HOME | DD
pureatheism — God's Army
Published: 2005-10-25 22:48:02 +0000 UTC; Views: 3150; Favourites: 17; Downloads: 168
Redirect to original
Description
You know the story is bad when it starts out "Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time..."Thank you Dwight Calwhite for playing jesus and Kyle Arthur for the excellent morph into jesus!
Related content
Comments: 130
I don't see how it's bashing Christians - we are all slaves to God, are we not? We were made by Him and should live to serve Him.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It's a pity that this is your viewpoint. It's also a pity that the church is most likely a large reason for this point of view; the very people who try to save you turn you away because they go about it wrong. Simply because the majority of Christians are taught to 'win souls', the rest of us are lumped into the pile as fanatics, rather than level-headed individuals who believe what they do for a reason. Basically, the fanatics diminish the credibility of the religion by their actions and words, which angers me most, and saddens me for those who are lost because of it.
I would like to know why you believe this.
...And I'm sure if I said 'Atheism enslaves you', a quite defensive reply would be given. What if it was true?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I dont believe the way I do because of the church. I feel the way I do because of the bible. The people that uphold the stipulations in it just further justify my reasoning. I am curious as to what makes you believe in any religion at all, especially christianity. Its only basis is a book written by MAN about 1600 years ago. On that note, my reasons are detailed in my 2 journal entries, if youre interested.
Atheism isnt enslaving, there are no guidelines, there are no rules, no punishments for disobedience, who is in slavery? Granted with scientology coming out of the woodwork, christianity is starting to look like canada from the US these days.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Also, fav'd.
If Jesus still existed today, he'd be ashamed of a lot of his followers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I agree, thanks for the fav!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow.. congrats on doing a "work" that has very little artistic value. Mostly all it's doing is proving you're just as prejudiced as you apparently think all Christians are.
If all you wanted to do was piss people off and get massive comment value- you've succeeded.
*rolls eyes at the whole mess*
👍: 0 ⏩: 4
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wow.. thank you for your comment that really has very little comment value. Note not only the sarcasm, but the lack of actual interest for anything you are really saying. Not only are you purposely trying to get a rise out of me by being a smart-ass, you are also ignoring the entire point of not only deviantart, but art itself. This "work" as you put it, expresses my view on mainstream christianity, and also is a reference to the way America is in the first place. If you didnt notice, its based on a war recruitment poster. To me there are a lot of similarities between the US and christianity in the ways they portray ideas. For example, the idea that we have to fight for freedom (USA) and that we have to fight for our souls (christianity). We dont have to fight for freedom, we arent under any threat from any other country taking over and/or controlling us under a dictatorship. The portrayal of the whole idea that we should go on an offensive and join up because our "freedom" is under attack is ridiculous. The war has cost way more than it wouldve to beef up defenses from terroristic attacks, which is the only real threat in the first place. Christianity is similar to that. The way they portray our souls already in the negative, that we need jesus to get back in the positive, THAT is ridiculous. Not only is it stupid that someone elses mistakes (adam & eve) cause for our souls being damned at birth, we are supposedly saved by someone else giving their lives for us. (referring to jesus, who because he was sinless, somehow makes him able to die for all of humanity's sins) So to me, this piece has artistic merit and value, and you being an ignorant closed-minded ----- thankfully can't change that fact.
So, roll your eyes all day.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If Theres One Thing Iv'e Learned Not To Talk About Publicly Is: Religion
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I must of missed that day of church...
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Most Churchs Are Not Really all that great
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
yo its ok man, people are ill minded in there views of life, and haven't awoke to the world. They still dream of "heaven" and non sense. They might have there views which is good, and they can be spoon feed there life to them, with rules, and trials they must do. As we have no rules and are able to venture and live life. Because there is after all only one you get to live. Im with you man, atheism is the way, but Christians minds are distorted as young children, and almost half go for friends. Or at least half the churches ive gone too. But besides that, nice art work man. How have you been?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
... If you Think About It Atheism Is Just A Nother Religion Just Like All The Others (Buddism, Shintoism, etc.) Atheism Is Just a New Age Religion Like Wicca. A Atheists Bible/Holy Moly Book is the Encyclopedia and There Churchs/Temples is The Public Schools. Thats All I Have To Say... For Now Mwahahaha!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ummmm......no, it's not. Atheism is defined as "the absence of belief in deities". Lack of belief in a god does not equate to a religion.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What My Point Was That Atheism is A Following
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Considering that atheism has no defined tenets, no organization, no faith, none of the trappings of religion, then it's not a religion. It doesn't have a 'following' either; rather, atheists are just people who don't believe in deities. That's all they have in common, really.
And it's definitely not "New Age," since it's been around as long as religion (even the Christian bible makes references to people without religion) and doesn't have the faith-based rituals that New Age religions have.
You should do some research regarding atheism & the term "New Age."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
At least someone has it right...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
No, I think I got it right...
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I like it, and I totally support this work.
Furthermore, I was studied theology in university (mainly eastern theology, апофатическое богословие и прочая фофудья
1. Christianity is NOT about 'love'. It is about reaching religious experience. This experience has nothing to do with 'good' or 'bad' behavior, it is just a state of. Salvation is not an achieving a place of heaven, but ascension (one of concepts of ascension) and unifying with god.
2. Christianity is NOT about moral. Moral is nothing 'sacred' (where 'sacred' is just a threat of sacrifice, see Sigmund Freud and Anry Jerar) or metaphysical, it is just a way to control behavior. Any culture has own ways of controlling behavior.
Killing in the war for the defense of state is, for example, not even "moral", but "heroic" (thus shying and overriding natural fear of death) in most cultures. So, systems of separating of behavior (violent behavior of only man groups (prison, army, football fans) AND restricted of violence behavior of "family" territory - place for women and children, fathers of families / pater familiae, e.t.c.) existed long before Christianity.
Furthermore, there Christ's "commandments" (i don't sure if it is a right word in English) are always confused commandments of Moses.
On Jewish tradition Messiah is not a "savior", but a divine political leader who will lead Jews to world superiority. There's no concepts of immortality or "salvation" in Old Testament, but only territory of ancestral.
Commandments of Moses are "don't kill" e.t.c., and are NOTHING more then codification of simple COMMON LAW of Jews. NOTHING more (Commandments of Moses don't conflict with other Torah books about literal genocide of not-Jew neighbor nations of Israel). AND Christ's commandments is even NOT about simple breaks of law, BUT about style of life (style of life of pariahs, protesters... lowlifes).
Christianity is ANTIsocial. ...
Crap, I don't know English well enough to summarize it all.
👍: 0 ⏩: 4
... If you Think About It Atheism Is Just A Nother Religion Just Like All The Others (Buddism, Shintoism, etc.) Atheism Is Just a New Age Religion Like Wicca. A Atheists Bible/Holy Moly Book is the Encyclopedia and There Churchs/Temples is The Public Schools. Thats All I Have To Say... For Now Mwahahaha
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I really don't care of what 'atheism' is. It is a word, yeah? I don't have a clue, why would anyone call themselves 'atheists'. So I really don't care.
But there are facts. And experimentally verified fact is _objective_ _truth_. As simple as that. Without any stupid "philosophical" trash. Just truth.
And there is also scientific method.
That's all i have to say.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
You know, kid, your message here... I don't even understand, what do you mean. Either there's something wrong with my English, either with your.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
yes and I bet one day the earth just made its self
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I'm gonna try to answer all of your grievances in a single post.
Obviously you have a very stereotypical impression of me by this point that will affect your judgments about me and your responses to my comments. This image is probably something like a very fundamentalist catholic that believes in the complete literacy of the bible and says that science is the devil. You might also think that I am a hick living in a small southern town that still has a KKK cell and segregated schools and that am undereducated and have no common sense.
I might also believe that you are a stereotypical Marxist communist. Of course I figure that you are not a stereotypical Marxist Communist and I hope you have the intelligence not to stereotype me. The point of this is that stereotyoes agaist anything, in this case the church, is harmful and will hurt any attempt to get a point across. Therefore I must ask you for a second to drop any preconceived notion you have about the catholic church and allow to state my side of the story.
First of all, lets have a talk about objective reality. In 500 BC, objective reality stated that there were four elements, the earth was the center of the universe, giants and mythical creatures once inhabited the earth; In 50 BC, objective reality stated that the world was still the center of the universe, and the leading scholars of the time stated that bleeding and leeching were the best cures for diseases; during the middle ages objective reality stated that the world was flat, and you fall off into a world inhabited by monsters, it also said that under water travel and air travel were impossible, and it stated that dragons inhabited the earth. Now odjective reality states that the world is round, it gives the ways the look at the stars and how to cure diseases.
What will objective reality say to us in a hundered or a thousand years. Even better, if objective reality is really just the results of educated observation and experimentation, then what is the objectvie reality of a retarded person, or a madman. Simply put your "Objective reality" is a constantly changing platform and nowhere near concrete enough for you to merely state something as impossible and be done with it.
Now to the question of the fallibility of god. (note, if you don't believe in god the following paragraph will have little meaning to you, and you will simply think I am an ignorant fool, but it still proves my point.) If god was fallible, then how could he construct a world so perfect and balanced. Furthermore look at the human body, something so incredibly perfect that your modern science still can't figure out how all of it works. Sure, there is no formula or statement that shows God's infallibility, but all you have to do is look at this creation and see that only someone without fault could create such a thing. On a more secular note, has science ever disproved god, or the existence of god. What is has done is shown itself as wrong many times over and is constantly being rewritten as scientists are gaining new facts.
About myth admitting its non-authenticity, I guess it doesn't, but history and science have tried to, and religion has somehow survived. Is this because we are simply lucky, or maybe possibly it is because Christianity is something more than simple myth. Also, Egyptian, Israeli, and roman history all give proof of many of the events that take place in the bible. So obviously the bible is more than myth if the events told by it are documented historically.
Now on the Hitler and Stalin, while there may be similarities between these leaders and religion, there is much more proof pointing to a more secular outlet. First of all Stalin didn't really start any "cults" or "New ideas", that award goes to Marx. I'm not going to go that far into Russian history because you are probably already fluent in it. Marx's idea of everyone helping each other had much to do with the people's want to end the super rich/super poor Czarist Russian state of the time and to make a world where they could be prosperous. In that sense, the communist plan was completely worldly and was simply a political agenda. Hitler is a little more vague, but since his plan was also completely worldly I wouldn't classify his Nazi regime as religion either.
Last but not least the attack on credibility. First of all I take most of my theological information about catholicism from the Bible, the councils held by the Vatican, and the catechism. I must admit my knowledge of secular history can still be improved, but I still think it is sufficient. On philosophy, I never really liked it, seemed like just a bunch of deadbeats after some quick cash, I prefer to look at the source material and make my own decisions. Now for my logic, I could say blessed is the mind too small for doubt, but thus far in my comments I have been lax with justifying myself because I figured that Pureaitheism would just discard what I said as rubbish, which he has. Other than that I feel that my logic is very simple, but not childish, I have gone over the facts, read from all the sources and have decided that Catholicism is the true path to happiness and redemption. Your decision about my intelligence is your own opinion however and I will not attempt to change that any more than I will attempt to convert you to Christianity.
P.S. this debate can go on until until long after you and I forget the original argument and simply devolve into an insult fest. I am happy to have a point/counter point debate but I think that we are both very set in our ways and nothing that you or I say will change our opinions. cheers.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
Lmao man your comments like a noval good job!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
mind if i quote you on some of that?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Well, first of all I didn’t want to be rude against you or to use stereotypes, I’m sorry if I did. But I have some experience with an agenda of orthodox Christianity, which supports questionable (at least) political things. Christian Church I see (east Russian Orthodox Church, РПЦ
Second. Well, you have very good reason to study a philosophy a bit.
I mean real philosophy like Charles Sanders Peirce ([link] ), epistemology of Wilhelm Wundt, Ernst Mach, overall Logical Positivism thing (see Rudolf Carnap, [link] ), works of Karl Popper - it is about very core of real science (not ‘science’ as some bizarre metaphysics which ‘can be wrong’ as you say, but real solid science as just (and nothing more but) a method – which incorporates a path of tries AND mistakes). Where’s no some ‘science dogma’, it is just a myth.
So, science can’t be ‘wrong’. Cause it can’t be ‘right’. Science is not an opinion, but a sum of ways to work with information and experience. Science doesn’t deny something. It just states what can be verified and seems to be meaningful.
Well... You just need good college-level course of epistemology! Trust me it is very important and really useful in everyday life (as well as it is overall solid basis in everything about information, experience, real knowledge). [link] This is about you can and can’t know for sure, why and on what basis/for what reason.
This knowledge (real effective knowledge, not some dnd-wise) also will not make you nerd or something, cause it is stacks perfectly with the good commonsense and common life experience.
Also, I suggest you to
1) find out something about structuralism and structural anthropology – everything about human behavior and myths, and cultures as ways to memorize forms of behavior.
[link]
2) Real theology. Catechism is simply indoctrination for children. And Bible – do you mean all books of ‘Old Testament’ (Hebrew cult text, Torah)? Or just some pro-Christian quotes? Cause I tell you again: in Torah, Messiah is political leader leading Jews to world dominance. Jesus Christ as character simply doesn’t match for a criteria of Messiah of Jews.
And New Testament – are you familiar with an apocryphal gospels?
Anyway... When I speak about _theology_ I mean critical knowledge of theology --- Patristics, furthermore Origen, Tertullian and Augustine, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite and Gregory Palamas (I’ve studied close the east tradition, the apophatic theology, [link]
), + problems of Trinity and Christology antinomies (simple example: who’s a Christ technically? God, human, or antinomian entity nor God, nor human, but both at the same time?), what is canon and what is heresy, differences between Roman Catholic theology and Eastern Orthodox theology (восточное богословие
Well... I don’t know English good enough to translate directly and fully what do I know/think on that matter.
Now for direct answers.
You see, what you tell me seems... naive? Meaningless in our case? Yes, that’s right.
‘Objective reality’ in your text is not some fact. It is a metaphysical term. ‘Objective reality’ never ‘stated’ anything. Only some particular authors stated some sentences. Look: any statement is nothing but a construction of language. A sentence. A verbal/text form determined by the syntax of your language. Right?
So you can ‘state’ anything. You can state that in 500BC, the proximal time of Pericles and Socrat (well, entire V century BC), quote: ‘giants and mythical creatures once inhabited the earth’. What do you mean? You mean that people believed in that (hey, they were mature men, with skills, life experience and commonsense!)? Or you mean that giants actually existed? Cause people can believe in literally anything, but in spite of what written in Mage: the Ascension rulebook, faith doesn’t change the _objective facts_.
And fact is: there’s no known evidence of existed in 500BC giants and unicorns at all. It is fact.
But beyond language there are empirical objects. Do you really mean that in ‘Medieval’ era Earth was flat? Yes or not?
But we can speak (meaningfully) about facts. You read my message on the monitor, which is flat solid thing, right? Now that is fact! Can you deny it? Well, you can deny everything (we all know all that fictional ‘matrix’ and ‘mage: the ascension’ stuff which is only good for a comic scenario), but for the sake of adequate behavior you must accept it. Your monitor is fact both for you and for ANY human who can visit your room. You can not pass through your monitor (or through the wall of your room), nor anybody. Your monitor has mass and other certain qualities. Do you really deny that?
You can truly and totally believe that your monitor is a portal to another dimension, but it is not, and any person around you can prove it with out doubts. This is all about repeatable experiments and empirical verification. NO statements of Christian myth ever been verified. Christianity can describe in their statements anything, but that would be the misuse of language.
About Christianity, Marxism, Stalinism and Fascism. Citation from English wiki (to avoid further sufferings with my English in such a subtle themes):
[link]
Eric Hoffer in his book The True Believer sees Marxism[1] as one of the chief examples of a mass movement which offers The True Believer a glorious, yet imaginary, future to compensate for the frustrations of his present. Such movements need people to be willing to sacrifice all for that future, including themselves and others. To achieve this aim such movements need to devalue the past and present. This is not only a criticism of communist tenets specifically; Hoffer's other chief examples are Fascists, Nationalists, and the founding stages of religions.
Arthur Koestler describes Marxism as a closed system, like Catholicism or orthodox Freudianism. Such systems have three peculiarities: they claim to represent a universal truth which explains everything and can cure every ill; they can automatically process and reinterpret all potentially damaging data by methods of casuistry which are emotionally appealing and beyond common logic; and they can invalidate criticisms by deducing what the subjective motivation of the critic must be, and by presenting this motivation as a counterargument. An example of the third feature might be the disregarding of such concepts as the free market or self determination as instances of false consciousness engendered by bourgeois ideology.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm really curious: do our little pro-Christian friends here have something to say about that. Meh. Whatever!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I normally dislike debates.... I tend to be bad at them, but this bothers me. Not just the picture itself, but some of the debates going on.
Yes, I am a Christian, and I'm not afraid to admit it, but I am not here to tell you "I'm offended go to hell you heathen I'm right you're wrong so there." If what I'm about to say comes off as holier-than-thou or arrogant or hateful, disregard it.
You don't seem to really understand what Christianity is, by nature. From what I can see, you say that Christians are slaves in some celestial army to take down the enemy. My point is that Christians are not slaves. Christianity is not about do's and don'ts and you-give-those-heathens-whatfor. It's about love. End of story. Yes, there's stuff in the Bible about the wrath of God and crush the enemy and whatnot, but there's much more about love. Christians are not forced into servitude, because then they would not love their master.
I hope this makes sense.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I hate to point this out to you, but you should really read up on the history of the religion you put so much faith in. The crusades for example... No, christians arent put into a labor-intensive camps forcing them to believe or be killed, but that is the message of christianity. Join or go to hell. However, when you join, you must abide by this set of rules or still be cursed to hell. Tell me, how is this not a form of slavery? Also, you might want to read my journal, you might get a kick out of it too.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
I hate to point out your ignorance but you should probably read the catecism before you make such inferences. This is how it describes virtuous people who are not catholic.
"Those who through no fault of their own have not received the sacrament of baptism can be saved through what is called baptism of blood or baptism of desire. Baptism of blood or desire makes a person a member of the Church in desire. These are the two linelines from the sides of the church to save those who are outside the church through no fault of thier own."
So it is possible to not be Catholic and be saved. Also, we all know that the Church has had its bad spots in history, but let us look at the history of atheism which includes such people as Hitler and Stalin.
There is no quicker convert than an atheist on judgment day. Good night and God bless.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Hitler and Stalin made cults of personalities similar to cult of Jesus Christ. Fascism or communism being typical political myth (very similar to religious/mystical myth) has nothing to do with atheism, science or methodology of science/positivism.
I don't want to be rude, but your logic is childish, your knowledge of history, theology or philosophy is flawed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hi, little one.
Perhaps you also should pick up some knowledge? Cause, you see, knowledge is power, and power corrupts. So study hard and be evil.
Heh.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Stop Talking Like your some old man
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I will respond to this when there is nothing left in my to do list, it is definitely not me that is in ignorance, but may I suggest you find more than 2 examples of famous atheists, say for instance most of the founding fathers of our country. Go read a non-fiction book once in a while.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Ok, hows about you read roman history, it justifies many of the events told in the gospels, the new testament and the old testament. And to give a list of the famous aetheists of the world would be impossible, but I'll try to give you a few: Karl Marx, V I lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Kim Jong, Mousilini, Chirac, Putin, and most of the communist and socialist dictators out there. I could argue with you forever, but I thnk we are both very firm in our beliefs. In any case my soul is prepared, hows yours?
Also, the Founding fathers were not Athesist, most were ethier protestant or deist, while not catholic they certanly beleived in some higher power.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
| Next =>