Re: Hell II (Was: Rational thought etc.)

Sean McHugh wrote:
> 
> Andrew Lamb wrote:
> 
>>On 5/05/2008 3:15:33 PM, misanthropic_curmudgeon wrote:
>>
>>>On May 3, 12:22 pm, Sean McHugh <se...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>>~ In 1999, Pope John Paul II made headlines by saying hell should be
>>>>~ seen not as a fiery underworld but as "the state of those who
>>>>~ freely and definitively separate themselves from God,
>>>
>>>That is hell? A life without any reference to gods, pixies, and
>>>externally imposed absolutes, threats, or manipulation?  If you'll
>>>excuse the pun, it sounds like heaven to me!!
>>>
>>
>>A life without any reference to gods? The world already has that, in
North
>>Korea, where the even word "god" was banned decades ago - see
>>http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5393#saltmines
I encourage you
to
>>emigrate to there Curmudgeon, then you would really get a taste of hell,
>>oops, 'heaven' on earth.
>>
>>In fact atheist regimes have a consistent record of producing hell on
earth -
>>Stalin in the USSR and Mao in China, who murdered citizens by the tens
of
>>millions. Pol Pot in Cambodia, and Robespierre in France, wannabees who
tried
>>hard but just had far fewer citizens available to kill. See the
two-minute
>>FoolsHeart clip http://www.foolsheart.com
for a brief overview of the
>>hell-on-earth produced by atheists when they get into power.
>>
> 
> 
> 
> That's designed for the wilfully incompetent Christians who will
> enthusiastically lap it up. Those listed leaders probably didn't
> believe in pyramid power either but that too is not the reason they
> murdered. Their wars were for political gain and were unlikely to have
> been impelled by their unbelief in Zeus, Thor or the Rainbow Serpent.
> Conversely one can point to many examples where religion has had a
> _direct_ motivation (or justification) for atrocities. If one is to
> believe the Old Testament, it abounds with atrocities over religious
> disagreement, that were supposedly carried out with God's sanction. We
> can then look at the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Conquistadors and
> the witch hunts. We can also look a long period in history call the
> Dark Ages. It was a time of religious struggle and control and a time
> when things went backwards. In more modern times, Hitler's Nazis had
> on the belt buckles, "Gott mit uns". It means, "God is with us". They
> too had religious justification for atrocities. Would anyone go into
> battle wearing, "Unbelief is with us"? Today we can look at the
> Islamic states (something your examples omit) where the religion is
> also the Law. 'Sharia', 'Jihad' and 'infidel' are products of
> religion. We don't want that sort of stupidity and that is why western
> states have secular governments (already) in power. Secular is
> essentially a-theistic. 
> 

Sorry Sean, but I do not agree. Show me one example of a genuinely 
atheistic government which has produced some sort of paradise. The best 
example I can think of is Cuba, amnd I doubt that the hordes who leave 
illegally to go the the USA would agree.

And I don't agree with your take on secular. Plenty of secular 
politicians are religious, and use their religious faith to inform their 
political positions (on both sides of politics). When you look at those 
who framed our constitutions and state institutions, many where 
Christians, and based their thinking on the Christian faith. That 
muslims might do the same seems commonsense to me. If Sharia law 
produces better political outcomes will be seen in time, but I very much 
doubt it. Just as Christians gradually moved from feudalism to 
democracy, I think that Muslims will move to a secular form of 
government separating religion from governance.

> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> 
> 
> Sean McHugh
> 
> 
Chris