A Christian and a Muslim are drowning, who would you rescue?

[Flail]

If a Christian and a Muslim were drowning and you could rescue but one, which one would it be?

I would think that if you were a Christian, you would rescue the Muslim, since you would "know" that your fellow Christian had eternal life anyway.

I would think that if you were a Muslim, that you would rescue the Christian, since you would 'know' that the Muslim had eternal life anyway.

If you were not religious you would attempt to rescue them both and die.. but you would have your salvation in your selfless act of kindness and non-judgment.....


So why all the fighting over who will be anointed?

[East of Eden]

If a christian and a muslim were drowning i would not save either of them. Then our world would be a little bit better.

Thank goodness.

Exactly what Stalin and your fellow atheists thought. Let's hope your kind never get power again.

This atheist never thought any such a thing, and finds your comment here a complete and utter refusal, or just plain failure, to learn anything about those with whom you disagree.

The 100,000,000 dead victims of atheistic communism would disagree with you, if they could talk. The communists thought the world would be better off without these 'undesirables', just like the bigot above who preferred to let people drown.

there is one big point when it comes to this 'atheistic communism' that you keep on totally ignoring.

When Stalin got in power, there were less than 1000 Orthodox churches, By the time he left, there were over 20,000 orthodox churches. If he was so hostile to religion, why the big increase?

I think you're referring the the WWII ploy which gave limited freedom to churches in an effort to lift moral. This is from Wikipedia on Stalin and religion:

"Continuous persecution in the 1930s resulted in its near-extinction as a public institution: by 1939, active parishes numbered in the low hundreds (down from 54,000 in 1917), many churches had been leveled, and tens of thousands of priests, monks and nuns were persecuted and killed. Over 100,000 were shot during the purges of 1937–1938."

It is nothing but spin to pretend Stalin was other than deeply, murderously hostile to religion. As were most atheistic communist regimes for that matter.

Was it a ploy??

I would say so. Again from Wikipedia:

"During World War II, the Church was allowed a revival as a patriotic organization, and thousands of parishes were reactivated until a further round of suppression during Khrushchev's rule."

In other words, after the war ended and that ploy's usefulness ceased, the suppression resumed.

As for 'monks and nuns being shot'.. was that because they were religious, or because they were opposing the communist government?

How were they opposing the government, by worshippping God instead of Stalin maybe?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 47:

Completely wrong, and speaking of honor, you should retract that.

I shall not, considering your refusal to retract your ostensible attempt to speak on my behalf.

When you can come to terms with the idea that not all atheists want to see folks drown, perhaps then you can understand that your attempts to clod clump are the height of dishonor.

[East of Eden]

From Post 47:

Completely wrong, and speaking of honor, you should retract that.

I shall not, considering your refusal to retract your ostensible attempt to speak on my behalf.

When you can come to terms with the idea that not all atheists want to see folks drown, perhaps then you can understand that your attempts to clod clump are the height of dishonor.

Cite or retract where I said ALL atheists, it would be the honorable thing to do.

[Goat]

How were they opposing the government, by worshippping God instead of Stalin maybe?

You are getting closer!. Not quite.. historically, the church has always been a center of power, and it was COMPETING with the government.. China takes control of the various religions where possible. They try to appoint the bishops for the RCC, and the 'adopt' their own Dali Lama.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 52:

Cite or retract where I said ALL atheists, it would be the honorable thing to do.

I contend my previous comments stand to reason, and will not retract, especially now that you seek to modify your previous statement.

Report me if you find such a condition intolerable.

It is my contention that the statement...

...your fellow atheists...

...should lead to the reasoned and logical conclusion that you referred to all atheists, but now that you've clearly been shown to be in error, you just can find it in yourself to admit as much.


But hey, if you wish to now amend, backpedal, or otherwise disavow your original statement, I think the observer has all the data necessary to see that when you say such as "...your fellow atheists..." you don't really mean what you say, given ya can't show it's truth anyway, but danged if you don't find it one heckuva powerful rhetorical...

tool.

[southern cross]

If a Christian and a Muslim were drowning and you could rescue but one, which one would it be?

I would think that if you were a Christian, you would rescue the Muslim, since you would "know" that your fellow Christian had eternal life anyway.

I would think that if you were a Muslim, that you would rescue the Christian, since you would 'know' that the Muslim had eternal life anyway.

If you were not religious you would attempt to rescue them both and die.. but you would have your salvation in your selfless act of kindness and non-judgment.....


So why all the fighting over who will be anointed?

The one with the best rack of course.
Is that too naughty?

[cubey]

[Replying to post 1 by Flail]
Nether, because the best thing for each them is for each one to be in there heaven of there beliefs.

[czyz]

I would save the one that I believed I had the best chance of saving.

[Ooberman]

Neither. I'm not the strongest swimmer and I know many times the rescuer is often dragged down with them. There is a technique to save someone drowning and you're not helping anyone if you both get killed.

Not being the right person to save them - knowing my limitations - I would call 9-11 and yell for help.

Then I'd say, "Both of you pray! Let's see what your god do!"

[99percentatheism]

[Replying to post 6 by Flail]

So long as there are belief systems pretending to be from God there will be hatred, judgement and killing by those who believe they are 'the chosen people' against others who believe they are 'the chosen people'. All such groups have a holy book and many rituals to hide behind. Therefore logic and reason will have no impact on the mindless superstitions of the participants.

Yet we see the godless secular world becoming so violent, debased and debauched, that most sane parents (note the plural) are terrified to let their children ride a bike down their own neighborhood streets in daylight hours.

Mindlessness, by reason, would be those without a Theistic compass to guide them. As indicative of an increasingly licentious, depraved and materialistic western world and worldview.

Godlessness begets a violent and lascivious society. How many sex slaves are there now in Europe? How many murders are commited in secularized American cities?