Amaru, do you have any facts to back up your opinion. I have stated several places from scripture above that I would just -love- for you to argue because the Bible often says do X, no X is wrong do Y, no Y is wrong do X.

As for Karl Marx, he several papers that make his theory more complicated. If you want, you can spend the next couple weeks reading them and get back to us, but as I figured you wouldn't care for such, I boiled it all down to a few simple statements.

It would be worthwhile next time if you attempted to say: Karl Marx's theories were wrong that isn't some crude attempt to evade discussion.

Karl Marx's era was when we had churches selling absolutions from sin. He saw this for what it was - a scam. If you wish to question it, I'd like to see some factual historical evidence to support that "God" has improved society.

In fact, in the case of Spain, when you're a reduced group of christians trying to reconquer a country from the arabs and nordic tribes that were there you'd need any and every help to keep cohesionated as a group. This includes a common religion, a common language (that later evolved into the actual spanish) and killing the different ones to further define themselves.

Saying "it's a war, we're going to die, and worms will have your body" isn't so apealing as "we're rescueing europe from the infidels and if you die you have a safe place in paradise". Same on the muslim side, on the other hand, wich paradise is for most males even better than the christian paradise. Just sounds much better and more rewarding.

May 5, 1818 Trier, Germany – March 14, 1883 London.

While I get your point, isn't that the same as asking for factual historical evidence to support that godlessness has improved society?

The point I was making is that nothing Marx writes is worth the effort of reading, because it is propaganda for his precious 'proletariat'. It's emotive, illogical in many places, and only ever truly admired by aspiring intellectuals.

This happened also with Lutero (protestantism starter) and Calvino (calvinism) who got sick of people paying the church a fixed amount of money for a paper (Called Papal Bulls) where their sins were forgiven. This started a brand new sect of the christian religion. So, Marx reaction has a precedent.

God gave us Bach and Mozart's Requiems. Just for that God has improved the world.

Now i wanna find factual historical evidence that wicca has improved society

oh and to keep in the tone with the thread

*random insult/rant/etc*

Then the bible apostle epistoles aren't worth reading, as they are religious propaganda for their precious co-believers to keep their hopes and themselves in the right track and spread the christian teachings.

Hm. The next time I feel the urge to go off-topic in the Quotes thread, I really should suppress it.

I feel most Sociologists would disagree with you. But let's put Marx aside. I posted several major inconsistencies in the Bible which are likewise illogical, debate those.

Modern society has evolved from European society. This is a culture where, for thousands of years, the greatest works of art (look at classical poets and literature, painters, sculptors, architects) were inspired by religion. The Church, for all its propaganda, created education in mediaeval Europe. It preserved and sought after knowledge. The first schools and universities were paid for and taught by the Church.

And it isn't just in the past. In the 20th century, people like Mother Teresa and Gandhi have been inspired by religion. Hitler, Mao, Stalin were inspired by secular ideologies. There is no avoiding the logical conclusion that war and brutality is a result of the human condition, and not of religion in itself. I happen to believe that the peaceful and charitable message of established religion has, over the years, had an effect on humanity more beneficial than my opponents would accept.





I personally, in my old-fashioned way, suppress a giggle at the idea of Sociology being a developed intellectual discipline.



Why is it that the poor and the rich both tend to be religious? The very poor and the very rich. The very impoverished and the very powerful. Name one member of the G8 who isn't a Christian? Christianity is not just for the poor and desperate, who need something to hold onto and believe in. But name one member of G8 who's a Marxist? Marxism is the product of a man in poverty, for others in poverty. It is real propaganda.

Actually, if we look at classical art, religion didn't inspire it - it sanctioned it. The only art that was tolerated was religious art. In fact, many ancient greek works were either banned, sealed off, or destroyed because they weren't christian enough.

Likewise, the educational system in medieval Europe was essentially a method of ensuring that the rich persons (the only persons to be educated) remained so. There was no benevolence in it.

And Hitler, for the record, was a good friend of the Pope. In fact, the Pope at the time held a birthday f-ing celebration for Hilter. His picture was taken with Hitler during that day. Learn the facts.

The selling of pardons occurred in pre-Protestant times. To say this happened in Marx's time, as Narsrim suggested, is ludicrous.



Firstly, please don't swear. What is there to get emotional about in this discussion? It's already six vs one.

Secondly. Religion -did- inspire art. You can't contest that. One look at Michelangelo or Raphael would dismiss it. I don't know much about ancient Greek art, but a lot of their great poetry and literature was inspired by their religion. It's a testament to its value that it's still admired today.

Thirdly, it was not only the rich who were educated in medaeval Europe. I wish you'd have a less angry tone when you accuse me of not researching my claims. I personally attended a Catholic school, several hundred years old, which began as a school for middle class boys in the 18th century.

There are other schools founded by the Churches which have been for poor children of merit. In fact, the Church was often regarded as the only means by which those born of a lower class could ascend through the tiers of old European society (see Thomas Beckett, Archbishop of Canterbury, of peasant origin).

Hitler being 'good friends' with the Pope does not mean that Hitler was inspired by religion, or guided by it. He saw only its potential to dominate the minds of the populace, and therefore created his own religion, based on pagan ideas of sun-worship. It wasn't very successful. His central ideology was a secular one.

Edit: The Pope has typically been on cordial terms with all European leaders. It is a big step to go from this to implying that the Church approved of Nazism.

The Church is a huge organization. For each good thing there's a bad thing. For each priest fighting powerty in a small brazilian suburb there's a more rich than you corrupt priest supporting a dictator. For each mad inquisitor burning political enemies you had a quiet monk copying the work of philosophers so it didn't get lost.

In the 20th century the Church gave us child molesters, attacks to the freedom of gay people, attacks to woman rights (catholic church mostly I think, don't know enough about protestantism) including the ability to divorce from a husband who beat them, the right to decide the number of children, the right to choose to work. Also, the catholic church helped and favoured the nazism and italian fascism (they asked for forgiveness afterwards) and were great supporters of dictatorships in both Spain and South America during most of the century.

In Medieval Europe, the church burned books that were not following the church beliefs, and denied the possibility to study subjects that clashed with the christian beliefs in any way. Also, destroyed most of the old knowledge from romans and arabs (it was the arabs who actually saved the roman empire knowledge that later was studied in the Renacentism and recovered). They created schools and they created universities to teach their own beliefs, and some were even in this restrictive environment to find inspiration into the true religion as philosophy and create art from it, ignoring the "eartly" version of it that included Popes being murdered on a monthly basis and cardinals being hereditary titles with a vote of sexual abstinence.

God, itself, is a great source of inspiration, as is anything that trascends the human basics of life. But the way the Church has abused power to destroy is something you cannot ignore or wipe away because doesn't sound good. Civilizations without a God, like the oriental ones, have advanced as much as occidental civilization.

Only because they were colonised. They've survived through adopting capitalism, which was created by the West.

I must remind you that Chinese culture had a writing system in place and paper centuries before we europeans learned to write.

So they had not a God, but several ancestor spirits in the best of cases...

I'm just putting forward the idea that all civilisations had a time in their existence where religion has been prevalent. I don't think they could've got very far (Red Indians) without it.

I can officially now



this forum.