▼
Tuesday 22 September 2009
The Crowning Glory of Atheism: The French Revolution
Episode 1
If you want to watch this and are confirmed in your belief that atheism does not lead to tyrannical and brutal regimes take a peep. Great series on what happens when a 'new ideology' takes the place of God and Religion and puts it at the service of one who believes in neither.
I was asked by a discussion member in the atheists internet forum to name one atheist who had acted negatively because of his atheism. 40,000 is the estimate at the number killed during the Reign of Terror, all as a result of Robespierre's atheism, rejection of the Church, of God and because of his fervent, passionate and evangelical 'new vision' of human society.
"The French Revolution", said the discussion chap, "was the poor rising up against the rich."
"Eh?" I replied, "What books have you been reading?!"
The French Revolution may have gathered a great deal of men and women who were impoverished to rise up and fight, but primarily it was a coup d'etat on a massive scale by a group of 'Enlightened' thinkers, not just a natural upsurge by the oppressed against the powerful.
Furthermore, as V.I Lenin maintained in his work 'What Is To Be Done?', such 'revolutions' require a 'Vanguard' - a group of 'enlightened men' who can maintain the constancy of the revolution in order to create the utopian vision required.
The victims of the French Revolution were many and varied. Many 'dissenters', however, were Catholics, the Church having been put underneath the power and authority of the State and subjected to it. Robespierre despised the Church because it didn't fit in with his 'passionate ideals' and those who refused his demands, he had slaughtered, because frankly, if you didn't really like the glorious republic and though it was actually a bit restrictive and rather naff, you didn't stand a chance. They had secret police and everything. The Inquisition had nothing on these guys! They hated Christianity so much they changed the flippin' calender! Robespierre died in the month of 'Thermodere' or something.
If you've got time on your hands and enjoy a good documentary...
Episode 2
Episode 3
Episode 4
Episode 5
Episode 6
Episode 7
Episode 8
Episode 9
Good one.
ReplyDeleteI would add: Lenin, Stalin,
Pol Pot...hmm, gotta be more.
This doesn't make much sense. For every brutal atheist regime, there are (historically) five brutal religious ones. Does that prove that religion leads to brutal and tyrannical regimes? The truth is that these things happen because of the failure of human beings to live up to their beliefs, whether the beliefs are religious or secular. I'll freely admit that, when religion goes out the window, many people don't adhere to any creed except what they feel like doing. But I'd say that the problem actually lies outside religion. A person could obey the ten commandments without any belief in God just as well as a person who obeyed them as God's word. The problem lies with the fact that, religious or irreligious, so many of us behave without any decency or civility.
ReplyDelete'For every brutal atheist regime, there are (historically) five brutal religious ones.'
ReplyDeleteEstimated worldwide abortions (1920-2000)
= 527 million to 836 million and counting!
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat8.htm#Abortions
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatx.htm
I'm not sure what your point is, in all honesty. My great aunt had five abortions and went to mass faithfully. Does that constitute proof that religious people are more inclined toward abortion? And if not, why not? Why does the brutality of atheists prove that atheism leads to brutality but the brutality of religious people doesn't prove anything?
ReplyDeleteI want to add that I too am a Catholic but I don't believe anyone is persuaded to a belief in God by illogical arguments; they harm our cause rather than help it. Leave logical argument to the scientists who wield it well. We come to our belief through the grace of God.
Dear anonymous
ReplyDelete'Why does the brutality of atheists prove that atheism leads to brutality but the brutality of religious people doesn't prove anything?'
We are, all of us, capable of brutality, meanness, hatred, envy, thirst for power and all of the sins under the sun, even, yes even, sickening crimes against the innocent, the child, the unborn.
That said, we have to beware of atheistic regimes or Governments which enshrine into legislation acts which are contrary to human dignity, human life and human freedom. In this country and worldwide, abortion, euthanasia and the rest are a pointer to the atheistic state.
The problem is heresy and while you might say to me, 'The Inquisition were so concerned about heresy that it ended up in death for those heretics,' just what, just what is heresy all about?
Great heresies run contrary to human freedom, life, love, and result in tyranny because they end up waging war against God, His Justice and His Mercy.
Looking over the bloodshed that has taken place because of great and dangerous heresy, the blood of the truly innocent that has been spilled, all because of the heresies which have been made so popular yet that result in the degradation of human freedom, life, love and liberty, then maybe, just maybe the Church's effort to stamp out ideologies which result in the death of freedom may not have been such a bad thing. The Church itself, by the way, does not shed blood. Heretics tried were handed over to the secular arm. It was up to the secular arm to do what they felt right.
Religious people can be brutal and nasty. No doubt about it. However, if you want to talk about the Crusades just look at Islam and the tyranny it has installed in Iran, Saudi Arabia and Africa where it is spreading. Had it not been for the Poles battling the Turks at the Gates of Vienna all of Europe by now would be under Islamic law.
If you want to talk about the Inquisition then look at the ideologies which have sprung up outside of the One True Faith which claimed the lives of hundreds of millions, be it in China, the former Soviet Union, Germany under Hitler, Pol Pot in Cambodia etc, or because of the Western acceptance of child murder in the womb as an acceptable, upon the discovery of an unwanted pregnancy.
And, I might add, tyranny is all you and I will get from the new atheistic agenda. You, and I, as Catholics, must be aware of the fact that the zeitgeist in this country is against Christ, against His teachings, against God and it grows more and more violently so.
Furthermore, you and I have a duty to warn others about it.
ReplyDeleteI don't really think you've gotten my point so I'll try again. What I'm talking about is a mode of argument that I think is pointless. Take this statement:
ReplyDelete"Great heresies run contrary to human freedom, life, love, and result in tyranny because they end up waging war against God, His Justice and His Mercy. "
Religious people agree with this already, so you don't need to persuade them. As far as they're concerned, you're preaching to the choir.
So who is it that you hope to affect with this kind of argument? Clearly, you're trying to reach those who disagree with it in hopes of persuading them. But, in constructing your argument, you simply forget that, to someone who doesn't believe in God, "waging war against God" is a meaningless phrase. You can't wage war against something you don't believe exists. I've made this argument myself, and been told that it was as meaningless as waging war against the Easter Bunny.
All of your arguments depend upon and contain the assumption of a belief in God, so to those who don't believe, they're like a hypothesis that begins with an incorrect statement - and, therefore, everything that follows from that statement is also wrong. You just never seem to notice that your target audience doesn't share your beliefs and that, as far as they're concerned, you haven't proven your case.
If you want to really understand what I mean, read back some of your own statements as if you hadn't written them, and substitute the words "magical pink fairies" every time you wrote the word "God". NOW you understand how they sound to non-believers. There is nothing better you could do to make atheists and agnostics close their minds against your message than to assume, with every word you say, that they share your belief in God and that that shared belief is the starting point of every discussion. And yet you do this relentlessly and without ever seeming to actually notice.
I agree we have a duty to speak up against wrong and injustice. When I do that, I'm not satisfied just to reach fellow Christians who, for the most part, already agree with me, so that we can commiserate together. One can't force others to a belief in God, and there are many non-believers whose view of the ideal world is a fundamentally Christian one. Do you really want to exclude and alienate them?
Finally, I'd say that you're trying to make a logical argument and seem to think that you've done so - but you haven't, because you're always making the assumption of faith. If you want to debate with logical thinkers and scientific types, then you have to play by the rules of logic and so cannot begin with a statement like "against the will of God." If you're going to play that game, you can't make up special rules that just apply to you. You have to first prove the existence of God in a scientific sense - with a repeatable experiment in a laboratory, where He shows up every time you call on Him. Since that obviously isn't going to happen, why don't you settle on the only real means of persuasion you have at hand? Live your own life as an example and call out to the spiritual elements in each of us, the part of us that wants to know God. Leave the field of logical argument for the exploration of science.
"You can't wage war against something you don't believe exists". That sounds perfectly logical but I am not sure it is true. God exists whether He is believed in or not.
ReplyDelete