What a waste

[Zzyzx]

.
Ancient cultures devoted large amounts of time and resources to worshiping their "gods", sacrificed food and animals (even people), built palaces and temples of worship, etc. It would seem as though using that time and the resources to better the lot of common people would have been more appropriate.

Are modern societies doing the same thing?

[sizzle-d]

In the real world

Who was talking about a magic world?

Atheism is growing and Christianity is declining in developed / technological / better educated nations

Most of the atheists i've met don't appear educated and guess what? Atheism has churches now, soon, they will have a god + lots of immorality.

Christianity is growing in undeveloped / non-technological / less educated nations of Africa, parts of Asia and South America.

Well they are more educated than a lot of atheists i've seen.

Young people in particular are abandoning Christianity so as the older generations of believers die out their religion should continue to decline (or perhaps die with them).

That's what i'm talking about. Who do you think lurks on reddit and yahoo answers? The atheists of course and there is no sin for them so everything is normal. Even threatening to rape a person.

Education seems to be the enemy of most supernatural belief systems (particularly when critical / analytical thinking is encouraged).

Yeah, the scientists promoting "critical" and "scientific" thinking have abandoned it. Get with the times. It's now faith.

[Hatuey]

Well they are more educated than a lot of atheists i've seen.

The dumbest atheist I've met wouldn't have a statement in his signature line followed by a link to a scientist that disagrees with that statement like you do. "Evolution is a lie... now follow this link to a Christian scientist who believes in evolution!"

[99percentatheism]

It is kind of silly to think that an atheist society would be so much different when the only difference is whether or not they believe in a certain entity.

You need to go on the net more often (reddit atheism subforum). Normally, i'ld be trying to converse with atheists to maybe make them to think of Christianity but i'm less bothered. It doesn't take a genius to know why atheism was never popular.
In one sentence, atheism is destroying its self.

Yeah, even an idiot can figure out that up to about 330 years ago, atheists (and other religions) would be executed by Christians via blasphemy law. No wonder it was never popular.

Please show evidence of this.

[Zzyzx]

.

In the real world

Who was talking about a magic world?

Most religionists tend to talk about a magic world in which various supernatural entities perform supernatural feats. Many claim that prayers to an invisible, undetectable "god" will magically influence human affairs. They often maintain that their favorite "god" (among the thousands proposed, worshiped, feared by humans) created the universe, the Earth, all life forms by magic. Some insist that their gods can take human form, die, and magically come back to life and magically levitate through the atmosphere.

Atheism is growing and Christianity is declining in developed / technological / better educated nations

Most of the atheists i've met don't appear educated

Decorum and Forum Rules prevent me from making the obvious comment.

and guess what? Atheism has churches now, soon, they will have a god + lots of immorality.

Ah yes, a Theist's great fear – an Atheist god – and "Atheist churches"

Christianity is growing in undeveloped / non-technological / less educated nations of Africa, parts of Asia and South America.

Well they are more educated than a lot of atheists i've seen.

It is not surprising that you would think that. Are you somewhat aware of educational levels in undeveloped nations? Are you aware that there is an inverse relationship between education and religiosity?

Young people in particular are abandoning Christianity so as the older generations of believers die out their religion should continue to decline (or perhaps die with them).

That's what i'm talking about. Who do you think lurks on reddit and yahoo answers? The atheists of course and there is no sin for them so everything is normal. Even threatening to rape a person.

Yes, the total explanation for young people leaving religious organizations must be the phenomenal influence of "Atheists" on reddit and yahoo answers.

Those Atheists who aren't very intelligent or well educated must be awesome people to scare the pants off Christians who outnumber them 50:1 (and who are better educated and more intelligent – with you as an example).

Education seems to be the enemy of most supernatural belief systems (particularly when critical / analytical thinking is encouraged).

Yeah, the scientists promoting "critical" and "scientific" thinking have abandoned it.

Are such foolish statements a deliberate attempt to make religion look silly? If so, it isn't necessary.

Get with the times. It's now faith.

It must be difficult to accept that religion declines as education increases and as science provides real answers for what was once attributed to "gods." Some still cling to fanciful "explanation" of storms, droughts, earthquakes, disease, etc as being "punishment from god for sins."

[Danmark]

Yeah, even an idiot can figure out that up to about 330 years ago, atheists (and other religions) would be executed by Christians via blasphemy law. No wonder it was never popular.

Please show evidence of this.

Moderator Clarification
This is a classic case of a short response that is not a 'one-liner.'
A one-liner is response that does not advance the argument. Examples are: 'I agree!' and 'I disagree!' There is nothing against the rules about a brief reply. It is acceptable to ask for evidence to support a a claim.'
Rules
C&A Guidelines


______________

Moderator clarifications do not count as a strike against any posters. They serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received and/or are given at the discretion of a moderator when he or she feels a clarification of the rules is required.

[Mr. LongView]

Modern societies still build there pyramids...
Luxor, seventh baptist church of the anointed, a small country called the Vatican and its affiliates, masques, temples, later day saints, Jehovah's witness protection, Hindu's doing, and all the rest....(lions, tigers, oh my)

Plus the cult of modern personality?

Kim Kardasheans butt was granted a seperate time zone! News at seven!
The octo-mom has agreed to fight in the octogon with an octopus!
Is your standard nine blade razor really up to the job of the new eleven blade shave-o-matic??(batteries not included)

I for one ain't going to stand for some stone age savages wasting time better than me!

[Danmark]

....
That's what i'm talking about. Who do you think lurks on reddit and yahoo answers? The atheists of course and there is no sin for them so everything is normal. Even threatening to rape a person.

Moderator Warning

Blanket negative personal remark.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Jashwell]

It is kind of silly to think that an atheist society would be so much different when the only difference is whether or not they believe in a certain entity.

You need to go on the net more often (reddit atheism subforum). Normally, i'ld be trying to converse with atheists to maybe make them to think of Christianity but i'm less bothered. It doesn't take a genius to know why atheism was never popular.
In one sentence, atheism is destroying its self.

Yeah, even an idiot can figure out that up to about 330 years ago, atheists (and other religions) would be executed by Christians via blasphemy law. No wonder it was never popular.

Please show evidence of this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discrimina ... t_atheists
Ctrl+F "execut"
Notice how many mentioned in the early modern period were called atheists as an insult merely because of controversial beliefs, even though many of them did believe in a God. They were executed for those beliefs, do you think someone who really was an atheist wouldn't have been executed?

There's also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law
"The last person hanged for blasphemy in Great Britain was Thomas Aikenhead aged 20, in Scotland in 1697. He was prosecuted for denying the veracity of the Old Testament and the legitimacy of Christ's miracles."

Naturally, Wikipedia has lots of sources (see superscript, square bracket enclosed numbers)

In fact, apostasy (which includes being an atheist) is still punishable by death in 11 countries such as the UAE, Somalia and Egypt.

[dianaiad]

You say this to justify the terrible acts of the people of YOUR faith and YOUR god: well THEY did it more than WE did so it's OK that WE did it.

Oh, please let me know exactly what 'terrible' acts of which the folks of MY faith and MY God are guilty. ...and please do remember that the folks who believe as I do claim that Christianity went off the rails very, very early on.

As well, I'm not the one doing the 'tu quoque argument here; that's you. All I am repeating are facts:

We have no evidence of an atheistic society/culture leaving us anything in terms of monuments, writings or ideas.

The only officially atheist societies we have had (the ones I have conceded are 'imposed from the top down,' but which were, nevertheless, determined to make 'atheism' their view on deity) were 100% lethal; they out murdered, out oppressed and out destroyed any theocracy that we know of in history.

In other words, we have no evidence that a 'bedrock' atheistic culture would be more moral, ethical, scholarly, peaceful or productive than a theistic one, and we do know that officially imposed atheism doesn't stop mayhem and horror.

That's the evidence we have about what 'wastefulness' is.

I'll leave it to you; what's more wasteful : a culture which (for instance) spends half its resources on religious rites and buildings, and only half on the material advancement of its people, or...

a culture that spends so little on either one that it leaves absolutely no trace of itself to it's descendents?

Or even better; a culture that 'wastes' its resources on religious buildings, art, music and panoply, or a culture that doesn't....but kills off 30% of it's population, instead, and actively seeks out and destroys all the art, architecture and philosophy achieved in the previous couple of thousand years?

I think, frankly, that in this case 'tu quoque' is not me claiming that 'because atheists are killers, we can be...' in fact, that argument has always been the other way around; it's atheists defending atheistic cultures by saying 'look how evil theocracies are; at least we didn't kill for God!"

But that's not the question here, is it?

All I am saying here, and the only claim I have ever made, is that any assumption that an atheistic culture would be 'better' in ANY way is air dreaming. It would not be. If there IS a God, it could not be. If there isn't one, then all cultures are atheist. Human motives and actions would not change a bit; the only difference between an atheist society and a theist one, should there be no god, is the excuses used to commit the mayhem people want to commit.

[connermt]

[Replying to post 59 by dianaiad]

...please let me know exactly what 'terrible' acts of which the folks of MY faith and MY God are guilty...

Doesn't change the fact you're playing the "well, we've done less bad things that YOU have so THERE!" Infantile thinking IMO.
But to answer your question, for this once and last time (as you tend not to get the answer the first 400 times so please pay attention, reading what's there and not what you WANT to be tere) : funneling $ to the Nazis to help eliminate the 'evil' Jews. Helping Nazis escape Europe at the War's end to avoid justice for their actions.
You may not call that 'terrible' but I do. But alas, by your calculations, that may be only 2 things and if, again by your apparent "standards":roll: if you can point of 3 positive things, you're win!:lol:

...what's more wasteful : a culture which (for instance) spends half its resources on religious rites and buildings, and only half on the material advancement of its people, or... a culture that spends so little on either one that it leaves absolutely no trace of itself to it's descendents?

I didn't see a 'range' of 'wastefulness' in the OP so I can't answer that question as it wasn't part of the OP. If you can show a 'range' of 'wastefulness' in the OP, please point it out.

But that's not the question here, is it?

Oh, well, it looks like you answered the previous issue. Very good. Seems you can answer your own questions which begs the question, why are you going on and on and on...? No need to answer - we all know

All I am saying here...

:yapyap: On and on and on you go beating a dead horse. OMG woman, I've answered at least twice. At this point, you have two options:
1) go back and find your answers from me that I've provided or
2) continue to :yapyap:
Either way, I'm done with you on this topic.