Does religion cause war?

[createdtoworship]

"All religion does is cause war!"
"What have Christians done for the sciences and humanities?"

Enjoy this graphic.

(click to enlarge)

This graph is a simplification of the data. Some debate remains as to if the 7% figure should be lower considering a lot of movements are contained in the number. The percentage drops to 3% after the Islamic wars are deducted.

Update to OP: Just as long as we're keeping in mind that, as everyone knows, Christianity is "anti-science, anti-intellectual, anti-thinking, anti-progress, etc." Keep the antis coming, the data speaks for itself.
View attachment 272494​

 

[Tolworth John]

Spoil sport, I was all set to leap in and quote the encyclopedia of war to you.

 

[createdtoworship]

Spoil sport, I was all set to leap in and quote the encyclopedia of war to you.

Yeah I figured people would ask for sources, it's nice the graphic has it all included. BTW this is stolen information from a retweet from a former atheist that used to make fun of christians:

more info about him here:
Former Atheist that used to make fun of christians gets saved

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

This graph is a simplification of the data.

Oversimplified indeed.

Some historians argue that what is termed "religious wars" is a largely "Western dichotomy" and a modern invention from the past few centuries, arguing that all wars that are classed as "religious" have secular (economic or political) ramifications.[5] Similar opinions were expressed as early as the 1760s, during the Seven Years' War, widely recognized to be "religious" in motivation, noting that the warring factions were not necessarily split along confessional lines as much as along secular interests.[6]

Religious war - Wikipedia

As for the personal religion of the Nobel prize winner to mean something you would first have to demonstrate how that is linked to the prize.

For example 96,71 % of the Nobel Prize winner are male while 3,29% are female. Do you really think this means that females are 29 more times warlike than males ? Or that having testicles is 29 more times like to result in peace prize for yourself than your wife?

The Nobel gender gap is worse than you think

If you want oversimplification attend Trump rallies.

 

[createdtoworship]

Oversimplified indeed.

It would be a good quote accept that it came from a publicly edited site, wikipedia literally will let any one log in and write stuff, no credentials needed. So that is not a great place to find history or any other source of debate information. I do use it for fast food information, that does seem to be a good source for that, but for debates I have noticed a lot of factual errors...

1. Most Wikipedia entries about companies contain factual errors, study finds
2. Up to six in ten articles on Wikipedia contain factual errors | Daily Mail Online
3. 90% of Wikipedia medical entries are inaccurate, say experts | Daily Mail Online
   
4. Examples of Bias in Wikipedia - Conservapedia

Some historians argue that what is termed "religious wars" is a largely "Western dichotomy" and a modern invention from the past few centuries, arguing that all wars that are classed as "religious" have secular (economic or political) ramifications.[5] Similar opinions were expressed as early as the 1760s, during the Seven Years' War, widely recognized to be "religious" in motivation, noting that the warring factions were not necessarily split along confessional lines as much as along secular interests.[6]

Religious war - Wikipedia

not wikipedia again....

As for the personal religion of the Nobel prize winner to mean something you would first have to demonstrate how that is linked to the prize.

For example 96,71 % of the Nobel Prize winner are male while 3,29% are female. Do you really think this means that females are 29 more times warlike than males ? Or that having testicles is 29 more times like to result in peace prize for yourself than your wife
?

not wikipedia again

The Nobel gender gap is worse than you think

If you want oversimplification attend Trump rallies.

so here you should never mock of make fun of people in leadership, but honor and obey them.

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." Romans 13:1-2

"for he is God’s minister" Romans 13:4

"for they are God’s ministers" Romans 13:6

in conclusion let me post some proof of wikipedia's anti christian bias:

"Anti-Christianity
See Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Anti-Christianity

1. Wikipedia has a lengthy entry on "Jesus H. Christ,"[25] a term that is an idiotic mockery of the Christian faith. Wikipedia used to say that the term is "joking" and "comedic", and relishes in repeating disrespectful uses of the term, without admitting that the phrase is an anti-Christian mockery. Meanwhile, Wikipedia does not describe mockery of any other religion as "humorous".
2. Arguments for atheism are prominently featured in Wikipedia's atheism article, but it fails to mention that American atheists give significantly less to charity than American theists on a per-capita basis, even when church giving is not counted for theists.[26] In addition, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention how key proponents of atheism have been deceptive. Wikipedia's article on atheism also fails to mention that Christianity and not atheism was foundational in regards to the development of modern science. Wikipedia's article attempts to associate atheism with scientific progress.[26] Finally, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that atheism is a causal factor for suicide.

above quote from links above

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

It would be a good quote accept that it came from a publicly edited site, wikipedia literally will let any one log in and write stuff, no credentials needed. So that is not a great place to find history or any other source of debate information. I do use it for fast food information, that does seem to be a good source for that, but for debates I have noticed a lot of factual errors...

Sure, do point out actual errors in posting instead of generalizing and posting silly pictures ; that should make everyone bit wiser. If you post a link saying 50% of stuff in internet is bad it is neiher relevant nor helpful.

Are you claiming that things presented as actual facts like " 96,71 % of the Nobel Prize winner are male while 3,29% are female." are incorrect ?

That is public data you are welcome to verify and then present correct information if you feel wikipedia is in error.

Back to your silly graphs. What correlation has a personal faith of the prize winner to the act of winning the prize ? In what way is this graph relevant ?

Do you feel the gender imbalance really means that women are 30 times less deserving to win the prize ?

Or , geee , that there might be some other factors that would explain it.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

so here you should never mock of make fun of people in leadership, but honor and obey them.

Well , that is probably one reason why you want the job. I go more for a rationale that honor, trust, obedience and respect are something that needs to be earned instead of being given to any glib demagogue that attains leadership postion.

But each to his own I guess.

Definition of demagogue

a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power

Sound like anyone we know ?

 

[A Realist]

It would be a good quote accept that it came from a publicly edited site, wikipedia literally will let any one log in and write stuff, no credentials needed. So that is not a great place to find history or any other source of debate information. I do use it for fast food information, that does seem to be a good source for that, but for debates I have noticed a lot of factual errors...

1. Most Wikipedia entries about companies contain factual errors, study finds
2. Up to six in ten articles on Wikipedia contain factual errors | Daily Mail Online
3. 90% of Wikipedia medical entries are inaccurate, say experts | Daily Mail Online
   
4. Examples of Bias in Wikipedia - Conservapedia

not wikipedia again....

not wikipedia again

so here you should never mock of make fun of people in leadership, but honor and obey them.

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." Romans 13:1-2

"for he is God’s minister" Romans 13:4

"for they are God’s ministers" Romans 13:6

in conclusion let me post some proof of wikipedia's anti christian bias:

"Anti-Christianity
See Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Anti-Christianity

1. Wikipedia has a lengthy entry on "Jesus H. Christ,"[25] a term that is an idiotic mockery of the Christian faith. Wikipedia used to say that the term is "joking" and "comedic", and relishes in repeating disrespectful uses of the term, without admitting that the phrase is an anti-Christian mockery. Meanwhile, Wikipedia does not describe mockery of any other religion as "humorous".
2. Arguments for atheism are prominently featured in Wikipedia's atheism article, but it fails to mention that American atheists give significantly less to charity than American theists on a per-capita basis, even when church giving is not counted for theists.[26] In addition, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention how key proponents of atheism have been deceptive. Wikipedia's article on atheism also fails to mention that Christianity and not atheism was foundational in regards to the development of modern science. Wikipedia's article attempts to associate atheism with scientific progress.[26] Finally, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that atheism is a causal factor for suicide.

above quote from links above

You criticize Wikipedia by using the Daily Mail and Conservapedia as sources? LOL:
Daily Mail - Media Bias/Fact Check
Conservapedia - Media Bias/Fact Check

 

[createdtoworship]

Sure, do point out actual errors in posting instead of generalizing and posting silly pictures ; that should make everyone bit wiser. If you post a link saying 50% of stuff in internet is bad it is neiher relevant nor helpful.

Are you claiming that things presented as actual facts like " 96,71 % of the Nobel Prize winner are male while 3,29% are female." are incorrect ?

That is public data you are welcome to verify and then present correct information if you feel wikipedia is in error.

Back to your silly graphs. What correlation has a personal faith of the prize winner to the act of winning the prize ? In what way is this graph relevant ?

Do you feel the gender imbalance really means that women are 30 times less deserving to win the prize ?

Or , geee , that there might be some other factors that would explain it.

so again if you want to quote valid sources of information (like I did), I will spend time to give you bullet points. But I don't even feel it is valid at this point.

 

[createdtoworship]

Well , that is probably one reason why you want the job. I go more for a rationale that honor, trust, obedience and respect are something that needs to be earned instead of being given to any glib demagogue that attains leadership postion.

But each to his own I guess.

Definition of demagogue

a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power

Sound like anyone we know ?

this is my last post about politics, but just because another person jumps of a bridge, does that mean that you should too?

again:
you should never mock or make fun of people in leadership, but honor and obey them.

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." Romans 13:1-2

"for he is God’s minister" Romans 13:4

"for they are God’s ministers" Romans 13:6

 

[Gregory Thompson]

"All religion does is cause war!"
"What have Christians done for the sciences and humanities?"

Enjoy this graphic.
View attachment 272420

(click to enlarge)

This graph is a simplification of the data. Some debate remains as to if the 7% figure should be lower considering a lot of movements are contained in the number. The percentage drops to 3% after the Islamic wars are deducted.​

Religion is basically one group saying we're right and you're wrong, and your God is a demon. I can kind of see why they'd start some wars.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

I will spend time to give you bullet points. But I don't even feel it is valid at this point.

Big surprise here. Maybe post some more pretty pictures if rationalization is too hard.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

you should never mock or make fun of people in leadership, but honor and obey them

I am sure that is comforting to leaders like Putin, Mohammad bin Salman, Kim Jong - Un and Ali Khamenei.

Honor and obey. That is probably what the dissidents and freethinkers are fed in prisons while resting between beatings.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

this is my last post about politics

 

[Gregory Thompson]

this is my last post about politics, but just because another person jumps of a bridge, does that mean that you should too?

again:
you should never mock or make fun of people in leadership, but honor and obey them.

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." Romans 13:1-2

"for he is God’s minister" Romans 13:4

"for they are God’s ministers" Romans 13:6

God can appoint an oppressor over us, such as the Europan beast of the Revelation prophecy. But we must continue to live in this question: Who can stand against the beast?

If the government is basically being satanic and we stand by because of Romans 13, then we forget what is written elsewhere in the same chapter that any commandment is summed up in a brief saying that love your neighbor as yourself.

If instructions to follow a rule result in the opposite (of loving your neighbor as yourself) then it's a commandment of man that has been severed from it's original root.

Thus since allowing governments to just do whatever because God appointed them is an abusive idea (since we are no longer in the middle ages), we must act in the best interest of promoting the root of the teachings which is that laws in basis are created to prevent harm. Laws that create harm and oppression need to be brought down. This is how we love our neighbor as ourselves in terms of legislation, if this law was applied to me, how would I like to be treated instead?

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Thus since allowing governments to just do whatever because God appointed them is an abusive idea

If it was someone else`s holy book people might speculate that this rationalization was written there so various rulers would give the faithfull easier time and make it easier for the religion to spread.

Luckily people who wrote the Bible were totally inspired and totally did not care if an angry ruler decided to chop off their heads so this is legit from God.

 

[createdtoworship]

I am sure that is comforting to leaders like Putin, Mohammad bin Salman, Kim Jong - Un and Ali Khamenei.

Honor and obey. That is probably what the dissidents and freethinkers are fed in prisons while resting between beatings.

again sir, I quoted chapter and verse (twice) and you just walked all over them, you obviously don't believe in the Bible. And that is fine, it's not my job to convince you.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

If it was someone else`s holy book people might speculate that this rationalization was written there so various rulers would give the faithfull easier time and make it easier for the religion to spread.

Luckily people who wrote the Bible were totally inspired and totally did not care if an angry ruler decided to chop off their heads so this is legit from God.

Wasn't saying that it wasn't from God.

However, the way it is being preached and applied is divorced from the original teaching by the fruit that it does not result in the reason for any commandment.

 

[createdtoworship]

I will be forced to ask mod's to close the thread, if political arguments continue. The OP is about religion and war, and religion and nobel peace prizes. Nobody commented on the fact that 4% of wars are caused by religion while 80% of the nobel peace prizes are caused by christianity. That is an amazing statistic that no one has been able to quote valid studies to disprove.

 

[createdtoworship]

Wasn't saying that it wasn't from God.

However, the way it is being preached and applied is divorced from the original teaching by the fruit that it does not result in the reason for any commandment.

again I will be forced to ask mods to close the thread if we don't stay on topic.