Diary of Anne Frank

[CWT36]

You are right Geo.

This topic has been very upsetting to me. I did my own little poll on this question, and across the board, Christians, including many catholics answered that no, Anne Frank is not suffering in hell. In fact, many people were disgusted at the thought. My husband, a catholic, thought this stance is very judgemental. Two people, including my husband, mentioned that the Jewish religion worships the same God as Christians. Why would the same God have two sets of rules. Also, when I was a child, attending a Methodist Church, I was instructed that Jesus was just an ordinary man, a human man. This view would also warrant a trip to hell, I suppose.

I have taken comfort in these responses, and it has reinforced my belief in humankind.

This is one of the reasons I think it might be a good thing if we had some rational believers in our discussions. I think we tend to hear from the vocal lunatic fringe.

I watched a special on MSNBC last night about the Branch Davidians. It was very insightful to hear what the theological scholars had to say, it would be great if we could get some people of that caliber involved in these conversations.

[stahrwe]

The Free 'Thinkers and atheists have managed to create a safe world for themselves. You dismiss the Bible because atheists and free thinkers for several hundred years have told you can.

No, Stahrwe. They dismiss the Bible and your interpretation of it because they do not think it has validity. Again, I ask, why are you not ok with that.

You say women are neglected or ignored by the Bible but when I point of over a dozen stories of strong women you totally ignore that or claim that some of the stories are patterned after some river drying up.

I do not think you really understand oppression. Oppression says nothing about the oppressed. People who are oppressed are strong because they have to be. I work with abuse survivors who oftentimes feel weak because society always tells them they are weak. The reality is that they are incredibly strong. They have to be to survive abuse. There are strong women in the Bible. That does not mean there is not also oppression of women in the Bible. I think that it is important to acknowledge the reality of the text. If we don’t we can never change our current society or acknowledge how much those ancient ideas have affected our relationships today.

The beauty of this is that once you render the Bible irrelevant, you can dismiss me as heartless. Sleep well in the knowledge that I, Stahrwe is condemning Anne to eternal misery.

Yes. You are condemning her to eternal misery. Your religious interpretation is abusive.

So if your general comes to you with bad news from the front, you dismiss it because you think the messenger lacks validity. That's smart
I am not condemning anyone.

[stahrwe]

Etudiant,

imagine... arrested, sent to a concentration camp, watching your sibling die, then suffering death by disease, then according to christianity's loving doctrine burning in hell forever... an innocent teenage girl vitimized by horrific people and a horrific doctrine.

And all that is considered is her nudity and modesty. And so happy she didn't have to suffer that indignity.
Yes, you are correct. That that insignifcant in the scheme of things issue is raised and held as a primary focus is beyond peculiar, it's fucking sick... and so Christian.

In a nut shell it comes down to : "She gets what she deserves in Hell, but at least she wasn't naked in her last moments on earth."

So much for the christian claim to holding the high ground on morality, ethics, or loving kindness. I'm disgusted.

What are your worried about. None of what I believe is anything more than an intellectual exercise right? Anne Frank might as well have been a centipede in the world of creation. Why not step on her? Humans have no more value than any other living animal.

On your blog, you have the following:

Stahrwe, hyper-religious Christian fundie celebrating Anne Frank's avoidance of nakedness as an upside of her death by typhus in a German concentration camp; Oct 17, Booktalk.org

I suggest you correct the post. I was not 'celebrating' her nakedness. The use of that word mischaracterizes what I said, is intellectually dishonest, and you know it.

Anyone reading this post think you are more innocent than Anne Frank?

[stahrwe]

You are right Geo.

This topic has been very upsetting to me. I did my own little poll on this question, and across the board, Christians, including many catholics answered that no, Anne Frank is not suffering in hell. In fact, many people were disgusted at the thought. My husband, a catholic, thought this stance is very judgemental. Two people, including my husband, mentioned that the Jewish religion worships the same God as Christians. Why would the same God have two sets of rules. Also, when I was a child, attending a Methodist Church, I was instructed that Jesus was just an ordinary man, a human man. This view would also warrant a trip to hell, I suppose.

I have taken comfort in these responses, and it has reinforced my belief in humankind.

Be sure to report your poll on judgement day.
Jesus said He is God, Methodist church says he isn't. I'm convinced.

[geo]

While there are conflicting passages about good works being a way to heaven, and good works accounting for nothing without belief in Jesus as savior, the latter is the dominant and prevailing Christian belief.

A few months back a relative of mine was very distraught (crying) due to the fact that some of her grandchildren hadn't been baptized in the Catholic Church. She believed that her grandchildren were quite literally going to hell. I was amazed that an otherwise very sane and intelligent person could believe that god would condemn someone to hell for an eternity due to a technicality. This relative apparently has been so thoroughly indoctrinated it doesn't occur to her to even question this "truth."

For some reason she's not upset about it any more and I can only assume that at some point she talked to a priest and he assured her that her grandchildren were safe. (This is where I would insert a smiley face with rolling eyes, but there isn't one.)

It does seem that in America, Christianity is galvanizing more into extremism. Or maybe I'm only noticing it more as I get older? Is the divide between believers and non-believers getting sharper? Regarding the so-called "Neo atheists" who are supposedly intolerant of religion, I have considered that maybe it's not that they are less tolerant as simply being unwilling to give religion a free pass any more. Why is it assumed that religion deserves respect? But it also may be that the religious are becoming more extreme. In the 1980s, Carl Sagan took on the lunatic fringe with regard to superstitions, but he for the most part he left religion out of the equation. The new breed—the "neo-atheists"—takes religion head on. What has accounted for this change, I wonder.

[seespotrun2008]

It does seem that in America, Christianity is galvanizing more into extremism.

I wonder about this too. I also wonder what it would like if we took a look at the huge divide between the rich and the poor. As our society becomes more unequal does fundamentalism become stronger? Religion is certainly used as a way to pacify and control people. Marx said that "Religion is the opiate of the masses." In many ways, I think this is true.

[geo]

You are right Geo.

This topic has been very upsetting to me. I did my own little poll on this question, and across the board, Christians, including many catholics answered that no, Anne Frank is not suffering in hell.

This would be a good litmus test for extremist belief. This question—is Anne Frank now burning in hell?—would show us how far gone they were. If they answer yes, I think we can safely say their minds have been subjugated by religious dogma. They are automatons who have lost their ability to reason for themselves.

A Zappa song comes to mind:

"Well those Jesus freaks, they're friendly but,
the shit they believe has got their minds all shut."

[Bart]

Geo,

The polls have been done. The responses are largely the three groups as indicated in my blog posting on this subject, which our Christian fundie hijacked to make this thread. http://atheistcamel.blogspot.com/

Overwhelmingly non-belief in jesus as saviour = damnation.
Christians who deny that are simply those outside the mainstream of Christian dogma.

Much as JW's and Mormons are considered "fringe" religions, or outside Christian doctrine, or even "cults" by the Christian mainstream sects, so are Universalist Christians who believe in universal salvation. Thus non-believers in Jesus going to hell is far from the fringe thinking. It is THE prevailing thought based on 1,500 year old scripture.


Although I detest the "New Atheist" / "Neo-Atheist" label the answer as to why the outspoken atheist perspective is so prevelant isn't really a mystery.

The scientific age is only 300 years old. As the "God of the Gaps" continues to shrink with new discovery / learning the number of people who hold supernatural religious belief continues to shrink in the industrialized world. Only in the most backward, impoverished, and uneducated countries does religion, Islam and Christianity, flourish.

As atheisim / agnosticism grows the recognition of the negative impact of supernaturalsm on the advancment of sience and medicine, it's intrusions into peoples personal lives, its insistence on being THE moral guide for everyone even if it means subjugating freedoms, and its propensity to instigate war... all is correctly perceived as a negative influence by the growing numbers of freethinkers. Speaking out against those injustices born of religious aflication is the just and moral thing to do to continue to advance society.

You may call it a new "Age of Enlightenment", or the replacing of superstition with reality which could never fully reach it's stride until science became the dominant factor in civilization.

Over the past 18 yrs non-belief has grown by 80% in the US to 14%, while those calling themselves Christian declined 10 perentage points to 76% of the population. While not nearly comparabe to the European Unions 52% non-beliebvers, the implies that in 80 years or so believers in supernaturalism will be in the small minority here.

Welcome it.

Regards,
Bart
aka Dromedary Hump

[CWT36]

It does seem that in America, Christianity is galvanizing more into extremism. Or maybe I'm only noticing it more as I get older? Is the divide between believers and non-believers getting sharper? Regarding the so-called "Neo atheists" who are supposedly intolerant of religion, I have considered that maybe it's not that they are less tolerant as simply being unwilling to give religion a free pass any more. Why is it assumed that religion deserves respect? But it also may be that the religious are becoming more extreme. In the 1980s, Carl Sagan took on the lunatic fringe with regard to superstitions, but he for the most part he left religion out of the equation. The new breed—the "neo-atheists"—takes religion head on. What has accounted for this change, I wonder.

I think there's little doubt that the extremely religious are more vocal and visible. I can tell you in my case that has had a huge impact on my becoming more open and vocal about my non-belief. I don't think I fall under your neo-atheist definition, but I'm probably not far off.

I think that it has become incumbent on the non-believers to counter the infiltration of religion into government. Jefferson's Wall of Seperation is getting knocked down brick by brick and short of Barry Lynn, I don't see any theists that are concerned about that. This has spurred many atheists to come out of the closet, out of concern of our country leaning towards a theocracy.

Historically atheists have been a very quiet people, but now there is a concerted effort among some to offset the religious fanatics. As usual, those in the middle ground tend be quiet and apathetic. Hence we hear only from the extremes.

[Bart]

CWT,
I agree. see my post above.

also..;.we need to remember, that up until very recently blasphemy laws were enforce. People were fined for blaspheming. You couldn't hold public office in some states as an atheist in the 19th century. Being an atheist was something you kept in the closet lest your good christian neighbors shunned you.

Much as gays and feminists have overcome the stigma and become vocal in their opposition to backward thinking and intolerance, so has atheism finally found it's voice.

Bart