Replies

The point of the comparisons is to show the "outcome" and\or the allowed behavior stemming from various "religions" and the built upon ideologies. Though Christians do not hate anyone who subscribes to any of these “religions”, we will use history to make valid and vital point.

No man can say that he is a Christian and then kill 30 million people. It is simply impossible; to do so contradicts the very basis of the teachings of Jesus.

He can however be entirely honest if he calls himself an atheist or a pagan. There are no absolutes in either "religion" and either of which have been the foundation of the very ideologies that drove men like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Genghis Kahn and others.

This point is valid in discussions of politics, society, religion, ideology and history. Especially now when so many make claims of "Christian Atrocities" in an effort to debunk, belittle or remove foundation from an argument. Which is what one of the individuals defending Penn & Teller did.

The crutch of the matter is the turn from the Moral Absolutes that the Judeo-Christian worldview brought the world. Without an Absolute Moral Authority we by default must ascribe to a relativism that allows anything and everything. Man only has his own mind to guide himself (and others?) when God is removed from the equation. That may seem like a decent alternative when you consider your own values but when you use logic and history to consider the actual outcome of such a ideology you must in all honesty concede that atheism and paganism lead to nothing but pain and sorrow for a society.

Consider this: if man uses only himself as the authority on moral issues who is to say the ideas of Hitler are wrong? Many agreed with Hitler and in a world of moral relativism you only need garner support to promote an idea. By mans own nature some will agree and some will not, each with their own self-interest. You may disagree with Hitler but you have no Absolute Authority to contradict him. You only have your own idea of morality and that has no more value that Hitler’s view. Many may agree with you but it is still only the ideas of men, so you battle to resolve the issue at hand but never place finality on the issue of right and wrong. It becomes even more difficult if you believe all men are equal. Who then decides that one man’s ideas is better than another’s? Do you trust popular opinion or the opinion of learned men? Both have been proven to fail. The problem with fascism and communism is at the DNA of the ideology; absence of Moral Absolute’s outside man himself.

Man cannot set his own standards of morality. It is the very nature of God that sets Absolutes that we must rely. And that very same nature allows for some to “not believe” and yet reap the benefits.

This is all very well described and ascribed too by the Founding Fathers of this Great Nation, even those few Deists who granted agreement to the concept though not believing in the “Christ”. This foundation is also why Jews the world over extended help from abroad in our early struggle for Liberty.
This because the model of a Transcendent God as the Creator of man that through authorship legitimately maintains Absolute Moral Authority is the only proven valid foundation.

Your opinions on #93?

It is the very nature of God that sets Absolutes that we must rely.

If you could actually prove that God existed, that might make an interesting case. As it is, you are merely handwaving a mythical creature in an effort to give the appearence of substance to what are, in fact, fanciful arbitrary value judgements.