Atheists create thousands of Christian martyrs during French Revolution

So, why did the majority of Christians engage in slavery, rape, and brutality in the Americas? It's not like the Conquistadores were excommunicated; most were lauded as heroes by the Catholic Church and Christians in general.

Most Hispanic people are at least partly descended of the American Indians who were brutalized and murdered; how is it anti-Hispanic to say that the Conquistadores engaged in brutal warfare, rape, slavery, and other historically supported facts?

Most imperialists were devout Christians. The Bible is big enough and vague enough to support any notion you desire, especially when one takes the logically consistent value that brutalizing someone's finite earthly life to win them over to Christ's eternal life was justifiable.

If you don't like that you're religion can easily be co-opted for violent means, that's too bad, so sad.

Jesus was a crazed madman who urged his followers to hate their own families in order to follow him and said that he came as a bringer of war, not of peace. A true Christian is a bloodthirsty monster hellbent on destroying infidels.

They hated Christians who did not believe in the correct version of Christianity. Learn2history.

Because Germany declared war on Russia because Germany agreed with Austria-Hungary's demands on Serbia that could not possibly be fulfilled. It was pretty apparent that Germany was itching for a fight prior to WWI.

Maybe Wilhelm II should have told the Hapsburgs to go (*)(*)(*)(*) themselves after they made their demands on Serbia; no WWI, no Hitler.

Plus, it's not like the rest of the Allies weren't keen on putting the war-guilt clause in the Treaty, either.

That describes the entirety of Christianity.

Why should I believe that propaganda?

So?

Have you ever read anything about Jews in Europe from about 600-1945? At all?

We mustn't forget that a large number were Christian, as well, including King Leopold II and Queen Victoria, between whom somewhere around 80 million people were exterminated.

So? Again, it's still positive and you totally glossed over the fact that developed nations with high per capita GDP tend to have lower birthrates.

 

Here: The Black Book of Communism

I discussed the question in an earlier post: http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...uring-french-revolution-8.html#post1062350755

I think we both made our positions clear. And I think you made some good points.

 

Ridiculous, they were heavily criticized.

Jesus' message calling for forgiveness, kindness, and human dignity is paramount for Christianity and quite clear.

When you finish foaming at the mouth please check this out: Hate Your Parents—or Love Them?

Jesus' message calling for forgiveness, kindness, and human dignity remains unaltered by your few misinterpreted passages.

Clemenceau was the most vindictive leader at Versaille.

Your easy dismissal of this excellent source makes it hard for anyone to take you seriously. Why do you reject this NYT article discussing records from the Soviet archives?

Queen Victoria?! Didn't you know she was just a figurehead? You throw out numbers with no proof. Your credibility continues to plummet. I'm sorry you can't accept the fact that by the 1800s the European elite had read Gibbon and Laplace and Comte and Shelley and very often rejected Christianity.

Let's look at some of the Christians who fought for Africans:

William Wilberforce

William Sheppard

lol So you should admit your error.

 

Yes, that's why so many of them were allowed to be buried in some of the most extravagant cathedrals of Europe and the Americas. Because the Catholic Church thought they were such evil men.

Except where he says he came not to bring peace, but a sword, and said that the only way to be a Christian was to hate your family.

Their apologetic stance is worthless in comparison to my interpretation; after all, sola scriptura makes every man a priest and thus my own interpretation is superior to those ignorant yokels' interpretations.

Yes, that's why the history of Christianity is filled primarily with bloodthirsting tyrants, slaughterers, and oppressors.

Certainly not because entire French towns were flattened and the French were the Allies who bore the brunt of the German offensive! Oh, wait, that's the entire reason why.

Why do you completely ignore las Casas' firsthand accounts of the cruelty of the Spanish Christians? Your refusal to accept that Christianity is an ugly religion with an ugly past is entirely because you can't allow yourself to see that it is one of the bloodiest religions in human history.

However, in short, I'm basically doing what you're doing regarding all sources contrary to your own worldview in which Christianity is perfect and any Christians who might deviate from that must be atheists or secret Jews or something else so that you don't have to contemplate someone sincerely believing that Jesus is their savior while simultaneously engaging in brutal behavior.

Firstly: anyone who thinks Queen Victoria was a mere figurehead is clearly ignorant of history.

Secondly: yes, they were such atheists that they felt some need to reference their devout Christianity in personal letters all the time.

Thirdly: Because you are including the Holodomor and Great Leap Forward as examples of Communist barbarity, you must also accept that the government of the UK was culpable for Late Victorian famines in India which killed 70 million people.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/d/davis-victorian.html

And let's look at one who did more damage to Africans than those two could ever hope to help:

King Leopold II

http://www.yale.edu/gsp/colonial/belgian_congo/index.html

DEUS VULT!

Yes, my error in pointing out that they have positive growth rates, which they do. :V

 

Sorry, which part of that even claims that communism is of central importance to atheism?

It definitely makes the reverse claim: that atheism is of central importance to communism - with which I don't think many people would disagree.

 

Not much to respond to. Mostly just another fact-free rant from Akhlut.

I could list the various historians who disagree with Marxist historian Mike Davis, but why bother? It's absurd of you to blame Christianity for the actions of the English elite, one of the most Godless set of individuals ever to live.

Here's Mike Davis, the historian you are relying on: They died in the golden age of Liberal Capitalism; indeed, many were murdered ... by the theological application of the sacred principles of Smith, Bentham and Mill."

Adam Smith rejected Christianity, Mill and Bentham were agnostics/atheists.

So Mike Davis blames the famines on the principles of non-Christian/atheist thinkers. Looks like the atheist movement has more blood on its hands!

And let's not forget the great work of Chrisian organizations in combating famine. Here are two organizations among hundreds:

United Methodist Committee on Relief

Catholic Relief Services

 

Given the large populations of the (defunct) USSR and China and other Communist countries I'd say a large percentage of the world's atheists were terrorized/lied into atheism by Communist dictators.

Two other atheist-prone groups: the decadent rich and pouting adolescent males fooled by the bigoted media bosses.

Glad we agree.

 

Projection's unbecoming of you, but I will note that you refuse to acknowledge that the Conquistadores were, in fact, Christians who were engaged in wholesale slaughter and brutality.

Yes, that's why they all belonged to the Church of England and sought to Christianize all the pink bits of the globe.

Because Christians never adopt the philosophies of non-Christians! That's why Neo-Platonism was never a thing! Or Christmas celebrations. Or Easter celebrations. Or the Eucharist as a pseudo-Passover feast. Or Yule logs. Or turning demigods and heroes into saints. Or adopting wholesale the theology of Zoroastrianism via Judaism which made Christianity possible.

So what? Many Republicans in the US adopt the philosophies of Adam Smith in some bastardized form along with the philosophies of Ayn Rand despite being fanatical Christians. Martin Luther King Jr. adopted the philosophy of Ahisma from Gandhi, who was a notable Hindu. One doesn't have to adopt the religious principles or lack thereof of a person to adopt other portions of their philosophy. Is that concept too difficult for you to comprehend?

Too bad it was Christians who put it into practice. So, maybe put the blame where it belongs: on the Christian hands of the English government who sought merely to use the Indians as a means to make money, as Jesus intended.

Or have you never heard of the religious justifications behind the "white man's burden"?

Fat lot of good that did back in the 19th century. :V

 

That's a very long-winded way of saying "you're absolutely right, I never claimed that", but I accept your implicit retraction nonetheless.

Yes, and I'm also glad we agree that communism is actually not of central importance to atheism and that you were wrong when you said it was.