Is The World Getting Better Or Worse?

And they are christians.

Sorry Faith but I doubt the Penobscots would agree with you.

Why do they have to have any religion at all? The government was responsible for the attacks on the Indians. Most of what was done could not have been done in the true Spirit of Christianity even if they call themselves Christians which most Americans have over the years. Those truly inspired by Christ don't do such things. Or if they get caught up in such sins they will eventually repent and that will show that they are Christians.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Both Protestants and Roman Catholics persecuted the Jews. And Protestants massacred Roman Catholics and banished them in Ethnic Cleansing several times.

You are just spouting your own snarky wishfulness. Prove it.

In England Protestantism was made the State Religion and Roman Catholics were not allowed to hold office and their properties were confiscated.The Penobscots were totally massacred by Protestants.Protestants and Roman Catholics bother persecuted the Native Americans, forced the peoples off their lands, banned their languages, dress, customs and religions.Come on Faith. Reality wins.

You have got to know the evidence is all throughout history. Showing you the evidence will be easy. Not by me. I'm too lazy. I've been there before, so, yes I know.But, I suspect you also know.[snark]
Is the truth so tenuous in your world? Just how loose are those screws?
[/snark]

Some time ago you put up as evidence a tome which was the work of Catholic apologists to "prove" the claim that the Protestants were as bad as the Catholics. I skimmed it. I finally wrote a post about it which you never answered. It mentions the Anabaptists which I know were persecuted by the early Protestants. Really nothing else. This is all Catholic counter-Reformation propaganda they've been engaged in ever since that movement dethroned them. Protestants aren't perfect but this attempt to equate them with the murdering papists is lying disinformation.I speak as someone, by the way, who thought I was going to become a Catholic when I went on my religious reading fest. I didn't just inherit my Protestantism I read my way to it.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You are still racist idiot.

Best you can do eh?The story of the first Thanksgiving shared between the Pilgrims and the Massasoit Indians, or was that the name of their chief, I forget, anyway, it was very inspiring. No impulse on the part of the Protestants to hurt the natives at all. The natives taught them about many foods, they made berry pies, they brought five deer they'd shot and dressed. They played games together. A lovely occasion. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Maybe you should read more of the history of the Plymouth and Massachusetts colonies.Massasoit's son, Metacomet, would disagree with your ignorant beliefs.Genocide of indigenous peoples - WikipediaEdited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

I'm sorry, I don't have the motivation or the eyesight to read modern revisionist history. There are plenty of Christianity-haters who love that kind of stuff and disagree with me, so what? And I note that you don't give even a hint of what it says. Ho hum.IIRC The Thanksgiving account is in the writing of Bradford? Governor of one of the first settlements, though I got it from some website or other. Here's an old blog post I wrote in which I copy out most of the article I mention. It's hard for me to read my own stuff any more so I'm just posting it without knowing what's in it except for my vague recollection that the writer intended to rescue the early history from the revisionists.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I followed your link and read four paragraphs. They are about WARS between American colonists and the natives, sometimes initiated by the natives. This has absolutely nothing to do with the topic of the specifically religious murders of heretics, nothing at all. You are actually trying to put these things in that category? That is crazy. In fact religion isn't even mentioned in these stories. Besides if you are trying to make Protestants the bad guys please note that the French were also involved in some of these stories. Were they Protestants?AND BESIDES, THE CATHOLIC INQUISITION WAS OFFICIAL, CONVENED BY THE LEADERSHIP OF THE RC CHURCH, THE PAPACY ETC. IT WAS SPECIFICALLY A SUPPOSED DEFENSE OF CATHOLICISM ITSELF. SINCE PROTESTANTISM DOESN'T HAVE SUCH AN OFFICIAL LEADERSHIP THE COMPARISON FALLS APART ON THAT SCORE ALONE. BUT THE PERSECUTIONS OF THE ANABAPTISTS *WERE* SPECIFICALLY PROTESTANT SO I'LL ACCEPT THAT COMPARISON UP TO A POINT: But there was absolutely nothing in Protestantism like "the Office of the Inquisition" of the RCC, which is still in existence and ready to go back to its dirty business whenever it becomes possible. The RCC also retains its judgments of the Council of Trent, a long list of curses (anathemas) against the doctrines of Protestantism, which would be the charges used to inaugurate an Inquisition against Protestants when possible. The only other specifically Protestant persecution I can think of was the death penalty against the nineteen witches in New England, although it was soon repented of.Sorry, you are comparing apples and oranges. Your examples are nothing at all like the RCC Inquisition or the Crusades. There is no religious motive given in these examples, it is just the usual horrendous warring mess between human beings that has occurred throughout history, over land, over cultural identity, whatever.Stop calling me ignorant for knowing the obvious differences you ignorant people.lEdited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Of course. The Catholics were always plotting to kill the Protestant monarch or blow up Parliament and take the country back from Protestantism to Catholicism. Bloody Mary had killed Protestants just for being Protestants. Elizabeth on the other hand had Catholics put to death for plotting to kill her or committing crimes against the state. (I forget where I heard or read that both Elizabeth I and James I had something like dozens of the equivalent of armed Secret Service men actually sleeping in their bed with them because of all the Catholic plots against them.)Holding office is another way to commit insurrection, so forbidding that is a good idea. And the Catholics would do that to the Protestants in the same situation. \\I seriously doubt it. Like Theodorix you must be calling English settlers Protestants. But there was no religious war against the Penobscots to compare with the Inquisition. Well that covers some pretty complicated history that can't be reduced the way you are doing it, and again you are merely talking about individuals as settlers not as members of any religion and certainly not as acting on behalf of their religion. There was nothing in Protestantism to compare with the persecutions by the RCC.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

The old "Billy did it!" defense.Faith, the fact that Roman Catholics were defending Christianity through violence does not absolve Protestants for their genocides and ethnic cleansing.Faith, the fact that the Protestants were not being directed by some single authority does not absolve them for their genocides and ethnic cleansing.