• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

If Gods are Real, Where are They?

Hitler was about greed and revenge. The crusades, particularly the children's crusade, were about humans being vindictive to the point of insanity. Justinian Marched to show strength while bringing the plague was a demonstration of greed and stupidity.

All three examples were, at least nominally, Christian. Is this intentional?
 
Hitler was about greed and revenge. The crusades, particularly the children's crusade, were about humans being vindictive to the point of insanity. Justinian Marched to show strength while bringing the plague was a demonstration of greed and stupidity.

Without the Crusades, we would be living in a Caliphate. It united the forever warring Christian sects. This aside.

Hitler's main ideology was fascism, just like Christianity and Islam.

I wrote this to a Christian.

-----

Both Christianity and Islam, slave holding ideologies, have basically developed into intolerant, homophobic and misogynous religions. Both religions have grown themselves by the sword instead of good deeds and continue with their immoral ways in spite of secular law showing them the moral ways.

Jesus said we would know his people by their works and deeds. That means Jesus would not recognize Christians and Muslims as his people, and neither do I. Jesus would call Christianity and Islam abominations.

Gnostic Christians did in the past, and I am proudly continuing that tradition and honest irrefutable evaluation based on morality.

https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/theft-values/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxoxPapPxXk

Humanity centered religions, good? Yes. Esoteric ecumenist Gnostic Christianity being the best of these.

Supernaturally based religions, evil? Yes. Islam and Christianity being the worst of these.

Regards
DL
 
Hitler was about greed and revenge. The crusades, particularly the children's crusade, were about humans being vindictive to the point of insanity. Justinian Marched to show strength while bringing the plague was a demonstration of greed and stupidity.

All three examples were, at least nominally, Christian. Is this intentional?

What religions, other than recently, challenged the Inquisitors in the West?

Yahweh is a god of war and Christians and Muslims use him quite liberally.

Ask the women and gays who also come under their vile fascist radars.

Regards
DL
 
Hitler was about greed and revenge. The crusades, particularly the children's crusade, were about humans being vindictive to the point of insanity. Justinian Marched to show strength while bringing the plague was a demonstration of greed and stupidity.

All three examples were, at least nominally, Christian. Is this intentional?

Actually I chose these three because, at core, all arose in a Europe evolved from Greek enlightenment.
 
Hitler was about greed and revenge. The crusades, particularly the children's crusade, were about humans being vindictive to the point of insanity. Justinian Marched to show strength while bringing the plague was a demonstration of greed and stupidity.

Without the Crusades, we would be living in a Caliphate. It united the forever warring Christian sects. This aside.

Really? The first crusade utterly wrecked the economy of the Byzantine empire, the buffer against Islam. They never really recovered. The crusader states were inherently unstable. But what's interesting is the Muslim reaction to the crusader states, ie none. Saladin conquered the crusader states while on the way to somewhere else. The crusader states didn't even act to unite the Muslims against them. They hardly gave a shit. Saladin acted on his own.

The Ottoman Caliphate was cosmopolitan. They had no interest in converting anybody to Islam. Until quite late they even forbade conversion.

The Islamic world only started getting upset about the Crusades in the modern anti-colonial rhetoric. Then they backdated the grand narrative of the Islamic conquest and the importance of Saladin.

What protected the west from the rule under the Caliphate was Vienna in 1520'ies. It was about military technology. Not religion

I think you're repeating a modern myth that was never true.
 
Hitler was about greed and revenge. The crusades, particularly the children's crusade, were about humans being vindictive to the point of insanity. Justinian Marched to show strength while bringing the plague was a demonstration of greed and stupidity.

Without the Crusades, we would be living in a Caliphate. It united the forever warring Christian sects. This aside.

Really? The first crusade utterly wrecked the economy of the Byzantine empire, the buffer against Islam. They never really recovered. The crusader states were inherently unstable. But what's interesting is the Muslim reaction to the crusader states, ie none. Saladin conquered the crusader states while on the way to somewhere else. The crusader states didn't even act to unite the Muslims against them. They hardly gave a shit. Saladin acted on his own.

The Ottoman Caliphate was cosmopolitan. They had no interest in converting anybody to Islam. Until quite late they even forbade conversion.

The Islamic world only started getting upset about the Crusades in the modern anti-colonial rhetoric. Then they backdated the grand narrative of the Islamic conquest and the importance of Saladin.

What protected the west from the rule under the Caliphate was Vienna in 1520'ies. It was about military technology. Not religion

I think you're repeating a modern myth that was never true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAn_I64mloU

Regards
DL
 
Really? The first crusade utterly wrecked the economy of the Byzantine empire, the buffer against Islam. They never really recovered. The crusader states were inherently unstable. But what's interesting is the Muslim reaction to the crusader states, ie none. Saladin conquered the crusader states while on the way to somewhere else. The crusader states didn't even act to unite the Muslims against them. They hardly gave a shit. Saladin acted on his own.

The Ottoman Caliphate was cosmopolitan. They had no interest in converting anybody to Islam. Until quite late they even forbade conversion.

The Islamic world only started getting upset about the Crusades in the modern anti-colonial rhetoric. Then they backdated the grand narrative of the Islamic conquest and the importance of Saladin.

What protected the west from the rule under the Caliphate was Vienna in 1520'ies. It was about military technology. Not religion

I think you're repeating a modern myth that was never true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAn_I64mloU

Regards
DL

YouTube videos are not evidence. Most refuse to ever even touch such. Maybe annotated text?
 
Really? The first crusade utterly wrecked the economy of the Byzantine empire, the buffer against Islam. They never really recovered. The crusader states were inherently unstable. But what's interesting is the Muslim reaction to the crusader states, ie none. Saladin conquered the crusader states while on the way to somewhere else. The crusader states didn't even act to unite the Muslims against them. They hardly gave a shit. Saladin acted on his own.

The Ottoman Caliphate was cosmopolitan. They had no interest in converting anybody to Islam. Until quite late they even forbade conversion.

The Islamic world only started getting upset about the Crusades in the modern anti-colonial rhetoric. Then they backdated the grand narrative of the Islamic conquest and the importance of Saladin.

What protected the west from the rule under the Caliphate was Vienna in 1520'ies. It was about military technology. Not religion

I think you're repeating a modern myth that was never true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAn_I64mloU

Regards
DL

YouTube videos are not evidence. Most refuse to ever even touch such. Maybe annotated text?
Plus a short synopsis of the content is always in order, author, etc.
 
Really? The first crusade utterly wrecked the economy of the Byzantine empire, the buffer against Islam. They never really recovered. The crusader states were inherently unstable. But what's interesting is the Muslim reaction to the crusader states, ie none. Saladin conquered the crusader states while on the way to somewhere else. The crusader states didn't even act to unite the Muslims against them. They hardly gave a shit. Saladin acted on his own.

The Ottoman Caliphate was cosmopolitan. They had no interest in converting anybody to Islam. Until quite late they even forbade conversion.

The Islamic world only started getting upset about the Crusades in the modern anti-colonial rhetoric. Then they backdated the grand narrative of the Islamic conquest and the importance of Saladin.

What protected the west from the rule under the Caliphate was Vienna in 1520'ies. It was about military technology. Not religion

I think you're repeating a modern myth that was never true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAn_I64mloU

Regards
DL

YouTube videos are not evidence. Most refuse to ever even touch such. Maybe annotated text?


00:05
whenever you're dealing with an
00:06
apologist for Islam or even a Muslim and
00:09
you bring up jihad almost immediately
00:11
they kick back to you well what about
00:13
those terrible Crusades why they're the
00:16
moral justification for jihad I mean
00:18
we're just as bad as they are so let's
00:20
not talk about jihad okay let's talk
00:23
about the Crusades well what I would
00:26
like to talk about here are facts and it
00:29
turns out i sat down and put together
00:30
some work and i created a database that
00:32
some 548 battles that Islam fought jihad
00:37
battles against classical civilization
00:40
this won't even all the battles it
00:41
really doesn't say much about Africa and
00:43
India Afghanistan and all that it's
00:46
primarily the battles against the
00:48
classical civilization of Rome and
00:50
Greece so 548 battles is a lot and it's
00:55
too much to even comprehend so I created
00:58
something which i call a dynamic battle
01:00
map in which you have a display of the
01:02
Mediterranean and a white dot means that
01:05
this 20 year period that's a new battle
01:07
so every time the screen changes its
01:10
20-year period they then colors white
01:13
turn to red so you can see a history
01:16
this may seem a little confusing but I
01:17
think when you see it you'll know
01:18
exactly what I mean and here it starts
01:22
Islam burst out of the Arabian Peninsula
01:25
and immediately starts attacking the
01:27
Middle East and notice that it doesn't
01:29
take long until they're crossing the
01:30
Mediterranean and attacking southern
01:32
France and Spain notice something here
01:36
most people think of Islam they think of
01:39
Arabs they think of Arabs they think of
01:41
desert and yet here we see that Islam is
01:44
projecting power throughout the
01:46
Mediterranean notice how the little
01:48
islands of the Mediterranean are getting
01:50
hammered the Navy of Islam would attack
01:55
coastal towns kill rob rape and then
01:59
take slaves so this whole battle map is
02:03
it's unfolds you're seeing slaves being
02:05
taken over a million slaves were taken
02:08
out of Europe into the Islamic world
02:11
that's something you don't think about
02:13
much but it's absolutely true
02:15
there were over two hundred battles
02:17
fought in Spain alone and we also see
02:23
however on the east coast in Turkey that
02:26
Islam is trying to break into Europe now
02:30
what's going to happen is in Spain this
02:33
ongoing fight that lasted for four
02:36
hundred years this the Christians are
02:39
going to push back the Muslims but now
02:41
then what has happened over in the East
02:43
is that Constantinople has fallen and
02:46
now then Eastern Europe is getting
02:48
hammered the jihad now comes to Eastern
02:51
Europe it's pushed out now of Spain
02:54
northern Africa is now completely
02:57
Islamic the Middle East is completely
02:59
Islamic this is all jihad relentless
03:03
jihad and why is it so relentless well
03:06
Mohammed was relentless in his jihad and
03:09
these people are good students of Islam
03:11
and so it's against the kafir on and on
03:14
it was traditional that when the Sultan
03:17
came to power the brand new Sultan he
03:19
would immediately try to launch new Wars
03:22
because he was going to be noted in his
03:24
Islamic history as to how well he fought
03:27
against the kafir
03:31
so that's what the jihad looked like
03:33
over that time period 548 battles but
03:37
remember when you bring up jihad people
03:40
want to bring up the Crusades so I also
03:42
prepared a dynamic battle map of all the
03:44
offensive raids of the Crusaders let's
03:47
watch it and make a comparison and so it
03:49
begins the Crusades enter into Turkey
03:51
and the Middle East battles go on but
03:54
aren't there far fewer than you thought
03:56
there might be and here we go the last
03:59
battles are fought and that is the end
04:03
of the Crusades so now then we can talk
04:06
about some facts yes there were Crusades
04:09
but notice they ended centuries ago and
04:11
jihad is being practiced today jihad has
04:15
been with us for 1400 years there is no
04:18
comparison between jihad and the
04:19
Crusades certainly not a moral
04:21
comparison and when you're looking at
04:24
the Crusades remember in one sense all
04:26
of the Crusades were defensive Wars why
04:29
well as we saw in the first jihad map it
04:31
was Islam that came out of Arabia and
04:34
conquered the Middle East a Christian
04:36
Middle East and so the Crusaders were
04:38
trying to free their Christian brothers
04:40
and sisters from jihad so there's no
04:43
moral comparison at all the motivation
04:45
of the Crusaders was to free Christians
04:47
the purpose of jihad is to enslave the
04:51
copper so the next time you hear
04:53
somebody talk about all those dreadful
04:55
Crusades you've seen some facts about
04:57
the matter why don't you pipe up and
04:59
tell them you know you don't really know
05:01
the matter

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.
 
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.

As a naturalist, I can agree on thanking nature for that bacteria, but do not worship nature for just doing what it naturally does.

Gnostic Christians do not idol worship anything. We are always eager to improve on whatever we believe.

That is why we are named by those who know us as the only good Christians.

Regards
DL
 
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.

As a naturalist, I can agree on thanking nature for that bacteria, but do not worship nature for just doing what it naturally does.

Gnostic Christians do not idol worship anything. We are always eager to improve on whatever we believe.

That is why we are named by those who know us as the only good Christians.

Regards
DL

You mean Gnostic Christians call you the only good Christians. Since the founding of that cannibal cult it has been "My kind of Christians are good Christians. All other Christians are bad Christians."

Eldarion Lathria
 
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.

As a naturalist, I can agree on thanking nature for that bacteria, but do not worship nature for just doing what it naturally does.

Gnostic Christians do not idol worship anything. We are always eager to improve on whatever we believe.

That is why we are named by those who know us as the only good Christians.

Regards
DL

I was being sarcastic.....I can not take any of this seriously.

Secular giving thanks is about acknowledging we are not above nature and are not all powerful. Wee part of the eco system not above it, that lalck of perspective is why we have so much trouble dealing with pollution and destruction of the eco system.

You seem contradictory. You say you d not worship anything but then infer a form of worship.n
Is being a bishop if that is what you are gain you deference from the community?
 
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.

As a naturalist, I can agree on thanking nature for that bacteria, but do not worship nature for just doing what it naturally does.

Gnostic Christians do not idol worship anything. We are always eager to improve on whatever we believe.

That is why we are named by those who know us as the only good Christians.

Regards
DL

You mean Gnostic Christians call you the only good Christians. Since the founding of that cannibal cult it has been "My kind of Christians are good Christians. All other Christians are bad Christians."

Eldarion Lathria

No.

Those who compare our morals are the ones who say we are the good ones.

Care to do that?

If so, do not use the information, like cannibal stupidity that the inquisitors put out o justify their many murders.

Go ahead and defend the murderers if you want.

I will show why we are the only good Christians.

Do you like the genocidal Yahweh?

Do you see him as good or evil?

I see him as evil. Do your morals match?

Regards
DL
 
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.

As a naturalist, I can agree on thanking nature for that bacteria, but do not worship nature for just doing what it naturally does.

Gnostic Christians do not idol worship anything. We are always eager to improve on whatever we believe.

That is why we are named by those who know us as the only good Christians.

Regards
DL

I was being sarcastic.....I can not take any of this seriously.

Secular giving thanks is about acknowledging we are not above nature and are not all powerful. Wee part of the eco system not above it, that lalck of perspective is why we have so much trouble dealing with pollution and destruction of the eco system.

You seem contradictory. You say you d not worship anything but then infer a form of worship.n
Is being a bishop if that is what you are gain you deference from the community?

Sarcasm is just one of your tools. You use it badly.

I did not infer worship in Gnostic Christianity at all.

We are perpetual seekers and hold to the good, whatever it is, till better comes along.

Regards
DL
 
I was being sarcastic.....I can not take any of this seriously.

Secular giving thanks is about acknowledging we are not above nature and are not all powerful. Wee part of the eco system not above it, that lalck of perspective is why we have so much trouble dealing with pollution and destruction of the eco system.

You seem contradictory. You say you d not worship anything but then infer a form of worship.n
Is being a bishop if that is what you are gain you deference from the community?

Sarcasm is just one of your tools. You use it badly.

I did not infer worship in Gnostic Christianity at all.

We are perpetual seekers and hold to the good, whatever it is, till better comes along.

Regards
DL

Perhaps you are just not self aware enough to see what you are saying. The difference between preaching to the choir, being your community, and actually being taken to task on what you say.


Do yiou have status in your community? Do people look to you for guidance?
 
I would not use the word graceful. That is a Christian rationalization and self justification.

History and the evolution of civilization is what it is.

What we should be grateful for is the ancient first life forms and bacteria. In fact we should have a religion that worships the ancient bacteria.

As a naturalist, I can agree on thanking nature for that bacteria, but do not worship nature for just doing what it naturally does.

Gnostic Christians do not idol worship anything. We are always eager to improve on whatever we believe.

That is why we are named by those who know us as the only good Christians.

Regards
DL

I was being sarcastic.....I can not take any of this seriously.

Secular giving thanks is about acknowledging we are not above nature and are not all powerful. Wee part of the eco system not above it, that lalck of perspective is why we have so much trouble dealing with pollution and destruction of the eco system.

You seem contradictory. You say you d not worship anything but then infer a form of worship.n
Is being a bishop if that is what you are gain you deference from the community?

Actually I thought it was an insightful observation. Bacteria were the first actual life on the planet. We cannot survive without microbes and the oxygen they produced.
 
I was being sarcastic.....I can not take any of this seriously.

Secular giving thanks is about acknowledging we are not above nature and are not all powerful. Wee part of the eco system not above it, that lalck of perspective is why we have so much trouble dealing with pollution and destruction of the eco system.

You seem contradictory. You say you d not worship anything but then infer a form of worship.n
Is being a bishop if that is what you are gain you deference from the community?

Actually I thought it was an insightful observation. Bacteria were the first actual life on the planet. We cannot survive without microbes and the oxygen they produced.

A thinking mind.

Nice to see.

Regards
DL
 
The Church Of The Holy Self Replicators.

Before bacteria was the first self replicating structures, of which we have no knowledge .

What 'you' are is a lot of continuous chemical processes at the cell level. Your conscious self is but an illusion. Solidity is an illusion.
l
We of The Church Of The Holy Self Replicators blieve in The One. The first self replicator that gives rise to all living things.

All hail The One!
 
Back
Top Bottom