Home > atheism, Buddhism > The Rise of Atheism, Irreligion, Buddhism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, Crime Rates and Immorality

The Rise of Atheism, Irreligion, Buddhism, Catholicism, Hinduism, Islam, Crime Rates and Immorality

Post link: http://crimestats.tk

Some historical facts (they are approximations for obvious reasons):

Over the past 1000 years, the Catholic church killed 50,000,000 people, including a few types of Christian groups worse then them, like the Cathars. Not everyone is equally bad, but as a group they are very bad. Here are some ancient accounts of some of the many persecution-murders they have committed.

Atheists have done worse: In the past 100 years, and in less than that time, they’ve  killed 150,000,000 people. Some atheists try to excuse this by saying that atheism just means “no beliefs”, or “no beliefs in gods”, but that doesn’t get rid of the fact that mass murder is done by the atheist group all the time. It would be like  a Catholic saying, “Catholicism is just belief in Mary being God’s mother, and praying to her and saints for forgiveness… and doesn’t lead to any other kind of behavior.” And bother groups are always aborting babies, and never with anesthesia, and cutting them to pieces and then throwing them away like trash.

Though these two groups are the worst, so called “pagans” have also done evil, before Rome converted to Catholicism, the pagans there killed about 6,000,000 Christians, including children, and in very cruel ways. It happened from 64 AD to 311 AD. If their rate of killing had continued for 1000 years, as with the Catholics, a total of 24,291,498 Christians would have been killed. Notice how that’s less than half the amount killed by Catholics, so, when they converted to Catholicism, they became more than twice as bad.

Some people say atheists only killed about 81,000,000, supposing that is true, and they killed that many in 90 years, if they continue for another thousand years at that rate, then 900,000,000 people will die.  That’s about as many people living in China right now. Because atheists are very oppressive. Right now they have 300,000,000 impoverished citizens,  and  the government thinks that they are helping them by murdering any second children they have before they are born.

Both Catholics and atheists continue to cause extreme damage to the world. Everyone knows about the problem the Catholic church has with sex crimes committed even by it’s priests, and some know that it hordes the donations it gets, money which is meant for the poor or to buy forgiveness of sins.

Russia, a mostly atheist nation, is suffering from widespread alcoholism and addiction to other types of drugs, especially meth (1) (2). Their population is in decline. The atheist government of China uses much of its money to grow its military, apparently to ready itself to take over other nations, and meanwhile, a third of it’s population is poor, and often abused by their corrupt local government.

Crime in Britain has become very great ever since its atheist population began to grow. Britain’s population was about 31 to 44% atheist. (1) (2)

“A poll published this week by the French newspaper Le Monde shows that the number of people describing themselves as atheists has risen to 31 per cent – from 23 per cent in 1994. The poll also shows that only half the population of France now considers itself to be Catholic.” Crime in France has also been rising since the number of their atheists has increased.

Notice how both in Britain and France, that greater punishments are not stopping the increase in crime (which by the way refutes the claim of many atheists who claim that unlike Christians, they don’t need the threat of punishment to do good, when actually, the threat of punishment has no affect on them in general).

Atheists are so bad as a group, that it’s self defeating, in that their own corruption and self-centeredness works against the spread of atheism.

They expanded artificially in that when they killed off the many religious in their areas, they were the ones left mainly to breed there, but over time, they’ve bought into the false belief that they have to kill off people so that they can keep up their troop population, which is dumb, because if they just let them go to other countries they could send money back to their country.

Buddhism also has a problem, in that it teaches people to be cold, to be like psychopaths, loveless, and to take advantage of others, despite some of it’s laws which are like the “ten commandments”, like not to steal. Examples of the contradictions:

“Associate not with evil friends, associate not with mean men; associate with good friends, associate with noble men.” – Verse 3 of Panditavagga (The Wise Man)

Notice it doesn’t say to be loving yourself, just to associate with “good” friends, whatever that means. Even if Buddha meant to be loving and to only associate with such friends, he then contradicts himself in these verses that come after:

“The good give up (attachment for) everything; the saintly prattle not with sensual craving; whether affected by happiness or by pain, the wise show neither elation nor depression.” – Verse 8

And,

“By having no attachment and desires… and by forsaking sensual pleasures, a wise man gets rid of his impurities.” – Verse 13

So, “have no attachment” and “no desire” for love, goodness, or the company of good friends, or the desire to obey Buddha’s laws. So to practice Buddhism fully leads no where, but to confusion, and for some, insanity. That is why Tibet became so corrupt and oppressive that it was easily defeated by the Chinese atheists.

Here is another contradiction:

“A wise man renounces evil and sensual pleasure and he does all meritorious work in order to attain Nibbana. He becomes a homeless one.” – Verse 12

And,

“My teaching does not require anyone to become homeless” – The Majjhima Nikaya, or “Middle-length Discourses” of the Buddha, is the second of the five nikayas (collections) of the Sutta Pitaka.

Perfectly obeying Buddha is supposed to lead to non-existence according to Buddha, yet he also said,

“Victory brings sadness”>

How can you feel sadness if you achieved victory by not existing anymore?

In Australia, in 2004, were about 4,779,120 people who didn’t believe in God (24% of Australia’s population at that time) according to Mr. Zuckerman. Buddhism greatly spread throughout Australia since at least 1986.

Since 1996, the number of Australians affiliated with the Catholic church grew by 7% to 5.1 million. The Anglicans decreased by 5% to 3.7 million, Uniting Church by 15% to 1.1 million, and the Presbyterian and Reformed churches by 12% to .6 million. The fastest-growing Christian denomination was Pentecostal (which are plagued with Arminians), which increased by 26% to about 220,000 members.

There was decline in irreligious citizens according to the Australian 2006 Census of Population and Housing, which reported that 18.7% Australians said that they were without religion or wrote in a response which was classified as non religious, which is equal 3,706,555 Australians, and which was a decline of 1,072,565 atheists since 2004.

In 2007, the three most common non-Christian religious  citizens in Australia were Buddhists, who made up 2.1% of the population, Islam at 1.7%,  and Hindus at .7%. Hindus more than doubled since 1996 to 150,000 members and Buddhists about doubled to 420,000 members.

Catholicism was the most common religious throughout Australia, but Catholics made up 18% of the population of  Tasmania while Anglicans made 29% of its population.

According to Australian Institute of Criminology’s crime records, overall crime began increasing since at least 1994, then began to decline in 2002 and continued to decline till 2008.  Though  crimes have in general decreased or remained about the same in Aus., alcoholism and binge drinking have increased, which would be an increase in immorality. The crime rates probably went down in general because of the rise of the Pentecostal denomination, whose adherents obey the Bible’s commandments, including the Arminians among them, however, Arminians eventually stop obeying the Bible out of a greater concern for material things or out of fear of persecution. That can take years, so an increase in crime may not be soon, but it will eventually happen once they start falling away:

Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for (that day will not come) until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. – 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4

The passage came through apostle Paul, from God. Paul meant that there that the world wouldn’t know who the anti-Christ was until the all false Christians gave up obeying God in mass (in other words, all at once, over a few days or weeks).

Crime will increase for sure once these false Christians decide to live like atheists, and it won’t just increase in Australia, but wherever these Christians are, and they are all over the world. If Catholics are included in this prophecy, then the increase in crime will be extreme, being that there are about 1 billion of them, out of the world’s population, which is about 6,813,592,000 as of 4/9/2010.

In America, atheism or non-religiosity grew since at least 1990. The proportion of the American population that can be classified as Christian has declined from 86% in 1990 to 77% in 2001. (ARIS survey). And in there were 10 percent fewer religious people in 2008. The crime rate went down according to some websites, but it’s untrue, because it doesn’t take into account legalized crime, like the Drug War and Iraq War and Afghanistan War, in which police and military are paid to do illegal things. Scroll to the bottom of this website where it says “US Arrests“, and you can see how arrests have risen. Now though it’s not a crime in the Bible to have or smoke marijuana, even if your government says that it is illegal (because you can’t make a law that contradicts God’s legally, like telling people it’s illegal to medicate yourself), and even though the arrests rose, those figures don’t represent true crimes, but imagine all the police that had to do wrong when doing those arrests, and think about all the wrongs that police do all the time that they get away with, and all kinds of crimes in America that go unreported:

“It is estimated that for every one case of elder abuse, neglect, exploitation, or self neglect reported to authorities, about five more go unreported.” – National Ctr. on Elder Abuse, The Am. Pub. Hum. Serv. Ass’n, The National Elder Abuse Incidence Study, 1998, (source).

And,

The FBI estimates that only 37% of all rapes are reported to the police. Bureau of Justice Statistics are lower-only 30.7% reported the crime. – National Criminal Victimization Survey, 1996

According to this site 10 to 14 percent of all rapes in America are marital rape. If there was such a thing, then there are still at least about 23% non marital rapes.

Police officers are also told to lie about crime activity in San Diego.

So, reports like this, are false.

At http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html, statistics are shown which show that even though atheists make up a small amount of the America’s population, they make up a high number of America’s prison populations, especially if you count Buddhists as atheists. There are more Catholics in prison but this is because there are many more Catholics than atheists and Buddhists in America. And for those who want to point out the larger number of “Baptists” in prison, I’ll bet anyone $1000 that most of those Baptists are Arminians, and mostly ones who know little about basic Biblical teachings or the history of Christianity or the Bible and so are not truly Christians.

If a person believes in looking the other way when they see a crime in their neighborhood, it endangers the lives of their neighbors. If they believe in doing crimes that makes it unsafe for their neighbors too. If they believe in fighting against crime, by prayer or reporting it peacefully to news agencies, that can help make it safer. What you believe matters, it affects how much you will decide to learn and what your actions will be: good, or evil.

This post can be reached at http://crimestats.tk or http://correlations.tk

About these ads
  1. aforcier
    April 8, 2010 at 10:10 AM

    i only had 3 short paragraphs comments… still, i do not remember what my “obviously” refered to. so i cannot comment on your comment of my comments. i’m sure you have a good heart… but so do most people. that’s my experience of humanity. religious believers or not.

    [url removed by knight]

    • April 8, 2010 at 10:35 AM

      And it’s significant that you are sure that most people have a good heart because? Are you beliefs magical? Do they make anything more or less true? Do your mere beliefs make you right? Do your mere feelings? Why do you deny the obvious? If everyone had a good heart, the planet would be good and there would be no crime and we would have spread throughout the universe long ago. Stop denying reality, think with your mind first, and let your heart follow, not the other way around like the world always does, and which has lead to endless crimes. Also, you’re judging the world by your standards, which is suited to your feelings. Judge the world by God’s, and man always fails. Do you know what a narcissist is?

    • April 8, 2010 at 10:44 AM

      I’ve read thousands of stupid comments, questions and including mere insults, you’re so self-centered that you think that you’re the only person in my life. Would you want to endlessly read comments and questions that are basically repeats of what you’ve read before, and always give the same replies when the person make the questions or comments merely has to read a little more to see that they are wrong, merely has to type a few words in a search engine to see if they are wrong about what they are saying to me or to answer their question? I’m not going to answer the easily answered forever, because of someone’s laziness or self-centeredness. Common knowledge from experience and known statistical facts are fine, everything else is assumption, and assumptions often lead to errors, it’s like so called, “blind faith”.

  2. aforcier
    April 8, 2010 at 1:40 PM

    how do i know that people have good hearts? lets take you for exemple… what do i observe by your comments? at first brush: anger, hatred, you’re displeased with other people’s unworthy feelings, their inadequacy toward your god…toward you (they make stupid comments) etc, etc. that’s how i see you. yet,deep down, i sense that you have a good heart. i bet that all this negative vision of our human planet comes from a place of “goodness”.

    we are all capable of acts that can cause great joy and great sorrow.

    • April 9, 2010 at 4:51 AM

      You’re ranting.

  3. Stevarious
    April 8, 2010 at 3:58 PM

    To lump the people who refused to answer in with the atheists is absurd. If you look at ACTUAL statistics (http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_briefs/aris/key_findings.htm), you will find that 19.1% refused to answer, and that only .4% identified as atheist. Since the 19.1% DID NOT ANSWER, we have no idea what their religious affiliation is. They may have been Muslim but refused to answer for fear of discrimination by Muslim-hating guards – that seems a very logical reason for them to not respond. They may have been anything and simply felt it was nobody’s business but their own.
    Surely you have enough intellectual integrity left to admit that 19.1% unknown and .4% atheist is not the same as 19.5% atheist.

    • April 9, 2010 at 4:47 AM

      “To lump the people who refused to answer in with the atheists is absurd. If you look at ACTUAL statistics (http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_briefs/aris/key_findings.htm),”

      Where did I lump “them” whoever “them” is, in, with whoever you’re talking about? It’s absurd to put words in my mouth when everyone can read what I said. Can’t you see the title?

      That’s America, not all the other places I mentioned. On top of that, so what if 19.1% didn’t answer? From those who did answer you can make an educated guess as to what the rest would have answered, that’s done all the time, you take a sample poll to see what the majority thinks. No offense but you’re ignorant.

      “and .4% atheist is not the same as 19.5% atheist.” I never said it was.

      “They may have been Muslim but refused to answer for fear of discrimination by Muslim-hating guards”

      Huh? There are Muslim-hating guards in America? So you think there are a large amount of Muslims in America’s police force? Why don’t you go read this: http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_islam_usa.html and why didn’t you look for that data in the first place?

    • April 9, 2010 at 8:32 AM

      Oh and, atheists are the ones with the fearful persecution complex, Catholics doesn’t need to fear that because of their massive numbers, and neither do other Christians. Atheists are the ones who fear discrimination. Agnostic need not fear because everyone, even atheists, sees them as potential converts and so doesn’t want to scare them away. So it’s safe to say that at least many of those who didn’t answer, were atheists.

  4. Stevarious
    April 9, 2010 at 7:11 AM

    From your article:
    “At http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html, statistics are shown which show that even though atheists make up a small amount of the America’s population, they make up a high number of America’s prison populations, especially if you count Buddhists as atheists.”
    The statistics you quote lump avowed atheists in the same category as “them”, the people who refused to state a religious inclination. You use this information to posit an extremely large atheist prison population. But statistics that separate the atheist population from the ‘unknowns’ (which I provided for you) shows us that only a very tiny percentage of the prisoners are actually atheists, which directly contradicts both one of the points of your article (that rising atheism may contribute to rising crime rates) and your specific statement that American prison populations have a larger portion of atheists then the general population. Why didn’t YOU look for that information?
    And for what possible reason would you assume that, because I suggested a possible fear of Muslim discrimination from prison guards, that I have any opinion on how many Muslims are in the police force? Prison guards are not cops. Muslim hating prison guards are not Muslim police officers. The two issues are COMPLETELY unrelated. Why would I look for ‘data’ that has nothing to do with my point? I was only suggesting a possible reason why someone would refuse to answer the question of ‘What religion are you?’ and why it is a fallacy to put people who refuse to answer in the same category as atheists.

    • April 9, 2010 at 8:35 AM

      I’ll read this more thoroughly later. Something for you to think about though: many Arminians and Catholics, after going through “Hell”, become atheists, and drop their morality. They don’t get better, but more hostile towards the religious. See what results you get from taking a survey of your local prison populations.

    • April 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM

      “And for what possible reason would you assume that, because I suggested a possible fear of Muslim discrimination from prison guards, that I have any opinion on how many Muslims are in the police force? Prison guards are not cops.”

      I thought you were talking about America’s demographics at one point, not the prison population, and when you said “guards” thought you were referring to police, because I get a lot of stupid comments from anti-Christians and so am in dumbed-down-language-interpretation-mode, and besides that, exhausted often from the easily heard noise throughout my apartment. So wasn’t simply “assumption”. But sorry for the mistakes.

      But my point about there not being many Muslims in prison is right as one, there aren’t many Muslims in America in comparison to everyone else, and second, which I didn’t mention is that they aren’t known for being as confrontational in comparison to atheists (except in Europe, and only because of religious offenses and the unjust harm and killings of Muslims and Arabs that have occurred over the years with little justice or compensation for the victims or their families). Common examples are liberal protests about various things held throughout the country, which sometimes get violent. Are you going to tell me that most liberals are Christians? There most likely going to be Catholics, Atheists, Wiccans, Satanists and Buddhists. But how many Muslim protests which have gotten violent have you ever heard of?

      Many Muslims, as I’m sure many atheists have said, don’t speak out against the “extremist” Muslims hardly, but instead, are quiet. Compare that to atheists who go out of there way to attack Christianity using the legal system. Are there any cases from the ACLJ brought by Muslims against Christians? And have any atheists make a hit-piece documentary exposing “(true) Christians” as wild and irrational to spur on others to trash it? Does “Dawkins” ring a bell? Has a Muslim ever done that? And look at this liar and how atheists praise him for it: http://techskeptic.blogspot.com/2007/12/atheist-charities.html calling “secular” “charities” “atheist charities” and the few atheist organizations he lists aren’t organizations dedicated for helping the needy and poor. Here’s another liar doing the same thing: http://www.squidoo.com/Atheist-Charities He lists 21 organizations of which about five are atheists, and claims that all of them are atheist and that “secular” and “humanist” = atheist. Notice his ratings? A perfect five of 17 votes. On top of that, FIVE IN COMPARISON TO how many Christian charities. On top of that every Christian church is a charity, though many are dismal helpers, but still, there are millions of them.

      As for Muslims being afraid of anti-Muslim prison guards, genius: it’s the other way around: No one these days wants to discriminate against a Muslim lest they are sued or attacked by fanatical Muslims and get their heads chopped off or that of their friends of families. You’re all liars and truth twisters.

      9:40 P.M.:

      Look what I found:

      Demographics of atheism
      From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      The demographics of atheism are difficult to quantify. Different people interpret “atheist” and related terms differently, and it can be hard to draw boundaries between atheism, non-religious beliefs, and non-theistic religious and spiritual beliefs.

        Furthermore, atheists may not report themselves as such, to prevent suffering from social stigma, discrimination, and persecution in certain regions, or in cases where the situation is reversed, religious people may keep their beliefs secret in societies with a pro-atheist government.

      [1] Despite these problems, one study classified 2.5% of the world’s population as atheists, and a separate 12.7% as non-religious.[2]

      And how much more likely would it be for atheists not to disclose their beliefs in comparison to Muslims, when Most of America is religious, and when more than half the country is against the Western wars in the Middle East, and thinks that we’ve severely wronged Muslims by these wars?

      9:48 P.M.:

      Atheists & Liberalism:

      It’s true that you’ll probably find more liberal than non-liberal atheists. Atheism represents a challenge to or dissent from traditional beliefs and traditional religion. Liberalism, through most of Western history, has also challenged traditions and traditional ways of doing things. Liberalism has furthermore generally done more to promote the rights of various minority groups — something which atheists obviously benefit from, given how much discrimination they tend to encounter.

      Atheists & Conservatism:

      Atheism among conservatives is unusual… from http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutatheism/p/AtheistPolitics.htm

      10:15 P.M.

      I thought I had mentioned “irreligion” in my post, I didn’t mean to give any impression that I believe all people in prison who didn’t say their beliefs were atheists, I believe many of them believe in God or some god, but are irreligious.

  5. April 10, 2010 at 6:19 AM

    You, out of totle ignorance and bigotry accuse atheists of having killed
    150 million people. These people were murdered by Communists, not all of
    whom were atheists. They died due to Communism. You’re exactly as ignorant
    as the people who say that Hitler was an atheist when it is well
    documented that he was a Catholic and never left the Church. And, this
    evil man was never excommunicated by the Roman catholic Church. There is
    no excuse for this after all the crimes he was responsible for. This isn’t
    to say that all Cathlics are evil, murderous maniacs, as you try to tar all atheists. Shame on you for your evil, bigotted lies.

    [comment locked by Knight]

    • April 10, 2010 at 7:11 AM

      “You, out of totle ignorance and bigotry”

      Because you said so and whatever you say is true because you said so.

      “accuse atheists of having killed 150 million people.”

      Who was in charge of the massacres? Atheists.

      “These people were murdered by Communists, not all of whom were atheists.”

      Who was in charge of the massacres? Atheists.

      “They died due to Communism.”

      Who was in charge of the massacres? Atheists.

      “You’re exactly as ignorant as the people who say that Hitler was an atheist”

      What books did Hitler send to Mussolini as a gift? What did Hitler say about churches? — YOU, are exactly ignorant.

      “when it is well documented that he was a Catholic and never left the Church.”

      http://atheismexposed.tripod.com/hitler_atheist.htm

      http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html

      So what were you saying about, “when it is well documented that he was a Catholic and never left the Church.”?

      Want more?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler%27s_Pope#Criticism_of_Cornwell.27s_work

      “And, this evil man was never excommunicated by the Roman catholic Church.”

      Did you read what I said about Catholics? You’re a moron. I already told you not to assume and advised you to read my comments about other Christians. Recent articles, if you had bothered to carefully read them, would have shut you up, unless you’re mentally ill.

      “There is no excuse for this after all the crimes he was responsible for.”

      So repent of supporting atheism and anti-Christianity.

      “This isn’t to say that all Cathlics are evil, murderous maniacs, as you try to tar all atheists.”

      Did you spend your time researching Catholic murder statistics like I did, for many hours? No, so shut up.

      “Shame on you for your evil, bigotted lies.”

      Was that evidence, that mere insult right there, or any of your insults, let alone scientific evidence which you atheists pretend to revere? You lose, again, because, as I warned you not to do, you go with your heart, and not knowledge. I told you not to assume. On top of that, why did you fire off more replies (the others I didn’t read) when I refuted you within minutes, with more evidence? Now look how much worse you have made atheists look in the eyes of the world? You arguments are completely defeated and your poor self-control, great lack of patience, and great bitterness is obvious being that you refuse to look at the evidence and suffer to study as I have. You, like a narcissist, want respect and praise for your mere careless banter and feelings, and are unwilling to work to learn and teach the truth on religion. I’m done with you.

      • April 10, 2010 at 8:16 AM

        Without allowing me to respond? Fine.
        I was correct when I called you a coward.

        [locked]

  6. April 10, 2010 at 8:21 AM

    As I said before, you are a coward running from commenters who disagree with you. I offered to back up my comments, but you’ve said more than once that you
    won’t respond to me anymore. You also replied to another atheist along with me without saying who said what. That is sneaky and not totally unexpected. You have
    your viewpoint and I have mine, but, to you, only your comments count. Therefore,
    I will return you the favor of no longer responding to you. You are dishonest and not worth my time.

    [locked]

  7. April 10, 2010 at 8:27 AM

    My comments have been marked as spam when you don’t even give me a chance to back them up. Then, you drag in a bunch of topics that we weren’t even discussing and then cut me off. This is the kind of behavior I’ve come to expect from rabid creationists. You see everything only from your fanatical religious
    viewpoint. Personally, I don’t care what you do or don’t believe. That is up to the individual. But, since I do not share your beliefs, you call my comments
    spam and try to cut me off. You failed, in that respect. Good bye, coward.

    [locked]

    • April 10, 2010 at 9:37 AM

      “Less than half of the British people believe in a God, yet about 72% told the 2001 census that they were Christian” Source: http://www.vexen.co.uk/UK/religion.html

      Like I repeatedly say in many ways, like my God: Atheists are stupid, atheists are confused, atheists are careless, atheists are arbitrary, and atheists are liars: not one of them can be trusted.

      All the replies you used to insult me, were without any evidence, yet you complain about not being able to have any time to get it, and you used all your replies to attack me right away, ignoring whatever I said, to your last reply. Truly you are a narcissist, and therefore cannot be reasoned with.

  8. Viriya
    October 26, 2010 at 5:06 AM

    This article is just so confused about Buddhism I don’t really know where to begin.

    “Buddhism also has a problem, in that it teaches people to be cold, to be like psychopaths, loveless, and to take advantage of others.”

    Complete nonsense. Buddhists are taught to have infinite love for all beings! It’s so important that it’s called a ‘divine abode’ – one of the four best states of mind for human beings. A good Buddhist would never dream of taking advantage of others: it’s completely unthinkable. See the Karaniya Metta Sutta, for instance: Buddhists are taught to love all beings like ‘a mother would love her only child’.
    http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.than.html

    As for being like psychopaths, well, it should be readily apparent that that is simply untrue. In my experience, I have found Buddhist monks and nuns, and dedicated Buddhist laypeople, all very welcoming and approachable. Thailand, with a 95% Buddhist population, is afterall known as ‘The Land of Smiles’. Buddhists aren’t even permitted to hurt a fly! It’s ridiculous to describe the gentle religion of Buddhism as psychopathic.

    The author sadly misinterprets the verses quoted. ‘Desire’ means something different in Buddhism to the ordinary English connotations of the word. It means craving. By all means, Buddha encouraged people to desire and seek out wisdom and morality! Again, and again, and again and again, the Buddha tells us to love and seek out the truth, wisdom, and morality!

    You said that the Buddha said “Victory brings sadness” without providing a reference. He would never have said this of spiritual victory, although he may well have said it of victory in war. Indeed, the Buddha is praised on account of his victory in the spiritual battle! The Buddha said:

    “Though one may conquer a thousand times a thousand men in battle, yet he indeed is the noblest victor who conquers himself.” – Sahassavagga Verse 4, The Dhammapada

    “But whoever overcomes this wretched craving, so difficult to overcome, from him sorrows fall away like water from a lotus leaf.” -Tanhavagga Verse 3, The Dhammapada

    Clearly, the spiritual victory over craving is a noble and sorrowless victory, according to the Buddha.

    And a small question: could you please provide the exact reference for this? The Majjhima Nikaya is voluminous and does not constitute a precise location. If you would be able to provide a sutta name and/or number, as well as a verse number if applicable, that would be great. (= Thankyou.
    “My teaching does not require anyone to become homeless” – The Majjhima Nikaya

    I hope that helps to clear up some misunderstandings,

    With much love,
    Viriya

    • October 26, 2010 at 12:26 PM

      “This article is just so confused about Buddhism I don’t really know where to begin.”

      No that’s not a pretentious line at all is it? With your first sentence you reveal what you care about, not truth, but showing off.

      “Buddhism also has a problem, in that it teaches people to be cold, to be like psychopaths, loveless, and to take advantage of others.”

      Complete nonsense.

      Because you said so and whatever you say with the feeling that you are right makes you right, especially because you used a pretentious quip. You should really stop reading new age books and watching Jurassic Park and repeatedly brainwashing yourself with evolutionist movies, TV shows and websites and convincing yourself that acting and talking like them makes you right and righteous.

      “Buddhists are taught to have infinite love for all beings!”

      Because you said so with an exclamation mark!: Miss Anti-reason: What “love” are you referring to? The love as God describes or the love that I pointed out? Non-genius how many times do I and others have to repeat and show what Tibet was like before the atheist Chinese government put a stop to it and gave some of those Buddhist monks the beatings they deserved? You’re an evil ignoramus, just as I said Buddhists are. ACTIONS not simply “I love God, I love you, I love”, not mere words, show you to be loving. And remember what the Buddhists did to the Chinese exploration fleet 600 years ago? No because you’re an ignorant shallow moron who doesn’t bother studying but like the Bible says, is a fool only interested in airing her feelings, in showing off her heart, not concerned about understanding the truth at all, but playing show and tell with her feelings, and exalting herself. And since you no doubt don’t know about that Buddhist attack, you no doubt don’t know about the constant wars between Buddhists and their enemies on that island in which that launched an attack against the Chinese fleet, which thanks be to God, beat them when they attempted it, and yet the commander of the fleet even left tribute to their false god Buddha, which to this day, most ones like you show no thankfulness too let alone consider, because as I pointed out, you Buddhists don’t care about truth, but babbling your feelings, ignorant feelings, your hodge podge of contradictory beliefs you obtained with your gullible minds, believing whatever pleased your heart at the time.

      “It’s so important that it’s called a ‘divine abode’”

      Yes because giving names to things makes whatever you say true. So if I say, “Heaven is the divine dwelling place of God” makes me right because I merely stated that phrase. How about you do a little more exploring on my journal and read the logical fallacies article being that your mind is full of them? A broken computer with a corrupt operating system behaves and thinks corruptly till it is fixed.

      “– one of the four best states of mind for human beings.”

      Because you said so and whatever you say based on your feelings – including that whatever Buddha says is right, including that whatever is best is best – is true because it was based on your feelings: Circular logic.

      “A good Buddhist would never dream of taking advantage of others: it’s completely unthinkable.”

      Because you said so and whatever you say based on your feelings is true because it was based on your feelings. Circular logic. “Buddhists don’t do wrong because they are Buddhists” is circular logic. It’s as wrong as me merely saying, “Christians don’t do wrong because they are Christians” or “Christians only do right because they Christians”. And “completely unthinkable” is another pretentious comment. You’re adding superfluous babble like that because you think the strength of your feelings makes you right. Did you read the article on narcissism?: http://narcissists.tk

      And again, what do you mean by “good”? You’re so ignorant you don’t even know the basic arguments between religions and between the religious and no-religious: by what standard are you judging? By what standard of morality? By what standard of good? When a Wiccan says, “Harm ye none” in their pretentious fashion, what do they mean by “harm” being that many of them if not most of them, reject the Bible? And when they claim, “It’s universally understood,” what is there evidence for that? How is it that you non-Christians don’t know that words like harm, love and goodness have many meanings? It’s because, as I said: You don’t care about the truth, and don’t want to know it, what you care about pushing your heart and opinions on others, playing God over them.

      “See the Karaniya Metta Sutta, for instance: Buddhists are taught to love all beings like ‘a mother would love her only child’.
      http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.than.html

      No Buddhists are not taught a singular thing from a single source: they are taught many things which contradict your claim or did you not read the glutton Buddha’s endless rants? Did you not bother to read the Bible and see that his endless rants are in contradiction to the Bible with the exception of the five precepts? Buddhists have and accept many teachers who contradict each other, but you’re so ignorant that obvious fact didn’t occur to you.

      “As for being like psychopaths, well, it should be readily apparent that that is simply untrue.”

      That’s called the “appealing to obviousness” fallacy. It’s not obvious that Buddhists are good, as I pointed out. Once again, I’ve made it convenient for you Miss Tunnel Vision, you with horse-blinders on: http://hypocrites.tk. And once again you use a pretentious quip speaking as if the strength of your emotions and a high cliche phrase makes you right. You are obviously a narcissist, a mentally ill person.

      In my experience, I have found Buddhist monks and nuns, and dedicated Buddhist laypeople, all very welcoming and approachable. Thailand, with a 95% Buddhist population, is afterall known as ‘The Land of Smiles’. Buddhists aren’t even permitted to hurt a fly! It’s ridiculous to describe the gentle religion of Buddhism as psychopathic.

      The author sadly misinterprets the verses quoted. ‘Desire’ means something different in Buddhism to the ordinary English connotations of the word. It means craving. By all means, Buddha encouraged people to desire and seek out wisdom and morality! Again, and again, and again and again, the Buddha tells us to love and seek out the truth, wisdom, and morality!

      You said that the Buddha said “Victory brings sadness” without providing a reference. He would never have said this of spiritual victory, although he may well have said it of victory in war. Indeed, the Buddha is praised on account of his victory in the spiritual battle! The Buddha said:

      ““Though one may conquer a thousand times a thousand men in battle, yet he indeed is the noblest victor who conquers himself.” – Sahassavagga Verse 4, The Dhammapada”

      And conquering how? And conquering what? God already said,

      “He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty; and he that rules his spirit than he that conquers a city.” – Proverbs

      See how unlike Buddha, God specifically pointed out what to conquer, what to get rid off, but with vague Buddha, conquering meant, and can to people like you, suppressing goodness and doing in place of it his version of goodness: doing whatever he felt was right.

      “But whoever overcomes this wretched craving, so difficult to overcome, from him sorrows fall away like water from a lotus leaf.” -Tanhavagga Verse 3, The Dhammapada

      And whatever is stated pretentiously is true because it just is, and it’s good because it’s pretentious and therefore you should speak in the same pretentious way, and “cravings” are bad because they just are. Of course, it’s so obvious, because you said so, and with pretentious wording.

      “Clearly, the spiritual victory over craving is a noble and sorrowless victory, according to the Buddha.”

      And craving to do good is bad because you god Buddha who supposedly obliterated himself or became one with whatever – so why are you worshiping him? – said so, and whatever he says is true because he said so, and he’s the closest thing to God because you said so. And being hungry and thirsty is bad because, and feeling pain is bad because, well because warnings that you need food and drink to stay healthy is bad, and your body which God programmed to let you know when it needs to move for blood circulation to flow well, or a wound to be cleaned or covered, or that it needs medicine or better food and drink, is evil. Buddha did well with the five precepts, but became a moron as he became puffed up due to the knowledge he learned and then cut short by obsessing on, rather than continuing to seek the truth with the intent to believe it.

      1 Corinthians 8:1-4 (New International Version)

      Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know, but the man who loves God is known by God. So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one. – 1 Corinthians 8:1-4

      “And a small question: could you please provide the exact reference for this? The Majjhima Nikaya is voluminous and does not constitute a precise location. If you would be able to provide a sutta name and/or number, as well as a verse number if applicable, that would be great. (= Thankyou.”

      You are asking me, a Christian, and one ignorant of the “simply obvious”?

      “My teaching does not require anyone to become homeless” – The Majjhima Nikaya

      So if he never said, “You will become homeless” or “You must become homeless”, this means what? And if Satan said the same thing, of what significance of it then that he is once again babbling? If I said, “My teaching does not require that you eat yellow-colored rice, who cares?” Why did you post that quote?

      “I hope that helps to clear up some misunderstandings,”

      Misunderstandings aren’t whatever you say they are, not is understanding, you have however repeated the same usual nonsense and added to the confusion already out there, but thanks to God I refuted it again. I hope that helps to clear up your misunderstandings.

      With much love,
      Viriya”

      “With much love” doesn’t mean “with much of the love that comes from God – love that is not self-seeking and destructive.” Your love is self-seeking and destructive, it seeks to please itself at the expense of others, it tries to take advantage of others, counting on their gullibility and their corrupt hearts. The Buddhist I last conversed with, on Zazzle, in which I am selling bumper stickers on – you can read his ranting, his harassment of me there. But oh, I know, “Buddhists don’t harass therefore he wasn’t harassing you.” Or, “Buddhists don’t harass, therefore he wasn’t a Buddhist.” Of course, it’s so obvious: and because you said so, and since you are the truth, as Buddha would have you repeat to yourself over and over, you’re always right, just believe, just have faith, forget evidence, forget reason (logic).

      May God open your eyes and break your following your heart in a circle and ignoring logic and the definitions of words, which in your delusion you think can mean whatever you feel you want them to mean, and no surprise you do that with words, since you do that with the rest of reality. If words have no definite meaning, and there is no absolute truth, then what you say is whatever I want it to mean, and I am just as right as you.

  9. April 8, 2010 at 12:06 AM

    In reply to aforcier, who said about this post, “ok, what are you selling? what do you represent(the all-good you.)?”

    Christians are ambassadors for Christ, according to the Bible, and he is perfectly good. So yes, we do represent the one who is perfectly good, though we do so, imperfectly.

    As for what I am selling, didn’t you notice the upper right hand corner of my journal? I see your next word is “obviously”, but I won’t be reading the rest, since you couldn’t be bothered to check the facts I carefully and kindly gave you.

  10. April 10, 2010 at 6:25 AM

    In reply to hypatiab7: I show evidence, you give mere claims, and offer a piece of evidence against my large amount in comparison which refutes your imaginary evidence, and yet you call me a bigot and say my lies will be disproved? And look everyone how these atheists replying to me all focus only on the prison evidence, that’s all they can do is hack at that, all the rest they ignore and yet call me a liar. What desperate sick idiots. Hype did you notice the other comments from me? How was anything in my journal disproved? Where is your magical evidence for the Big Bang, life created from inanimate matter, macro evolution, randomness, no God, and that atheists are not oppressive, mass murderers and liars? And, “know your lies will be disproved?” And you know this how? If you had bothered to carefully read my other comments – not many – you would have seen that I brought up and explained the point you’re doting on already.

    Also, depending on the location you will find more of one belief system then the other, so there will “more” of one type. What matters is the ratio of the number of atheists and others in prison in comparison to the number of the ones outside.

    And where in the world did I say in this article or anywhere in my journal anything close to, “All Christians are true and real” let alone, “the same”? Many oversights have you made. Stop putting words in my mouth and then calling me the liar.

    Your comment has been marked as spam.

    6:39 A.M.:

    I just read my article again on the area you and your other atheist brother complained about: What is the lie? Exactly, so, you are the liars and bigots. And, YOU WASTED MY TIME WITH YOUR IMPULSIVE HEART, WHICH YOU DO KNOWING THAT MEN’S HEARTS ARE NOT TRUSTWORTHY. So what is your excuse for that?

    [6:49 A.M.

    http://christianrethinker.wordpress.com/2008/10/06/lies-damned-lies-and-atheists-in-prison
    http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs/hosb1501.pdf]

    No more will I read any arguments against this article after the three stupid one’s I’ve gotten so far. Clearly there is no argument.

    May you turn to God before he destroys you for your careless harassment disguised as just attacks and concern for truth.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 52 other followers

%d bloggers like this: