Getting to grips with God

[seer]

Christianity had centuries as the world's most violent religion or ideology. Let’s see, we have the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Witch-hunting, Democide in the Americas, Africa and Australia, slavery in the Americas and Africa etc, etc. Yep, nice peace loving people these Christians.

Tass I would put all those deaths, for all those centuries, against just two atheistic systems in China and the former Soviet union. It wouldn't be close. Never mind the fact that none of the above is actually in keeping with the teachings of Christ.

[Tassman]

Tass I would put all those deaths, for all those centuries, against just two atheistic systems in China and the former Soviet union. It wouldn't be close.

Don’t be ridiculous. Atheism doesn’t kill people; Fanaticism kills people regardless of whether that is religious or political...not to mention that the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao were psychopaths with absolute power.

Never mind the fact that none of the above is actually in keeping with the teachings of Christ.

And yet the perpetrators of the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Witch-hunting, Democide in the Americas, Africa and Australia, slavery in the Americas and Africa ALL claimed to be Christians. So how do you explain this?

[seer]

Don’t be ridiculous. Atheism doesn’t kill people; Fanaticism kills people regardless of whether that is religious or political...not to mention that the likes of Hitler, Stalin and Mao were psychopaths with absolute power.

Then why blame the Crusades, Inquisitions, and witch-killing on Christianity? Are they in keeping with the ethics of Christ and His example?

And yet the perpetrators of the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Witch-hunting, Democide in the Americas, Africa and Australia, slavery in the Americas and Africa ALL claimed to be Christians. So how do you explain this?

Sure, and they may have been Christian, but they were certainly not following the teachings of Christ or the New Testament in general. And you know that. Men do wicked things Tass, even Christians or Buddhists or Atheists.

[Tassman]

Then why blame the Crusades, Inquisitions, and witch-killing on Christianity? Are they in keeping with the ethics of Christ and His example?





Sure, and they may have been Christian, but they were certainly not following the teachings of Christ or the New Testament in general. And you know that. Men do wicked things Tass, even Christians or Buddhists or Atheists.

King James Bible: "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" Matthew 7:16

[seer]

King James Bible: "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" Matthew 7:16

So are you saying that they weren't genuine Christians? That is a possibility...

[One Bad Pig]

So are you saying that they weren't genuine Christians? That is a possibility...

It sure is, but you and I both know that that's not what Tassman was trying to imply.

[Jedidiah]

It sure is, but you and I both know that that's not what Tassman was trying to imply.

But it certainly followed from his quote.

[JonathanL]

But it certainly followed from his quote.

Well, you know Tassman, always eager to shove his foot up his mouth.

[Tassman]

So are you saying that they weren't genuine Christians? That is a possibility...

I'm saying that millions of people, in the name of Christianity perpetrated the Crusades, Inquisitions, witch-killings, slavery and colonial democides, including the slaughter and cultural destruction of native Americans. The facts speak for themselves. The history of Christianity is no less violent than that of Islam.

[seer]

I'm saying that millions of people, in the name of Christianity perpetrated the Crusades, Inquisitions, witch-killings, slavery and colonial democides, including the slaughter and cultural destruction of native Americans. The facts speak for themselves. The history of Christianity is no less violent than that of Islam.

Again Tass, were those people following the teachings of Christ and the New Testament? Yes or no?

[One Bad Pig]

I'm saying that millions of people, in the name of Christianity perpetrated the Crusades, Inquisitions, witch-killings, slavery and colonial democides, including the slaughter and cultural destruction of native Americans.

Most of this (beyond the first two) was not, in fact, perpetrated in the name of Christianity.

The facts speak for themselves. The history of Christianity is no less violent than that of Islam.

The facts say no such thing. Nearly all of Islam's spread has been by the sword - and they've killed more of each other than anyone else. The Dar al-Harb is not a Christian concept.

[Sparko]

Most of this (beyond the first two) was not, in fact, perpetrated in the name of Christianity.

The facts say no such thing. Nearly all of Islam's spread has been by the sword - and they've killed more of each other than anyone else. The Dar al-Harb is not a Christian concept.

And even the Crusades were not just something perpetrated on innocents. They were started to defend pilgrims from muslim marauders and to defend the Holy Land. In other words, not much has changed in the Middle East. It was overrun by terrorist thugs back then as it is now. The Crusades were basically doing the same thing the multinational military forces are doing now.

[One Bad Pig]

And even the Crusades were not just something perpetrated on innocents. They were started to defend pilgrims from muslim marauders and to defend the Holy Land. In other words, not much has changed in the Middle East. It was overrun by terrorist thugs back then as it is now. The Crusades were basically doing the same thing the multinational military forces are doing now.

Well, they were started because Constantinople asked for help holding back the Muslim hordes, and the West decided that if they didn't take the fight there, it would come to them. The Crusades weren't especially helpful to the East (tending to do more harm than good), but the Muslims did attack Europe once Constantinople was out of the way.

[Tassman]

Most of this (beyond the first two) was not, in fact, perpetrated in the name of Christianity.

You’re right. I made the same mistake as those who argue that Mao and Stalin spread their evil in the "name of atheism". I should have said that these things were perpetrated by Christians, not necessarily in the name of Christianity as such.

The facts say no such thing. Nearly all of Islam's spread has been by the sword - and they've killed more of each other than anyone else. The Dar al-Harb is not a Christian concept.

Nevertheless death and violence has been a massive byproduct of Christian colonial expansion. The Christian democides resulted in the death and destruction of entire cultures from the Australian Aborigines, to the Native Americans and the Conquistadors of South America. And where the Christian colonialists went the missionaries accompanied them to preach the love of Jesus.

Well, they were started because Constantinople asked for help holding back the Muslim hordes, and the West decided that if they didn't take the fight there, it would come to them.

It’s a pity that the 4th Crusade got diverted and sacked, raped and pillaged Christian Constantinople instead, isn't it?

[One Bad Pig]

Nevertheless death and violence has been a massive byproduct of Christian colonial expansion.

No, human colonial expansion. Since disease caused rather more deaths than anything else, straight edge atheist pacifists visiting the same shores would've accomplished much the same thing.

The Christian democides resulted in the death and destruction of entire cultures from the Australian Aborigines, to the Native Americans and the Conquistadors of South America.

You might want to re-think your sentence structure here, since it rather implies that the Conquistadors were native cultures destroyed by Christians.

And where the Christian colonialists went the missionaries accompanied them to preach the love of Jesus.

You make that sound like a bad thing. The love of Jesus caused missionaries to condemn the violence done by their own people to the natives.

It’s a pity that the 4th Crusade got diverted and sacked, raped and pillaged Christian Constantinople instead, isn't it?

Rather. The Crusades were all around a failure, but that's probably the low point.