Why won't Atheists admit they have benefited from a Christian society?

[sean]

Why won't Atheists admit they have benefited from a Christian society? Imagine an Atheist living in an Islamic state. Their lives would be in danger. They owe a lot to Christianity. It has been the bedrock of civility and stability for hundreds of years. This is also the foundation of white western European culture. Do Atheists realize how free they are because of Christians? Christianity tolerates a more secular society. Because Christianity values the individual more, rather than a collective. That is something to think about before they go on their next quest to remove crosses from churches.

Well, there are plenty of people who lack strong faith, but they still see the benefit in belonging to a sound Christian society (Jews for example).

Spoiler!

Atheists still get their morality from religious teachings whether they realise it or not. They still copy their morality from the dominant religion of that society.

Atheists inside America still base their morality largely on the Christian values of the majority - they just don't realise it. They parrot the word "science" like Evangelicals in America parrot God or Jesus. Atheists are nothing more than secular evangelicals.

Things like saying "bless you" when someone sneezes, waiting in line, not stealing or cheating: are all Christian values that American Atheists benefit from.

Even leftists in America constantly appeal to science as a divine authority on all matters and give blind faith to whatever their political ideological leaders say the new science is. The left always exclaims it's our moral and humanitarian duty to help climate refugees and asylum seekers. Where else outside the west have we heard that? The meek shall inherit the earth. Leftists are just as religious as the Evangelicals they mock, they just pray to climate scientists.

Even small, homogeneous countries in Scandinavia have shed the 'shackles' of faith for their own benefit, their culture was fundamentally crafted by the teachings of Jesus over hundreds of years, and as a result, even atheists in Scandinavia live like good Christian people and remain cucked as a result.

They are the laughing stock of the whole Internet (even wogs and catholic cunts on TA make fun of them for being so cucked), it is no wonder birthrates are so low within post-Christian populations.

After all, if all Germanic Christians followed:

Matthew 5:43-48 But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven

Then NW Europe would be an Islamic Caliphate right now lel.

Other societies don't have these values. Atheists in China regularly cheat, steal, and cut in line because they don't have a majority religious view that says those things are wrong. It's very easy to take Christianity for granted until its taken away from you.

And many non-white societies around the world don't share modern secular values either. Christian societies in Africa are just as barbaric as their Muslim neighbours (see Tigray War). Christians in the Phillippines and Latin America don't share what you think are Christian values either.

Because you've been raised by western cultural norms that were formed in the Enlightenment, that specifically rejected the stale teachings of the Church, and was better spread by believers who could read the Bible in their own language than by a corrupt quasi-monarchy based in Rome.

Atheists are motivated only in rebuking the old ways of religion. At least Christians are pitifully represented in philanthropic endeavours and charities and donations. Atheists are only offering condolences to survivors of terrorist attacks and nothing more.

They decry all religion when a Muslim terrorist attack occurs. Is it at all helpful to tell anybody that Christians are just as bad as Muslims when a Muslim just suicide-bombed a bunch of little girls for no reason?

Anyway, there is nothing wrong with being an Atheist. The issue is the leftist Reddit-tier atheists who aren't really atheist, they just hate Christianity and love Muslims.

Spoiler!

Even anti-white woggy cunts on TA love Muslims. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

List of Catholic clergy scientists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a list of Catholic clergy^[1] throughout history who have made contributions to science. These churchmen-scientists include Nicolaus Copernicus, Gregor Mendel, Georges Lemaître, Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, Pierre Gassendi, Roger Joseph Boscovich, Marin Mersenne, Bernard Bolzano, Francesco Maria Grimaldi, Nicole Oresme, Jean Buridan, Robert Grosseteste, Christopher Clavius, Nicolas Steno, Athanasius Kircher, Giovanni Battista Riccioli, William of Ockham, and others listed below. The Catholic Church has also produced many lay scientists and mathematicians.
The Jesuits in particular have made numerous significant contributions to the development of science. For example, the Jesuits have dedicated significant study to earthquakes, and seismology has been described as "the Jesuit science."^[2][3] The Jesuits have been described as "the single most important contributor to experimental physics in the seventeenth century."^[4] According to Jonathan Wright in his book God's Soldiers, by the eighteenth century the Jesuits had "contributed to the development of pendulum clocks, pantographs, barometers, reflecting telescopes and microscopes, to scientific fields as various as magnetism, optics and electricity. They observed, in some cases before anyone else, the colored bands on Jupiter’s surface, the Andromeda nebula and Saturn’s rings. They theorized about the circulation of the blood (independently of Harvey), the theoretical possibility of flight, the way the moon affected the tides, and the wave-like nature of light."^[5]
Because there is a List of lay Catholic scientists, this list does not include lay members of religious orders, such as (non-priest) monks and nuns, brothers and sisters, or anyone in 'minor orders' at such times that those were not considered clergy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...rgy_scientists

[Hithaeglir]

It all started with the Renaissance and later with the advancement of sciences. I don't think Christians really played any part in this reformation.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

These are the most ironic examples, Catholic clergy men that contributed by their work to create the main theories that aheists holds as prove against religion:

William of Ockham

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

William of Ockham (/ˈɒkəm/; also Occam, from Latin: Gulielmus Occamus;^[9][10] c. 1287 – 1347) was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, and theologian, who is believed to have been born in Ockham, a small village in Surrey.^[11] He is considered to be one of the major figures of medieval thought and was at the centre of the major intellectual and political controversies of the 14th century. He is commonly known for Occam's razor, the methodological principle that bears his name, and also produced significant works on logic, physics, and theology. William is remembered in the Church of England with a commemoration on 10 April.

Faith and reason[edit]

William of Ockham espoused fideism, stating that "only faith gives us access to theological truths. The ways of God are not open to reason, for God has freely chosen to create a world and establish a way of salvation within it apart from any necessary laws that human logic or rationality can uncover."^[24] He believed that science was a matter of discovery and saw God as the only ontological necessity.^[15] His importance is as a theologian with a strongly developed interest in logical method, and whose approach was critical rather than system building.

Philosophical thought

In scholasticism, William of Ockham advocated reform in both method and content, the aim of which was simplification. William incorporated much of the work of some previous theologians, especially Duns Scotus. From Duns Scotus, William of Ockham derived his view of divine omnipotence, his view of grace and justification, much of his epistemology^{[citation needed]} and ethical convictions.^[26] However, he also reacted to and against Scotus in the areas of predestination, penance, his understanding of universals, his formal distinction ex parte rei (that is, "as applied to created things"), and his view of parsimony which became known as Occam's Razor.


Nominalism[edit]

William of Ockham was a pioneer of nominalism, and some consider him the father of modern epistemology, because of his strongly argued position that only individuals exist, rather than supra-individual universals, essences, or forms, and that universals are the products of abstraction from individuals by the human mind and have no extra-mental existence.^[27] He denied the real existence of metaphysical universals and advocated the reduction of ontology. William of Ockham is sometimes considered an advocate of conceptualism rather than nominalism, for whereas nominalists held that universals were merely names, i.e. words rather than extant realities, conceptualists held that they were mental concepts, i.e. the names were names of concepts, which do exist, although only in the mind. Therefore, the universal concept has for its object, not a reality existing in the world outside us, but an internal representation which is a product of the understanding itself and which "supposes" in the mind the things to which the mind attributes it; that is, it holds, for the time being, the place of the things which it represents. It is the term of the reflective act of the mind. Hence the universal is not a mere word, as Roscelin taught, nor a sermo, as Peter Abelard held, namely the word as used in the sentence, but the mental substitute for real things, and the term of the reflective process. For this reason William has sometimes also been called a "terminist", to distinguish him from a nominalist or a conceptualist.^[28]
William of Ockham was a theological voluntarist who believed that if God had wanted to, he could have become incarnate as a donkey or an ox, or even as both a donkey and a man at the same time. He was criticized for this belief by his fellow theologians and philosophers.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

Gregor Mendel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gregor Johann Mendel (/ˈmɛndəl/; Czech: Řehoř Jan Mendel;^[2] 20 July 1822^[3] – 6 January 1884) was a meteorologist,^[4] mathematician, biologist, Augustinian friar and abbot of St. Thomas' Abbey in Brno, Margraviate of Moravia. Mendel was born in a German-speaking family in the Silesian part of the Austrian Empire (today's Czech Republic) and gained posthumous recognition as the founder of the modern science of genetics.^[5] Though farmers had known for millennia that crossbreeding of animals and plants could favor certain desirable traits, Mendel's pea plant experiments conducted between 1856 and 1863 established many of the rules of heredity, now referred to as the laws of Mendelian inheritance.^[6]
Mendel worked with seven characteristics of pea plants: plant height, pod shape and color, seed shape and color, and flower position and color. Taking seed color as an example, Mendel showed that when a true-breeding yellow pea and a true-breeding green pea were cross-bred their offspring always produced yellow seeds. However, in the next generation, the green peas reappeared at a ratio of 1 green to 3 yellow. To explain this phenomenon, Mendel coined the terms "recessive" and "dominant" in reference to certain traits. In the preceding example, the green trait, which seems to have vanished in the first filial generation, is recessive and the yellow is dominant. He published his work in 1866, demonstrating the actions of invisible "factors"—now called genes—in predictably determining the traits of an organism.
The profound significance of Mendel's work was not recognized until the turn of the 20th century (more than three decades later) with the rediscovery of his laws. Erich von Tschermak, Hugo de Vries and Carl Correns independently verified several of Mendel's experimental findings in 1900, ushering in the modern age of genetics.

How did Mendel help Darwin?

In simple terms, Mendel's theory says that individual traits are "coded' by pairs of particles. In reproduction, one particle would be contributed by each parent for every trait. This observation is known as the Law of Segregation. ... Mendel's Laws of Inheritance helped revive Darwin's theory.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

Nicolaus Copernicus


Nicolaus Copernicus (/koʊˈpɜːrnɪkəs, kə-/;^[2][3][4] Polish: Mikołaj Kopernik;^[b] German: Niclas Koppernigk, modern: Nikolaus Kopernikus; 19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543) was a Renaissance polymath, active as a mathematician, astronomer, and Catholic canon, who formulated a model of the universe that placed the Sun rather than Earth at its center. In all likelihood, Copernicus developed his model independently of Aristarchus of Samos, an ancient Greek astronomer who had formulated such a model some eighteen centuries earlier.^[5][c][d]
The publication of Copernicus' model in his book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), just before his death in 1543, was a major event in the history of science, triggering the Copernican Revolution and making a pioneering contribution to the Scientific Revolution.^[7]
Copernicus was born and died in Royal Prussia, a region that had been part of the Kingdom of Poland since 1466. A polyglot and polymath, he obtained a doctorate in canon law and was a mathematician, astronomer, physician, classics scholar, translator, governor, diplomat, and economist. In 1517 he derived a quantity theory of money—a key concept in economics—and in 1519 he formulated an economic principle that later came to be called Gresham's law.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

Georges Lemaître


Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître (/ləˈmɛtrə/ lə-MET-rə; French: [ʒɔʁʒ ləmɛːtʁ] (listen); 17 July 1894 – 20 June 1966) was a Belgian Catholic priest, mathematician, astronomer, and professor of physics at the Catholic University of Louvain.^[1] He was the first to theorize that the recession of nearby galaxies can be explained by an expanding universe,^[2] which was observationally confirmed soon afterwards by Edwin Hubble.^[3][4] He first derived "Hubble's law", now called the Hubble–Lemaître law by the IAU,^[5][6] and published the first estimation of the Hubble constant in 1927, two years before Hubble's article.^[7][8][9][4] Lemaître also proposed the "Big Bang theory" of the origin of the universe, calling it the "hypothesis of the primeval atom",^[10] and later calling it "the beginning of the world"

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

It all started with the Renaissance and later with the advancement of sciences. I don't think Christians really played any part in this reformation.

The Renaissance came from catholic universities it didn't pop out of nowere, please stop repeating this crap as if 1000 years of christianity didnt have any influence in modern western society.

There could be no René Descartes, Galileo Galilei, Gottfried Leibniz or isaac newton if people like Roger Bacon, Duns Scotus, William of Ockham and Nicolaus Copernicus didnt came out of catholic seminaries and settled the foundations for the renaissance.

[frankhammer]

It all started with the Renaissance and later with the advancement of sciences. I don't think Christians really played any part in this reformation.

They likely played a large part, just not their religious side.

[Jacques de Imbelloni]

Infanticide


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Infanticide (or infant homicide) is the intentional killing of infants. Now universally illegal, infanticide was a widespread practice throughout human history that was mainly used to dispose of unwanted children.^[1]:61 Its main purposes were controlling population growth^{[citation needed]} and saving resources from being spent on weak or disabled offspring. Unwanted infants were normally abandoned to die of exposure, but in some societies they were manually killed.
Most Stone Age human societies routinely practiced infanticide, and estimates of children killed by infanticide in the Mesolithic and Neolithic eras vary from 15 to 50 percent. Infanticide continued to be common in most societies after the historical era began, including ancient Greece, ancient Rome, the Phoenicians, ancient China, ancient Japan, Aboriginal Australia, Native Americans, and Native Alaskans.
Infanticide became forbidden in Europe and the Near East during the 1st millennium. Christianity forbade infanticide from its earliest times, which led Constantine the Great and Valentinian I to ban it across the Roman Empire in the 4th century. The practice ceased in Arabia in the 7th century after the founding of Islam, since the Quran prohibits infanticide. Infanticide of male babies had become uncommon in China by the Ming dynasty (1368–1644), though female infanticide remained common until the 19th century. During the period of Company rule in India, the East India Company attempted to eliminate infanticide but were only partially successful, and female infanticide in some parts of India still continues. Infanticide is now very rare in Western and other developed countries, but may persist in some less developed countries.
Parental infanticide researchers have found that mothers are far more likely than fathers to be the perpetrators of neonaticide^[2] and slightly more likely to commit infanticide in general.


In ancient history[edit]

In the New World[edit]

Main article: Child sacrifice in pre-Columbian cultures
Archaeologists have uncovered physical evidence of child sacrifice at several locations.^[8]:16–22 Some of the best attested examples are the diverse rites which were part of the religious practices in Mesoamerica and the Inca Empire.^[12][13][14]
In the Old World[edit]

Three thousand bones of young children, with evidence of sacrificial rituals, have been found in Sardinia. Pelasgians offered a sacrifice of every tenth child during difficult times. Syrians sacrificed children to Jupiter and Juno. Many remains of children have been found in Gezer excavations with signs of sacrifice. Child skeletons with the marks of sacrifice have been found also in Egypt dating 950–720 BCE.^{[citation needed]} In Carthage "[child] sacrifice in the ancient world reached its infamous zenith".^{[attribution needed][8]:324} Besides the Carthaginians, other Phoenicians, and the Canaanites, Moabites and Sepharvites offered their first-born as a sacrifice to their gods.


Greece and Rome


The historical Greeks considered the practice of adult and child sacrifice barbarous,^[26] however, the exposure of newborns was widely practiced in ancient Greece.^[27][28][29] It was advocated by Aristotle in the case of congenital deformity: "As to the exposure of children, let there be a law that no deformed child shall live.”^[30] In Greece, the decision to expose a child was typically the father's, although in Sparta the decision was made by a group of elders.^[31] Exposure was the preferred method of disposal, as that act in itself was not considered to be murder; moreover, the exposed child technically had a chance of being rescued by the gods or any passersby.^[32] This very situation was a recurring motif in Greek mythology.^[33] To notify the neighbors of a birth of a child, a woolen strip was hung over the front door to indicate a female baby and an olive branch to indicate a boy had been born. Families did not always keep their new child. After a woman had a baby, she would show it to her husband. If the husband accepted it, it would live, but if he refused it, it would die. Babies would often be rejected if they were illegitimate, unhealthy or deformed, the wrong sex, or too great a burden on the family. These babies would not be directly killed, but put in a clay pot or jar and deserted outside the front door or on the roadway. In ancient Greek religion, this practice took the responsibility away from the parents because the child would die of natural causes, for example, hunger, asphyxiation or exposure to the elements.


The practice was prevalent in ancient Rome, as well. Philo was the first philosopher to speak out against it.^[34] A letter from a Roman citizen to his sister, or a pregnant wife from her husband,^[35] dating from 1 BCE, demonstrates the casual nature with which infanticide was often viewed:
"I am still in Alexandria. ... I beg and plead with you to take care of our little child, and as soon as we receive wages, I will send them to you. In the meantime, if (good fortune to you!) you give birth, if it is a boy, let it live; if it is a girl, expose it.",^[36][37] "If you give birth to a boy, keep it. If it is a girl, expose it. Try not to worry. I'll send the money as soon as we get paid."^[38]

In some periods of Roman history it was traditional for a newborn to be brought to the pater familias, the family patriarch, who would then decide whether the child was to be kept and raised, or left to die by exposure.^[39] The Twelve Tables of Roman law obliged him to put to death a child that was visibly deformed. The concurrent practices of slavery and infanticide contributed to the "background noise" of the crises during the Republic.^[39]
Infanticide became a capital offense in Roman law in 374, but offenders were rarely if ever prosecuted.^[40]
According to mythology, Romulus and Remus, twin infant sons of the war god Mars, survived near-infanticide after being tossed into the Tiber River. According to the myth, they were raised by wolves, and later founded the city of Rome.
Middle Ages[edit]

Whereas theologians and clerics preached sparing their lives, newborn abandonment continued as registered in both the literature record and in legal documents.^[5]:16 According to William Lecky, exposure in the early Middle Ages, as distinct from other forms of infanticide, "was practiced on a gigantic scale with absolute impunity, noticed by writers with most frigid indifference and, at least in the case of destitute parents, considered a very venial offence".^{[41]:355–56} The first foundling house in Europe was established in Milan in 787 on account of the high number of infanticides and out-of-wedlock births. The Hospital of the Holy Spirit in Rome was founded by Pope Innocent III because women were throwing their infants into the Tiber river.^[42]
Unlike other European regions, in the Middle Ages the German mother had the right to expose the newborn.^[43]
In the High Middle Ages, abandoning unwanted children finally eclipsed infanticide.^{[citation needed]} Unwanted children were left at the door of church or abbey, and the clergy was assumed to take care of their upbringing. This practice also gave rise to the first orphanages.
However, very high sex ratios were common in even late medieval Europe, which may indicate sex-selective infanticide.^[44]

Christianity

Christianity explicitly rejects infanticide. The Teachings of the Apostles or Didache said "thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou slay it when born".^[49] The Epistle of Barnabas stated an identical command, both thus conflating abortion and infanticide.^[50] Apologists Tertullian, Athenagoras, Minucius Felix, Justin Martyr and Lactantius also maintained that exposing a baby to death was a wicked act.^[4] In 318, Constantine I considered infanticide a crime, and in 374, Valentinian I mandated the rearing of all children (exposing babies, especially girls, was still common). The Council of Constantinople declared that infanticide was homicide, and in 589, the Third Council of Toledo took measures against the custom of killing their own children.