Agreed, acknowledging historical atrocities connected to some ideologies is not bigotry and is being truthful, even if irrelevant, so why won't atheism engage in a discussion about Islamic atrocities, then, as posted in the two videos above?  Why won't a single one of you even watch these videos?  Surely, that is a demonstration of denial and of "whitewashing", and IS  being untruthful?  The bigotry itself is exposed in the wilful demonstration, as witnessed in here, of an all too eager willingness to discuss and loudly proclaim Christians' atrocities, but yet ignore the same in the other two cultures.  The absolute confirmation  of the bigotry is the refusal to watch these videos on those other cultures' atrocities and, worse, the point blank refusal to discuss Christianity's philosophy at all,  but only ever its atrocities.

If you cannot see the double standard here, the glaring hypocrisy and the outright bigotry in the treatment of discussing philosophies and great thinkers, then your credibility is under a serious cloud.

But you are not right, dear Grafix. Atheism does not "focus on Christian atrocities"; atheism simply states that there is no reason to believe in god's existence. I am an atheist, and I dislike all religions equally in principle. I do know history a bit, however, and history suggests that Christians and Muslims have been quite comparable in the havoc they wreaked in the world throughout history.

You are welcome to cite a known case where a Greek philosopher, say, tortured or murdered someone. I am not aware of such cases. I am aware of cases of Christians and Muslims doing that, however, while being endorsed by respective churches and religious gurus.

I said already that the Christian and Muslim atrocities are a result of the holy books being written in a weaponisable way. I have never said anything about who is to blame; you simply are so sensitive to any criticism of your precious religion that any criticism of anything related to history of Christianity you automatically take as me solely blaming Christianity itself for it. That is not at all my point; take a deep breath and reread my actual words.

What are you talking about? Atheists criticise Islam all time; I did it on countless occasions in this thread alone. Some of the Islamic countries nowadays are some of the worst places to live in, and Iran or Yemen are absolute horrors to be avoided at all costs. The Christian world, at least, has moved past fundamentalism, but those guys are living it.
Are you happy now, or do you still feel that I experience some unique feelings to your book?

Dee

@RickeyD

Yes keep running .........

Grafix

@MayCaesar - You wrote ...

But you are not right, dear Grafix. Atheism does not "focus on Christian atrocities"; atheism simply states that there is no reason to believe in god's existence. I am an atheist, and I dislike all religions equally in principle. I do know history a bit, however, and history suggests that Christians and Muslims have been quite comparable in the havoc they wreaked in the world throughout history.

I would be a dishonest fool to deny Christians and Muslims were involved in havoc wreaked throughout history, but I take issue with the two being comparable in scale or nature.  This is typical of the type of misinformation, disinformation, fabricated outright croc, that atheists peddle.  If you watched the videos, you would quickly learn from Islam's own texts, that there's a massive difference in the scale of wars, the expansiveness of them, the atrocities and the sheer number of nations subjugated by the sword.  Christianity has never subjugated any nation by the sword.  It has only defended  with the sword nations already  Christian. The Crusades never subjugated any nation and fought Islam only in the regions generally around Israel.  They had but one mission, to protect pilgrims, holy relics, holy sites and Christian churches from destruction by Islamic invaders. 

Islam subjugated every nation in the Middle East, all the way up through Turkey into Europe, including Austria, Italy, Southern parts of Russia, the Caucuses and the Greek islands.  Going in the other direction across to India, Indonesia and other island Pacific nations.  At the same time right across the top half of Africa and all the way to Andalusia, Spain.  The whole way it was slaughter, bloodshed, rape by force into harems, sex slavery and sold into labor slavery by the hundreds of thousands, which became ultimately many millions, to finance the ongoing expansionist wars and subjugation. Prior to that, the lands which were Islamic, were parts of the Arabian peninsular, not even all of it.  Christianity never ran a slave trade or harems of sex slavery. If you are not prepared to watch these videos, then you will continue to sprout ignorant waffle, like you have above.  Then you write ...

You are welcome to cite a known case where a Greek philosopher, say, tortured or murdered someone. I am not aware of such cases. I am aware of cases of Christians and Muslims doing that, however, while being endorsed by respective churches and religious gurus.

I am not aware of a single Christian theologian or philosopher torturing or murdering anyone, either.  We have already agreed that it is just illogical to construe that the actions of flawed men reflect upon a philosophy or ethos, yet you cast this aside in the case of Christianity, but not in the case of the Greco-Roman cultures, vindicating my accusation of bigotry.  If you are not willing to cast this aside for the Christian ethos, then you can't cast it aside for the Greco-Romans either.  The Roman atrocities in many ways were more barbaric than the Islamics.  They impaled people alive, they bound people to poles and burnt them alive, like torches, for public entertainment.  They put people in arenas with wild animals, armed with but a sword for public entertainment, they disembowelled people and left them to die slow deaths.  They had the most cruel of tortures too.  Should we dismiss their philosophy for that, as you dismiss the Christian philosophy and focus on their atrocities?  Then you write this abomination ....

I said already that the Christian and Muslim atrocities are a result of the holy books being written in a weaponisable way.

Have you ever read the Gospels of Christ?  Show me a single violent, seditious, barbaric, murderous, evil, cruel, egregious, sadistic act that is espoused by Christ?  There's not a single one and there is not a single one in the Christian ethos, either, because it follows Christ's Gospels and doctrines to the letter.  Atheists just don't know anything about it, merely think they do, as I have already demonstrated.   They read very twisted inculcated propaganda, designed to slur, malign, undermine and sustain a hatred of Christianity, funded by its very redoubtable enemies who are many and varied, with a multi-billion dollar budget.  Christianity's enemies have been at their game for centuries, now well crafted.  You are a victim of it.  Do you honestly think educated Westerners where the greatest population of Christianity is found, would honestly in this day and age subscribe to a barbaric and murderous ethos?  To even contemplate and believe such a thing demonstrates an absolute clueless naivete and total ignorance of the subject and the ethos.  Islam is not even a religion.  It feigns religion to excuse its wars of expansionist power.  The two are complete opposites in every way.  Islam is the enemy of Christianity and burns our books, our classical scholarship, our churches and slaughters and rapes our people..

Christian atrocities pale compared with the other two cultures with none for more than 800 years.  Islam has been slaughtering non-Islamics for close on 1800 years, a sustained slaughter, non-stop to this day - 90,000 a year.  The Romans sustained their barbaric customs over many centuries too.  Flawed Christian zealots did not, their atrocities but a short blip in its history, because its ethos repudiates all forms of violence.  Christ's message is to "turn the other cheek",  the reason we see 90,000 Christians slaughtered every year.  Brutality and barbarianism is not part of the Christian ethos.  It never has been, unlike the other two cultures, yet you ignore that.  How come? The actions of brutal and barbaric individuals do not reflect the ethos at all.  It merely reflects the flaws of man.  I have stated that a dozen times and am tired of your stubborn rejection of it.  You then write ...

What are you talking about? Atheists criticise Islam all time; I did it on countless occasions in this thread alone. Some of the Islamic countries nowadays are some of the worst places to live in, and Iran or Yemen are absolute horrors to be avoided at all costs. The Christian world, at least, has moved past fundamentalism, but those guys are living it.

Well, if that is so, why aren't you willing to view and discuss this newly translated history of Islam?  Why do you shy away from the videos?  I don't believe you, May, because actions speak louder than words.  Then you talk about "fundamentalism".  Another ignorance of Jurasic Park proportions.  If one does not adhere to the fundamental teachings of Christ but instead rejects them, then one cannot be  a Christian.  There is no such thing as a Christian "fundamentalist".  There is but one Christianity.  It's faith rests on fundamental beliefs common to ALL  of the denominations.  Comments like that expose atheists' ignorance of the subject and reveal the inculcation, because such terms are repeated way too widely to be unique to the individual, common from the U.K., to Australia to America, Canada, etc.  What does that tell you?  That it is all a carefully orchestrated inculcation of lies.  Further, you're wrong.  I defend the truth, against false prophets.  It has nothing to do with being "sensitive", but everything to do with rebutting lies and defending the faith truthfully.  Thank you for reading this long post.

MayCaesar

@Grafix

No, there is not. By countless historical estimates the amount of violence from followers of both religions is quite comparable, both in the absolute sense and in the per capita calculations. Even the size of territories conquered and owned is very similar.

Well, I have never accused Christian theologists and philosophers of torturing or murdering anyone, have I? However, countless Christian theologists and philosophers openly endorsed atrocities in the name of Christianity; something I cannot say about the Greek philosophers, who generally were very vocal in their opposition to any violence.
Unlike the Christian world throughout the majority of history, the Greek society was actually very pluralistic, and a lot of ideologies coexisted peacefully on the massive scale. People who put people in arenas with wild animals believed in quite different things from what Socrates or Plato believed in.
For that matter, the Greek philosophers' ideologies were not even that popular in Greece. They were widespread among the elite, but the vast majority of the population was uneducated and uninterested in what they saw as useless abstractions. It was quite different in the Christian world, where people were forced into Christianity, and any opposition for the majority of history was burned out with extreme prejudice. Greek philosophers constantly criticised each other's ideologies, and simple folks did so even more commonly; in the Christian world at many times in its history, nobody who dared to criticise the governing ideology openly lived for long.

Jesus certainly did not endorse any form of violence (other than against slaves; there is still a debate among historians on what his words actually meant). I do not remember claiming otherwise.

Another claim about what "atheists" know. There are hundreds millions atheists in the world, at least; how in the world can you know what all of us know and where all of us get our information from?

You could say that brutality and barbarianism is not part of socialism either; in theory, the ideology is just people working together towards common goal by sharing means of production between them.
I am not just interested in abstract theoretical notions, however; I am more interested in where they lead in an actual human society, with all the human flaws exposed and exploited.
Christianity certainly can be practiced in a very peaceful way - the way it perhaps was intended to be practiced originally (which might very well be true) - on the individual basis. The problem is, when implemented as a governing ideology on a scale of a large group of people, it becomes a tool of oppression. All totalitarian ideologies have this property.

You do not believe that I think lowly of Islam? , I am an anarcho-capitalist and a voluntarist... Sharia law is absolutely incompatible with my values. What else do you want me to say? I even put Islam into "the evil four": Islam, Christianity, Socialism and Fascism - four ideologies that together, I believe, are responsible for the vast majority of human suffering through the last 2,000 years.
Your problem seems to not be what I think about Islam, but that I put it on the same level as Christianity. But you know that I do not think highly of Christianity, so why would it be different for Islam? Think it through, pal.

Grafix

@MayCaesar - You claim ...

No, there is not. By countless historical estimates the amount of violence from followers of both religions is quite comparable, both in the absolute sense and in the per capita calculations. Even the size of territories conquered and owned is very similar.

What is the origin of the word "barbarous"?  The Barbary Pirates from the Islamic Barbary Coast.  Given you doggedly stick to your fake history, disproved in the newly translated texts, (the reason you refuse to watch the videos), then quote from authentic historical texts evidence that the Crusades did all of the below (a) to (j) as Islam did and as evidenced in these newly translated archives, as follows ...

(a) Conquered almost one third of the world by the sword, raping and slaughtering unarmed peoples and sold the strongest into slavery by the tens of thousands from each campaign
(b) Sustained a massive slave trade to finance bloody and brutal campaigns for the next round of slaughter and bloodshed to conquer the next innocent nation
(c)  Forced the captive women into harems as sex slaves, when tired of them beheaded or sold them into slavery and replaced them with new captives, beheaded or sold them too and replaced them, on and on
(d)  Forced captured children to be their child-brides, legalising paedophilia -  (Islamics still do so to this day via arranged marriages)
(e)  Raided unarmed pilgrims journeying on foot on pilgrimage to holy sites .  Raped the women and children, then slaughtered every pilgrim and robbed them
(f)   Raided monasteries and convents for their wealth, raped the nuns and barricaded them, with other clergy, inside their churches and burnt them to the ground, burning alive  all those locked inside.
(g)  Sacked churches for their wealth, precious silver and gold acroutements, desecrated their altars and holy relics and razed them to the ground
(h)  Razed to the ground all of the Christian libraries, destroying tranches of Classical history and archived knowledge, every book destroyed - the reason for the huge gap in knowledge during this period
(i)  Pillaged and  plundered every town and city, every Christian edifice, monument, shrines, graves, tombs, as each fell in their path 
(j)  Patrolled the Mediterranean Sea day and night - like the Barbary Pirates - storming merchant ships and sinking them, taking all the booty, still evidenced on the sea bed today, destroying the trade, wealth and commerce of the European bloc of nations dependent upon these sea trade routes, weakening their economies therefor also their defences, in order to attack and subjugate them

Next you write ...

Well, I have never accused Christian theologists and philosophers of torturing or murdering anyone, have I? However, countless Christian theologists and philosophers openly endorsed atrocities in the name of Christianity; something I cannot say about the Greek philosophers, who generally were very vocal in their opposition to any violence.

You implied it by stating no Roman or Greek philosophers had.  There is no such evidence on the record that Christian philosophers and theologians ever did anything of the kind either.  They interpreted the teachings of the Christian God from ancient texts to bring the faith to the people.  Prove your outrageous fabrications and wild claims.  Where's your evidence?  I can even quote a certain Greek philosopher who IS  on the record, his philosophy espousing certain atrocities !!!  You even quoted him yourself.  LOL!  Like to do so again, now?

Unlike the Christian world throughout the majority of history, the Greek society was actually very pluralistic, and a lot of ideologies coexisted peacefully on the massive scale. People who put people in arenas with wild animals believed in quite different things from what Socrates or Plato believed in.

Precisely, and the same applied to the philosophy of Christ, the Christian philosophy, but your rabid bigotry is so heinous you can't even see this, let alone acknowledge it, which gets us back to the very crux of this argument, namely that you will not allow the actions of barbarous Emperors, leaders and warriors to impinge on the "purity" of your darling Greco-Roman philosophers, but you very willingly, vocally and eagerly love to allow it to impinge on Christ's teachings in your twisted bigotry.  As I've said, all along, the stench of your double standards and hypocrisy is suffocating, sickening and unhinged.

Then you claim this outrageous nonsense, with nary an apology for those forced into Islam's putrid cess pit of fake religion by the sword, convert or die being the rule, yet somehow only Christianity gets a mention here.
with this next abomination of yours ....

It was quite different in the Christian world, where people were forced into Christianity, and any opposition for the majority of history was burned out with extreme prejudice.

You can't just make it up, say whatever you like and fly your insidious kite of fakery and get away with it, May.  There is no evidence at all  anywhere in the entire history of Christianity of a single soul ever being "forced" into its faith. It is against its ethos.  Some flawed Christians persecuted their own kind, whom they perceived as heretics, burning them at the stake.  Tell me how they "forced" nearly 3 billion Christians into Christianity without raising an army. eh?  Apart form a bunch of crusaders, mercenaries if you like, in a very short window of its history, Christianity has never had an army. UH DUH !!   Yet, Islam's armies of death and destruction are infamous.

Then we get this heap of horse-shite

Jesus certainly did not endorse any form of violence (other than against slaves; there is still a debate among historians on what his words actually meant). I do not remember claiming otherwise.

You know full well the correct translation is not "slave" but "servant" in those texts.  You defer to pagan translations.  We've already had that argument out to the fullest with authentic sources

Another claim about what "atheists" know. There are hundreds millions atheists in the world, at least; how in the world can you know what all of us know and where all of us get our information from?

But you don't pretend to be an expert on Christianity and its philosophy, eh?  Same question straight back at you.  I debate what is right in front of me.  YOUR OWN WORDS. That's how I know.

Then you prattle on only to follow up with another fake claim, again rabidly attacking Christianity but never uttering a single word, damning the atrocities committed by Islam, not a single solitary one and still refusing to watch the videos, all the while taking every opportunity to denigrate, slur, bash and vilify Christianity.  Makes a of your first opening words to this discussion wherein you claimed you never do that, only to prove that is all you've done.  You can't help yourself and do so at every opportunity.  Your naked, unhinged, uncontrolled, completely rabid bigotry you just can't hide, May.

As I've given you every opportunity to do otherwise, allowed you to vent your despicable hatred of Christianity, hopefully you can now pack it all up for five minutes and pay me the courtesy of getting back on topic?.  You do realize that these recent posts of ours have been totally off-topic?  Right? Yet you claimed you were staying on topic?  Right?  Claimed that atheists don't bash Christianity.  Right?  Well now's your chance to prove your claims.  You admitted you wouldn't watch the videos.  My response as to why you refuse to watch the videos, I give below with a final question.  Can you answer it?

YOU   DON'T   WANT  TO    KNOW  THE   TRUTH,   BECAUSE  YOU   NEED   TO   BELIEVE   IN   AN    ANTI-AMERICAN    AND    ANTI-CHRISTIAN     L  I  E    TO   PROTECT  YOUR    FAKE    HISTORY.

You're no different from every other Anit-American, Anti-Christian Liberal, Islamic, Socialist  Atheist I've met, including all those in this forum.  I have no intention of unjustifiably singling you out for this deceit. 
I prefer  to look at things objectively and ask the bigger questions.  The bigger question here is, why are all of these demographics afraid of the truth and why do they fight so hard to protect the lie?
 
 I consider this lie IS  a religion, an inculcated one.   So,  why do all of these demographics defend the lie with such vigor and so strenuously, too, as if  THE  LIE,   this fake history, were a religion? 
 
C A N    Y O U    A N S W E R    T H A T    Q U E S T I O N ?           C A N     A N Y   O N E    O F    Y O U    O N    T H I S    F O R U M    A N S W E R    I T ?
.

.

MayCaesar

@Grafix

And I disagreed that Muslims have committed a lot of atrocities - where again? You keep talking to me like I am somehow defending Islam and the history of the Muslim world, while all I am saying is that both the Muslim and the Christian worlds have committed a lot of atrocities.
If you are trying to persuade me that Christians were somehow less barbarous, then you are doing a pretty poor job at it. I actually do think that, in terms of the absolute number of atrocities committed throughout the whole period Muslims are slightly ahead of Christians - but, by any measurable statistics I have ever encountered, the discrepancy is fairly minor.

Regarding Christian philosophers and theologists, you will like this sample from Bernard of Clairvaux:
https://history.hanover.edu/courses/excerpts/344bern2.html

BUT THE KNIGHTS OF CHRIST may safely fight the battles of their Lord, fearing neither sin if they smite the enemy, nor danger at their own death; since to inflict death or to die for Christ is no sin, but rather, an abundant claim to glory. In the first case one gains for Christ, and in the second one gains Christ himself. The Lord freely accepts the death of the foe who has offended him, and yet more freely gives himself for the consolation of his fallen knight.

The knight of Christ, I say, may strike with confidence and die yet more confidently, for he serves Christ when he strikes, and serves himself when he falls. Neither does he bear the sword in vain, for he is God's minister, for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of the good. If he kills an evildoer, he is not a mankiller, but, if I may so put it, a killer of evil. He is evidently the avenger of Christ towards evildoers and he is rightly considered a defender of Christians. Should he be killed himself, we know that he has not perished, but has come safely into port. When he inflicts death it is to Christ's profit, and when he suffers death, it is for his own gain. The Christian glories in the death of the pagan, because Christ is glorified; while the death of the Christian gives occasion for the King to show his liberality in the rewarding of his knight. In the one case the just shall rejoice when he sees justice done, and in the other man shall say, truly there is a reward for the just; truly it is God who judges the earth.

I do not mean to say that the pagans are to be slaughtered when there is any other way to prevent them from harassing and persecuting the faithful, but only that it now seems better to destroy them than that the rod of sinners be lifted over the lot of the just, and the righteous perhaps put forth their hands unto iniquity.

Historians agree that this narrative was prevalent in the Christian world in between approximately 900 and 1400 AD. This is not exactly news.

Yes, there were many disagreements among Christians, but questioning Christianity itself was not allowed in many Christian states in many periods of history. In Ancient Greece, questioning any ideology was pretty much a holy grail of the public debate.

No evidence that a single soul was forced into Christianity? Ever heard of things like "inquisition", conversion of cities in Kievan Rus, extreme laws against non-Christians in the Crusader-occupied Jerusalem, countless kings initiating wars against other nations over religious disagreements and slaughtering thousands of innocent people over it... Or is it all a grand conspiracy?

I have never made a single claim about what all Christians believe in. I am only talking about the general patterns.

piloteer

@Grafix

So the little alter boy wants to play philosophy. OK, lets do this.  

The social and cultural makeup of certain countries during certain periods in time does not make Christianity a philosophy. Christianity may have been a strong influence on many cultures, but so was the black plague. A cultural influencer does not make something a philosophy. Not to say that all Christians do not have an understanding of philosophy, but I'm sure a lot of Christians would roll their eyes if they knew it was you personally assigning yourself a representative of "Christian philosophy". Philosophy is "the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline." Given that definition, lets start with a few questions that should be simple if there are philosophical insights from Christian doctrine to use as guidance. 

Are our personalities formed by natural circumstances, or are our personalities formed by a social upbringing?    

What is the nature of our universe according to Christian doctrine? Do we live in a materialistic universe, or do we live in an idealistic universe according to Christian doctrine?

Why is murder wrong? Did "God" create the universe in accordance with the moral truth that murder is wrong, or is murder wrong because "God" says it is?

The bible claims that God grants us all free will, but if everything happens according to God's plan, and God already knows everything that will happen, how can it not be predetermined? If it is predetermined by God, how can it be free will? 
   
Go ahead oh mighty philosopher of christian doctrine. Tell us what your book offers for answers to these philosophical queries.   

Dee

@Grafix

*****There is no evidence at all  anywhere in the entire history of Christianity of a single soul ever being "forced" into its faith. It is against its ethos.  

Utter nonsense as well you know but that’s no surprise and as usual you launch into a rabid personal attack on your opponent and of course blame everyone else of the same.

Read below Christianity’s blood soaked history of forced conversion at the point of a sword 

Incidentally why do you call Christianity a “philosophy “? If the starting point of a philosophy is religious doctrine then the reflection that follows is theology, casuistry, theodicy , exegesis, apologetics or hermeneutics but it’s certainly not philosophy 

Wiki

Although Islamic law prohibits forced conversion, following the Quranic principle that there is "no compulsion in religion" (2:256),[42][43][44] episodes of forced conversions are recorded in the history of Islam. Historians have qualified such instances as "rare"[45] or "exceptional".[42]

Christianity

Christianity was a minority religion during much of the middle Roman Classical Period, and the early Christians were persecuted during that time. When Constantine I converted to Christianity, it became the dominant religion of the Roman Empire. Already under the reign of Constantine I, Christian heretics were being persecuted; beginning in the late 4th century, the ancient pagan religions were also actively suppressed. In the view of many historians, the Constantinian shift turned Christianity from a persecuted religion into one capable of persecution and sometimes eager to persecute.[2]

Late Antiquity

On 27 February 380, together with Gratian and Valentinian II, Theodosius I issued the decree Cunctos populos, the so-called Edict of Thessalonica, recorded in the Codex Theodosianus xvi.1.2. This declared Trinitarian Nicene Christianity to be the only legitimate imperial religion and the only one entitled to call itself Catholic. Other Christians he described as "foolish madmen".[3] He also ended official state support for the traditional polytheistreligions and customs.[4]

The Codex Theodosianus (Eng. Theodosian Code) was a compilation of the laws of the Roman Empire under the Christian emperors since 312. A commission was established by Theodosius II and his co-emperor Valentinian IIIon 26 March 429[5][6] and the compilation was published by a constitution of 15 February 438. It went into force in the eastern and western parts of the empire on 1 January 439.[5]

It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the administration of Our Clemency shall practice that religion which the divine Peter the Apostle transmitted to the Romans.... The rest, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative (Codex Theodosianus XVI 1.2.).[7]

Forced conversions of Jews were carried out with the support of rulers during Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages in Gaul, the Iberian peninsula and in the Byzantine empire.[8]

Medieval western Europe

During the Saxon Wars, Charlemagne, King of the Franks, forcibly converted the Saxons from their native Germanic paganism by way of warfare, and law upon conquest. Examples are the Massacre of Verden in 782, when Charlemagne reportedly had 4,500 captive Saxons massacred for rebelling,[9] and the Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae, a law imposed on conquered Saxons in 785, after another rebellion and destruction of churches and killing of missionary priests and monks,[10] that prescribed death to those who refused to convert to Christianity.[11]

Forced conversion that occurred after the seventh century generally took place during riots and massacres carried out by mobs and clergy without support of the rulers. In contrast, royal persecutions of Jews from the late eleventh century onward generally took the form of expulsions, with some exceptions, such as conversions of Jews in southern Italy of the 13th century, which were carried out by Dominican Inquisitors but instigated by King Charles II of Naples.[8]

Jews were forced to convert to Christianity by the Crusaders in Lorraine, on the Lower Rhine, in Bavaria and Bohemia, in Mainz and in Worms[12] (see Rhineland massacres, Worms massacre (1096)).

Pope Innocent III pronounced in 1201 that if one agreed to be baptized to avoid torture and intimidation, one nevertheless could be compelled to outwardly observe Christianity:

[T]hose who are immersed even though reluctant, do belong to ecclesiastical jurisdiction at least by reason of the sacrament, and might therefore be reasonably compelled to observe the rules of the Christian Faith. It is, to be sure, contrary to the Christian Faith that anyone who is unwilling and wholly opposed to it should be compelled to adopt and observe Christianity. For this reason a valid distinction is made by some between kinds of unwilling ones and kinds of compelled ones. Thus one who is drawn to Christianity by violence, through fear and through torture, and receives the sacrament of Baptism in order to avoid loss, he (like one who comes to Baptism in dissimulation) does receive the impress of Christianity, and may be forced to observe the Christian Faith as one who expressed a conditional willingness though, absolutely speaking, he was unwilling ...[13]

During the Northern Crusades against the pagan Balts and Slavs of northern Europe, forced conversions were a widely used tactic, which received papal sanction.[14] These tactics were first adopted during the Wendish Crusade, but became more widespread during the Livonian Crusade and Prussian Crusade, in which tactics included the killing of hostages, massacre, and the devastation of the lands of tribes that had not yet submitted.[15] Most of the populations of these regions were converted only after the repeated rebellion of native populations that did not want to accept Christianity even after initial forced conversion; in Old Prussia, the tactics employed in the initial conquest and subsequent conversion of the territory resulted in the death of most of the native population, whose language consequently became extinct.[16]

Early modern Iberian peninsula

After the end of Islamic control of Spain, Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492.[17] In Portugal, following an order for their expulsion in 1496, only a handful were allowed to leave and the rest were forced to convert.[18] Muslims were expelled from Portugal in 1497, and they were gradually forced to convert in the constituent kingdoms of Spain. The forced conversion of Muslims was implemented in the Crown of Castile from 1500–02 and in the Crown of Aragon in the 1520s.[19] After the conversions, the so-called "New Christians" were those inhabitants (Sephardic Jews or Mudéjar Muslims) who were baptized under coercion and in the face of execution, becoming forced converts from Islam (Moriscos, Conversos and "secret Moors") or from Judaism (Conversos, Crypto-Jews and Marranos).

After the forced conversion, when all former Muslims and Jews had ostensibly become Catholic, the Spanish Inquisition targeted primarily forced converts from Judaism and Islam, who came under suspicion of either continuing to adhere to their old religion or having fallen back into it. Jewish conversos still resided in Spain and often practised Judaism secretly and were suspected by the "Old Christians" of being Crypto-Jews. The Spanish Inquisition generated much wealth and income for the church and individual inquisitors by confiscating the property of the persecuted. The end of Al-Andalus and the expulsion of the Sephardic Jews from the Iberian Peninsula went hand in hand with the increase of Spanish and Portuguese influence in the world, as exemplified in the Christian conquest of the Americas and their aboriginal Indian population. The Ottoman Empire and Moroccoabsorbed most of the Jewish and Muslim refugees, although a large majority remained as Conversos.[20]

Austria

The crypto-Protestant parents were taxed to pay for the Catholic institutionalization and education of their 289 children.

Colonial Americas

During the European colonization of the Americas, forced conversion of the continents' indigenous, non-Christian population was common, especially in South America and Mesoamerica, where the conquest of large indigenous polities like the Inca and Aztec Empires placed colonizers in control of large non-Christian populations. Historians broadly agree that most native populations that converted did so under the threat of violence, often because they were compelled to after being conquered, and that the Catholic Church cooperated with civil authority to achieve this end.[21]

Eastern Europe

Upon converting to Christianity in the 10th century, Vladimir the Great, the ruler of Kievan Rus', ordered Kiev's citizens to undergo a mass baptism in the Dnieper river.[22]

In the 13th century the pagan populations of the Baltics faced campaigns of forcible conversion by crusading knight corps such as the Livonian Brothers of the Sword and the Teutonic Order, which often meant simply dispossessing these populations of their lands and property.[23][24]

After Ivan the Terrible's conquest of the Khanate of Kazan, the Muslim population faced slaughter, expulsion, forced resettlement and conversion to Christianity.[25]

In the 18th century, Elizabeth of Russia launched a campaign of forced conversion of Russia's non-Orthodox subjects, including Muslims and Jews.[26]

Goa inquisition

The Portuguese practised religious persecution in Goa, India in the 16th and 17th centuries. The natives of Goa, most of them Hindus, were subjected to severe torture and oppression by the zealous Portuguese rulers and missionaries, and forcibly converted to Christianity.[27][28][29][30][31][32]

In 1567, the campaign to destroy temples in Bardez met with success, with 300 Hindu temples destroyed. Prohibition was laid from December 4, 1567 on rituals of Hindu marriages, sacred thread wearing and cremation. All persons above 15 years of age were compelled to listen to Christian preaching, failing which they were punished. In 1583, Hindu temples at Assolna and Cuncolim were destroyed by the Portuguese army. "The fathers of the Church forbade the Hindus under terrible penalties the use of their own sacred books, and prevented them from all exercise of their religion. They destroyed their temples, and so harassed and interfered with the people that they abandoned the city in large numbers, refusing to remain any longer in a place where they had no liberty, and were liable to imprisonment, torture and death if they worshiped after their own fashion the gods of their fathers", wrote Filippo Sassetti, who was in India from 1578 to 1588. An order was issued in June 1684 for suppressing the Konkani language and making it compulsory to speak Portuguese, on pain of severe penalties. All non-Christian cultural symbols and books written in local languages were also ordered to be destroyed.[33]

Papal States

In 1858, Edgardo Mortara was taken from his Jewish parents and raised as a Catholic, because he'd been baptized by a maid without his parents' consent or knowledge. This incident was called the Mortara case.

World War II

During World War II, Orthodox Serbs were forcibly converted to Catholicism.[34][35]

Greek Catholics in Eastern Europe

Following World War II, the Greek Catholic Church in Slovakia, Transylvania and Ukraine was outlawed, its members were forced to convert to orthodoxy unless they preferred to be imprisoned, and its properties were confiscated and given to either the Moscow Patriarchate or the Romanian Orthodox Church.

Hindus in India

In 2009, the Assam Times reported that about fifteen armed Hmar militants, members of the Manmasi National Christian Army, tried to force Hindu residents of Bhuvan Pahar, Assam to convert to Christianity.[36]

Hinduism

Indian Hindus have alleged that "radical Christian groups" in Orissa, India have forced Christian converts from Hinduism to "revert"[37] to Hinduism. These "religious riots" were largely between two tribal groups in Orissa, one of which was predominantly Hindu and the other was predominantly Christian, over the assassination of a Hindu leader named Swami Lakshmanananda by Maoists who were operating as terrorist groups in India (see Naxalite).[38] In the aftermath of the violence, American Christian evangelical groups have claimed that Hindu groups are "forcibly reverting" Christian converts from Hinduism back to Hinduism.[37] It has also been alleged that these same Hindu groups have used allurements to convert poor Muslims and Christians to Hinduism against their will.[39][40] Similarly, Hindus claim that Christian missionaries use money and free education to lure Hindus to convert to Christianity.[41] .

Grafix

Edited and re-posted below

Grafix

@MayCaesar ; with cc to  - @TGMasterX +  @piloteer +  @JGXdebatePRO +  @xlJ_dolphin_473 +  @Dee +  @RickeyD + @Happy_Killbot

I see.  I gave you enough rope to prove yourself, but yet you fall back into more of the same.  You refuse to watch the videos, no matter how many times I urge you to do so.  They're on topic.  You refuse to come back to the topic, in spite of many requests that you do so.  You refuse to answer the question I put in front of you, THREE  times now, which reflects the topic title.  You refuse to debate on-topic at all, in spite of repeated requests, even after being told in no uncertain terms to STFU, if you can't stay on topic, but do you?   Your persistent resistance points to some kind of deluded derangement. 

Atheism pretends it holds some kind of elusive "intellectual" higher ground.  Where is it?  Where's yours?  You can't even stay on topic, let alone stay out of the rhetorical gutter.  If it were only you, I would have no point, but it's not only you.  It's true of every Atheist I've ever had a discussion with.  They're ignoramuses on every subject.  Every  subject.  They have no scholarship of their own to claim.  There's no "intellectualism" in Atheism at all.   Atheism borrows its pseudo "intellectualism" by deferring to the intellectual endeavour of the Greco-Roman philosophers and the dubious "scholarship" of early Islam, but has none of its own, nor any philosophy of its own.  A blank page.  It has no ethos.  A blank page.  It has no ideology.  A blank page.  It has no history.  A blank page.  It has no scholars.  A blank page.  It is a fraud.  A croc.   A lie.  A deceit.  A double blind.

So what is the purpose of this double blind?  It claims it is a column of smoke, a nothing, with a single belief - that there is no God - yet we know it has a mission, a mission about which it is extremely zealous, so zealous it cannot repress its rabid bigotry, unsurpassed by any other group.  It never shuts up about it and invests billions, funding people like Dawk Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the like.  Why? ... funding their every move, their every speaking tour, their accommodation, their venues, their meal tickets, their flights, their hire cars, while pretending to be nothing, just a benign column of smoke of nothing.  So what's going on?  Well, the Genie is out of the bottle.  You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.  Atheism is a brother in arms with Islam.  They are peas from the same pod.  How?

Just like Islam, it's purpose is political, political narcissism of the worst kind, just like Islam's political narcissism.  Neither of them are what they pretend to be.  Both are insidious deceptions, with exactly the same mission, using a fake identity to conceal their mission.  Islam was never a religion, least of all of the Abrahamic stock.  It slaughters, rapes, beheads and enslaves with great vengeance and unbridled delight all and any who identify with the Abrahamic religion.  So how has it claimed this completely fake croc for so many centuries and even convinced the West to teach this croc, that it is one of "three" religions which belong to the Abrahamic belief system?  Islam has a multi-billion dollar budget invested in this propaganda, a globally orchestrated, well-funded inculcation, networked across the entire world for centuries, destroying all classical scholarship which exposed it.  

Atheism does the same with an identical modus operandi.  Mohammed needed a Cause Célèbre  to amass a following through whom to wage war, conquest, subjugation and power.  Atheism, similarly, with its fake cover of nothingness, has built a multi-billion dollar network to become a political power through Communism.  Both must eradicate Christianity before they can hope to succeed.  It stands in their way.  This is why I cannot get a single Atheist in this forum to watch the videos on the bloody slaughter-crazed depraved history of Islam.  It is why not one of you will enumerate a single one of Islam's atrocities.  You are all frauds.  Every single one of you.  Despicable liars.  Cheats.  Villains.  Vehicles of Satan.  What's worse, most of you in ignorance, are not even aware that you are.  Ignorance is Atheism's flagship.  If you were not ignorant, you would never support it.
.

xlJ_dolphin_473

@Grafix
I watched the videos. They do not prove your point.

Grafix

That's it?  Not willing to defend your rebuttal?  It's not really a rebuttal then is it?  Now defend it.

Happy_Killbot

@Grafix You are still ranting about this?

What exactly would you consider good evidence to disprove your point, that is, give me a hypothetical scenario, that if true would make you reconsider your position.

Grafix

@piloteer - You wrote ....

The social and cultural makeup of certain countries during certain periods in time does not make Christianity a philosophy. Christianity may have been a strong influence on many cultures, but so was the black plague. A cultural influencer does not make something a philosophy. Not to say that all Christians do not have an understanding of philosophy,

The best comparison of the Judeo-Christian ethos you can come up with is the black plague?  That proves my point in my last post - that Atheism relies on ignorance to corral its supporters.  Well done. Next.

Philosophy is "the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline."

You need to first prove that the scholarship of Christianity does not likewise engage this scholastical endeavour.  You haven't.  Until you do you have no argument.  Christianity does study all of these disciplines.  It has Christian/Catholic Universities.  It even studies these in more depth than secular scholarship does, researching the reason for our existence and how our existence came about, by what cause and effect.  Cause and effect are the primary pillars of scientific endeavour.  Some of the greatest scientists were Christians.  The Vatican has its own Department in this scientific discipline and one of the largest space telescopes in the world, commanding a very diligent study of astro-physics and the natural sciences.  You didn't know that did you?  Ignorance does not trump.  Now prove that Christianity is not equally engaged in the sciences.  Until you do, you have no argument.  Then you ask ...

Are our personalities formed by natural circumstances, or are our personalities formed by a social upbringing?   

Neither.  One's personality is genetically inherited.  However, undue hardship, undue pressures, undue catastrophes and trials and tribulations can manifest in excesses, which were inherently dormant in the genes and which may never have manifested themselves but for such afflictions, which ultimate manifestation can appear as personality disorders, shaped by circumstance, but the proclivity to react in a certain way is nevertheless inherently genetic, because different people react differently to the same things, which proves that.  Science has in any case proved that personality is genetically inherited.

What is the nature of our universe according to Christian doctrine? Do we live in a materialistic universe, or do we live in an idealistic universe according to Christian doctrine? 

Christian doctrine does not teach that we live in an idealistic universe.  I am a scholar of Christianity and have no clue as to what that even means.  It is not what Christianity teaches.  I should know.  When you present your arguments based on facts, then we can have an enlightened discussion.  While you deal in misconceptions, ignorance and non-facts, that's impossible.  

The nature of our universe is defined by the science of astro-physics.  How it came into being no-one really knows.  Although the theory of the Big Bang has been advanced by some, it is also rejected by many scientists including many who are not  "Creationists".   Creationists understand physics.  Creationists understand science.  Many scientists, who are not Creationists also understand that atheistic science is a lie, is not based on imperial evidence nor on provable evidence or even on any sustainable probability.  That is why they reject it too. 

It was not only Creationist scientists who held for decades that the structure of the universe dictates the necessity of Intelligent Design and argued that solidly, due to all of the empirical evidence, the order, the precision, the astronomical sense of it and also acknowledging what Einstein proved with his equation of relativity.  They took into account that Einstein himself was so gobsmacked by the revelations of his own equation, that he declared it proved evidence of a higher super power, the existence of a super intellect, although he never came to worship any God personally.  Nevertheless, it caused him to reject atheism afterwards and adopt Pantheism, which is belief in a higher supreme intelligence of unknown qualification. Einstein declared atheism was no longer a rational belief, subsequent to his discovery.

Why is murder wrong? Did "God" create the universe in accordance with the moral truth that murder is wrong, or is murder wrong because "God" says it is? 

Now you move into philosophical opinion in the hope of proving Christianity wrong.  I thought you said Christianity had no philosophy?  This very question proves it does.  The Christian philosophy is simple, but packed with wisdom.  It is this.  If a society does not set for itself a basic pillar of foundational morals, accepted and adhered to by the whole of society, then it will fall into decay.  That's its fundamental philosophy.  The question of whether murder is wrong, or rape, or incest, bestiality, or theft, extortion or deception, infidelity or licentiousness, etc. all fall under the same moral purview.  They cause harm to others and harm causes discord with hurt.  Hurt produces undisciplined counter-reactions, which in turn create strife and which in turn can ultimately lead to civil unrest and crimes, the beginning of the decay of any society.  This is the philosophy of Christianity, although you claim one doesn't exist.  Whether these moral codes come from God or elsewhere matters not.  The point is that Christianity insists on a moral compass to prevent social discord as a defence against social decay, because it acknowledges the wisdom of such.  Who or where these come from is another debate altogether, i.e., whether God exists - irrelevant here.

The bible claims that God grants us all free will, but if everything happens according to God's plan, and God already knows everything that will happen, how can it not be predetermined? If it is predetermined by God, how can it be free will?   

Again sustained inculcation of lies and deceptions lead you up the garden path, the reason Christianity abhors atheism.  It is an orchestrated deception promulgating misinformation as just demonstrated.  You think you know the definition of "God's Plan" and base your question on an erroneous understanding of it, an understanding inculcated by your unholy religion of atheism.  God's Plan is not to control our destiny.  God's plan is not to control anything at all.  God's Plan has nothing to do with control.  God's Plan is the opposite of control.  Satan teaches that fallacy, through his false prophet of atheism and others.  God's plan is for the faithful and only for the faithful, those who demonstrate that they are faithful, that they may receive the gift of eternal life and live on the face of this earth forever in harmony, peace, knowledge and love for one another to enjoy a subliminal existence.  Those who do not wish to be a part of that plan are free to reject it, because God gave them the free will to do so.

If the future and our own personal futures were pre-determined by God, then why would He want all the strife and hurt, He being a benevolent and loving God?  Why would He allow a persona such as Satan = the temptation to do wrong and harm others, even exist?  The concept allows that God could wipe out Satan in a jiff.  If God chose to put his thumb on everything and to control the outcome, why would He allow the shocking suffering in our world?  He doesn't create that.  Satan does.  God gave everyone free will, including Satan.  Satan chose to defy God. God banished him and bound him to the earth.

Your argument is unintelligent, shows just why the Christian philosophy is streaks ahead of the dumb atheist philosophy.  In your blinkered state and dulled mental capacity, you are unable to appreciate that just because God is omniscient - (all knowing, all wise and sees and knows all in advance) - does not demand that he must by natural progression, therefore control our destiny, every choice we make and every thought we have.  Knowing the future does not need to be bolted to controlling it.  It is simply fore-knowledge, but with a hands-off approach, giving each of us the free will to control our own destinies.  If God sought to control everything, there would be no Atheists.  There would be no Islam, etc.  No wars.  No crucifixions, not even of Himself.  He loves us so, that He gave up His only beloved Son to prove that unconditional love.  Do you understand unconditional love?
.

Dee

@Grafix

No other religion comes close to the blood soaked religion of Christianity which has raped , looted,  pillaged in a frenzy that lasted 100’s of years they destroyed books, manuscripts , statures , paintings and buildings all in the name of Jesus and done so in every corner of the world 

Stop wailing and attempt a defence instead of going into a self pitying “poor me rant “

Grafix

Really?  I have never seen Christianity's arms, legs, swords or armies, let alone watched or read of its raping, pillaging, plundering anything.  I have watched and read about flawed humans doing that, though.  Show me a single breath in Christ's Gospels which advocates any of these.  Then you might have an argument.  Meanwhile, the Koran not only condones such, but exhorts its followers to slaughter infidels.  That's you and me.  We're both infidels.  Happy now?  Like all good unintelligent and dumb atheists, you conflate a philosophy with the actions of flawed men.  That does not make the philosophy flawed.  It makes the men flawed.  Get it?

Dee

@Grafix

***** Really?  I have never seen Christianity's arms legs, swords and armies, let alone watched or read of its raping, pillaging, plundering anything.  I have watched and read about flawed humans doing that, though.  Show me a single breath in Christ's Gospels which advocates any of these.  Then you might have an argument.  Meanwhile, the Koran not only condones such, but exhorts its followers to slaughter infidels.  That's you and me.  We're both infidels.  Happy now?  Like all good unintelligent and dumb atheists, you conflate a philosophy with the actions of flawed men.  That does not make the philosophy flawed.  It makes the men flawed.  Get it?


  I have never seen Islam’s  arms legs, swords and armies, let alone watched or read of its raping, pillaging, plundering anything.  I have watched and read about flawed humans doing that, though.  Show me a single breath in Quran which advocates any of these without taking it out of context?

Then you might have an argument.  Meanwhile, the Bible not only condones such, but exhorts its followers to slaughter non Christians me.   Happy now?  Like all good unintelligent and dumb Christians , you conflate a philosophy with the actions of flawed men.  That does not make the philosophy flawed.  It makes the men flawed.  Get it?

By the way Christianity is still not a “philosophy “

Grafix

@Dee - So you agree then, if Islam is not a physical entity than Christianity is not either?  Great.  Moving right along.  The difference between the two is that Islamics who have arms and legs adhere to a cultural doctrine which instructs them to shoot, rape and slaughter Infidels, you and me.  Christianity incites and calls for no such thing.  Islam has armies carrying out its exhortations in its texts, called Jihadists.  Christianity has no such armies.  It's army is only peaceful preachers.

If you cannot accept these differences then you are plainly beyond all help and obviously a little maggot caught in their dung heap of deception and iniquitous intent - to wipe out Christianity - with you an unwitting foot-soldier, happily marching along doing their stinking bidding.

Dee

@Grafix

***** So you agree then, if Islam is not a physical entity than Christianity is not either?  Great.  Moving right along.  The difference between the two is that Islamics who have arms and legs adhere to a cultural doctrine which instructs them to shoot, rape and slaughter Infidels, you and me.  

If you take the Quran out of context ....The “UnHoly Bible”.... Psalm 137, states, "Blessed is he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks."

****Christianity incites and calls for no such thing.  

Hilarious you said the same about slavery 

****Islam has armies carrying out its exhortations in
its texts, called Jihadists.  Christianity has no such armies.  It's army is only peaceful preachers.

“Peaceful crusaders “ you mean like the crusades and the inquisition?

***If you cannot accept these differences then you are plainly beyond all help and obviously a little maggot caught in their dung heap of deception and iniquitous intent - to wipe out Christianity - with you an unwitting foot-soldier, happily marching along doing their stinking bidding.

If you cannot accept these differences then you are plainly beyond all help and obviously a little maggot caught in their dung heap of deception and iniquitous intent - to wipe out Islam  - with you an unwitting foot-soldier, happily marching along doing their stinking bidding.

Grafix

@Dee - Quit trying to re-prosecute old arguments in which you were soundly beaten, hands down.  You bring them up only to re-prosecute them, because you cannot accept defeat.  If you can't accept the truth, which unequivocally showed your sources were flawed, your arguments were based on flawed texts, fake history, then I say again, you are beyond help and just a little maggot caught in their dung heap of deception and iniquitous intent - to wipe out Christianity - you the unwitting foot-soldier happily marching along doing their stinking bidding.

OK.  If you wish, compare the crusades with the Islamic destruction, slaughter, slavery, rape and forcing of Christian women into harems for sex-slavery but watch the damned video.  Until then your arguments have no credible source, just inculcated opinions, made up, fabricated, dumped in your lump of muscle you call a brain and etched into it deliberately to defend fake history.  Go right ahead.  Watch the video if you want accredited and authenticated sources - original Islamic texts boasting about their conquests.  It's all there.   When you've watched the video, then I'll take you seriously.

The argument of this topic is already on this page.  Why haven't you responded to it?  Respond to it or STFU.  Here it is again ... 

Grafix said::

@MayCaesar ; with cc to  - @TGMasterX +  @piloteer +  @JGXdebatePRO +  @xlJ_dolphin_473 +  @Dee +  @RickeyD + @Happy_Killbot

I see.  I gave you enough rope to prove yourself, but yet you fall back into more of the same.  You refuse to watch the videos, no matter how many times I urge you to do so.  They're on topic.  You refuse to come back to the topic, in spite of many requests that you do so.  You refuse to answer the question I put in front of you, THREE  times now, which reflects the topic title.  You refuse to debate on-topic at all, in spite of repeated requests, even after being told in no uncertain terms to STFU, if you can't stay on topic, but do you?   Your persistent resistance points to some kind of deluded derangement. 

Atheism pretends it holds some kind of elusive "intellectual" higher ground.  Where is it?  Where's yours?  You can't even stay on topic, let alone stay out of the rhetorical gutter.  If it were only you, I would have no point, but it's not only you.  It's true of every Atheist I've ever had a discussion with.  They're ignoramuses on every subject.  Every  subject.  They have no scholarship of their own to claim.  There's no "intellectualism" in Atheism at all.   Atheism borrows its pseudo "intellectualism" by deferring to the intellectual endeavour of the Greco-Roman philosophers and the dubious "scholarship" of early Islam, but has none of its own, nor any philosophy of its own.  A blank page.  It has no ethos.  A blank page.  It has no ideology.  A blank page.  It has no history.  A blank page.  It has no scholars.  A blank page.  It is a fraud.  A croc.   A lie.  A deceit.  A double blind.

So what is the purpose of this double blind?  It claims it is a column of smoke, a nothing, with a single belief - that there is no God - yet we know it has a mission, a mission about which it is extremely zealous, so zealous it cannot repress its rabid bigotry, unsurpassed by any other group.  It never shuts up about it and invests billions, funding people like Dawk Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the like.  Why? ... funding their every move, their every speaking tour, their accommodation, their venues, their meal tickets, their flights, their hire cars, while pretending to be nothing, just a benign column of smoke of nothing.  So what's going on?  Well, the Genie is out of the bottle.  You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.  Atheism is a brother in arms with Islam.  They are peas from the same pod.  How?

Just like Islam, it's purpose is political, political narcissism of the worst kind, just like Islam's political narcissism.  Neither of them are what they pretend to be.  Both are insidious deceptions, with exactly the same mission, using a fake identity to conceal their mission.  Islam was never a religion, least of all of the Abrahamic stock.  It slaughters, rapes, beheads and enslaves with great vengeance and unbridled delight all and any who identify with the Abrahamic religion.  So how has it claimed this completely fake croc for so many centuries and even convinced the West to teach this croc, that it is one of "three" religions which belong to the Abrahamic belief system?  Islam has a multi-billion dollar budget invested in this propaganda, a globally orchestrated, well-funded inculcation, networked across the entire world for centuries, destroying all classical scholarship which exposed it.  

Atheism does the same with an identical modus operandi.  Mohammed needed a Cause Célèbre  to amass a following through whom to wage war, conquest, subjugation and power.  Atheism, similarly, with its fake cover of nothingness, has built a multi-billion dollar network to become a political power through Communism.  Both must eradicate Christianity before they can hope to succeed.  It stands in their way.  This is why I cannot get a single Atheist in this forum to watch the videos on the bloody slaughter-crazed depraved history of Islam.  It is why not one of you will enumerate a single one of Islam's atrocities.  You are all frauds.  Every single one of you.  Despicable liars.  Cheats.  Villains.  Vehicles of Satan.  What's worse, most of you in ignorance, are not even aware that you are.  Ignorance is Atheism's flagship.  If you were not ignorant, you would never support it.
.

JGXdebatePRO

@Grafix Ironic, you preaching about slaughters and rapes, when most periods of violent history were christian-ruled.

JGXdebatePRO

also, not all atheists are communist.@Grafix