Are Christians Resonsible For Wars?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Sean

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]

Interesting article....

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]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

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.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Sean

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.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by jfrog

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

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Sean

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?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by jfrog

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]

Good night.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Sean

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.

Originally Posted by Sean

The dude was a straight up psycho.

Excuse me, did that make him any less a Catholic? The simple skinny answer would be...no.

Originally Posted by Sean

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.

Originally Posted by Sean

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.

Originally Posted by Sean

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?