The Barbarity of Christianity (as compared to Islam)

Yes, you can point that out. It would not be true though.As I pointed out, many of the instances came long after the Bible was readily available in the Vulgate and are continuing even today.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

A nonsense distinction, and one that even the Muslims you criticize make. It's rarely the threat of violence through their own initative; it's generally the threat of violence if that is Allah's will, and they do hold out the option that Allah's will be done through the speaker. Right. It's the same kind of victim-blaming that all abusers rely on. "You make me do this to you." Heard it time and time again.

Christians DON'T hold out that option. Amazing how you can blame someone who has done absolutely nothing whatever to you for somehow making you a victim. Like somebody who has been told to avoid falling into a pit but gets too close on a dare anyway and falls in, and then blames it on the person who warned him. Great sense there.

I'm blaming he who made the pit. Why is it you insist on applying mortal standards of culpability to an infinite God, who, by definition, is culpable for everything that ever happens?This message has been edited by crashfrog, 02-18-2006 10:28 AM

This is a philosophical topic unto itself!Several possibilities:
Assuming that a "pit" exists:
1) If pit=Hell or damnation, one can argue that the pit was never created for humans. It was created for rebellious independant "spirits" who never intend to conform to an absolute standard. The counter-argument is that the absolute standard was dictated by humans who desired to "control" other humans.2) As an atheist, you cant rant at "God" since for you, God does not exist. So you are quite on the mark ranting at religious folk. You would agree, however, that there are some absolutes. Don't play in the street is an absolute that all parents know too well.
Stay away from that plug! is another one.

---

Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. Even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil. --Alexander Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

You aren't an automaton are you?

I don't see the relevance. It's fairly common, in fact, for a third party to be held responsible for another's actions, even though nobody involved is an automaton.

As Faith points out, a Christ-influenced Christian won't carry out violence against you in the name of God - they will warn of what God will do to you as part of the positive ("its great")/negative ("it will be horrible")argument they put forth. In the case of such Christians is the distinction still nonsense and why? All will find out. Before you get a chance to present your case he will present his. It is not unreasonable to suppose that he will be in a position, through being able to call on every thought and word and deed you've ever had, to present you with a compelling case that you were wrong. Not a case reliant on his being able to force you to accept it - but simply one that is based on logic and justice. A case so compelling that you will turn and join the line of the millions of others whose mouths were silenced. A case so compelling that you will have none in return.From what I understand of the environment of Hell the inhabitants will not even have the comfort of being able to point the finger and blame God for their predicament. The finger will finally and everlastingly point to oneself. Everyone in Hell will agree with God that there is where they belongAn eternal, anguished "Duh!"

We've already established that this idea of "Christ-influenced Christian" is nonsense; it's just a rhetorical bolthole for you to duck into when the long, bloody history of forced Christian conversion is raised. Those people were "Christ-influenced", objectively; they just had a difference of opinion about what it was that Christ wanted to influence them to do. The threat is there, regardless. The method and the means of violence is irrelevant; the promise is "convert to Christianity or you'll be sorry." Exactly like every other religion that has expanded itself via conquest. And I'm pretty confident I can convince him otherwise.I'm a pretty confident guy. I've never found the idea of "Hell" particularly compelling, or particularly Biblical, for that matter. It's merely a rhetorical framework for you to phrase your violent threats in the most ominous terms possible. The Muslims have the exact same thing, of course.

But the History of Christianity says something different. Christians killing in the name of God has been the norm for Christianity.This message has been edited by jar, 02-18-2006 02:43 PM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Yes, but Jar you forget that the catholic church is of course not christian. And of course the vast majority of protestant churches are false as well. In fact, from one I've heard from many on here, there were no true christians until the rise of the modern fundamentalist movement in america.So because there were no true christians until the modern rise of american fundamentalism we can not blame christianity for any historical atrocities.

Yes, there are those that claim the Roman Catholic Church is not Christian. As I've said, that's just a cop out.But the Christian Church, particularly the Evangelicals and Fundamentalists today are the oppressors, oppressing those they consider different, for examples the homosexuals that want basic human rights.As a Christian, I have a duty to speak out when my Church, the Christian Faith is being used to harm others. Evil in the name of GOD is still evil and it is still the act of Christians.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

i was doing some searching on amazon for a paper i'm writing on genocide and mistakenly was directed to this list. it is, however, relevant here.amazon list on 'understanding christianity's violent tendencies"

Jar, I would have a question. Are those who don't follow Christ really 'Christians'? The Bible says that many who claim Christ will not be recognized by Him. 'Christians' who follow Christ aren't supposed to worship idols, yet look at the idols enhancing church buildings and cars.
Just because someone does something 'in the name of Christianity' doesn't mean it is... or they're Christian.
Getting back to the topic... people over the ages, including today, do many unchristian things against others.

Certainly they are Christains. For example, those that follow Dobson and Focus on the Family are Christians, yet they also behave as bigots and oppressors when they try to deny basic human rights to a segment of the population. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell are Christians even though they preach hate and intolerance. Jim Bakker is a Christian even though he stole from his parish. Fred Phelps is a Christian even though he preaches intolerance and says that those folk killed in Iraq are punishment from GOD.Granted they are disgusting people, but they are still Christians.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion