Let’s see how our debate is going on ALL THE TIME here:

I “catch” to something you, or somebody, say, or I give an example trying to show (by my opinion) you or somebody is not right.
I usually give really a lot of arguments, and I am trying to build a logical skeleton and skeleton of arguments, to support my claims.

In this case, “catching” to Horatio’s #10:
“Hitler was not a christian”
I showed that whether he was or was not a christian was unimportant, but the fact he was ELLECTED from CHRISTIAN nation WAS the fact that matters.
He fooled chirstian naton in a way that eventually they ELECTED him on free, open, and fair elections.

I also gave you example of Russia, supported with many histroical articles written by emeinent professsionals, which all confirmed several facts:
- Russia WAS highly religious country
- Communist party WAS a negligible force in the timeme of revolution, unable to take power by force without being supported by SOMEBODY
- Communists TOOK power there, so they WERE supported by somebody.

ALL you had to say, and you said, was: communists did not fool (religious) people.
A claim without ANY argument, support…., just a claim.

You, unfortunately, use LIES to “fight” me, like this:
„Do you really believe Lenin came to power with a platform of “We promise to wipe out religion”.

He certainly did not act that way, and I NEVER said anything like this! YOU put words in my mouth, then use them to “fight” me!
VERY unfair! ROTTEN!

Communists “invented” PROMISSES church and regime never offered to people, to attract them to die for communism:
PEACE, LAND, BREAD.

So, my poit is: religion is a good platform for future dictator regimes.

And YOU have NOTHING to support your opinion and to fight mine, except your empty claims and, and LIES, from time to time.

Fair people do not debate that way, but, hey, who expects a believer to be fair?

It also admits that the noble aims of communism, were completely corrupted by Stalin. That is sad but true. On the other hand, the European Social Democratic System seems to have worked very well.

You do not make the distinction between social organizations like a church, hierarchical or otherwise, and political/governing organizations. While you might be correct in saying that “Soviet Communism is to the Party as Christianity is the Russian Orthodox Church” to a first order approximation, as in an SAT question, you would not answer, unless disingenuous or stupid, the question “Which item does not fit into the category consisting of Galugpa Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism, Zoroastrianism, Presbyterianism, Wicca, Vajrayana Buddhism, Methodism? 1.) Baptist Christianity, 2.) Lutheranism, 3.) Soviet Communism, 4.) Reform Judaism, 5.) Shia Islam.” other than a 3.

Of course, the preconditioning premise for the question adequately covers all possibilities other than the correct answer “3″.

You mean other than his out right admission in #25?

Of course religion is abused and used for personal gain. Name something that is not. Politics, corporations, charities, Academics, Wall Street, Main Street but you more than likely participate in all of these to some degree. To not be hypocritical you would need to completely withdraw from society

To somehow use the abuse of religion as some reason to completely ignore all the good done by the genuine articles is nothing but simple mindedness at it’s best.

What with Germany?
Who brought Hitler to power?

Fooled christians!

You may call it ridiculous, but you avoid to give your explanation.

Very simple: HOW did communists get to power in Russian revolution.
Not by power (without support of masses, because there were too few of them to fight army, police …), not by fooloing people, then HOW.

Mybe your explanation will not be ridiculous.

LOL now that is funny. Much of religion maybe but not God. O is must be difficult to find history books that eliminate all references to Christianity, God, prayer and the Bible during our founding.

Interesting reference to Jefferson. A terrible father, a back-stabber, slepping with his slaves, a poor manager of money and no mistake he was in France during the institution of the Constitution. The most overrated of the founders.

Thank you Observer. Severin you see how ridiculous your simple-minded claim is in reality? You even have Observer calling it simple minded. Do you really believe Lenin came to power with a platform of “We promise to wipe out religion”.

Communism is always appealing to the masses at first. Why not it sounds great in theory. But when the fat cats get fatter and the proletariat continues to be backed into the rear fence until all four sides strip away all freedom, then they realize they are captured sheep. By then it is too late.

America is on the same path with a man who claims to be a Christian. If she doesn’t awake we will find all four sides of the fence in place.

Rusian communist revolution WAS massively supported by ordinary people, and you can not do anything against it. You can not just deny it – or, you can, of course, in which case YOU will be deceptive.

Was that people who supported communists religious or not, you can also find in many documents. ALL of them I read claim Russia was HIGHLY RELIGIOUS country.

So, again: The question was not whether highly religious russian population supported bolsheviks or not, but WHY?!

Because bolsheviks were more clever than sclerotic existing regime and sclerotic church: they knew how to attract attention of masses which had nothing to lose and much to get.

Almost unbelievable, but bolsheviks EXCEEDED the church in LYING to people.