The Barbarity of Christianity (as compared to Islam)

Yes, it is religion based in that the participants may have a religious affiliation but it is a political struggle to gain POWER, control.Shia and Sunni are not killing each other over their beliefs, but rather their political membership. It is NOT an attempt to convert religious beliefs but rather to aquire power or keep from losing power. Not really Tal. The issue of the Kurd, Sunni and Shia is not new. If you look at history, you will find that the issue has been discussed at least since the late 1800s.Shia, Sunni and Kurd are all Islamic. The control of resources and political power though has historically been held by only one of the three factions. It is that issue, access to resources and power, not religion, that leads to the violence.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'd say that that killings that are now being done in the name of Islam are related to Islam in exactly the way that Hitler's genocide was related to Christianity.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

True. True. True. But there are also Christians who hold to the same mode of behavior. In the US, the threat is usually more subtle than violence, but we still see the good Christians lining up shouting that God Hates Fags and bombing abortion clinics. Not all that long ago good US Christians were bombing churches and hanging folk.Religion is a powerful tool to sway the masses, particularly ignorant masses.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

But in the case of burning folk at the stake to save their souls or because the people were thought to be witches, the proximate cause was Christianity.

---

I'll have to grant that if you really think you'll save a soul by burning its owner, religion would have to qualify a dominant cause. I wonder, though, if the original idea of burning people came from the Bible, from the previously existing pagan culture of Europe in some ways only got a thin veneer of Christianity and Roman laws.And was it the Bible that dictated that single women might witches? Or sexism that was just native to that society?

quote:

---

The continued expulsion of Jews throughout Europe had as its proximate cause Christianity. The fact that we are speaking of Jewish Expulsion (and we should also be including other pogroms such as special taxation and ghettos) makes those events religiously driven. The people may also have been xenophobic in general and there were other groups who were also targeted (Romany being one example) but the "Jewish Question" was based on Christian dogma.

---

Did the instruction to oppress Jews come directly from the New Testament, or was it a convenient interpretation of the New Testament by religious authorities in Europe? It makes a difference because any interpretation by the latter may be colored by the local culture, of which religion is a part but not the whole.

quote:

---

Complicated. Since the treatment and acceptance of individual freedoms varies greatly among Islamic Nations that is very hard to answer. Indonesia is far different than Saudi Arabia.

---

Yes. This is because religion doctrine quickly becomes interpreted by different cultural groups. The original Islamic cultural hearth of Saudi Arabia had a very different starting culture than the Pacific Rim culture of Indonesia when Islam was introduced. While all references to previous pagan cultures were either Islamized or effaced by Mohammed during his time, when Islam arrived in Indonesia later a sort of coexistance between pagan tradition and Islam was struck out. While the area is threatened by stronger interpretations of Islam, such as Wahabism from the Gulf States, some of the old pagan shrines are still visited today.This sort of variation of behavior even in one religious system, I think, strengthens my argument, which basically is, "it's complicated".

quote:

---

That too makes some assumptions I believe unwarranted. For example, the idea of a modern day Christian Nation. I am not at all sure that other than the Vatican, there is a Modern Day Christian Nation.

---

I knew that would be mentioned. You are technically correct. The United States, for example, is a nation with numerous different religious persuasions, including the non-religious, and has a secular government. But someone from a very different background visiting here, say India or Saudi Arabia, would still probably consider this to be a Christian nation. For the sake of simplicity, I consider most of the west to be "Christian" even though we have secular governments and tolerate numerous different belief systems, because it is the Christian tradition that has had the greatest influence on us historically.Edited by gene90, : Corrected some of my atrociously bad typing.

quote:

---

True. But there are also Christians who hold to the same mode of behavior. In the US, the threat is usually more subtle than violence, but we still see the good Christians lining up shouting that God Hates Fags and bombing abortion clinics. Not all that long ago good US Christians were bombing churches and hanging folk.

---

Christian violence still exists in the US, and if you want more examples you can find them in the Third World, where the majority of belief systems tend to be at their most violent.However, it seems to be Islamic violence and terrorism that is the greatest danger at this time. I think over time Western ideas of personal freedom will filter into the Islamic countries and the violent parts of the Quran will be reinterpreted just as parts of the Bible are no longer considered binding by Christians (the New Covenant) or by Jews (the Oral Law).

When you engage in an activity knowing that innocent people are going to be killed, how do you escape moral culpability when those people are killed?

---

This world can take my money and time/ But it sure can't take my soul. -- Joe Ely

May I ask, based on what?I'm an Intelligence Analyst on my second tour in Iraq, both of which I've been in Baghdad, the center of gravity for violence.

---

News Media: Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory 1 negative report at a time.

quote:

---

When you engage in an activity knowing that innocent people are going to be killed, how do you escape moral culpability when those people are killed?

---

War is not the only activity in which people die as a result of our actions. My old hydrogeology textbook cited a study that found that 1/20,000 people will contract cancer caused by drinking chlorinated water over their lifetimes. (I can cite it if you'd like, but don't have it with me at the moment.)Does that mean that water utilities are culpable for the deaths from those cancers?The question is whether the number of people that die outweighs potential good from acting, or the potential evil that would result from inaction.

I think a very important point IS that the situation is complicated.Religion, IMHO, whether Christianity or Islam or Judaism or Hinduism or whatever flavor, is most often simply a tool. Almost always the question boils down to "Who controls certain resources and power." I would disagree there.IMHO the greatest danger is Ignorance, just plain Ignorance. Historically, Islam has been as accepting of other cultures, perhaps even more than Christianity, than any other Theocratic Political movement.When Christian Spain expelled the Jews, it was a Muslim Caliph that welcomed them and even sent ships to transport them away from Spain. It was the Islamic world that maintained knowledge and education during the period of the Christian Dark Ages.Even under the Islamic Caliphate in Spain, Christian Monasteries continued to thrive, and it was in a large part, those monks and nuns that returned to more northern Europe from those monasteries bring back tales of indoor plumbing and clean streets and hospitals and schools that lead to the great awakening that followed the Dark Ages.Islam today is threatened (and the rest of the world as well) by virulent strains of Fundamentalism. It is that, Fundamentalism, that is the issue. The facts are that right now Fundamentalism does not hold strong political control in much of the west. However, that does not mean that we are free from the threat of Fundamentalism any more than Islam was.Like the Islamic world, which at one time was the height of tolerance, education and enlightenment, we face the threat of a rise in Fundamentalism. Should we see a continued increase in what I call the Christian Cult of Ignorance, we too could rapidly descend to a state of sectarian warfare and intolerance.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Based on statements I've heard different scholars of religion make. Sorry, don't have time right now to dig them out, have to get back to you on that.I suppose you think I'm going to be impressed by your credentials. I am, as far as Intelligence goes. And, I'm also grateful for the service you provide to our country. I really am. However, that doesn't make you any more an expert on comparative religions than I am.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

The key to your question is knowing.Let me tell you about an incident at one of our snap VCPs (Vehicle Control Point) that happened recently (and happens far too often). A vehicle approached the VCP, and did not stop when flagged to slow down by the Paratrooper. The Paratrooper then used his escalation of force procedures. The EOF went to 2 warning shots ,the vehicle still did not stop, and then the Paratrooper fired several rounds at the driver. The vehicle stopped. Inside was a man, who was dead from multiple bullet wounds. Behind him in the backseat, was a little girl, who also died from multiplel bullet wounds. The badguys know how to test our forces, and they do so while putting innocent people in harms way, knowing they will probably be killed. I don't hold the soldier who fired the shots responsible for her death, I hold the person that put her in the car responsible.The key point is, we don't target civlians, and we don't go on raids where we know we are going to kill X number of innocent people. It just happens. That is morally unequivocal to someone who drives a car into a crowd of people shopping for dinner, or someone who puts children into cars that are testing our TTPs (tactics, techniques, and procedures).

---

News Media: Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory 1 negative report at a time.

quote:

---

IMHO the greatest danger is Ignorance, just plain Ignorance.

---

Maybe. No belief system or culture has a monopoly on that.

quote:

---

Islam today is threatened (and the rest of the world as well) by virulent strains of Fundamentalism. It is that, Fundamentalism, that is the issue. The facts are that right now Fundamentalism does not hold strong political control in much of the west. However, that does not mean that we are free from the threat of Fundamentalism any more than Islam was.

​

Like the Islamic world, which at one time was the height of tolerance, education and enlightenment, we face the threat of a rise in Fundamentalism. Should we see a continued increase in what I call the Christian Cult of Ignorance, we too could rapidly descend to a state of sectarian warfare and intolerance.

---

I cannot dispute that.But I would say that Islamic Fundamentalism is the proximal threat, and that Christian Fundamentalism is currently held in check by our secular traditions. I hope traditions of religious freedom and secular government will triumph over both, but right now Islamic Fundamentalism holds sway in more parts of the world than Christian Fundamentalism does.

I'm just telling you that so you know that I am in the thick of it, and I see every report in Baghdad on a daily basis regarding this topic. That's all. It doesn't make me an expert in comparative religions, but the motives behind the murders and who is carrying them out, that I do know. And yes, some murders are carried out by people with criminal motivation (money), most by people with religious motivation (I'm a Sunni so I'm going to kill you Shia since you killed my Sunni buddy), and ALL of them are controlled/guided/commanded by transidealogues (Islam will wipe Israel off the map, the West is bad, type guys. These are upper tier personalites whose influence spreads across countries).So, in short, the criminally movitated are still paid by the religeously motivated.

---

News Media: Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory 1 negative report at a time.

And nothing I have said has suggested that I think Islamic fundamentalism is not a threat. I fully recognize that it is. My question in this thread is not directed to exonerating, but to comparing.However, one thing does strike me. In that region, it would seem that in a given case, it might be difficult to differentiate a political motive from a religious one, particularly where the thug is dead. I'd guess that in many cases, it's probably some combination of both. Of course, it also seems likely that they same could be said for much of the violence in the past that has been committed in the name of Christianity.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin FranklinWe see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

quote:

---

I don't hold the soldier who fired the shots responsible for her death, I hold the person that put her in the car responsible.

---

Neither do I. As far as I know, this guy joined pre-9/11 (or shortly afterwards during Bush's misinformation campaign) and didn't realize that someone with no good reason would put him in a situation where he would have to kill innocent people.I am talking about the political and military leaders who, knowing that innocent people would be killed, planned and implemented the invasion to begin with and continue with the war.-

quote:

---

The key point is, we don't target civlians, and we don't go on raids where we know we are going to kill X number of innocent people. It just happens.

---

Sure. And drunk drivers don't intentionally hit other people, and some of them even conscientiously take the less busy streets to reduce the risk of killing anyone.Frankly, though, I don't understand why the morality of a drunk driver is something we should be aspiring to.

---

This world can take my money and time/ But it sure can't take my soul. -- Joe Ely