1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is Christianity that bad?

Discussion in 'General Debates' started by PopeADope, Dec 22, 2019.

  1. PopeADope

    PopeADope Habemus papam

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    14,627
    Ratings:
    +5,931
    Religion:
    Amish Taliban
    True many Christians do a lot of damage, but atheist communists killed more people in the 20th century than Christians did. That doesn't make atheists bad does it?

    Is there anything intrinsically wrong with Christianity?
    Atheism?
    Islam?
    Judaism?
     
  2. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    18,498
    Ratings:
    +13,407
    Religion:
    None
    Through recorded history religion had killed far more than any other un-natural cause.

    And are you counting Hiller, Stalin (and arguably Pol Pot) as atheist because that is not so.
    Both Stalin and Hitler were christian until their deaths
    Pol Pot was Buddhist, educated by catholics.

    Religion that indoctrinates children from birth is wrong
    Religion that kills in the name of religion (or its gods) is wrong
    Religion that bars progress and lives in deliberate ignorance is wrong

    There are more but i can't be bothered considering you purloined my post from another thread and forced this on me

    Is Atheism wrong? Is the disbileaf in gods when no evidence exists for gods wrong? Is not collecting stamps wrong, is not playing football wrong?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  3. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium सच्चिदानन्द
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    7,686
    Ratings:
    +9,355
    Religion:
    Advaitist Hindu
    She never criticized Christianity. She said Christians. It's the people, their interpretations of an ideology, and the behaviors based on those interpretations, not the ideology itself.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium सच्चिदानन्द
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    7,686
    Ratings:
    +9,355
    Religion:
    Advaitist Hindu
    Perhaps I spoke too soon.

    But sticking to my point above,

    It's what people do in the name of religion that indoctrinates children from birth that is wrong
    It's what people do in the name of religion that kills in the name of religion (or its gods) that is wrong
    It's what people do in the name of religion that bars progress and lives in deliberate ignorance that is wrong
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  5. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    24,987
    Ratings:
    +9,518
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    Depends on what damage is done in the name of religion and not something else unrelated to any religion.
     
  6. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    18,498
    Ratings:
    +13,407
    Religion:
    None
    All true, but it because of religion that they do it
     
  7. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium सच्चिदानन्द
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    7,686
    Ratings:
    +9,355
    Religion:
    Advaitist Hindu
    Inasmuch as it's because of pencils that people make writing errors.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  8. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    1,027
    Ratings:
    +880
    Religion:
    none
    Atheism makes no claims about its moral status. Religions do. And measured against that claim they all fail, Christianity and Islam the hardest.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. lukethethird

    lukethethird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2018
    Messages:
    1,114
    Ratings:
    +454
    Religion:
    Xian
    Is Christianity that bad?
    Worse.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  10. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    1,027
    Ratings:
    +880
    Religion:
    none
    Ever had a pencil that claimed to make you a better writer?
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
  11. Saint Frankenstein

    Saint Frankenstein Pyrphóros ⚡Lux Aeterna
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2012
    Messages:
    28,961
    Ratings:
    +14,298
    Religion:
    Olympianism (Hellenic polytheism)
    No.
    Well, I'd say yes simply because I disagree with their conclusions on the question of God, but otherwise no.
     
  12. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium सच्चिदानन्द
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    7,686
    Ratings:
    +9,355
    Religion:
    Advaitist Hindu
    All pencils claim to make me a better writer. Ever try writing in graphite without one?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. Vouthon

    Vouthon In varietate concordia
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,547
    Ratings:
    +2,295
    Religion:
    Catholic Christianity
    Amen.

    I first learned this many years back when I waded deeply into Islamic theology, with an open-mind. I discovered that the religion itself was remarkably heterogeneous and that a number of Hadith, as well the earliest Islamic jurists, had a very developed (and for the time praiseworthy/relatively progressive) doctrine of civilian immunity that was directly polar to the terrorism committed by modern Islamists.

    There was general consensus on the nature of just war / jihad from all four schools of medieval Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali, Hanafi, and Shafi'i) to the effect that non-combatants who did not participate in fighting should not be killed in the prosecution of war.

    Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, the first Sunni Caliph, established the general code of conduct in the following address to his Islamic armies:


    I instruct you in ten matters: Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, nor an aged man. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone..."

    (Source: Imam Malik’s compilation of the Hadith “Kitab al-Jihad.”)

    I could quote many others who reiterate the same broad doctrinal interpretation. For comparative purposes, the Romans before the birth of Islam had observed basically little-to-no civilian immunity in their prosecution of wars:


    "War was different in the ancient world. There was no Geneva Convention back then. There were no rules for war other than those decided on by the combatants and which they then had the power to enforce. The Roman Republic itself had practiced brutal war repeatedly before Caesar and had even practiced genocide on the Carthaginian culture after the Third Punic War." - Julius Caesar, War Criminal? by Dr. Miland Brown.​

    Dutch Archaeologists Find the Site of a Massacre Julius Caesar Boasted About

    In Julius Caesar’s personal account of the Gallic Wars, De Bello Gallico, the Roman commander (and emperor-to-be) detailed the massacre of two Germanic tribes by Roman troops in 55 BCE. The tribes had asked Caesar for asylum. Instead, they were massacred. Caesar boasted that his troops killed 430,000 people, the majority of them women and children. Some died by sword or spear either in battle or while fleeing the Romans. Others attempting escape drowned in a nearby river.


    But I also became aware of the complicated process of "theologizing" by later religious jurists - based upon more problematic scriptural precepts, and often completely ignoring or exegetically marginalising the explicitly enlightened ones - that resulted in the ideology that could justify, Islamicly, terror against civilians (mostly, although not entirely, arising from the the 14th century fundamentalist and inspiration for modern day Salafists, Ibyn Taymiyyah: Ibn Taymiyyah - Wikipedia).
     
    #13 Vouthon, Dec 22, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. SalixIncendium

    SalixIncendium सच्चिदानन्द
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2016
    Messages:
    7,686
    Ratings:
    +9,355
    Religion:
    Advaitist Hindu
  15. MikeDwight

    MikeDwight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2019
    Messages:
    1,406
    Ratings:
    +108
    Religion:
    Presbyterian
    Nah its not about what is IN Christianity, its about Defenders of the Faith. Pope excommunications allow the overthrow of rulers. The League of Nations brings all Nations out of Nationalism and back to the Faith. Legalism! Its about that feeling its like, in Medieval total War, a province is 99% orthodox, and you know, next turn, it'll have to be , 100% Orthodox. nice.
    Check out these Specs man... Just think about it for me, OK?
    Religions and denominations - Europa Universalis 4 Wiki
     
  16. Stevicus

    Stevicus Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2011
    Messages:
    10,229
    Ratings:
    +5,078
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I don't think there's anything wrong with the "idea," in and of itself. It's people who are the problem. It doesn't matter what people actually "believe," since humans invariably suck. In fact, even these belief systems acknowledge just how bad humans are, so they're attempting to make people "good." Humans are viewed as so "bad" that religionists might need to beat them, torture them, or even burn them at the stake as the only way of making them "good."

    Some religions and belief systems might not be quite so severe about it, but they all seem to have a goal of moving humans away from their base, carnal, depraved, animalistic nature and more towards an enlightened way of thinking towards the "greater good."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Vouthon

    Vouthon In varietate concordia
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,547
    Ratings:
    +2,295
    Religion:
    Catholic Christianity
    I should note that although the OP specifically focuses upon Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity & Islam), violence and/or intolerance in the name of religion is far more pervasive generally across human belief systems - whether religious or secular - than many are willing to admit outside scholarship.

    I mentioned this on a different thread already, but take Buddhism - in its scriptures one of the most non-violent and compassionate creeds imaginable. But not all Buddhists have been so, unfortunately. I think we'd all agree that there isn't something inherently wrong with Buddhism. Its a religion, moreover, that is effectively atheist - it has no conception of a supreme creator deity (and the devas are just beings subject to samsara like the rest of us).

    But consider the Mahāvaṃsa, the "Great Chronicle" of 5th century Buddhist Sri Lanka written in the Pali language, composed by a Buddhist monk at the Mahavihara temple in Anuradhapura.

    One of the Buddhist kings it describes, Dutugamanu destroyed his opponents in battle. After the bloodshed, he laments for causing the deaths of millions of innocents in the campaign. Eight enlightened monks (arhant) comfort him with this explanation:


    "From this deed arises no hindrance in thy way to heaven. Only one and half human beings have been slain here by thee, O lord of men. The one had come unto the (three) refuges, the other had taken on himself the five precepts. Unbelievers and men of evil life were the rest, not more to be esteemed than beasts. But as for thee, thou wilt bring glory to the doctrine of the Buddha in manifold ways; therefore cast away from thy heart, O ruler of men!"

    (Geiger 1993 translation; 178)​


    This is no different to what you'd expect to hear from the most intolerant Abrahamist, for example in the Catholic Spanish Inquisition or Islamic Mihna. Buddhists are distinguished from non-Buddhists, the murders in the narrative of the "unbelievers" of "evil life" are dismissed, because the king has pure intent with the desire to defend Buddhism.

    This kind of rhetoric has been used today in majority Buddhist Burma, against the Muslim minority in that country:


    Persecution of Muslims in Myanmar - Wikipedia


    A BBC article on it by Professor Alan Strathern, an anthropologist from Oxford University, makes an excellent point about the corruption of religious ideals arising from the almost inevitable bargain with "state power":


    Why are Buddhist monks attacking Muslims?


    Of all the moral precepts instilled in Buddhist monks the promise not to kill comes first, and the principle of non-violence is arguably more central to Buddhism than any other major religion. So why have monks been using hate speech against Muslims and joining mobs that have left dozens dead?

    This is happening in two countries separated by well over 1,000 miles of Indian Ocean - Burma and Sri Lanka. It is puzzling because neither country is facing an Islamist militant threat. Muslims in both places are a generally peaceable and small minority...

    On Tuesday, Buddhist mobs attacked mosques and burned more than 70 homes in Oakkan, north of Rangoon, after a Muslim girl on a bicycle collided with a monk. One person died and nine were injured...

    Aggressive thoughts are inimical to all Buddhist teachings...while your compassion for all living things grows.

    Of course, there is a strong strain of pacifism in Christian teachings too: "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you," were the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount...

    But however any religion starts out, sooner or later it enters into a Faustian pact with state power. Buddhist monks looked to kings, the ultimate wielders of violence, for the support, patronage and order that only they could provide. Kings looked to monks to provide the popular legitimacy that only such a high moral vision can confer.

    The result can seem ironic. If you have a strong sense of the overriding moral superiority of your worldview, then the need to protect and advance it can seem the most important duty of all.


    Christian crusaders, Islamist militants, or the leaders of "freedom-loving nations", all justify what they see as necessary violence in the name of a higher good. Buddhist rulers and monks have been no exception.

    So, historically, Buddhism has been no more a religion of peace than Christianity.

    Burmese rulers, known as "kings of righteousness", justified wars in the name of what they called true Buddhist doctrine.

    In Japan, many samurai were devotees of Zen Buddhism and various arguments sustained them - killing a man about to commit a dreadful crime was an act of compassion, for example. Such reasoning surfaced again when Japan mobilised for World War II.
     
    #17 Vouthon, Dec 22, 2019
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. Eyad Sarraj

    Eyad Sarraj Howdy!

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2019
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +4
    Religion:
    none
     
  19. Eyad Sarraj

    Eyad Sarraj Howdy!

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2019
    Messages:
    8
    Ratings:
    +4
    Religion:
    none
    Not so much talked about, the greatest travesty of religion is the Taiping Rebellion. Over 22 million people murdered in the name of Jesus. From practically the very beginning Christianity has been violent. For over 800 years a world wide inquisition, numerous bloody civil wars in Europe, the slaughter of Jews located in the South of France by a failed
    Crusade, the list is so long it would be impracticable to list.
     
  20. sun rise

    sun rise "Let there be peace and love among all"
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    40,905
    Ratings:
    +15,987
    Religion:
    Love
    There is nothing wrong with any of those you've listed and more besides. It's the state of humanity's consciousness that's the problem. People whose hearts are oriented to love can practice any of those in a loving way and find loving messages in them.

    Those whose hearts are tuned to selfishness and tribalism will find those things in the religious doctrines and use that as an excuse to act out their lower desires.
     
    • Like Like x 3
Loading...