You got any evidence to back that up?

1, You do more charity because Christianity is fucking two thousand years old and has been a massive political power for most of human existence. Atheism isn't nearly that well established and thus doesn't have access to the same resources. That's about as dishonest as you could possibly be in making a comparison.

2, It's entirely possible that atheist individuals DO make significant charitable contributions that just aren't as visible because maybe not everyone feels the need to brag about it and/or there's no central atheist organization to draw that data from.

3, You are straight up lying to everyone here if you're saying that the church's charity has absolutely nothing to do with spreading Christianity. That is bullshit of the absolute highest magnitude.

Sound doctrine from various theology teachers for many years.

I mean i could also quote Bible verses about us being responsible stewards or how there's nothing wrong for wanting comfort and God actually wants us to enjoy the things he's given us but why bother, i doubt you'll change your mind.




You seem angry.

1. Atheism is just as old, even older actually, read up on some of the epicureans, sophists, etc. Charity is a central tenant of Christianity, for atheists, eh not so much.

2. Yes it's possible but what atheists give as a bloc is a drop in the bucket compared to what Christians give as a bloc. Cry all you want, this is reality.

3. Never did i say that, spreading the word of God is central but that does not categorically mean that there is no charity without proselytization. When i volunteered for the homeless shelter or for a refugee resettlement agency i didn't do it to spread the Word. In fact i didn't convert a single soul.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Aug 3 2017 04:17pm

That is pretty much the Protestant ethic in a nutshell right there though.

Some verses don't require deep theological thinking or context. It's pretty clear Jesus is saying that the vast majority of wealthy Christians won't go to heaven.

And even most of the poor among us in developed countries like America or Britain are wealthy by historical standards. So we can be sure the vast majority of Christians in developed countries won't go to heaven.

Just a couple verses up from the scripture Dro quoted:

Matthew 19:21
Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”

So if we read the scripture properly(no context or nuanced theological discussion needed), if Christians don't sell what they have and give it to the poor, they aren't really following Christ, and thus won't go to heaven.

1, Atheism is not a religious institution, nor has it been for the past 2,000 fucking years. It doesn't have tenants because IT'S NOT A FUCKING RELIGION. You are just being a deceitful ass at this point. Every single person on this forum knows that the Christian churches have been one of the most fundamental political powers on the planet for two millennia now and for you to try to somehow equate that to something that has historically been an extreme minority for most of human existence is insulting to the intelligence of every person reading your post.

2, Do you have some sort of issue with reading comprehension? I was literally getting at the point, in the post you quoted, that no shit a group that's massively larger and more powerful will have a larger gross donation amount, but that it says nothing about how charitable each individual is - to know that, by definition, you'd have to go by a per capita amount for each group. That is, it's entirely possible atheist individuals do contribute as much as Christian individuals, but you just aren't seeing it because you're not looking at per capita donations, which could be because it's hard to get that data.

3, My argument isn't that 100% of the charity is due to proselytization, but that the majority of it is, even if it's not explicitly stated on each occasion. How exactly do you think the church has amassed its power?

This post was edited by Magicman657 on Aug 4 2017 10:03am

Simply no. Jesus is not saying that, and the second bold statement is not backed by anything Biblical.

The quoted Bible verse again, context does matter, otherwise you end up with pure stupidity that is your last sentence. Go re read that verse and a few prior to that verse. Jesus is talking to a wealthy ruler that has kept all of the Mosaic commandments and is asking Jesus what must he do to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus sees that he has kept all the Mosaic stuff but wealth is something that he holds above God. God demands that we place Him above all other desires, so Jesus asks him to give up something that he knows is THE Idol of the young rulers heart. It's not about giving up the money itself, it's all about giving God priority above all else.

And if you aren't wiling to give your belongings to the poor you are placing them above gods orders.

Jesus also was pretty clear about the world ending soon after his resurrection, so that's another important piece of context. He didn't think his followers would need to live that long after giving their belongings away.

I might if you provide some contradicting verses. I'm not one of those atheists that takes every opportunity to take a swipe at religious people, I don't care what religious beliefs people hold as long as they don't infringe on other people's rights. I get the feeling you are being hostile to my question because I'm dissing your religion but in actuality I just want someone with more theological knowledge than me to explain something I always wondered about.

Icemage have some good points about the wealth, something is broken.

Nothing is more disgusting than those pseudo-religious hypocrites, hidding behind racism & freedom of not paying taxes, while arguing with bible versets like jihadist.