Is Christianity really as violent as Islam?

This is just sad.

A new CBS poll shows that every 6 out of 7 Democrats think Christianity is as Violent as Islam. I am truly baffled by how anyone can say this. Historically Islam has always expanded via violence, the Islamic holy city of Mecca was the site of a massacre, in which Muhammad slaughtered the people who opposed him. This trend of violence continued, with the Ottoman Empire, a massive empire which conquered and subjugated other religions. After they conquered Constantinople and took the Balkan peninsula, they implemented Jizya, a policy in which non-muslims had to give up a child to the empire. They then attempted invasions of Spain and tried to gain control of western Europe.

I'm not saying Christianity was immune to symptoms of conquest and violence, but they were never as aggressive as the Islamic state.

Even today, Islam is more violent then Christianity. They are the ones actively trying to destabilize and destroy countries. Islamic governments execute gays, women, and Christians for no reason, other than they do not conform to Islamic Tradition. Even the more stable Islamic countries contribute large sums of money to terrorist organizations. Christianity today does not have this kind of violence, and it does not support this kind of action.

Can someone please explain to me how anyone can believe Christianity is as violent as Islam? especially with today's modern political climate in the Middle East?

 

Not big on history, are you?

 

It's just as valid of an explanation of the laws of the universe as Christianity, for what that's worth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Because Islam is a minority religion in the West, practiced mostly by brown skinned minorities, which activates all kinds oppressor/victim machinery in the Marxist mind. They can't help but defend it. And, like the left, they count Christianity and Western civilization as some of their enemies. It's a natural ally for the left in their war against the West.

 

Here's the report you're citing. https://www.scribd.com/document/338...cord-low-approval-rating-for-Trump#from_embed
Here's the quote,

"And despite strong language before the election by the Trump campaign about the threat of violence from radical Islam, most Americans don’t believe that the Islamic religion as a whole is more violent 3 than other religions. More than six in 10 Republicans think Islam is more violent than other religions, while most Democrats and independents think Islam is no different than other religions."

So it's not, "Are Muslims more dangerous?" It's "Is the religion of Islam more violent?" In other words, old testament god, who killed everyone in all of humanity except for Noah vs. whatever Islam says.

 

Of the two religions, islam is correctly recognized as the most violent, simply because violent practices are still actively and regularly practiced. Christianity has its share of violence in the past, but such has fallen out of practice. The same cannot be said for islam, where homosexuals are regularly murdered, as is adultery, and anyone who dares to claim that the individual Mohammad was not a prophet.

 

OP misrepresented the poll. The question is Bible vs. Koran.

 

I think it is safe to say that Christianity has largely evolved from its barbaric roots, while Islam has not, or at minimum has evolved to a much lesser degree.

 

I am pretty big on history. Christianity spread peacefully to encompass Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. It did take South America by force, but no conquests before.

Islam exploded out of the desert and conquered the Middle East, North Africa and the Iberian peninsula. To the east it proceeded with a bloody conquest of South Asia. I have seen estimates of 600 million killed in what are now India and Pakistan to bring the blessings of the "Religion of Peace."

 

You also have to consider the concept of holy war or the crusades did not exist before islam. Both came from islam either trough its influence(concept of holy war) or as a responce to islam conquering Christian lands in the First place(crusades) Christians Are obviously No Saints either but they Are nowhere near the crap islam did over the years wich at its very Core is all about conquest and hate.
Personally i think if the roles where reversed between the west and the arabian Countrys i fully expect that the west would have been brutally subjected/enslaved or nuked by now.

 

Christianity did not have barbaric roots. It was adopted by a civilized nation peacefully. Islam did, of course, have barbaric roots and was spread initially by an illiterate warlord.

 

My position is not to denigrate Christianity, I am merely acknowledging the Crusades, which is undoubtedly where she was going with her train of thought. Even if we are going to acknowledge that the Crusades were barbaric, that in no way is comparable to today because that happened 700 years prior. All religions evolve to some extent, yet parts of Islam are inarguably stuck in a time warp.

 

Or maybe they just can't stand ugly white men poisoning everything with their see-through, vacant-minded racist bile who assume to speak not just for their own aberrant DNA kin but the more humanly aware white community at large. Just a thought.

Evolved into separation of church and state so nice Christian folk can go to church on Sunday to praise God and then flip a switch on Monday to terminate people half across the planet.

The devil has all the cool tricks.

 

That's not true at all. The Thirty years war alone killed approximately 8 million people in Europe. Millions more were killed in the French wars or religion, as well as the Eighty years war. Not to mention the destruction of pagan tribes and cultures throughout Northern Europe.

I defend against the "Christianity is worse than Islam" argument that the left makes, but let's not pretend that Christianity spread peacefully in Europe. It didn't.

 

Reading through the lines of your incomplete thought, I am assuming that you are referring to war. Our government is secular, so the claim that its actions reflect upon Christianity in any way is patently false.

 

There was a poster on here one day who said that he would like to see Christianity in the US replaced with Islam because Christianity was less tolerant of gay people.

You can't manufacture that level of stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

How many Christian terror organization attacks did we have in 2015 again?

 

Since you've chosen to pit one religion against another .... Who's responsible for serial killings? Pedophile abductions? Invading Iraq illegally? Lying about WMD's? Starting illegal wars in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, all of Latin America and Africa? The Holocaust? The Hutu/Tutsi slaughter? Ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia? Writing/producing/directing American Psycho, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Silence of the Lambs, Texas Chain Massacre, Elm Street, Freddy, Friday the 13 th. Apocalypse Now, etc?

 

The first Crusade happened after hundreds of years of Islamic aggression. They had colonized almost 2/3rds of Christendom at the time before they were fought back against.

 

The Crusades were not the root of Christianity, but an episode about halfway through. Christianity did not start out being spread through conquest and Islam did.

Violent conversion and religious persecution is in the DNA of Islam and this fact is reflected in its Holy Books and subsequent history. And Muslims have a long history of persecuting Christians right up until modern times. Just ask the Armenians. Of course there is nothing special about Christians that they were persecuted by Muslims. They also persecute Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus and Buddhists.

 

These progressive ramblings make a good point, many left-wing whites defend Muslims, who are mostly brown skinned, because they feel a strong, urgent, progressive need to differentiate themselves from those "other white people". It's called "Passover Syndrome", and it usually affects wealthy, middle aged whites who live far away from the kind of diversity they claim to support:

http://takimag.com/article/diagnosing_passover_syndrome_among_white_liberals/print#axzz4Y7BCARo8

 

The first people to beat the drums of war are always so-called Christians. They want war, they want government executions, they vilify other religions, they oppose liberty at every turn, and the extreme sects want to start WWIII to fulfill "God's plan" and bring about the Armageddon.

If you want to find supporters for war, death, and the loss of liberty, find a Christian.

 

Saturday secularists, Sunday worshippers.

 

All Christians?

Funny how you guys only oppose sweeping generalizations when it comes to brown skinned Muslims.

 

I understand what you are saying, although that is an argument that doesn't need to be waged. In the debate whether Christianity is as violent as Islam, we are talking about the modern day. Someone taking the position that Christianity is as bad, wants to talk about 700 years ago. Doing so is a strawman, because what happened 700 years ago has no bearing on modern times. I see no value in arguing the oppositions strawman, because that is precisely what they want to discuss.

The opposition doesn't have a leg with which to stand in modern times, but they can make a halfway plausible argument about Christian barbarism during the crusades. By arguing their strawman, it can look like they have a halfway plausible argument, which they clearly do not.

 

I agree with you. The link between the Christian texts and the violent actions of the Medieval period are not very well defined, mostly due to the fact that Christians are expected to act like Jesus, who was a peaceful man. That's the exact opposite of Islam, where followers are expected to follow Muhammad's example, a violent warlord who, unlike Jesus, explicitly commanded followers to wage war against unbelievers. That's a fact that leftists cannot refute, so they try and deflect instead.