Christianity Is the Most Violent Religion

Old testament again. Your point, desert-rat?

 

Old testament again. Your point, desert-rat?

Yes the sacking of Jerico was between 2000-3000 years ago . I thought this thread was on violence done in the name of religion .

 

The Holocaust was carried out by Christians. This is an established fact, and most of them volunteered to do it. It would be ludicrous to claim that Christianity motivated them to do it though, especially with so many Christians at that time risking their lives to save those condemned by the Fascist regimes.

However the Germans did go to the trouble of putting "God is with us" on their belt buckles, and it is interesting to note that being a Christian did not stop these people from volunteering for the einsatzgruppen that rounded up the condemned.

There are good people and bad people, and religious people and non-religious people, and there does not seem to be a systematic relationship between those positions.

It does bother me though that Christians and Muslims who claim to abhor violence continue printing scriptures that contain so many things that are contrary to their own professed morality.

 

I thought the town of Jericho was sacked in the first place by a group of nomads who went on an exodus out of slavery from a different country back to the origins of their ancestors lands which was of course not empty anymore. The story was most likely written down first centuries after that happening. Although it might have been under the banner of a religious purpose from the start it is actually a fine example that religion in practice is often (ab)used to serve different goals.
So it is arguable where it comes to things like the sacking of Jericho (which I find a great story nevertheless), the crusades and other conflicts that it was seemingly done in the first place by religion but actually religion merely served as an excuse.
As the common folks in most periods in history were illiterate and fairly gullible where it comes to religion their leaders could easily abuse it for their own purposes. So this does show that people are violent and christian messages have been abused but to say christianity itself is responsible for this violence in all cases seems overly simplistic to me and frankly does not give an objective view at all.

 

You can find it in their own holy book, the basis of their religion of love and peace. /sarcasm
I'm not sure which is more violent, the Koran or the Bible. Both are pretty disturbing.

 

If you interpretate it all as a guideline for your own life and actions just like that it is disturbing. If you take it for what it is, a book with lots of different stories with lots of different interpretations it's a very nice and interesting book.
Unfortunately, if you want someting to be evil or bad you often make yourself blind to other aspects of it. You, Sappho, seem awfully prejudiced and onsesided. But I wonder, did you read the whole bible yourself or just looked up the parts that (at first instance) look like they only can have a bad influence?

 

To Asmodean , I have heard there is no historical edvance that jasuha did sack Jericho . As I remember it had been sacked before the time of Jachua . I was just using it as a violent Bible story .

 

No - people are the violent ones, citing religion as an excuse to be. There is a bigger picture here.

Religion is no more violent than a gun that is used to shoot someone, or a car that is used to run someone over, or the tobacco that may cause cancer if smoked.

Man is always the controller and oppressor of such tools, and has a choice how to use them.

 

The point is that just because "You can find it in their own Holy Book" doesn't mean most Christians are influenced by it or that you could predict violence in their behavior from the words you quoted. As noted, you quote mainly from the Old Testament, which was written over centuries by a variety of people for a variety of purposes. Christian fundamentalists think it's true, but they're a minority of Christians. And even they don't go around committing violent acts because of what some ancient Hebrews did centuries ago. By your logic, it would seem that Judaism is the most violent religion, since much of what you quote comes from that faith. You can also find "in their holy book" lots of stirring passages preaching justice, love of neighbor, and peace. It is those very passages most Christians think is the essence of their religion. Why, after others have asked, haven't you quoted those? Don't you think not doing that presents a distorted impression? Don't you think that can stir up hatred? Don't you think that's your purpose? So what conclusions can we draw about that? Namaste.

 

so you say....

either way,the point I was trying to make was that Christians have committed more killings than any other religious group.I believe my point is still valid.

I don't believe my post was subjective.These atrocities were committed by Christians,and I was not claiming anything besides this.There are no generalizations as far as I know.

 

Yes your thread title claims christianity is the most violent religion because the atrocities you named were commited by people who had a christian background. That's a conclusion you draw yourself and I'm glad to see I am not the only one who think that's an easy and wrong conclusion to make. If you don't look further than your own nose it might even appear true.

 

What is the relevance of the Crusades, the witch trials, the Inquisition and genocide against Indians in the Americas to Christianity today? Those things happened centuries ago, and Christianity then was a lot different than Christianity now. Also, all of those "atrocities" resulted from forces much more complex than religion. The knights who rode off to the Crusades were mainly interested in plunder, rape and pillage; same goes for the Conquistadors who slaughtered the Indians. If you throuw in the pioneers, they were mainly interested in land. The witch hysteria was a complex phenomenon, in which power and grudges among neighbors played at least as prominent a role as piety. And of course the Inquisition was the product of religious divisions that have long since healed. There are violent Christian groups today in the backwoods of the South and the Mountain Northwest. But it's been awhile since Christians did anything that would warrant your designation "most violent religion."

 

well,my post was to put my title into context.I meant it in the context that Christians have murdered more than any other religious group.Whether it is Christians or Christianity,it does the make a difference to me.Whether they have followed the whims and desires of their religious hierarchy or their scriptures,they did what they did under the pretext of religion.

the relevance is that it has shaped the world as we know it today.To think that history has no relevance today would be denying the impact that past events have on the future.Even today however,we have evangelicals and other christian groups in the military viewing their fight overseas as holy crusade.That might not be true,but it doesn't matter.What matters is how they view it and the impact it has on the minds of the Muslims they're occupying and the war in genral.Also we have evangelical elements that are in favor and support of Zionist atrocities because they believe the god has ordained it and that it will pave way for the "rapture".I'm am not saying every christian believe this nor that most Christians believe this,rather I am saying that violence under religious pretext has been committed by Christians the most.

 

At the same time, we need to realize that some past events are really past. I doubt that we have to worry about another witch mania, nor do I think that of all the real problems we should be worrying about, a resurgence of the Inquisition is a biggie. When we worry about what those Christians might be up to and ignore what those North Korean Communist atheists might be up to, we could get ourselves into some real trouble. Have I heard mention of the mass murders of Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot? I think if you tally them up, you might come up with a higher body count than even those Christian conflicts of yore you mention.

Yes, there are nuts to watch out for. They're very real, armed, dangerous, and need to be set straight. But it's not helpful to lump them together with the Quakers, Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopalians, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.

 

Just as with Hitler and the mostly Christian einsatzgruppen (action groups) I do not think that Stalin ever actually murdered anyone himself. Also, he actually did not personally even order many of the mass killings and imprisonments that occurred throughout Russia and occupied territories (although he certainly did order some of them personally, such as the massacre of thousands of Polish officers). However in my opinion whether or not he ordered them, and whether or not he was actually an atheist (although he clearly was 'officially' an atheist), is not the most relevant factor here. Most Russians were Christians. They did not stop being Christian just because their state declared itself an atheist state.

Major General F.W. von Mellinthin wrote in his memoirs that when his unit would chase the NKVD out of a Russian village, that one of the first things the people would do would be to take their religious icons out of their hiding places and hold masses (even kissing the crosses around German soldiers necks). Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a Russian officer arrested by the NKVD while fighting on the front lines, also tells of hidden religious icons, and makes other statements in his book The Gulag Archipelago that reveal the religiosity of many of Russia's populations. The NKVD, being composed of Russian citizens, was therefor also most likely composed of large numbers of Christians. So, for example, when the NKVD shot 120,000 Russian soldiers during the course of the second world war it was most likely Christians pulling the trigger.

I am, of course, not making the ludicrous claim that either the einsatzgruppen or the NKVD were motivated by Christianity to carry out their atrocities. Rather I am simply trying to undermine the claim that they were motivated by atheism, whatever that might even mean (and I find the claim to be equally ludicrous). If being Christian does not prevent a man from volunteering for the action groups and carrying out the holocaust, then why would a lack of Christianity motivate a man to do it?

 

You might like to do a head count of the women who have been put to death under Islam. You might also like to do a head count of the female babies the Hindus still murder on a daily basis. You might like to add up the dying that the Brahmins and Kishatrya's step over every day when they have the money and means to help. As oakiefreak said, the Christian "atrocities" happened centuries ago. The above is happening as we type. You might also like to look at the stats on which religions are helping the most people today. Christians.

 

Has Buddhism ever hurt anyone?
What about Hinduism?
Jainism?
Taoism?
Paganism?
Wicca?

 

Yes

 

Buddhist monks helped recruit the Kamikaze pilots, and were fanatical supporters of Fascism. The fact is that some people are willing to carry out atrocities, and whether they are religious or not they will find motivation for their acts. The kinds of Christians or Hindus or Buddhists who would commit atrocities would commit atrocities if they were atheists and the kinds of atheists who would commit atrocities would commit atrocities if they were Christians or Hindus or Buddhists, and the kind of people who would not commit atrocities would not commit them whether they were Christians or Buddhists or Hindus or atheists.

 

good to know. thanks for the info.