What is Atheism?

[Prolescum]

Don't you just love (and deserve) being called an illiterate barbarian by someone whose words are so lucid you have to cower in fear at the intellect required for so clearly accurate, concise and enlightening arguments like

We also find a book summary on the book cover

or falter under the weight of an uncrushable assertion such as

Western culture is Christian

Yes, that means that lederhosen, Cockney rhyming slang, Cornish pasties, caber tossing, and morris dancing are all Christian. Just like Easter, named after the Christian fertility goddess. All Christian. Tough luck, atheists.

This is our resident historian showing why atheists are functionally retarded. Sit down in amazement, heathens.

Incidentally, I knew VyckRo reminded me of someone...

[centre]

[/centre]

How about that sinking feeling all the atheists got when he showed how illiterate and stupid we evidently are that we questioned his thread title...

Its amusing that you claim atheists to be illiterate barbarians, in a topic called 'Why is atheism?' (what does that even mean?)

what is Atheism?
why Atheism?

...and this came out!

Not only is that just exactly how you construct a sentence, there was no post-ridicule changing of the title or anything, just to show how fundamentally stupid we are. Well done VyckRo! 5-0 dumb atheists.

 

[australopithecus]

Does that mean my A Level in English Literature and my degree from a school of art and design have been rendered irrelevancies by my lack of faith in a very specific god? Damn and curse you, and damn my now useless vocabulary and creativity!

 

[Prolescum]

[centre]Christian

Christian

Christian

Christian

Christian

Christian

Christian

[/centre]

Take that, atheists.

 

[scalyblue]

Re: Why is atheism?

Quantify culture in a non-subjective manner.

For starter I can say what culture is not, culture is not civilization, culture is not scientific progress!

While you're at it, explain why christian culture is superior to buddhist culture, or shinto culture, or voodoo culture

That is a Impossible Question, ther are no superior and inferior cultures I just say that atheism is a lack of culture. However, we can speak of cultural models viable, and not-viable

just an example.
The britisher egyptologist, John Romer, a man who do not declares himself "a believer"
in his book Testament, The bible and History., he state:
"In the course of its journey, the Bible provided the West whit a unique sense of universal order and its undestending of God. It also gave the West its particular ambition, its sense of progress and tension, and something, too, of its discontents.
We also find a book summary on the book cover:
"The Bible has more influence upon western civilization than any other book. So splendid are its phrases that many have taken them to be the unmediated word of God. Since its texts were gathere together the book has been venerated and enshrined, execrate and burned. But wherher we are belivers or not the Bible still remains our heritage, the linchpin of modern civilization. It has provided the West whit a sense of the sacred and our sense of historical destiny."

What has had more impact on the world's culture, a few pieces of christian-inspired art, or the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people and the systemic oppression of free thought and innovation?

FacePlam Fallacy of composition and a false generalization! Western culture is Christian, European culture is Christian, without christianity the current scientific progress would not have been possible, because there is no other viable model to allow this!
So this is way when the christians began colonizing Americas and Australia, natives have not responded with atomic bombs, even if by some atheistic assumptions, without a "dark age" humanity should have colonized the universe (It seems that the australian aborigines, do not rushed to do it, as well the buddhist shinto, or voodoo believers!)

Guess your book is blank because there's not enough blood to write in it

Believe me, you do not want to play numbers with me!

or the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people

hundreds of what? :ugeek: :roll:

Actually I think that non-christian arabs were pretty far ahead of the christians in the math and science, the only thing the christians were better at was giving swords to guys.

I also like how you don't mention eastern culture, and their scientific achievements. China and Japan would disagree with you, there.

I also really like how you neglect to mention how the christian colonization of the Americas and Australia was somehow beneficial to culture as a whole.

Your statements can really be read as "the advent of christianity has been very good for christian culture, screw every other culture because mine is the only one that matters"

Of course, given the format of your response, you don't wish to have a discussion based on facts, your only motive seems to be to proselytize. Since you won't convert me, or anybody else here, I suggest you go to someplace where that particular world view is welcome if you don't wish to have your stance refuted.

 

[Thyssane]

For a while atheists are waging a desperate fight, to claim science, science for atheism! :twisted:

Because it makes you an illiterate barbarian, an illiterate barbarian who wants to destroy what he does not understand!

Which one is it?
We are trying to claim science, which helps us to understand what we don't understand yet.
or:
We want to destroy what we don't understand.

But what about Culture? :?:

What about it? I'd say it's a case of each to his/her own. As long as adhering to your culture doesn't harm others, I couldn't care less about it.

Regards,
Thyssane.

 

[scorpion9]

Is this thread suppose to equate cultism with culture?

They are similar words but not the same things.
Cultism can be part of culture, and it can have its own subset of culture, but its not culture.


so

Cultism != Culture

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Re: Why is atheism?

For starter I can say what culture is not, culture is not civilization, culture is not scientific progress

Well, you know what would be helpful? If you defined culture for us. Because, I can give you a definition that anthropologists use, but that would include things like science and civilization in it because those are learned traits that are passed from person to person.

However, even though you just claimed that culture is not civilization or science (based on your yet undefined use of the word culture), you then go on to quote a book that says this:

"The Bible has more influence upon western civilization than any other book. So splendid are its phrases that many have taken them to be the unmediated word of God. Since its texts were gathere together the book has been venerated and enshrined, execrate and burned. But wherher we are belivers or not the Bible still remains our heritage, the linchpin of modern civilization. It has provided the West whit a sense of the sacred and our sense of historical destiny."

After that, you go on to right this:

FacePlam Fallacy of composition and a false generalization! Western culture is Christian, European culture is Christian, without christianity the current scientific progress would not have been possible, because there is no other viable model to allow this!

Talk about doublethink. The funny thing is that you made all those statements in the same post. Perhaps next time you can construct an internally consistent argument.

One more thing, you also state this:

So this is way when the christians began colonizing Americas and Australia, natives have not responded with atomic bombs, even if by some atheistic assumptions, without a "dark age" humanity should have colonized the universe (It seems that the australian aborigines, do not rushed to do it, as well the buddhist shinto, or voodoo believers!)

However, in your debate with theyounghistorian77 you stated repeatedly that catholicism is not true christianity, in order to write off some of the atrocities attributed to christianity:

VyckRo[/url]"]Or I answer him that Catholics are not "true believers" and follow a complicated explanation of the origin of the word "Orthodox"

Stop trying to have your cake and eat it too. It only makes you look pathetic. The Spaniards, who were the first Europeans to start colonizing the Americas, were catholic. In fact, how can you claim western civilization as a testament to christian culture when you are excluding the largest population of christians on earth?

 

[Noth]

Re: Why is atheism?

"In the course of its journey, the Bible provided the West whit a unique sense of universal order and its undestending of God. It also gave the West its particular ambition, its sense of progress and tension, and something, too, of its discontents..."

So, this 'Western Christian Ambition' of which you speak is the instigator of such historical jewels such as Manifest Destiny? Truly a wonderful example of the Christian sense of superiority let loose upon the heathens, indeed.

"The Bible has more influence upon western civilization than any other book...."

Assumption. How?

"...So splendid are its phrases that many have taken them to be the unmediated word of God...."

And the fact that people aren't critical about the book is relevant how? Moreover, you yourself hinted at not having a literal interpretation of the bible in the opening page of this thread and being proud of this fact when coming across atheists wishing to pin you down on such an interpretation. So using this quote doesn't help your case much.

"...Since its texts were gathere together the book has been venerated and enshrined, execrate and burned. But wherher we are belivers or not the Bible still remains our heritage, the linchpin of modern civilization. It has provided the West whit a sense of the sacred and our sense of historical destiny."

Whether or not the bible played a part in Western history, and assuredly it did, is for its relevance today and for its factuality completely and utterly irrelevant. Again, this "historical destiny" has lead to the killing of many as per example I mentioned above, and I will refrain, for fear of invoking Godwin, from pointing out certain other people in the last century with outrageous ideals they felt justified through a sense of historical destiny.

Western culture is Christian, European culture is Christian, without christianity the current scientific progress would not have been possible, because there is no other viable model to allow this!

Do... explain yourself. Scientific progress has been held back by the church quite often. And I know where might be going: yes, most scientists back in the day (centuries back) were Christians, or at least proclaimed to be. Then again, everyone was, because they didn't know better or for fear of prosecution. And we won't even go into the inter-christian-sect feuds on this. Scientific progress, as proven over and over again in the last few centuries, thrives perfectly well without religion.

So this is way when the christians began colonizing Americas and Australia, natives have not responded with atomic bombs,

Damn, you got me there... Amerindians and Aboriginals hadn't invented the atomic bomb yet. Yep, this supports your case completely. I suppose it doesn't help me much if I point out that 1) they had both developed forms of religion and 2) we are talking about the scientific advances of our culture, not theirs. The Amerindian reverence for nature, for example, would not quickly have led to them settling in large cities, let alone dig for e.g. iron, just to name 1 aspect.

even if by some atheistic assumptions, without a "dark age" humanity should have colonized the universe (It seems that the australian aborigines, do not rushed to do it, as well the buddhist shinto, or voodoo believers!)

Gross over-generalisation, exaggeration and failing comparisons. Ignoring, again, that you point to other religious cultures, we are specifically talking about our western civilisation. And over here there seems to be a strong correlation between past influence of christianity and the stifling of scientific advancements in the period we now call the dark ages. This may or may not have been the only factor, but it certainly held back advancements for centuries.

In summary:

while the bible and christianity obviously cannot be ignored when you look back at the rise of western civilisation, to say that this religion is the main reason why we did so well as we did blatantly flies in the face of history, as well as scornfully neglecting the multitude of suffering inflicted in the name of that religion throughout the last two centuries.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Re: Why is atheism?

Actually I think that non-christian arabs were pretty far ahead of the christians in the math and science, the only thing the christians were better at was giving swords to guys.

I also like how you don't mention eastern culture, and their scientific achievements. China and Japan would disagree with you, there.

I also really like how you neglect to mention how the christian colonization of the Americas and Australia was somehow beneficial to culture as a whole.

Your statements can really be read as "the advent of christianity has been very good for christian culture, screw every other culture because mine is the only one that matters"

Of course, given the format of your response, you don't wish to have a discussion based on facts, your only motive seems to be to proselytize. Since you won't convert me, or anybody else here, I suggest you go to someplace where that particular world view is welcome if you don't wish to have your stance refuted.

While we're on the subject...

I enjoy how Romania is somehow implicitly included in this "Christian Cultureâ„¢," and it's ethereal achievements. As though, simply by also being Christian, they somehow get Credit for what Western Europe did.

What are Romania's cultural achievements exactly? Aside from not being completely dominated by Russians and Turks? Because it seems to me that, to paraphrase a notable Brit, there is more culture in one small, private English library than in the entire Eastern Bloc.

 

[Independent Vision]

Re: Why is atheism?

While we're on the subject...

I enjoy how Romania is somehow implicitly included in this "Christian Cultureâ„¢," and it's ethereal achievements. As though, simply by also being Christian, they somehow get Credit for what Western Europe did.

What are Romania's cultural achievements exactly? Aside from not being completely dominated by Russians and Turks? Because it seems to me that, to paraphrase a notable Brit, there is more culture in one small, private English library than in the entire Eastern Bloc.

Well... Vlad Ţepeş ruled over an area that is a part of current Romania. So... I guess the inspiration for Dracula and hence most of todays vampire stories is Romanias cultural contribution via history? *shrugs*

That's... about... it...
At least notably...( they're also highly superstitious).

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Re: Why is atheism?

While we're on the subject...

I enjoy how Romania is somehow implicitly included in this "Christian Cultureâ„¢," and it's ethereal achievements. As though, simply by also being Christian, they somehow get Credit for what Western Europe did.

What are Romania's cultural achievements exactly? Aside from not being completely dominated by Russians and Turks? Because it seems to me that, to paraphrase a notable Brit, there is more culture in one small, private English library than in the entire Eastern Bloc.

Well... Vlad Ţepeş ruled over an area that is a part of current Romania. So... I guess the inspiration for Dracula and hence most of todays vampire stories is Romanias cultural contribution via history? *shrugs*

That's... about... it...
At least notably...( they're also highly superstitious).

I'm sorry, but I can't help but notice that your example not only proves how barbaric Romania is (what with the impaling), but also nicely demonstrates my point about English literature.

You are my new favorite person.

EDIT: Best. Post Count. Ever.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Re: Why is atheism?

For starter I can say what culture is not, culture is not civilization, culture is not scientific progress!

Surely nor civilization nor science is the same thing as culture. But they are indeed inseparable, and to think otherwise is living in a cardboard box.
Those factors influence how we go about our lives, what we learn, the jobs we take, the buildings we make, the cloths we wear, the language we speak, the way think, what we appreciate, the decisions we take. Essentially it influences every aspect of our culture.
To state otherwise is being profoundly and purposefully ignorant.

While you're at it, explain why christian culture is superior to buddhist culture, or shinto culture, or voodoo culture

That is a Impossible Question, ther are no superior and inferior cultures I just say that atheism is a lack of culture. However, we can speak of cultural models viable, and not-viable

This is just nonsense. If a culture exists then it is already viable, you never see unviable cultures because if they are not viable they never become cultures.
There are better cultures than others, some cultures promote better a societal life than others.
You got everything upside down on a poor excuse to try and excuse your point, and you know that. You are just trolling.

What has had more impact on the world's culture, a few pieces of christian-inspired art, or the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people and the systemic oppression of free thought and innovation?

FacePlam Fallacy of composition and a false generalization! Western culture is Christian, European culture is Christian, without christianity the current scientific progress would not have been possible, because there is no other viable model to allow this!

Galileo disagrees.
What saved the modern world was not Christianity, it was the Ancient Greek culture, their natural philosophy. Culture which was in part rescued by the Arabs who have made great contributions, such as the Arabic numerals and geo-navigation which greatly contributed for the enrichment of Europe centuries later. On the other side of the world the Chinese had a greater culture then what Europe did back then, they have greatly contributed with inventions such as paper and gun powder which would have become essential to revolutionize the modern world. But science as we know it would kick start much later, only after centuries of struggle to gently push back the strong grasp of the oppression of the clergy. How many people have been burned, tortured and killed just by telling the truth which was not convenient to the church?
Only after it was safe to question long set of traditional values, when people where not persecuted for speaking a truth that went against scripture, when nothing else was sacred, that the world as we know became what it is.
You are the kind of person who would lock someone in a cage, starve them, torture them and then have the nerves to say "Can't you see how miserable you would have been without me?"

 

[theyounghistorian77]

i thought it may help to clarify what could be meant by the word "culture"

It is often regarded that Culture should be defined as [and I'll paraphrase] "the whole way of life found in a paticular society". But the truth is it is much more complicated than that! Raymond Williams, a theorist on culture went as far as to say ...

"Culture [as a concept] is one of the two or three most complicated words in the english language" - from his book, "Keywords"

Whether we should take it as far as that i will l leave it to you to decide. But anyways the word "Culture" has been and continues to be deployed in varying contexts and in different ways both by sociologists and in everyday conversation, which does make an exact definition more tricky than one may would think. However this doesn't mean that there aren't common threads in the definitions. In the acedemic world, definitions tend to contrast culture, implicitly or explicitly with nature itself. The things that Humans produce or do are cultural wheras the things that exist or occur without human intervention are part of the natural world. Christopher Jencks (1993) dscribes culture in this sense as "All which is symbolic: the learned ... aspects of human society". He goes further and distinguishes four broad senses as to how the word is used.


1) Culture can be seen as a state of mind: Someone becomes cultured if they move towards the idea of societal perfection, "a goal of or an aspiration of indivudial human achievement or emancipation". From this perspective, culture is seen as a quality posessed by indivudials who are able to gain the learning and achieve the qualities that are seen as desirable in a human being.

2) The first definition here is elitist, in that it sees some aspects of what is human to be superior to others. The second definition Jencks identifies is also elitist, but unlike the first this definiton is applied to to the concept of civlizatiion itself. So some civilizations come out as being inherently better ie more cultured than others. For this, Think "social darwinism" and the ideas of herbert spencer.

3) Culture is the "collective body of arts and intelectual work within any one society". From this perspective, Culture is to be found in in theatres, Concert halls, Art galleries and Libraries etc. rather than in all aspects of human life. Culture in this sense is sometimes referred to as "High Culture"

4) "The culture of a society is the way of life for it's members; the collection of ideas and habits which they learn, share and transmit from generation to generation" - Ralph Linton. (1945). This is the one [with varaitions] most adopted by sociologists [according to Haralambos and Holburn] and hence you should compare this to the definition right at the start.

-----

These definitions of culture can be developed further through a brief examination of different TYPES of culture


High Culture: As already mentioned, is usualy used to refer to as cultural creations that have a paticularly high status. These creations can be seen as the epitome of of the highest levels of human creativity. And include such things as Classical music like the symphonies of a "Beethoven" or "Mozart", Literature such as the writings of Shakespeare, paintings and i can go on and on (I wonder if one can include Fine dining as well?).

Folk Culture: The culture of ordinary people, esp those coming pre-industrial societies. Folk culture is often taken to arise from

"the grass roots, is self created and autononomus and directly reflects the lives and experiences of the people." - Dominic strinati (1995)

Although not regarded in such a high esteem as high culture, it nonetheless imho should still be respected and actualy some elemets of it are quite beautiful in their own way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NNgLqz89Z8

Mass Culture: essentialy a product of the mass media, and that which comes from an industrial society. examples include "Soap Operas" and "Pop music". It is Highly consumerist. If folk culture can be seen as created by ordinary people. Mass culture merely consumes them. Critics see Mass Culture as debasing to the indivudial and corrosive to the fabric of society. Overall it is held in the least esteem of this list.

Popular Culture: often used in a similar way to mass culture, the difference is that here elements of high culture become popular. eg the Harry Potter series or pieces of "Carmen"

Im sure you've all heard this:



Subculture: referrs to groups of people in a given society that have something in common with each other, but not to the whole. So they are distinguished in a significant way, eg Youth groups who enjoy a similar taste in music and enjoy similar leisure activities.

------


I hope this in some small way helps in getting a definition.

 

[VyckRo]

Re: Why is atheism?

First of all, when we establish a definition, we must be careful that, that definition fits only one thing and one thing alone!
A definition is not valid If it fits simultaneously to 10 different stuff.

What is culture?
Culture is difficult to define since it can define completely different subjects as popular culture, or general knowledge.
However we can define two types of "culture"
1. a set of values, ideals, goals, religious beliefs, rites, traditions, myths, all these are reflected in the art as sculpture, painting, music and in philosophy. the term has its origins in antiquity Latin cultura = cultivation, or to "to cultivate" that is something which cultivate the human soul. something that has to do with spirituality, spiritual knowledge and not whit science or civilization.
If we equate culture whit science or civilization we will get to say funny things as India and Africa have no culture, or George Bush an Barack Obama are some very cultured people.

2. Cultural can mean to having general knowledge, especially about your culture ( in the case of Europe on the Greek culture and Christianity) but also to have basic knowledge about other cultures as India, Africa, China.
Again in this case, also culture is not science, a rocket scientist may very well be illiterate, when it comes to ancient Greek-Roman, French, German, Italian literature and art! but that does not mean he it's not a good scientist!

"Independent Vision"

I can't read a dictionary because I am an atheist?
Or I don't understand the concept of culture because I am an atheist?

You don't understand the concept of culture because you are an atheist. but I can give you a helping hand.
Think, how many times have you heard an atheist, trying to equate science with atheism (I speak daily with such atheists)
But how many times have you heard an atheist to say that atheism is culture?

How about... maybe theistic people don't understand the concept of culture because they are theists?

LOL! Because they are theists they practice a culture, but you, you're an atheist!

Same thing here. Christian culture is just one version of culture.

Finally! is the cultural model that gave rise to current European model
Model which now falls, both demographical and cultural it collapses under the relentless attacks of the atheists.

Any culture is under continuous attack, from some other cultural models! but as long as the attacker is outside the wall ( extra muros) there is essentially no danger.
But here athest intervene, they relentlessly attack the Christian culture and civilization.
No matter the demographic model collapses, and we already know that some European countries will become Islamic republics in the next half-century, Islamic republics whit Sharia.
Millions of Europeans and Americans abandon modern science, and turn to the power of crystals, and colored stones, to aromatherapy, acupuncture, energetic massages and so on ...
So What happened
The enemy is now inside the walls (intra muros) and, he attacks the last defenders of the city.
No matter that the most vocal are the muslim radicals. No matter on what various pagan sects are preaching on the ~miraculous rituals" from stonehenge.
The enemy is not interested in this, he has one goal, destruction of the Christian cultural model!

Obviously, that once a cultural model is destroyed, another cultural model will take the empty place, therefore for the European countries now atheist, it will be, Islam, or the return of magic and superstition!

What you are basically saying is that without belief in God there is no culture, without culture there wouldn't be science and therefor there has to be a God because without a God we wouldn't have what we have today. That's essentially what you are trying to say, isn't it? And we don't understand it because we have no culture at all, since we lack a belief in God?

LoL! Not even I could say it better!
Yap! It is my argument.
Do you mind if I use your definition?

 

[VyckRo]

Re: Why is atheism?

AdmiralPeacock

Heh, if you were the principle opposition to the Enlightenment

I'm not atheist! I think I made it very clear!

borrofburi

How do you get from "lack of culture" to "illiterate"? How to get from "lack of culture" to "barbarian"? Please define the following terms: culture, illiterate, and barbarian.

"lack of culture" = Atheism
illiterate = Thunderf00t ( the greatest Atheist on the Internet), Christopher Hitchens (the most enlightened mind of contemporary atheism)
barbarian = term has been used to define those who were not under the influence of the Roman Empire, or Byzantine empire
but in this case we will it, use for defining the western atheist whose culture comes from MTV cartoonnetwork
PS.
if I mock atheism Is this blasphemy?

Prolescum

Yes, that means that lederhosen, Cockney rhyming slang, Cornish pasties, caber tossing, and morris dancing are all Christian. Just like Easter, named after the Christian fertility goddess. All Christian. Tough luck, atheists.

There is nothing more wonderful than an atheist who makes an appeal to history or religion
or an atheist who uses the English language to prove this argument!

What is Cockney rhyming slang?
http://www.cockneyrhymingslang.co.uk/cockney_rhyming_slang
A true Cockney is someone born within the sound of Bow Bells. (St Mary-le-Bow Church in Cheapside, London).

Cornish pasties
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pasty
Morris dance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_dance
All seem quite Christian to me!
-----
Easter in English and German

The origins of the word have to do with the period in which Jesus was crucified,and that was during the hebrew festival of Passove. An alternative is that it comes from the Greek form of "suffer" (Greek πάσχω (pà¡scho, suffer).
The Classical forms are:
Hebrew Pesach.
Greek Πάσχα
Latin Pascha
In Romanian we say Paste that can com from Greek or Latin,in French is Pà¢ques, in Spanish Pascua, Italian Pasqua, Portuguese Pà¡scoa. In all the earth languages whether they are Latinic Semitic Celtic they have a form of the word Pascha, in some Slavic countries we also have on alternative word which mean "The Great Night"
see
http://www.omniglot.com/language/phrases/easter.htm
or
Dansk
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pà¥ske
Russian
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пасха
Turkish
http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paskalya
Swedish
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pà¥sk

The english term of Easter has its origin in Eostur Monath (a month in the old germanic calendar).

PS
But continue to say your story, because truth does not matter in promoting atheism!

 

[VyckRo]

Christian

Take that, atheists.

NO Take that, atheists.

Take that, atheists.

Take that, atheists.

Take that, atheists.

and that, atheists.

 

[borrofburi]

Re: Why is atheism?

How do you get from "lack of culture" to "illiterate"? How to get from "lack of culture" to "barbarian"? Please define the following terms: culture, illiterate, and barbarian.

"lack of culture" = Atheism
illiterate = Thunderf00t ( the greatest Atheist on the Internet), Christopher Hitchens (the most enlightened mind of contemporary atheism)
barbarian = term has been used to define those who were not under the influence of the Roman Empire, or Byzantine empire
but in this case we will it, use for defining the western atheist whose culture comes from MTV cartoonnetwork

Err... so essentially you just assert that atheism is a lack of culture, and you just assert that we're illiterate (despite the fact that here we are, reading your poorly worded posts, and responding with very well worded posts), and you just assert that we care about MTV and cartoon network....

Essentially, you make a lot of bullshit claims without any evidence or basis. But the most wrong is clearly the baldfaced assertion that we're "illiterate" (I do not think that word means what you think it means... you might want to look it up in the dictionary).

 

[borrofburi]

NO Take that, atheists.

Err... no... his point is that for your assertion that "all culture is religious" to be true, some clearly non-religious cultural items must be religious... The existence of some religious cultural items does not prove that all cultural items are religious.

On second thought, I'll be massively surprised if you understand the above, so I don't even know why I bother.

 

[VyckRo]

Re: Why is atheism?

he_who_is_nobody

However, even though you just claimed that culture is not civilization or science (based on your yet undefined use of the word culture), you then go on to quote a book that says this

I made it very clear that I talk of a cultural model ( the Christian culture), a cultural model that contributed substantially to modern civilization
Since this model has allowed the development of science, education, and preserve what was best from all the cultures that came in contact whit.
As was the case with Greek art and literature.
I can help build a building,without me being The Building. it seems logical? you do not think so?

However, in your debate with theyounghistorian77 you stated repeatedly that catholicism is not true christianity, in order to write off some of the atrocities attributed to christianity:

Here, I'm not talking about what religion is correct! ~catholicism is not true christianity" if it were,"until now we will have colonized the universe"
But it still kept some aspects that havepropelled western civilization

how can you claim western civilization as a testament to christian culture when you are excluding the largest population of christians on earth?

simply I do not claim anything!


Noth

while the bible and christianity obviously cannot be ignored when you look back at the rise of western civilisation, to say that this religion is the main reason why we did so well as we did blatantly flies in the face of history, as well as scornfully neglecting the multitude of suffering inflicted in the name of that religion throughout the last two centuries.

obviously "that this religion is the main reason why we did so well"
LOL this quote shows that you have a very rich culture! probably a few atheist sites,

 

[Commander Eagle]

NO Take that, atheists.

So you don't actually have an argument, then?