Apostolic Friends Forum

Apostolic Friends Forum (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/index.php)
-   Fellowship Hall (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Are Christians Resonsible For Wars? (https://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=46526)

Michael The Disciple 07-22-2014 04:43 PM
Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Rock Star Tom Petty:

Quote:
But while he’s tackling controversial subject matter, Petty told Catholics he respects whatever faith they want to have, but that he wouldn’t personally continue supporting a church that actively covered up crime.

“Catholics, don’t write me. I’m fine with whatever religion you want to have, but it can’t tell anybody it’s OK to kill people, and it can’t abuse children systematically for God knows how many years,” he told Billboard. “If I was in a club, and I found out that there had been generations of people abusing children, and then that club was covering that up, I would quit the club.”

Speaking of religion more generally, Petty told Billboard that “it seems … to be at the base of all wars.”

“I’ve nothing against defending yourself, but I don’t think, spiritually speaking, that there’s any conception of God that should be telling you to be violent,” he continued. “It seems to me that no one’s got Christ more wrong than the Christians.”
While he was specifically talking about Catholics, in general he blames "religion" for wars.

We always here this from the world.

Can anyone name what wars were started by Christians?

Evang.Benincasa 07-22-2014 05:57 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple (Post 1326723)
Rock Star Tom Petty:



While he was specifically talking about Catholics, in general he blames "religion" for wars.

We always here this from the world.

Can anyone name what wars were started by Christians?
Is this a trick question? :hmmm

Michael The Disciple 07-22-2014 06:04 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa (Post 1326748)
Is this a trick question? :hmmm
Which wars?

WW1? WW2? Korea? Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan?

Where are the wars Christians are responsible for?

The media/liberals are always saying all wars are because of "religion".

But is this true of the Christian religion?

Evang.Benincasa 07-22-2014 06:11 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple (Post 1326751)
Which wars?

WW1? WW2? Korea? Vietnam? Iraq? Afghanistan?

Where are the wars Christians are responsible for?

The media/liberals are always saying all wars are because of "religion".

But is this true of the Christian religion?
OK, I'll give it a try....

Wars throughout history are usually fought for land and resources, religion is only used to get the peasantry and plebeians to fight for the wealthy land owners who were in power. The rank and file are usually sold a dream how God is against whoever they are fighting. Also the enemy is demonized and therefore they need to be convince that they are literally the arm of God avenging man kind. This posed a problem when America had its Civil War, due to both sides were brothers and Protestant Christians.

Biblical Christianity has issues like "love your enemy" and "turn the other cheek" which causes it to be ineffective as a true war religion. IMO.

aegsm76 07-22-2014 07:00 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
I am sure that Christianity was behind the Mass Killings by Stalin, Mao and Kim, as well.
Oh wait, they did not believe in a God or religion!!!!

KeptByTheWord 07-22-2014 07:09 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa (Post 1326755)
OK, I'll give it a try....

Wars throughout history are usually fought for land and resources, religion is only used to get the peasantry and plebeians to fight for the wealthy land owners who were in power. The rank and file are usually sold a dream how God is against whoever they are fighting. Also the enemy is demonized and therefore they need to be convince that they are literally the arm of God avenging man kind. This posed a problem when America had its Civil War, due to both sides were brothers and Protestant Christians.

Biblical Christianity has issues like "love your enemy" and "turn the other cheek" which causes it to be ineffective as a true war religion. IMO.
Good answer. :thumbsup

Sean 07-22-2014 07:36 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
The Myth that Religion is the #1 Cause of War
by Robin Schumacher
edited by Matt Slick

Atheists and secular humanists consistently make the claim that religion is the #1 cause of violence and war throughout the history of mankind. One of hatetheism's key cheerleaders, Sam Harris, says in his book The End of Faith that faith and religion are “the most prolific source of violence in our history.”1

While there’s no denying that campaigns such as the Crusades and the Thirty Years’ War foundationally rested on religious ideology, it is simply incorrect to assert that religion has been the primary cause of war. Moreover, although there’s also no disagreement that radical Islam was the spirit behind 9/11, it is a fallacy to say that all faiths contribute equally where religiously-motivated violence and warfare are concerned.

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.

religious wars bar chart



religious wars pie chart

That means that all faiths combined – minus Islam – have caused less than 4% of all of humanity’s wars and violent conflicts. Further, they played no motivating role in the major wars that have resulted in the most loss of life.

Kind of puts a serious dent into Harris’ argument, doesn’t it?

The truth is, non-religious motivations and naturalistic philosophies bear the blame for nearly all of humankind’s wars. Lives lost during religious conflict pales in comparison to those experienced during the regimes who wanted nothing to do with the idea of God – something showcased in R. J. Rummel’s work Lethal Politics and Death by Government:

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003
Rummel says: “Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not germs.”4

The historical evidence is quite clear: Religion is not the #1 cause of war.

If religion can’t be blamed for most wars and violence, then what is the primary cause? The same thing that triggers all crime, cruelty, loss of life, and other such things. Jesus provides the answer very clearly: “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man,” (Mark 7:21–23).

James (naturally) agrees with Christ when he says: “What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight and quarrel,” (James 4:1–2).

In the end, the evidence shows that the atheists are quite wrong about the wars they claim to so desperately despise. Sin is the #1 cause of war and violence, not religion, and certainly not Christianity.

Michael The Disciple 07-22-2014 07:42 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326766)
The Myth that Religion is the #1 Cause of War
by Robin Schumacher
edited by Matt Slick

Atheists and secular humanists consistently make the claim that religion is the #1 cause of violence and war throughout the history of mankind. One of hatetheism's key cheerleaders, Sam Harris, says in his book The End of Faith that faith and religion are “the most prolific source of violence in our history.”1

While there’s no denying that campaigns such as the Crusades and the Thirty Years’ War foundationally rested on religious ideology, it is simply incorrect to assert that religion has been the primary cause of war. Moreover, although there’s also no disagreement that radical Islam was the spirit behind 9/11, it is a fallacy to say that all faiths contribute equally where religiously-motivated violence and warfare are concerned.

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.

religious wars bar chart



religious wars pie chart

That means that all faiths combined – minus Islam – have caused less than 4% of all of humanity’s wars and violent conflicts. Further, they played no motivating role in the major wars that have resulted in the most loss of life.

Kind of puts a serious dent into Harris’ argument, doesn’t it?

The truth is, non-religious motivations and naturalistic philosophies bear the blame for nearly all of humankind’s wars. Lives lost during religious conflict pales in comparison to those experienced during the regimes who wanted nothing to do with the idea of God – something showcased in R. J. Rummel’s work Lethal Politics and Death by Government:

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003
Rummel says: “Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not germs.”4

The historical evidence is quite clear: Religion is not the #1 cause of war.

If religion can’t be blamed for most wars and violence, then what is the primary cause? The same thing that triggers all crime, cruelty, loss of life, and other such things. Jesus provides the answer very clearly: “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man,” (Mark 7:21–23).

James (naturally) agrees with Christ when he says: “What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight and quarrel,” (James 4:1–2).

In the end, the evidence shows that the atheists are quite wrong about the wars they claim to so desperately despise. Sin is the #1 cause of war and violence, not religion, and certainly not Christianity.
YES!

Evang.Benincasa 07-22-2014 08:24 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326766)

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003
While I agree with most of the article I would like to point out that some of these individuals were religious.

Shinbutsu-shūgō was the religion of Hideki Tojo, while Pol Pot was a Theravada Buddhist, he studied at a Buddhist monastery. Also in one of his speeches on Democracy calling Buddha his leader. Joseph Stalin was raised Russian Orthodox in the home of a Russian priest, he attended Eastern Greek Orthodox seminary in order to join the priesthood. While Stalin would denounce Christianity in his youth. The biographer Edvard Radzinsky in his book Stalin: The First In-depth Biography Based on Explosive New Documents from Russia's Secret Archives, notes that “During his mysterious retreat (of June 1941) the ex-seminarist had decided to involve the aid of the God he had rejected.” Vladimir Lenin had strong Jewish roots, and always admired the Jewish religion, his thoughts on Christianity is well known. Mao Zedong was raised in a very devout Buddhist home of wealthy aristocrats, while he is known for his one statement that "atheism must take the place of God" you have to keep in mind that Buddhism doesn't have a god, but Mao was also quoted as saying that "it is wrong to tell people to be against religion.” So, there's your quandary concerning Mao.

Now, last but not least, Mr Adolf Hitler the Godzilla which everyone picks when you need a bad example. Adolf Hitler should not be a choice when you want to prove that Non-religious leaders kill more than religious leaders. Hitler was a Catholic, he also went as far to incorporate the Nationalist Socialist Party into the German Church calling it Deutsche Christen which symbol was a Christian cross with swastika in the middle. Books on this topic are The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany, by Susannah Heschel, and The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 By Richard Steigmann-Gall.

Adolf Hitler in a speech in 1922 remarked, “My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter…”

In his autobiography Mein Kampf, Hitler stated:

Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.

Please I don't want to take away from Sean's post, but just trying to merely point out that when having a discussion how these individuals (especially Hitler) were non-religious you might not have such a strong argument. If anything all these men were raised in heavily religious homes and cultures, and another argument that could be posed is that their upbringing still had to have some strong influence in their later years even if they weren't practicing their religion (as in the case of Mao Zedong.

Pressing-On 07-22-2014 08:32 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Interesting article....

Quote:
The Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity?

Before I get to the particular facts, there is more than just a factual problem here. There is a theoretical problem as well and I tried to make the point that we must distinguish between what an individual or group of people do and what the code that they allegedly follow actually asserts. The fact is that there are people who do things consistently that are inconsistent with the code that they allegedly follow. But often times when that happens, especially where religion is concerned, the finger is pointed not at the individual who is choosing to do something barbaric, but at the code he claims to represent. The only time it's legitimate to point to the code as the source of barbarism is if the code is, in fact, the source of barbarism. People object to a religion that used barbaric means to spread the faith. But one can only use that as an objection against the religion if it's the religion itself that asserts that one must do it this way, as opposed to people who try to promote the spread of the religion in a forceful fashion in contradiction to what the religion actually teaches.

http://ht.ly/yiG4U

Sean 07-22-2014 09:06 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa (Post 1326771)
While I agree with most of the article I would like to point out that some of these individuals were religious.

Shinbutsu-shūgō was the religion of Hideki Tojo, while Pol Pot was a Theravada Buddhist, he studied at a Buddhist monastery. Also in one of his speeches on Democracy calling Buddha his leader. Joseph Stalin was raised Russian Orthodox in the home of a Russian priest, he attended Eastern Greek Orthodox seminary in order to join the priesthood. While Stalin would denounce Christianity in his youth. The biographer Edvard Radzinsky in his book Stalin: The First In-depth Biography Based on Explosive New Documents from Russia's Secret Archives, notes that “During his mysterious retreat (of June 1941) the ex-seminarist had decided to involve the aid of the God he had rejected.” Vladimir Lenin had strong Jewish roots, and always admired the Jewish religion, his thoughts on Christianity is well known. Mao Zedong was raised in a very devout Buddhist home of wealthy aristocrats, while he is known for his one statement that "atheism must take the place of God" you have to keep in mind that Buddhism doesn't have a god, but Mao was also quoted as saying that "it is wrong to tell people to be against religion.” So, there's your quandary concerning Mao.

Now, last but not least, Mr Adolf Hitler the Godzilla which everyone picks when you need a bad example. Adolf Hitler should not be a choice when you want to prove that Non-religious leaders kill more than religious leaders. Hitler was a Catholic, he also went as far to incorporate the Nationalist Socialist Party into the German Church calling it Deutsche Christen which symbol was a Christian cross with swastika in the middle. Books on this topic are The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany, by Susannah Heschel, and The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 By Richard Steigmann-Gall.

Adolf Hitler in a speech in 1922 remarked, “My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter…”

In his autobiography Mein Kampf, Hitler stated:

Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.

Please I don't want to take away from Sean's post, but just trying to merely point out that when having a discussion how these individuals (especially Hitler) were non-religious you might not have such a strong argument. If anything all these men were raised in heavily religious homes and cultures, and another argument that could be posed is that their upbringing still had to have some strong influence in their later years even if they weren't practicing their religion (as in the case of Mao Zedong.





If you think Hitler was a Catholic, you need to get your facts straight. The dude was a straight up psycho. Same with Pol Pot or Mao. If I claim to be pentecostal and I am a MASS MURDERER, would you call me religious, or some nut job? You are NOTHING in reality unless you PRACTICE your beliefs' tenets.

Monterrey 07-22-2014 09:23 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Oh yes, I definently believe a rock and roll artist's concept of Christianity!!!!

Very very deep theology here!!!

Abiding Now 07-22-2014 09:36 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
War? Christians? The guy evidently visited AFF and read the ALL TRINITARIANS ARE LOST thread.:heeheehee

jfrog 07-22-2014 10:30 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326773)
If you think Hitler was a Catholic, you need to get your facts straight. The dude was a straight up psycho. Same with Pol Pot or Mao. If I claim to be pentecostal and I am a MASS MURDERER, would you call me religious, or some nut job? You are NOTHING in reality unless you PRACTICE your beliefs' tenets.
There is alot of doubt that Hitler was actually a Christian. So I don't think he really was at that time in his life.

But then again Sean, I'd say that if you went out and gunned down a bunch of people tomorrow that most would not remember you as a Christian either. Especially considering many of your non orthodox beliefs.

So while I'm 95% comfortable agreeing that hitler was not a Christian I think we all need to be honest and admit that Christianity has a habit of denouncing anyone as a Christian who does something bad.

If you are a public figure and cheat on your wife you are no longer a Christian.
If you are a public official and make a policy decision that results in someone dying then you are not a Christian.
If you are a public official and take alot of bribes then you are not a Christian.
.........

And this list goes on and on.

jfrog 07-22-2014 10:47 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326766)
The Myth that Religion is the #1 Cause of War
by Robin Schumacher
edited by Matt Slick

Atheists and secular humanists consistently make the claim that religion is the #1 cause of violence and war throughout the history of mankind. One of hatetheism's key cheerleaders, Sam Harris, says in his book The End of Faith that faith and religion are “the most prolific source of violence in our history.”1

While there’s no denying that campaigns such as the Crusades and the Thirty Years’ War foundationally rested on religious ideology, it is simply incorrect to assert that religion has been the primary cause of war. Moreover, although there’s also no disagreement that radical Islam was the spirit behind 9/11, it is a fallacy to say that all faiths contribute equally where religiously-motivated violence and warfare are concerned.

An interesting source of truth on the matter is Philip and Axelrod’s three-volume Encyclopedia of Wars, which chronicles some 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history. Of those wars, the authors categorize 123 as being religious in nature,2 which is an astonishingly low 6.98% of all wars. However, when one subtracts out those waged in the name of Islam (66), the percentage is cut by more than half to 3.23%.

religious wars bar chart



religious wars pie chart

That means that all faiths combined – minus Islam – have caused less than 4% of all of humanity’s wars and violent conflicts. Further, they played no motivating role in the major wars that have resulted in the most loss of life.

Kind of puts a serious dent into Harris’ argument, doesn’t it?

The truth is, non-religious motivations and naturalistic philosophies bear the blame for nearly all of humankind’s wars. Lives lost during religious conflict pales in comparison to those experienced during the regimes who wanted nothing to do with the idea of God – something showcased in R. J. Rummel’s work Lethal Politics and Death by Government:

Non-Religious Dictator Lives Lost

Joseph Stalin - 42,672,000
Mao Zedong - 37,828,000
Adolf Hitler - 20,946,000
Chiang Kai-shek - 10,214,000
Vladimir Lenin - 4,017,000
Hideki Tojo - 3,990,000
Pol Pot - 2,397,0003
Rummel says: “Almost 170 million men, women and children have been shot, beaten, tortured, knifed, burned, starved, frozen, crushed or worked to death; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed or killed in any other of a myriad of ways governments have inflicted death on unarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could conceivably be nearly 360 million people. It is though our species has been devastated by a modern Black Plague. And indeed it has, but a plague of Power, not germs.”4

The historical evidence is quite clear: Religion is not the #1 cause of war.

If religion can’t be blamed for most wars and violence, then what is the primary cause? The same thing that triggers all crime, cruelty, loss of life, and other such things. Jesus provides the answer very clearly: “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man,” (Mark 7:21–23).

James (naturally) agrees with Christ when he says: “What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? You lust and do not have; so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight and quarrel,” (James 4:1–2).

In the end, the evidence shows that the atheists are quite wrong about the wars they claim to so desperately despise. Sin is the #1 cause of war and violence, not religion, and certainly not Christianity.
I think the book in question assumes religion can be separated from morals and a societies world views and ethics and justifications for war. Is religion a direct cause of most every war? Probably not. However, religion is there in the background in everything. It's a part of society that influences every other aspect of people and society. How much of the influence for our wars was a result of religion?

The american civil war? Fought over slavery and states rights and a few other minor things. How much did Christianity influence whether that war took place? I think quite a bit. Don't you?

Sean 07-22-2014 10:48 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1326786)
There is alot of doubt that Hitler was actually a Christian. So I don't think he really was at that time in his life.

But then again Sean, I'd say that if you went out and gunned down a bunch of people tomorrow that most would not remember you as a Christian either. Especially considering many of your non orthodox beliefs.

So while I'm 95% comfortable agreeing that hitler was not a Christian I think we all need to be honest and admit that Christianity has a habit of denouncing anyone as a Christian who does something bad.

If you are a public figure and cheat on your wife you are no longer a Christian.
If you are a public official and make a policy decision that results in someone dying then you are not a Christian.
If you are a public official and take alot of bribes then you are not a Christian.
.........

And this list goes on and on.



Amen, If I did any resemblance of that evil stuff tomorrow, I am not a Christian but a BACKSLIDER and OF THE DEVIL... There is no such thing as a Christian backslider or a Christian devil.....1 John 3:8

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.



Again, these wicked men were not following any religious tenets....they were of SATAN. They came to KILL,STEAL and DESTROY

Sean 07-22-2014 10:55 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1326790)
I think the book in question assumes religion can be separated from morals and a societies world views and ethics and justifications for war. Is religion a direct cause of most every war? Probably not. However, religion is there in the background in everything. It's a part of society that influences every other aspect of people and society. How much of the influence for our wars was a result of religion?

The american civil war? Fought over slavery and states rights and a few other minor things. How much did Christianity influence whether that war took place? I think quite a bit. Don't you?


Not really, it was an ethical thing. I think most folks happened to be religious, but they were not shouting..."Jesus will help us kill our southern brothers"...This was a divided country over ethics, not religion. It was UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO OWN SLAVES

jfrog 07-22-2014 11:00 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326792)
Amen, If I did any resemblance of that evil stuff tomorrow, I am not a Christian but a BACKSLIDER and OF THE DEVIL... There is no such thing as a Christian backslider or a Christian devil.....1 John 3:8

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.



Again, these wicked men were not following any religious tenets....they were of SATAN. They came to KILL,STEAL and DESTROY
Thanks and that's the problem I'm pointing out. A Christian by your definition can never do something horrible. It's simply impossible by definition. Then again a persons true Christian status can never really be ascertained in your view either. So since the definition is so retroactive why even bother trying to label someone as a Christian? Wouldn't the label professing Christian illuminate everything much better and then we could have God alone dictate who was a Christian on judgment day as it seems fitting for your definition of Christian?

Praxeas 07-22-2014 11:02 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple (Post 1326723)
Rock Star Tom Petty:



While he was specifically talking about Catholics, in general he blames "religion" for wars.

We always here this from the world.

Can anyone name what wars were started by Christians?
Short answer...yes

Long answer is not so clear. It's not religion. It's religious leaders or Political leaders who use religion and the gullibility of the general believers to wage wars and other things

jfrog 07-22-2014 11:05 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326795)
Not really, it was an ethical thing. I think most folks happened to be religious, but they were not shouting..."Jesus will help us kill our southern brothers"...This was a divided country over ethics, not religion. It was UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO OWN SLAVES
Ummmmmm.... It was not unconstitutional to own slaves at the time. In fact the constitution even addressed a slave as counting for 3/5 of a citizen for purposes of representation in the house of representatives. Slavery was quite constitutional at that time.

jfrog 07-22-2014 11:05 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxeas (Post 1326797)
Short answer...yes

Long answer is not so clear. It's not religion. It's religious leaders or Political leaders who use religion and the gullibility of the general believers to wage wars and other things
:thumbsup I like that answer

Sean 07-22-2014 11:20 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1326798)
Ummmmmm.... It was not unconstitutional to own slaves at the time. In fact the constitution even addressed a slave as counting for 3/5 of a citizen for purposes of representation in the house of representatives. Slavery was quite constitutional at that time.

Slavery was NEVER constitutional.
They just had "clauses" to make it legal, that were unconstitutional. Much like some laws they pass these days that must be struck down by the supreme court...

This is what the constitution said...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
— Declaration of Independence, 1776

The 13th amendment ABOLISHED this unconstitutional law....
The Thirteenth Amendment
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.




The Civil War wasnt over religion...

Evang.Benincasa 07-22-2014 11:22 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326773)
If you think Hitler was a Catholic, you need to get your facts straight.
If I think Hitler was a Catholic?

My boy, please, I don't have to think Hitler was a Catholic, I know Hitler was a Catholic. My facts are straight, but are you looking for religious piety?

Sorry if I deflated your crème de la crème list of NON-RELIGIOUS mass murderers.

But maybe you should do a little reading outside of materials on "how to debate Atheists".

No slight against you personally so you shouldn't take my offering as an offense against you or your post. I was merely pointing out that your list of communist, imperialist, and fascist leaders was not a list of atheists by a long shot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326773)

The dude was a straight up psycho.
Excuse me, did that make him any less a Catholic? The simple skinny answer would be...no. :heeheehee


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326773)

Same with Pol Pot or Mao.
Well, I suggest you might want to look into it further. Also, you may not know this but Buddhists aren't smiling Dali Lama you see here visiting the United States. No they have a pretty violent history, especially the Tibetan Buddhists. It is my humble opinion that the communist Chinese in actuality liberated the Tibetan people from the horrible feudal conditions of the Tibetan system. But enough about that, you don't seem like a chap who wants to read new information which contradicts your paradigm. You would rather take your list and parade it in front of people who have slightly less knowledge then you do about the subject. They get amazed, you get pleased, yet inaccuracies were handed out, and nobody cared.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326773)

If I claim to be pentecostal and I am a MASS MURDERER, would you call me religious, or some nut job?
Allow me to state the obvious, you would be a Pentecostal MASS MURDERER.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326773)

You are NOTHING in reality unless you PRACTICE your beliefs' tenets.
Practice?

Hitler practiced his Catholicism as much as any religious individual in any religion, he showed up, he sat down, he may of listened to the liturgy, ate the cracker, and even was photographed numerous times leaving the cathedral.

Sorry, I cannot vouch for his piety, but as far as history records they see him as a Catholic.

What ever your bias, or opinions may lead you believe to be his character, as psychopath, villain, or the dark Lord Sauron it really doesn't make him any less a member of the Roman Catholic Church.

OK, this will be for free....

According to Pope Francis, “about 2%” of Catholic clergy are child molesters.

Now, this is the Roman Catholic Pope stating that 2% of his ministers are child molesters, now my question to you is, are they Catholics?

I'm not trying to see you defend whether they are good, pious, devout, or sticking to the church canon, but are they Catholics?

jfrog 07-22-2014 11:24 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326801)
Slavery was NEVER constitutional.
They just had "clauses" to make it legal, that were unconstitutional. Much like some laws they pass these days that must be struck down by the supreme court...

This is what the constitution said...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
— Declaration of Independence, 1776

The 13th amendment ABOLISHED this unconstitutional law....
The Thirteenth Amendment
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
Section 1.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.




The Civil War wasnt over religion...
The constitution and declaration of independence are two different things... I'm in utter amazement right now...

Evang.Benincasa 07-22-2014 11:27 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1326803)
The constitution and declaration of independence are two different things... I'm in utter amazement right now...
Sadly I'm not :bored

Sean 07-22-2014 11:32 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1326796)
Thanks and that's the problem I'm pointing out. A Christian by your definition can never do something horrible. It's simply impossible by definition. Then again a persons true Christian status can never really be ascertained in your view either. So since the definition is so retroactive why even bother trying to label someone as a Christian? Wouldn't the label professing Christian illuminate everything much better and then we could have God alone dictate who was a Christian on judgment day as it seems fitting for your definition of Christian?


Amen, good point.....
Actually , It is said that the Sinners gave us the name "Christian", in the 1st century. They knew these folks were the real deal....and represented Jesus well....

The New Name
"And it came about that for an entire year they met with the church, and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch." (Acts 11:23-26).

After having gone to Tarsus to get the new convert Saul, only recently a persecutor of the church himself, Barnabas returns with Saul and they work with the church at Antioch for a year. What an encouragement he must have been to Saul, for most believers were still afraid of him. Later, Barnabas and Saul (soon to be known as Paul) will travel through Asia Minor together establishing many churches in many different cities. Antioch would become their "headquarters" from where they would launch their missions and return after completing them.

It was during this year in which Barnabas and Saul are at Antioch that the disciples were first called "Christians". The disciples were followers of Christ. A disciple of Jesus is happy to wear His name. Later, Peter tells disciples to "in that name (that is, in the name "Christian" -J.Q.) let him glorify God." (1 Peter 4:16). Though the enemies of Christ may speak the name with a sneer, disciples wear it joyfully. The Lord has been sanctified in our hearts (1 Peter 3:15).

Not every believer becomes a disciple, but every disciple is a Christian. "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12).

Evang.Benincasa 07-22-2014 11:37 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Good night. :heeheehee

Sean 07-22-2014 11:39 PM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfrog (Post 1326803)
The constitution and declaration of independence are two different things... I'm in utter amazement right now...


They were connected....bet ya never knew that...

True American Government
Constitution Connected To the Declaration of Independence

The Supreme Court declared in 1897, the Constitution is the body and letter of which the Declaration of Independence is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

The Constitution itself connects itself to the Declaration of Independence by dating itself from the date of the Declaration of Independence, thereby showing clearly that it is the second great document in the government of these United States and is not to be understood without the first. How many today say the Constitution stands alone devoid of all reference to the Declaration? Let them see hear and understand what those who wrote the Constitution said about our American government. See Article VII.

The Founders believed the Declaration was the foundational document in our Constitutional form of government. The Founders dated their government acts from the year of the Declaration rather than the Constitution. The date of the Declaration of Independence was the recognized date of Sovereignty and Independence of the United States.

In the Declaration, the Founders established the foundation and the core values on which the Constitution was to operate. The Constitution was never to be interpreted apart from those values expressed in the Declaration.

Samuel Adams pointed out: Before the formation of this Constitution this Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the States in the Union, and has never been disannulled.

Well into the twentieth century, the Declaration and the Constitution were viewed as inseparable and interdependent. While the Court's change of standards has perhaps been a display of poor judgment, the Court's actions have actually been illegal under the standards of original intent. Furthermore they have violated the value system of "the laws of nature and of nature's God" established in the Declaration of Independence.

"The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent nation of Christians." John Qunicy Adams

p>

jfrog 07-23-2014 12:23 AM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326807)
They were connected....bet ya never knew that...

True American Government
Constitution Connected To the Declaration of Independence

The Supreme Court declared in 1897, the Constitution is the body and letter of which the Declaration of Independence is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

The Constitution itself connects itself to the Declaration of Independence by dating itself from the date of the Declaration of Independence, thereby showing clearly that it is the second great document in the government of these United States and is not to be understood without the first. How many today say the Constitution stands alone devoid of all reference to the Declaration? Let them see hear and understand what those who wrote the Constitution said about our American government. See Article VII.

The Founders believed the Declaration was the foundational document in our Constitutional form of government. The Founders dated their government acts from the year of the Declaration rather than the Constitution. The date of the Declaration of Independence was the recognized date of Sovereignty and Independence of the United States.

In the Declaration, the Founders established the foundation and the core values on which the Constitution was to operate. The Constitution was never to be interpreted apart from those values expressed in the Declaration.

Samuel Adams pointed out: Before the formation of this Constitution this Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the States in the Union, and has never been disannulled.

Well into the twentieth century, the Declaration and the Constitution were viewed as inseparable and interdependent. While the Court's change of standards has perhaps been a display of poor judgment, the Court's actions have actually been illegal under the standards of original intent. Furthermore they have violated the value system of "the laws of nature and of nature's God" established in the Declaration of Independence.

"The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent nation of Christians." John Qunicy Adams

p>
Dude you said the constitution said "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
— Declaration of Independence, 1776"

Your statement is flat our wrong. No amount of historical evidence will ever make the constitution say what you claimed it says. Seriously dude, fess up. You typed too fast or something. But don't act like arguing that the constitution and declaration of independence are related makes your previous statement correct.

jfrog 07-23-2014 12:31 AM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1326807)
They were connected....bet ya never knew that...

True American Government
Constitution Connected To the Declaration of Independence

The Supreme Court declared in 1897, the Constitution is the body and letter of which the Declaration of Independence is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence.

The Constitution itself connects itself to the Declaration of Independence by dating itself from the date of the Declaration of Independence, thereby showing clearly that it is the second great document in the government of these United States and is not to be understood without the first. How many today say the Constitution stands alone devoid of all reference to the Declaration? Let them see hear and understand what those who wrote the Constitution said about our American government. See Article VII.

The Founders believed the Declaration was the foundational document in our Constitutional form of government. The Founders dated their government acts from the year of the Declaration rather than the Constitution. The date of the Declaration of Independence was the recognized date of Sovereignty and Independence of the United States.

In the Declaration, the Founders established the foundation and the core values on which the Constitution was to operate. The Constitution was never to be interpreted apart from those values expressed in the Declaration.

Samuel Adams pointed out: Before the formation of this Constitution this Declaration of Independence was received and ratified by all the States in the Union, and has never been disannulled.

Well into the twentieth century, the Declaration and the Constitution were viewed as inseparable and interdependent. While the Court's change of standards has perhaps been a display of poor judgment, the Court's actions have actually been illegal under the standards of original intent. Furthermore they have violated the value system of "the laws of nature and of nature's God" established in the Declaration of Independence.

"The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent nation of Christians." John Qunicy Adams

p>
By the way, you really should cite your source:
http://www.christianparents.com/deconst.htm

obriencp 07-23-2014 10:49 AM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
what's the term, "owned?" lol.

Aquila 07-23-2014 11:02 AM
Re: Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?
 
To me, it looks like power mad institutions kill people. Many are religious and many are atheist. Regardless... the danger is when fallen, power hungry people are united in large institutions.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.