I believe it would.The strong have always excerted power over the weak.Traditionally men seen women as weaker and still do in certain parts of the world .Religion is the excuse but not the reason.
1 Like
Yes
Ethnic minorities all over the world would like to know tooâŚ
So, men oppressing women is the natural order of things?
On a large scale that has been what was happening in many parts of the world in the past but rightfully no longer is.
Sadly still is the case in some parts of the world.
Particularly those parts where itâs sanctioned by religion.
No.Where it has been sanctioned by men.
1 Like
Some people would always seek to oppress others. Where religion comes in is to convince those that wouldnât, and the victims of the oppression, that itâs the way it should be.
1 Like
Like when a man hits a woman and tells her itâs her fault for making him do it.
When a priest,or anyone abuses,do they do it cause God told them to?
Bad people do bad things and look for an excuse where they can.
1 Like
You donât. (That you is singular).
Throughout the thread Iâve seen you misuse and misapply the Bible numerous times. It wouldnât matter to most, as they wouldnât know the difference, but to someone who does know the Bible, and has been theologically educated, itâs easy to see.
Please have some humility.
3 Likes
ALL groups have it in them to divide and fight. It is part of the human condition. The reasons are usually because of things like power, resources, greed, politics, influence, domination.
Sometimes throughout history religion has been used as a unifying âbannerâ to rally people for evil purposes. Nobody of a reasonable religious persuasion would say yes, thatâs what my faith looks like, but the atheists will still hammer it as though it is representative of the faith.
On the other side of the coin it is easy to point to acts that have been perpetrated BY atheists too, even on a nation state level. Some of the useful constraining parts of religion - things like charity, love, goodwill, peace - have just not been there, in the absence of religion. So to offer a recent example:
Does anyone of an atheist persuasion want to tell me why the officially atheist Chinese government is systematically wiping out the religious Uighur community?
Iâm just not seeing the Gene Roddenberry enlightenment thing that atheists often seem to fantasize about.
The truth is that ALL groups have it in them to divide, fight, conquer, subjugate, and commit horrible acts. It is a most unfortunate part of the human condition. Atheism offers me no answer to that.
You havenât
Youâve seen him apply his own interpretation of the bible. Which is no more or less than youâve done.
Are we going to do this again? It didnât go well for you last time.
Thatâs not true tbf. Stating something is a âuniversal truthâ based on one personâs experience is just a ridiculous statement.
To deal with that one in particular, most of those I grew up with in church had read the bible from cover to cover. It was actively encouraged. Iâve no idea how well atheists know the bible and wouldnât never presume to speak for all of them
Not true. And again, arrogant atheist.
But grrrâŚ. I can beat up the Jehovahâs Witnesses at my door.
Not true. And again, arrogant theist.
All you offered was whose NAME atrocities were done in.
It was naive in the extreme.
Thatâs not the point of contention. @RedOverTheWater said @Klopptimist misinterpreted the bible. He didnât.
You started off suggesting Hitler was an atheist, and it went downhill from there.
He was replying to the âuniversal truthâ post, which I notice you didnât call out.
Iâve enjoyed reading various perspectives in this thread, but wild generalisations and oversimplifications make genuine discourse challenging
1 Like
Thatâs mischaracterizing it. Important context is needed.
I spoke up because Klopptimist said that atheists know the Bible better than Christians. It was another arrogant atheist statement.
1 Like