View Full Version : christian morals pwn?
deeppurple66
2006-10-21, 14:29
if u study when nations were primaraly christian nations (this excludes goverment run churches) you can see that they have good funtioning econonies
for example victorian england was still more imperialistic in the 1700 then the 1800's came and they invented much had a good economy and so forth
and the majority of the nation was christian and the king quit the idea of goverment churches
alborate
The_Big_Beef
2006-10-21, 17:55
Christianity (a religion if you have forgotten) does not control the economy, it does not control what people invent or anything and their morals have nothing to do with how the economy is. the 1800s was a time of invention practically every nation that was updating their technology and adding to it was pretty much economically stable.
quote:Originally posted by deeppurple66:
If you study when nations were primarily christian nations (this excludes government run churches) you can see that they have good, functioning economies.
For example, Victorian England was still more imperialistic in the 1700's, then the 1800's came and they invented much, had a good economy and so forth.
Also, the majority of the nation was christian and the king quit the idea of government churches.
Elaborate
Hopefully that makes more sense.
~Q~
anon99989
2006-10-21, 20:01
Except Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China, Israel, etc.
It may also have to do with the fact that the Christian nations colonized the non-Christian nations.
ShouldTrip
2006-10-21, 20:19
Non religious countries seem to be better off actually.
Lower crime rates, and what not.
Japan for example.
I dunno, *yells for rust* He knows everything, he likely has links to facts ^_^
DieSmokin
2006-10-22, 22:20
quote:Originally posted by Q:
Originally posted by deeppurple66:
If you study when nations were primarily christian nations (this excludes government run churches) you can see that they have good, functioning economies.
For example, Victorian England was still more imperialistic in the 1700's, then the 1800's came and they invented much, had a good economy and so forth.
Also, the majority of the nation was christian and the king quit the idea of government churches.
Elaborate
Hopefully that makes more sense.
~Q~
STFU. Nobody give's a shit that he didn't spend 2 extra second's to type something, even though you know what he's talking about without it.
Faggit, I bet your in your mid to late 20's and think's he sound's so smart and educated when you flame about grammar. Go die.
quote:Originally posted by DieSmokin:
STFU. Nobody give's a shit that he didn't spend 2 extra second's to type something, even though you know what he's talking about without it.
Faggit, I bet your in your mid to late 20's and think's he sound's so smart and educated when you flame about grammar. Go die.
Dude, chill out. You'll give yourself heart attack.
Star Wars Fan
2006-10-22, 23:58
Yes, christian morals pwn. They pwned the Christians, the non-Christians, the world was pwned due to Christianity.
The_Big_Beef
2006-10-23, 03:43
quote:Originally posted by Star Wars Fan:
Yes, christian morals pwn. They pwned the Christians, the non-Christians, the world was pwned due to Christianity.
Even the women and the children got pwned during the crusades. i wish i was a christian so i could pwn everyone too.
Peanutbutter Soup
2006-10-23, 05:29
You can't draw any sort of substantial conclusion about something by a single random positive correlation. It's like saying that since average global temperature has increased while the number of pirates sailing the oceans has decreased, then less pirates = higher global temperatures. You're just trying to match up two sets of statistics that may or may not have anything to do with each other.
Another thing, why are these morals "christian"? I'm assuming (and correct me if I'm wrong) that the morals you mention are those that frown upon murder and taking what is not yours (nevermind the fact that the "good book" explicitly condones these practices...), loving your neighbor, being a kind, cheritable individual, and doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. These morals have been around far longer than Christianity, so why claim them as your own (assuming you're a christian)?
quote:Originally posted by DieSmokin:
STFU. Nobody give's a shit that he didn't spend 2 extra second's to type something, even though you know what he's talking about without it.
Faggit, I bet your in your mid to late 20's and think's he sound's so smart and educated when you flame about grammar. Go die.
Haha Q is like 15.
Viraljimmy
2006-10-23, 21:13
quote:Originally posted by deeppurple66:
alborate
Y doent yoo albergate.
It's yoor dumass stakement anyhou.
insert witty comment here
2006-10-26, 00:14
quote:Originally posted by Peanutbutter Soup:
You can't draw any sort of substantial conclusion about something by a single random positive correlation. It's like saying that since average global temperature has increased while the number of pirates sailing the oceans has decreased, then less pirates = higher global temperatures. You're just trying to match up two sets of statistics that may or may not have anything to do with each other.
Another thing, why are these morals "christian"? I'm assuming (and correct me if I'm wrong) that the morals you mention are those that frown upon murder and taking what is not yours (nevermind the fact that the "good book" explicitly condones these practices...), loving your neighbor, being a kind, cheritable individual, and doing unto others as you would have them do unto you. These morals have been around far longer than Christianity, so why claim them as your own (assuming you're a christian)?
max weber would disagree with you...
go read