"Atheists Killed >140 millions" is Fallacious

[Immanuel Can]

I'm not sure whom you mean by "they." Do you mean mankind? ...

Of course, I'm still talking about Adam and Eve, who should be 100% guilty even though you can discuss about them now... Because if they had stayed close to god, then you wouldn't be there either...

That's very likely true. But we don't know, because they didn't do that. If they had, there's perhaps no reason for the human race ever to have become fallen...or maybe a later person might have made the same mistake...it's impossible to speculate. However, this we do know: what they did, you and I have also done. We've confirmed their bad choice in our own case, repeatedly, through our own choices. We also turned to our own way, and rejected God. So Adam and Eve have 100% responsibility for their choice, and we have an equal responsibility for our own choices.

Hence the need for salvation for all of us.

[nemos]

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

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

[promethean75]

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

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.

[Immanuel Can]

... 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.

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.

Take it or leave it. But truth is truth.

[Immanuel Can]

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.

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. 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.

[bahman]

Right. She could have trusted God, but she didn't. And what she did use to make the decision is actually spelled out: she thought it looked good, probably tasted good, and might make her aware of new things. The text says that.

I guess I'm having trouble seeing why you're not recognizing that as a clear case of a free will decision. Is it your supposition that she was somehow "forced" to do something? The text certainly says otherwise.

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.

[Immanuel Can]

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.

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."

[nemos]

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. Neither you nor your Bible is my authority. Don't tell me what I must to do and I won't tell you where you must to go. How many millions are you willing to sacrifice in defense of your "authority".
I invite you to respect the free choice of others, even if it meant being sinful. Even God did not deny Adam and Eve this choice.

[bahman]

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."

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!?

[Immanuel Can]

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...

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.

[Immanuel Can]

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

[bahman]

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...

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

[Immanuel Can]

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...

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.

[nemos]

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

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

[bahman]

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.

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.