"Atheists Killed >140 millions" is Fallacious

[Age]

I wonder how many people have died in any number of holy wars throughout history.

'We' could also wonder how many wars were actually started, for whatever reason/s, but which a more deeper the war was actually started was because there was a inner hatred of or for another religion. But this was never classed as a so-called 'holy war'.

The gruesome twosome obviously being christianity and islam. Yo imagine how many more would have died if those n*ggas had guns instead of swords.

If you cannot write a word fully without hiding a part of it behind a *, then why even write it?

I also wonder if those leading/declaring these holy wars were true christians and muslims, or frauds, like in the post revolutionary autocracies that everybody calls 'communisms', when/where the leaders were fake ass marxist posers.

Let us think about this carefully, IC.

Wait holy crap. Isn't there another holy war going on right now over in the middle east somewhere? Technically we need to wait until it's over before we factor in the number of dead.

[bahman]

The Bible does not say anything about whether she was fooled or not.

I quoted it. If you can't read it, I can't do much about that.

I argue in favor of what I think is correct. I cannot do much about that if you cannot understand it

How do you know that that verse refers to natural evil and not moral evil?

I said that: context.

Could you please elaborate?

How do you know that we are Adam's children?

Who else's?

We are the result of evolution!

[Age]

... Hence the need for salvation for all of us.

Please do not speak on my behalf, I have not authorized you!

I have not "spoken on your behalf." I've spoken about you, on the basis of what the Bible says is true of all of us. That's quite different.

In what absurd world would make you think or believe that the words in the bible would only speak of salvation 'for' you human beings alone.

The only thing doing Wrong absolutely anywhere is you adult human beings, So, what this means is that absolutely every thing, even including you adult human beings, need salvation 'from' you adult human beings.

Salvation is 'for' all things, as all things need saving 'from' the Wrong that you adult human beings are continually doing, in the days when this is being written.

And the Bible says, "All we, like sheep, have gone astray, we have each one of us turned to our own way..." It says, "There is none righteous, not even one." It says, "If we say we have not sinned, we make God out to be a liar, and the truth is not in us." So on the strength of that authority, that's what I say.

And, when these adult human beings also uncover and discover what the word 'sin' means and/or is referring to here, exactly, then they will also see the funny side and humor, which has been set aside for them within here, in order to be revealed, one day, but soon enough I will add here 'now'.

Take it or leave it. But truth is truth.

Do you "immanuel can" still not yet see how claiming 'truth is truth', but only when the words are from one religious denomination only, can come across as being Truly weird, absurd, and just totally 'bonkers'?

If you want to claim that the 'word of the bible' is 'the truth' but the words in other religious denominations is not, then what are you basing this belief and claim on, exactly?

[Age]

I wonder how many people have died in any number of holy wars throughout history.

Just under 8%.

Just under 8% of the war dead in history have been in the various "holy wars." Half of those have been by one religion, all by itself -- Islam. The other 4% comprises all the dead in wars over Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Taoism, Shinto, Yoruba, Mormonism, Catholicism...and all the rest. And some religions, such as the Quakers, Mennonites and Anabaptists, never killed a single person ever.

So that's your answer.

Not one mention of "christianity", nor even a hint towards "christians" in all of this.

Do you think you could come across as being more one sided here "immanuel can"?

How many so-called "christians" have fought and killed not just in the two so-called 'world wars, but before and after these wars, and in the 'name of God'? And, how many "christians" have fought and killed under the banner, 'God will prevail'?

Let us think about this carefully, IC.

How I wish Marxists could! Even a cursory count would show that they've killed far more people than any other ideology in history...by orders of magnitude...nothing comes close.

But Marxists always, always, always, disown their own history. It's so shameful, so utterly tragic and awful, that they could never get going if they owned up to even a tenth of what Marxists have done.

Now, absolutely anyone could write;

But, [add any religious teaching here], always, always, always, disown their own history. It's so shameful, so utterly tragic and awful, that they could never get going if they owned up to even a tenth of what Marxists have done.

And some, very closed individuals, would just believe it to be absolutely true.

So they just pretend "that wasn't real Marxism," and go on and plan the next bloody revolution, the next set of purges, the next set of people to hate, alienate, torture and murder, and so on. It's all they can do, because their own record is so utterly deplorable, their real history such an irrecoverable failure.

'We' here could, once again, just remove the 'marxism' word, replace it with any religiously taught denomination, and, again, there would still be some very closed individual human beings who would believe 'this' to be absolutely true. As you "immanuel can" are proving quite nicely here, for 'us'.

[Age]

No, she was not forced at all. She just got fooled into believing that the Serpent telling the truth. Did you get my argument? I repeat it again: But apparently, she believed that she wouldn't die otherwise she wouldn't eat the fruit.

I got that. I answered it.

She knew what God had told her. She heard what the Tempter told her. She made her choice between the things she had been told. But she also used her own eyes, her own desires, and her own wisdom to make the decision she did. The Biblical account is very, very clear about that.

Therefore, she was fooled. But God should not her as she was fooled. This means that the act of punishing them by God is unjust.

No, she wasn't "fooled." She was offered a choice. She chose badly. Nothing coerced or forced her into the decision she made. She could have believed God, but she chose not to. She could have refused, but she didn't. She had enough experience to make a better choice, but went with her own preferences, and encouraged Adam to do the same. It's all pretty clear how her decision was formed: she was no victim.

No, she was fooled. It does not make any logical sense that she eats the fruit if she knows that she will die.

Why?

you adults, in the days when this was being written, were continually informed that if you continue to do some things, then you will surely die. But you continued on doing them.

[Age]

I got that. I answered it.

She knew what God had told her. She heard what the Tempter told her. She made her choice between the things she had been told. But she also used her own eyes, her own desires, and her own wisdom to make the decision she did. The Biblical account is very, very clear about that.


No, she wasn't "fooled." She was offered a choice. She chose badly. Nothing coerced or forced her into the decision she made. She could have believed God, but she chose not to. She could have refused, but she didn't. She had enough experience to make a better choice, but went with her own preferences, and encouraged Adam to do the same. It's all pretty clear how her decision was formed: she was no victim.

No, she was fooled.

Apparently not. She made the decision based on three considerations, all of which are given to us in Genesis. None of them is merely that "she was fooled."

Have you not heard of the serpent story "immanuel can" and how it was explained how an adult human being was 'fooled', 'tricked', and/or 'deceived', by a 'lie'?

Which, by the way, is just another reference for the 'devil', and/or 'evil', which is within every one of you adults human beings continually trying to, and is, 'fooling', 'tricking', and 'deceiving' all of you, well back in the days when this was being written, anyway.

Otherwise, how do you explain your continual rejection of God, and your continual turning to your own way?

[Age]

No, she was fooled.

Apparently not. She made the decision based on three considerations, all of which are given to us in Genesis. None of them is merely that "she was fooled."

So you think that God created something that does something that does not make any logical sense, I mean she eats the fruit even though she knows she dies!?

In the days when this is being written, do adult human beings continue to eat the food that is known to be the biggest or leading cause of death among human beings?

Why would "eve", the purported to one the first human beings, created along the evolution path, be any different?

The only real difference here, in the days when this is being written, is that you adult human beings here 'know', or believe, that you will so-call 'die', one day, just like "eve" did, but you adult human beings here are continually being told that the food you are eating will 'kill' you, earlier. However you adult human beings still continue to eat that same food.

So, what makes even less logical sense here now?

Knowing that you are going to die, or will surely die, and continuing to do something, OR, knowing that you will die, earlier than you would if you did not do something, but yet still continue to do that thing?

[Age]

Apparently not. She made the decision based on three considerations, all of which are given to us in Genesis. None of them is merely that "she was fooled."

So you think that God created something that does something that does not make any logical sense...

No, I think that it makes perfect sense. The narrative definitely teaches us that human choices are volitionally free, and are our own responsibility. There's nothing we can blame them on, apart from our own wills.

But this is obviously not true at all.

Unless, of course, if you really want to blame your own wills, only. But if you did, then you would have to accept and agree that your own wills were created, and given to you, by God.

Now, if you or anyone would like to look at, and see, what the actual Truth is here, then by all means let us have that discussion, which will bring to light the Truth.

See, what there is, which can be actually so-called 'blamed', or thus is the actual 'reason', for the Wrong that all of you adult human beings do, in the days when this is being written, is not your own so-called 'wills', or 'free will' itself, but the actual choices you make.

Now, of course, the choices you have to choose from, in childhood, are absolutely limited AND none of your own doing. However, as an adult, although the choices from which you have to choose from is also limited, some of those limited choices to choose from are because of and the sole responsibility of your own previously chosen choices.

Although this may well not yet be understood by you people here, all of this can be fully explained, and be understood fully. Again, that is if anyone is Truly interested in discussing and learning here.

[Age]

I've spoken about you, on the basis of what the Bible says is true of all of us.

I have a feeling you are setting the base for another bloody war.

You're wrong, of course. War does nothing good.

It's human hubris that's responsible for every war that's ever happened.

Or, your greed, selfishness, confusion, and/or just a misunderstanding is what has been responsible for any or every war.

As excessive pride or self-confidence, or in other words 'hubris', does not necessarily lead to war at all.

And it doesn't make a difference whether that hubris was tinged with religion or with outright Atheism. On the other hand, a more honest and humble view of human nature might have made us more reluctant to invest ourselves in blind utopian schemes of either kind.

Mankind's confidence that they can "do it on our own" has been ultimately responsible for all the misery.

Considering the irrefutable Fact that it was God who has left you human beings to 'your own devices' to 'do it all on your own' and how much belief and faith you put in God "immanuel can", this claim of yours here is really rather very humorous.

Confidence in being able to do things 'on one's own', although may have led to some misery, it was this confidence, or belief in one's own 'self', which has led and allowed you human beings to have created absolutely all and everything that you have. Which, compared to the rest of the known, to you people in the days when this is being written, Universe is Truly remarkable and amazing.

Confidence in one's own ability is a Truly remarkable thing, which can lead, literally, to a Truly rewarding and satisfying life.

However an over-confidence can quickly lead to misery, and despair.

And that's whether "it" was "usher in the kingdom of a god," or "make the human race into their own god."

you are all on the way to Utopia. you, however, can try and get there on your own, or with God.

But obviously you will have to uncover, or discover, learn, and understand, who and what God is, exactly, first, or just keep trying to get 'there', to 'you', 'here', to 'us', on your own.

[Age]

No, I think that it makes perfect sense...

So, we reach to conclusion that I suggest: She was fooled.

Not from anything I've said, and not from anything Genesis says. But I don't doubt that you are keen on that "conclusion." It's so much more convenient than the truth.

But you do not, yet, know the Truth "immanuel can".

Unless, of course, you believe otherwise.

Which would then mean that, to you anyway, you do already know the Truth, right?

[nemos]

... practically bad, like volcanoes, tidal waves, diseases, and other mishaps.

Volcanoes are the eruption of magma through openings in the earth's crust, earthquakes are formed at the contact points of continental plates, tsunamis are most often the result of a volcano or an earthquake.

So what exactly should be considered natural evil?
Magma or the earth's crust that floats on it? By the way, thanks to the liquid state of magma, the earth's core rotates in it, forming a shield of the earth's magnetic field, the lack of which would create another natural evil - cosmic rays.
We have encountered natural contradictions:
- on the one hand, magma forms volcanic "evil", on the other hand, it forms protection against the "evil" of cosmic rays.
- on the one hand, the movement of the earth's crust creates the "evil" of earthquakes and tsunamis, on the other hand, what would we do without this crust.
- on the one hand, the sun gives energy to life, on the other hand, it is UV burns, the danger of radiation as a result of eruptions, and actually an inevitable factor of destruction in the final part of its evolution.
- on the one hand, life should be a proof of God's miracle, on the other hand, life has a natural inherent aggressiveness and the need to eat other lives to sustain itself. Including microorganisms that naturally cause infections, diseases and even death.

So what exactly from all of this should be considered natural "evil"?

[Age]

So, we reach to conclusion that I suggest: She was fooled.

Not from anything I've said, and not from anything Genesis says. But I don't doubt that you are keen on that "conclusion." It's so much more convenient than the truth.

It is quite logical if you think about it: She wouldn't eat the fruit if she was sure that she would die so the opposite is true, namely she was sure that she wouldn't die if she ate the fruit. That was what Serpent said which was a lie so she was fooled.

What is clearly obvious to 'us' here is not to "immanuel can". But, then again, "immanuel can's" words here might be being used, by God, to show the rest of humanity just how simple and easy people can be and are 'fooled' by the lies, which are told to, and heard by, "themselves", from within.

Just like the, literal, lowest form of life was telling lies, by splitting the truth with a forked tongue, to "eve", from within.

One, however, always has 'the choice', the 'free will', to choose whether to accept and follow a 'lie', 'one's own way', or to accept and follow the 'Truth', 'every one's or God's way'.

[Age]

Mankind's confidence that they can "do it on our own" has been ultimately responsible for all the misery.

If you're bothered by people's expressions of free will, then go and bang your head against the wall.

It's not free will I'm bothered about at all. Free will is a great thing. It's sine qua non for responsibility, relationship, morality, freedom, identity, personhood...lots of good stuff.

What should concern us all is only the particular choices men make.

Why not the particular choices that women make?

Or, are you only concerned about 'men' here and what 'they' do?

They clearly aren't all good.

Yes. A lot of choices you make "immanuel can" are not good, at all. As can be clearly seen and proved here.

And some are very, very bad indeed.

Yes you have also shown and proved this as well "immanuel can".

[Age]

Not from anything I've said, and not from anything Genesis says. But I don't doubt that you are keen on that "conclusion." It's so much more convenient than the truth.

It is quite logical if you think about it: She wouldn't eat the fruit if she was sure that she would die so the opposite is true, namely she was sure that she wouldn't die if she ate the fruit. That was what Serpent said which was a lie so she was fooled.

If one person tells you the truth, and one tells you a lie, are you fooled?

Obviously not if you already know which one is 'a lie' and which one is 'the truth'.

It is, obviously, when one has made a choice, from two things, and then one later finds out they had made a choice, on 'a lie', then, and only then, do they realize that they had been 'fooled'.

That's up to you.

What is 'up to you' here, supposedly?

How about just saying what you actually mean, instead of speaking in riddles or just alluding to things only?

you asked a clarifying question, and then said and claimed that 'that' is up to you.

Which, by the way, asking a question, not waiting for a response, and then claiming something is true, was a very common practice among adult human beings, in the days when this was being written, as can be clearly seen here, once again, and throughout this whole forum here.

Believe the person who's the truth-teller. Doubt the liar. That's the right choice. But don't blame anybody but yourself if you go the other way.

Here we can see 'confirmation bias' at its finest.

This one believes that absolutely every word in the bible is 'absolute truth'. And, that its own very individual interpretation is the one and only right and true one. So, if absolutely anyone says or claims absolutely anything opposing this one's own interpretation, then it is them and their interpretation that is 'the lie', and this one's own interpretation that is 'the truth'.

And so to be able to distinguish between a so-called 'truth teller' from 'the liar', this one just turns to its own interpretation of the bible, to gain what it considers is 'the truth'.

So no, it's not at all the logical conclusion.

This here, by "immanuel can", is a prime example of "eve" being 'fooled' played out in what is sometimes called and referred to as 'real time'.

[Dubious]

I'd say it was meant to be taken literally but only becuz the authors of those stories had no other way of understanding their origins.

I won't bother refuting it since, approx 2600 years later there are still many who believe it as an actual event including one on this site. To them evolution and genetics are fictional; the god-created Adam and Eve is the one real event which accounts for us being here!

Amazing how many of the mentally mutilated still roam this planet! The future by no means looks bright in that and many other ways.