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

Originally posted by celticdog
reply to post by NorEaster

 

If by game changer you mean the bible is not the word of god. Or the big bang theory is true sort of thing. My guess would be their faith would be shattered some would commit suicide. A small number would try and destroy the information.I think most christians are christian in name and may cause them to stop in their tracks and make them get off the fence. It may cause them to get angry not at atheist but at the church for being lied too. Now christians in the third world or least educated places maybe be a whole different matter.

Except for the FACT that origins of the Big Bang theory was the sole idea of a Catholic priest.

Source

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by Fromabove

 

Best you can come up with? lol

Ok Muslims are 4.8% of our populace...hardly enough to make us become a Muslim nation and only 40% of them want Sharia law so that is about 2.1%.

The Scots will not leave, It is more to do with more local power and polls suggest only 26% of Scots want out....In fact it is funny the English would vote for scotland leaving the UK with 29%.

Uk crumbling? the world is in economic meltdown at the moment so the same could be said for any country.

So answer why Christian numbers are shrinking instead of deflecting my facts.

edit on 1-4-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

Muslims, not like Christians, are world conquering religious people. The want the UK, and if they take it from you, you will not speak against them as you do Christians, because doing so would mean they would have to kill you.

Christians are doing just fine. Organized religion is what your talking about, but Christianity is moving out of that scene to a more simpler form called home or house churches. All your hopes are dashed, but please, feel free to take solace in your dreams and hopes for a Christian free world.

Originally posted by Elvis Hendrix
I cant think of a more violent religion than christianity. Just look at the chaos it has caused right now and down through the ages.

Really ? Seriously ? You can't think of one. Let me help you.

1. Islam
2. Atheism
3. Communism

Hows that, there's three of the top contenders for the title and position of violent religions.

Ok, ok... I know you're thinking, why did I include Atheism and Communism. Each religion has to be based on a doctrine of behavior and faith. A belief that it is the only true way for humans to live. A religion does not need to have a god to worship, just a doctrine and a belief system. Are you a member of one of these three groups ? Just asking.

Originally posted by NorEaster
FoxNews has a book of martyrs? That's just too wonderful to be true!

:shk: Seriously dude ... stop talking and save yourself the embarrassment.

Originally posted by adjensen
Foxe's Book of Martyrs is a Protestant book from the Reformation that lists Christian martyrs from Christ to the author's present time (conveniently, of course, including Protestants killed by Catholics, but not Catholics killed by Protestants, as martyrs.)

Yep ... how soon they forget that a whole lotta' Catholics were martyred ... by protestants.

List of Catholic Martyrs during the English 'Reformation'
Lists of Catholic Martyrs of the Early Modern Era

etc etc etc

reply to post by NorEaster


I'm really not sure what kind of information that would be. Anything short of divine revelation (ha!) is pretty easy to deny. We haven't seen Christians up in arms about the Gnostic Gospels and similar jokes. I don't think science is going to make any discoveries that Christians couldn't accommodate (life on other planets is the most significant event that I can think of, and I don't think that would lead to violence.)
Unless they feel threatened (not in their religion, but in their persons–i.e. if they believe they are going to be seriously persecuted) I really don't think most Christians would resort to violence. Instead, they'd all get together to try to accommodate their understanding of Scripture with whatever else has come up. It's happened a couple of times in history, usually because the people reading the Bible had a very narrow perspective on things. Even the Bible itself discusses this in the New Testament.

Ateism is no state religion, but, if someone wants to force you to take other religion than yours is, that is the problem

Originally posted by dragnik
Ateism is no state relligion, but, if someone wants to force you to take other religion than yours is, that is the problem

edit on 4/2/2013 by dragnik because: edit

edit on 4/2/2013 by dragnik because: edit

Or, if the religion of the State, Atheism wants to force you to abandon God for their belief system, that also would be a problem.

reply to post by BrokenCircles


Religion is not the cause of people acting like douches. It is the people who practice who are douches. No religion says be a douche.

Thank you for reading.

If science were to discover life, even intelligent life on other planets, it would only confirm what the Bible says about the universe.

Genesis 2:1 (NKJV)

" Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished."

The word host used here literally means "mass of persons"

Revelation 12:12

" Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.”

The word " heavens " and " them " are plural. The scripture talks of those who live in " them." The Earth is mentioned as a specific place.

The Fact that life may well be out there is of no surprise to the Christian, or to the Jews.


But, to stay on topic, the answer is still no, Christians would not be violent. Muslims would be.

Originally posted by Fromabove

Originally posted by dragnik
Ateism is no state relligion, but, if someone wants to force you to take other religion than yours is, that is the problem

edit on 4/2/2013 by dragnik because: edit

edit on 4/2/2013 by dragnik because: edit

Or, if the religion of the State, Atheism wants to force you to abandon God for their belief system, that also would be a problem.

Personal right not to provide any rites?

reply to post by NorEaster


well there was the crusades so yes it is possible likely in this day and age no probably not but the muslims are not being threatened they in the most fanatical branches of their sects they are taught to hate everyone else.

Anything that asked you to sacrifice part of your pay check will sooner or later ask you to sacrifice your life.
Our Father Can Whoop Your Father Who Art In Heaven
God The Priest The Rabbi The Imam Never Disagree ..Ever!!
Dont Worry About Your Comfort And Well Being In This Life For Things Really Rocks In The After Life..Ah Got 99 Virgins But You Ain't One.

I was refraining from posting to this thread because it is clearly drawing evil into it in attacking Christianity when in fact the only historical evidence presented is of those Christians who thought they knew what being a Christian really is..

So to answer a Faith ridiculing thread that has an agenda (why would atheists care if they don't believe?) let me explain what Faith is.

Faith is not acting on behalf of God, Faith is trusting in God to act on your behalf. (Vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord) So the basic premise that all Christianity is prone to violent action is flawed by what these Christians by name (not by Faith) had given the impression of being, extremist zealots.

Sorry, my Faith is stand-alone (with God), is user friendly (I feel peaceful and content until I interact with people who refuse to adjust their pre-programmed mindset) , and has more truth and justice within it than any inferiority complex displayed by those who either aren't willing to take that leap of Faith, or are so hopelessly lost God Himself gives them delusions so they might believe the lies.

It costs me nothing to believe, in fact the rewards are overwhelming. It costs a person their very soul to not believe and that is a tough pill to swallow for many since they see themselves as being perfect rather than a mold to perfection.

Oh wait, now comes the snipes of self-righteousness (I've been down this road before) so perhaps a clarification on righteous indignation and righteous conviction is in order.

Righteous indignation is what the violent Christians display, righteous conviction is having Faith in God and knowing this day would inevitably come..

Too many have trusted interpretation rather than trusting God. The Nicolaitons

When Jesus walked among men, He taught His disciples to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, whom He denounced as hypocrites. With them, He classed the chief priests and the temple officials, together with teachers in the synagogues. He declared that they had so corrupted the truth of God with the doctrines of men (the same sin as the Nicolaitans) that the truth, as originally given, was no longer with them. That which these blind leaders of the blind were giving forth as truth was making their converts more the children of hell than they were. The deeds of these false teachers are in the second chapter of Revelation. It states "To the angel of the church of Ephesus write, 'These things says He who holds the seven stars in His right hand, who walks in the midst of the seven golden lampstands . . . But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." (Revelation 2:1, 6)

source: Nicolaitans

... just because the churches are impotent doesn't mean the Faith is.

You asked "if their Religion was threatened?"
Since when hasn't it been threatened?

Christ was murdered. Only one apostle died of natural causes. How many churches are there?

So to understand a Christian heart, lose the stereo-typing. and seek the answers within yourself.

It IS there for ALL but won't manifest until you accept truth as your guide rather than the recorded flavor of history we have all been fed.

But since you asked, you aren't grasping the power of the Saints. Now also understand what it takes to abandon the very laws of God in bringing justice to an unjust world... bringing good out of an evil world.

Why no man knows the hour? It falls upon the Saints to take that final step and if you saw truth outside the box of lies, you wouldn't be so judgmental towards God by blaming Him for the actions of men.

But then what do I know, I believe in God and feel led.

Nothing personal, I was lost once too...

Originally posted by StalkerSolent
reply to post by NorEaster

 

We haven't seen Christians up in arms about the Gnostic Gospels and similar jokes.

Interestingly enough, the Gnostics were the original writers of the gospels, and were killed off by the Literalists during the first few centuries of Christianity. When the Romans decided to officially get behind the Literalist Christian movement, the Gnostics were finally eradicated and their gospels were hidden until the 20th century. The only Gnostic gospel that survived was The Gospel of John, but they did get the Book of Revelations and several of Paul's letters in, but only after being heavily edited.

Some suggest that the last of the Gnostic scholars were conscripted as skilled editors for the 50 bibles project that Constantine ordered, and that the reason that the Christian bible is so littered with obvious contradiction is because the Gnostics hid those contradictions within the verses as a clue that they were working for the Roman Literalists under duress. When you realize that most Roman middle managers were barely literate, this explanation for why the bible is so poorly constructed becomes pretty compelling. This explanation is also offered for why the Book of Revelations is so unusual and clearly separate from the rest of the book. That it was written as a cryptic account of what these Gnostic Christians believed to be the hijacking of their mystery religion by the Roman Empire. This would mean that the verses about the 666 Beast (Man worshiped as God) are referring to the emergence of Jesus as divine within the evolution of the religion. That the deification of Jesus, in their own interpretation of what was happening, was an abomination. That'd be ironic.

Pretty fascinating stuff.

reply to post by ballymoney50


Good. Appreciate your thoughts.

My view is general. The people who are dissatisfied with their material condition are more likely to seek glory via religion. You can research about suicide bombers etc.

Originally posted by NorEaster
Pretty fascinating stuff.

... and absolute fiction, for which there is zero evidence, and plenty of contradictory proofs.

Nor Easter, great thread. s/f

Here's a little clip of at least one guy who would, and has preached it to others:
This vid is entitled Righteous Violence I:

Yep! They would.....
I totally know what you're talking about - the 'rabid' Christians. Yes, they ARE violent. What about the guy who shot the doctor IN CHURCH?
You've already mentioned Jesus Camp. Those poor kids And how many stories have we heard of kids being beaten to within an inch of their lives by Evangelical parents? How about the mega churches who want a war and 'to take out Iran' to bring on Armageddon?

And THIS nut job....just watch it! She's ready to kill her own kids! Talk about rabid. Holy cow!!



Anyone who says these types would NOT be violent - well, they're mistaken.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by NorEaster
Pretty fascinating stuff.

... and absolute fiction, for which there is zero evidence, and plenty of contradictory proofs.

proof?

I suppose you know where a thought comes from? Goes to? Inspiration?

I have all the evidence I need and found it within. The fact you come up empty should tell you something.

This lady would answer your OP, I bet!


With "yes" - she even threatens the Mexican kid with having his family killed.

And hits the cameraman several times and throws dirt on him, while he's calmly saying, "don't touch me."
Nutjob. They're always right on the verge of hysteria, and it wouldn't take much for them to go ballistic.

Originally posted by wolfbitch
*the following may be yoinking the discussion in another direction, but that is not done with ill intent*
*also, there are no citations of proof here because it's philosophical meandering*

For the record, the proofs you want are in various anthropological studies.

We all form ourselves into "tribes": We pick a sports team to follow and love to talk about it with others who follow that same team; we gather together with those who share similar political and/or social views with us; we have clubs that we belong to along with others who share the goals of that club... and we group ourselves by a religion or by a refusal of religion. (Yeah, each of us winds up as a member of a large number of tribes, because that's complexity for ya.)

Nicely put, and yes, what's interesting in modern times (or as a society becomes more "modernized" is that the number of "tribes" (to use your terminology) that one belongs to increases. In other words, we have more options than when our world was mainly constrained by the village and the local ruler.

At one time, sticking up for your tribe meant acting in ways that guaranteed the survival and success of your tribe. If your tribe succeeded and survived, your offspring would also survive as would your genetic heritage. ...(snippage occurs)...If I am part of a certain religious "tribe", for example, and feel that another religious "tribe" is threatening my tribe, I will likely get angry and yell a lot, very much like the threat displays put on by gorillas. The other tribe will do the same.

Will I become violent? If our group/tribal defense instinct is still operable, on a very subconscious level, then yes, the possibility of violence exists, if the threat displays don't work. However, this is where the modern human has it all over her ancient ancestors: Threat displays usually do work. So me and my opposing religionist will screech at each other, write massive screeds in hot-blooded blogs, hang up signs, recruit like-minded members of the tribe to do the same, and so on.

Very very true.

The big question isn't "Will X become violent if Y happens."

What I want to know is, "What will it take to push X beyond the threat display and into open aggression?"

I think the answer is probably the perceived size and immediacy of the threat. In other words, if the threat (by atheism, to return to the original question) is seen as something that would destroy the culture and the current lifestyle, the action will become more extreme than if the threat is seen as inconveniencing but controllable.

So let's take a look at other countries. An atheist ranting against religion on a street corner in Japan is perceived as rude (people would walk by -- the country is largely atheist and public displays are considered rude.) Their belief system is very robust and not threatened by other philosophies. In America, such a rant is likely to get a group of fairly angry citizens shouting back at him (unless it's on a college campus, where you may get the atheists and freethinkers shouting at the Christians who are shouting at them while the Muslims and the Buddhists and the Baha'i and Jews and Hindus stroll on past. In general it's the ones who feel that the atheist is going to destroy their religion who are feeling threatened and react.

An atheist on the street corner in a very fundamentalist Christian nation (some of the African nations) or a fundamentalist Muslim nation or a fundamentalist Hindu area or a fundamentalist Buddhist area is very likely to be harmed violently. Here the atheist is seen as tearing down their entire social structure and everything they know and have ever learned about.