be religious means you on the right wing of the map

[Ozes]

Proof of contribution is also proof of the benefits Christianity claims to have.

for the sake of the argument, assuming that's the case. are we to let this "lie" prolong, cause it benefits? what happen to the search for truth? truth not beneficial?

the proof of contribution, is the proof of contribution. human contribution under influence by belief in a fantasy, its still a fantasy. Greeks contribute as well greatly to human progress. it was not under christianity, from mathematics to philosophy, under system of belief in multiply gods. Zeus, Venus etc they don't seem receive same respect as jesus for some reason.

Now you twist your own words. You claimed the invention of religion had no positive impact on the world. You try to redirect it too "truth" now. Truth is subjective, contribution is a lot more objective. Hence you probably chose it at first to debate, now you switch it up.

Actually, its Christianity which doesn't recieve any respect. If so, tell me where outside of purely Christian circles. (places of relevance please). I never said other religions didn't have positive influences on science and philosophy. Still, the Greeks and Romans had many barbaric practices which were only abolished under Christianity.

[ygalg]

You only represent a portion of yourself. Its impossible to be an independent mind all together. Hence the few that come somewhat close are remembered in history books.
Of each book you read, you reject and accept most of its content based on gutfeeling, its attractiveness due to cultural upbringing or propaganda and countless other factors. Unless you are a perfect person, you will accept countless of notions simply because they suit you. This is an automatic process every person in the world falls into. And people have build there entire lives around trying to rid themselves of these human flaws, never with full success.

there is no an ideal representation of oneself. sure. we learned, process and eject as much in our capability of other sources we absorb information from. we learn from each other.

but I'm my own person, there are no clones of me, have yet science able to duplicate me. my kind, is an obscure notion. and border to guilt by association fallacy. just because someone out there, shares similar views, does not means we belong to the same group.

christians and jews same kind? they've both share the bible (OT).

[ygalg]

Theist doesn't mean 'a person with fantasy". It means you believe in a God. So no, it doesn't make any sense. Marx did not believe in God, and the reason he hated Christians was their refusal to rise up and destroy the rich for him to establish his utopia.

figure of speech, not necessarily a literal meaning. the fact both are fantasies "god" and "ideal world" that's indicating Marx failed miserably. atheist don't only reject god, but anything conflicting with reason. Marx in that case, was abnormal.

[Ozes]

You yourself showed to be a fan of "universal ethics". This is exactly the same as a utopia. Marx never said the world would be perfect, he recommended violence against dissenters.

A purely logical world is a world of violence. If you have money in your pocket, and i have none, its logical for me to try and take it from you.

[ygalg]

Now you twist your own words. You claimed the invention of religion had no positive impact on the world. You try to redirect it too "truth" now. Truth is subjective, contribution is a lot more objective. Hence you probably chose it at first to debate, now you switch it up.

I wrote "religion to be considered as good innovation ... its a naive view." I have yet agree that indeed religion benefited humanity and should be rewarded. history shed not so great light on religion.
I wrote "for the sake of the argument, assuming that's the case."
what I'm asking, despite its (assumed) contributions, yet divinely unproven to be true, should be credit anyway, and truth does not matter?

Actually, its Christianity which doesn't recieve any respect. If so, tell me where outside of purely Christian circles. (places of relevance please). I never said other religions didn't have positive influences on science and philosophy. Still, the Greeks and Romans had many barbaric practices which were only abolished under Christianity.

there were barbaric practices under the banner of christianity; inquisition, burning "witches', the crusades.

[ygalg]

You yourself showed to be a fan of "universal ethics". This is exactly the same as a utopia. Marx never said the world would be perfect, he recommended violence against dissenters.

A purely logical world is a world of violence. If you have money in your pocket, and i have none, its logical for me to try and take it from you.

murder, rape, pedophilia etc these universally understood to be wrong.

what is utopia, if not the perfect world?