Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Would Christians Be As Violent As Muslims If Their Religion Was Threatened?

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
reply to post by NorEaster
 


The answer is no. We don't make holy wars anymore.
edit on 1-4-2013 by Trueman because: (no reason given)


I see.

So......you're not being sarcastic...right?




posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy
What is there, roughly 1.5 Billion Christians on the planet? How many of those are Christians who practice their religion and actually read the Bible? Christianity has been under attack for a longtime...


I'm only considering the 30 million hardcore Evangelicals that litter the heartland and southern extremities of the US. The 3rd world Catholic Christians are cannon fodder for the most part. They only know how to die by violence and terrible living conditions. It's the Xtians with the sincere faith in their own dominion over the rest of the planet and its contents that I'm thinking about in this concern. The ones who "slaughter with Love", and "kill the body to save the soul". Those Christians. The ones who put Bible verses on their DU munitions before locking and loading. The "Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammo" Christians.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 




Those Christians. The ones who put Bible verses on their DU munitions before locking and loading. The "Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammo" Christians.


Where are these people located?
Do you have more information about them, maybe links?
I don't want to be afraid to go to sleep tonight if some of these types are in my neighborhood.
edit on 1-4-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 



Though, as you know, I am a theist who is solidly in support of evolution, I don't know how you could take that position. If evolution were somehow proven to be impossible, a non-supernatural explanation for the state of reality unravels pretty quickly.

To anyone who said "I'm an atheist because there is no proof of deities", you'd just have to point them in the direction of the impossibility of life in the absence of both evolution and deities, and there's the evidence which kills the point.

Well stated, and well taken, as always adjensen. I claim atheism because it is as close as I can get to my beliefs at this point in my life. My problem is not with the existence of an entity that matches the description of the biblical god, or any other so-called god for that matter. My problem with the idea of gods, deities, and divinity, is just that. I don't believe an entity deserves reverence, worship, or the status of godhood just because said entity is more powerful than we are. Or that it created us.

Few people would bestow god status on an alien species, if it were found they were responsible for our existence. In my mind, there is no difference in that alien species, and what humans refer to as god. They are both alien from our vantage point. So I am an atheist because I strongly oppose the very idea of gods or goddesses. They deserve that title no more than the richest, most powerful men/women on earth do.

So for me, evolution or not makes no difference. I still refuse to bestow divinity and reverence on an alien being, supernatural or not. They are a sentient being. Nothing more. The amount of power they wield does not make them worthy of anything but fear, if that power is used as such. And respect if they are benevolent.

Hopefully, that helps clear up my stance a little. It isn't always easy to explain because different people define words differently. I would say I'm closer to agnostic, but that isn't quite right either. I'm in limbo, I guess.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by JesuitGarlic
reply to post by NorEaster
 



Not the usual Richard Dawkins drivel. Serious information that's crumbling the Christian credibility from one end of the globe to the other.


There is no kind of information that I can imagine that would destroy any credibility in Christianity...the truth of Christianity is already established beyond a shadow of a doubt for anyone who looks seriously at Biblical prophecy fulfillment, evidence for supernatural creation of the cosmos and life, global flood geology, scientific limits to Earth's age, historical evidence of Jesus' resurrection, archeological evidence of events from the OT and NT, exorcism deliverance, personal emotional connection to the Creator in prayer, ect. It is impossible to take down Christianity as a religion for anyone who knows the facts of history that back it up.

The world could turn completely against me and my religion and I would not care. By dying as a martyr, like a sheep to the slaughter I am actually rewarded with extra honors and distinction in Heaven....Christians should know that their kingdom is not of this world and that the best effect of evangelism is showing to the world how great your God is that you can endure such hardship and punishment yet remain unbroken by it. When the early Christians were targeted to be killed it only grew Christianity even faster.


Not going to even entertain the premise, then. Okay. Well, thanks for playing anyway.....sort of.




posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


No.

The Qu'ran calls for the death of all Kafirs.

The followers of Christianity may have been bloodthirsty in the past, killing in what they thought was the will of God, but there is no explicit scripture that requests the death of non-believers (except the Amalokites)

The Qu'ran wages a holy war, "true" Muslims, if they actually follow their scriptures, should want Islam to be the only religion on this planet, and should not stop until it is, if that means fighting or killing then they should do that if they truly follow the word of their scripture.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Malcher
 




Regarding number 1 - It matters if one were to believe the "information" was accurate and not just someones view point.

I think I see what you meant to convey now. It was your use of the word "allowed" that threw me off.




Regarding number 2 - I think you are being disingenuous. He used the term "peeling off", i think atheists would view that as having potential to peel off atheists. I know from research they would defend evolution theory and it would be difficult to some to see it the new information as non confrontational and just truth...providing information came to light that all the species who went extinct never evolved.

I'm not being disingenuous at all. You are equating all atheists with evolution. Not all atheists are evolutionists.
Of the atheists I personally know. None of them would be prone to violence if evidence disproved evolution tomorrow. That's not to say they would be easily convinced though.

"peeling off" simply denotes exposing something heretofore unseen. It has nothing to do with force. Though here again, I think I understand what you were initially getting at.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by NorEaster
 




Those Christians. The ones who put Bible verses on their DU munitions before locking and loading. The "Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammo" Christians.


Where are these people located?
Do you have more information about them, maybe links?
I don't want to be afraid to go to sleep tonight if some of these types are in my neighborhood.
edit on 1-4-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)


These Christians made the national news a handful of years ago in Iraq, and some officers got called on the carpet over it. It made a 60 Minutes segment. Here's a story about bible verses on gun scopes shipped to Iraq

Looks like the bombs for Jesus stories got scrubbed off the web. Not surprising.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
Hopefully, that helps clear up my stance a little. It isn't always easy to explain because different people define words differently. I would say I'm closer to agnostic, but that isn't quite right either. I'm in limbo, I guess.

Yes, thank you for the insight. I'd say that your position is pretty close to what mine was before I decided that some deity must exist, regardless of how one framed that concept -- as a force, a watchmaker or as a personal God. I leaned toward watchmaker initially, and though I'm now fairly well in the "personal God" camp, I'd say that there's still a lot of that Deist viewpoint in me.

I was watching an interview with Dawkins a while back when the extraterrestrial notion came up, and he was, surprisingly, okay with that, though he couldn't help but insert the evolution bit in there -- sure life on Earth could have been the result of aliens, but those aliens... well, THEY had to evolve from nothing on some distant world at some point. Just kind of moving the goalposts to a realm that couldn't have a resolution, lol.

 

OP: I guess I never answered your question. On a general basis, no, Christians are generally taught to be vocal and to stay true to Christ, but to be largely submissive to authority. I suppose that it would depend, in some measure, on what the nature of the conflict was -- if Christians were actively being suppressed, that's one thing, but if it was just a matter of a secular assault (as it were) on Christian beliefs, no, I don't see that turning violent (apart from the occasional nutjob, the type that exists in every subgroup of humans, not just Christian ones.)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Ok, so I don't really have to start worrying. These were a small group of people that were surreptitiously putting bible verses on military accessories and apparently munitions. I suppose when our secular government found out, there were problems with that.

There weren't any groups of Christians going around killing nonbelievers, anyway. Whew!
edit on 1-4-2013 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy06shake
reply to post by Malcher
 

"How about the first human male of any species? Where did it come from as only females reproduce so where did the male chromosome originate from? I cannot see how it came from a chicken egg. I wish a biologist can come and solve this."

Biologists have been trying to solve that question since its inception, my answer is phrased in the form of a yoke. LoL

I don't even think the Human race originated from this planet, so as to where Adam came from I would say look to the stars!
edit on 1-4-2013 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)


I understand and am well aware of panspermia, but as an atheist doesnt life need to be born as opposed to created? Only females give birth so where did the first male come from?



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Malcher
 


"I understand and am well aware of panspermia, but as an atheist doesnt life need to be born as opposed to created? Only females give birth so where did the first male come from?"

I could not tell you mate i'm not an atheist, or even a Christian in the true sense of the word. Maybe males were created by some as of yet unseen entity or quirk of biology. Who knows!

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I think (speaking as an anthropologist) that the reaction would be different forms of aggression in different cultures -- just as we see with the Muslim culture today.

I believe that in the less educated and more rural areas of the world where competition for numbers of the faithful also translates to political and economic power (such as these 2006 riots where Christians killed Muslims in Africa) they would certainly resort to beatings and other forms of violence against Muslim. These hatreds and practices have roots that are hundreds of years old and aren't easily wiped away.

I can certainly see this being used against atheists. It is a difficult stance even in this country (very few officials or people in position of authority admit to being atheists, and it's *almost* a "kiss of death" to a politician's career to admit to this.) Scientists frequently get labeled "atheist" (even though they may not be) whenever someone dislikes the result of an experiment.

In the more educated areas of the world (first world countries) you would see more verbal and written forms of aggression, but physical violence and aggression would be very small. There would still be a number of incidents (as we saw here in Texas after 9/11) but the majority of people would not be inclined to form up a lynch mob and start killing people.

At least, not with our present cultures. If our philosophy and cultural ideas changed (say, to the way it was in the 1700's and 1800's, when it was dangerous to NOT be Christian here in America), then I could see a lot of physical violence here in America against atheists by those religions that are founded on the Old Testament plus other writings (which would be Christian, Muslim, Mormon and a handful of others such as the Baha'i.) But under today's culture, no.
edit on 1-4-2013 by Byrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
Maybe you folks that frequent this forum can help settle an argument I'm having with a friend of mine. She says that if Atheists acquired information that could literally transform the way that people who live in the modern world perceive religion - and Christianity in particular - and began to succeed in peeling off impressive numbers of theists from (specifically) Christianity as a result of the powerful nature of that information, that there'd be no overtly aggressive reaction from any Christian groups against the Atheists whose information campaign had transformed the public debate. I say that there would be an overtly aggressive reaction, and that these Atheists would be in grave danger.

What do you folks think would be the reaction. I'm aware that there are about 30 million Evangelical Christians living in the US alone. Who knows how many other kinds of Christians there are, but as I see it, the violence potential primarily exists within the ranks of the 30 million or so Evangelicals. Hell, if even .01% decide that their god has approved of the elimination of these Atheists - preventing the damnation of millions as a direct result of their elimination - that's still 30,000 potential Christian jihadists from this one society alone.

Now, keep in mind that what I'm talking about is a real game changer, as far as what these Atheists possess. Not the usual Richard Dawkins drivel. Serious information that's crumbling the Christian credibility from one end of the globe to the other.

I got that piece of information..

Religion is a symptom of an underlying mental disorder.

There's the information.

Now, I don't think christians will be violent if you try to remove their religion from society and/or by labeling them as mentally disordered. I think that the reason we've seen religious extremism on the muslim side is because of the oil (the economics in those regions) and the lack of modern standards. Some people will say they say lack modern standards because of their religion, but I say they lack it because of war and because of tradition. The oil has pushed them into relying on it too much, just like how fishing communities rely on fishing too much. And because other nations want oil, it has increased the tensions and the possibility for coercion through war.

I think if our countyr was thrown back 200 years for a while and then we suddenly tried to be modern again we might see more of the religious extremism from all factions.

I guess what I'm saying is that religious extremism is more of a byproduct of other things in this world. The flag or religion that someone bares is not the reason, it's just along for the ride.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   
However, have a look at this:

Just a glimpe into the christian zionism.

Christians are extreme in a lesser way. They don't do suicide bombings. They simply give their support to another country based on religious reasons (their bible).

Since religion is not rationale, this is actually a scary thing.

I was a fundamentalist christian when I was growing up. I also believed that somehow the end times would happen in the middle east. I watched TBN. I bought this stuff.

There're many peopel in Israel who also buy into this and are in fact anti-muslim. But it's easier to understand since war and terrorism in that region is so constant. The constant rain of rockets from palestinian terrorists just adds fuel, just as the suicide bombings have.

Of course, islamist extremism is worse. But this doesn't make christian zionism any more respectable. Irrational actions by anybody should always be challenged, here or anywhere else.

As I stated in my last post, I don't think you'll see the sort of extremism you see in hte middle east simply because we're living in a first world country that's more diverse. Keep in mind that Islam is actually a very big religion and shared by some 21% of the worlds population. Most of those followers are not extremists. I believe if it were not for the conditions in the middle east - irregardless of religious faith - that we would not see the terrorism we're seeing now.
edit on 1-4-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:19 PM
link   
In my opinion ,small as it may be:
If Christianity was threatened by Muslim then yes there would be war.
but
If Christianity was confronted by extra terrestial proof of 'no Jesus/God' then no.
Christianity would change its beliefs to align itself with the 'new proof' while holding on to religion overall. But there would be a percentage that would 'drop out' of religion because of this new proof.

Unfortunately many Muslims would lash out at this new proof and those that brought it along with anyone that accepts this new proof. I know my opinion of the Muslim zelots is not good but that's how I feel.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   
Historically, the answer is yes.
Probably more so, given the fact they signed off on the Inquisition and the 'Holy wars.'

M.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Would Christians Be as Violent as Muslims If Their Religion was Threatened?

How are Christians threatening to take Islam away from Muslims?
If anything, the non-Islamic nations bend over backwards and kiss butt
with so called muslim nations in order not to 'offend' them.

Last I saw, it was the Muslim nations that were taking away the rights of
non-muslims to worship as they see fit.

No rosaries or bibles to be taken into Saudi Arabia.
ATS Thread - Iranian Christian Pastor Death Penalty for not converting to Islam
etc etc

And no .. Christians aren't calling for muslims to be beheaded because they can't
have their rosaries or bibles or prayer group meetings in 'Islamic' countries ....
edit on 4/1/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 

a christian who truly follows the example set by christ wouldn't become violent over such things. humans were given free will, and although it would sadden me, i would let them believe what they wished as long as it didn't harm others.

this is my view on morality, do as little harm as possible and work to lessen the suffering of others.



posted on Apr, 1 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Moshpet
Historically, the answer is yes.
Probably more so, given the fact they signed off on the Inquisition and the 'Holy wars.'

M.


I guess this means that South Sea Islanders still eat missionaries and explorers.
Egypt still has a pharaoh too?

I believe the OP was speaking to current events, not the Crusades.






top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join