Is it really even fair to hold Christians accountable?

[JohnB445]

A lot of Anti-Theists who believe that religion is bad blame Christianity for wars, terror, and oppression. For example the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Jones Town, Shooters, Hitler, Slavery, etc.

I read the Bible and Jesus never told us to kill in his name, oppress others. So is this even fair we are blamed for the atrocities along with our God being blamed as well? I don't even know where Hitler gets into this because he never declared himself as a Christian, and Jones Town was a cult and the source of the teachings didn't come from the Bible.

So all of a sudden because of these events Anti-Theist blame Christians, the Bible, and our God for everything, even though our God never commanded such things.

How is this fair? Is it even rational?

 

[Halbhh]

A lot of Anti-Theists who believe that religion is bad blame Christianity for wars, terror, and oppression. For example the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Jones Town, Shooters, Hitler, Slavery, etc.

I read the Bible and Jesus never told us to kill in his name, oppress others. So is this even fair we are blamed for the atrocities along with our God being blamed as well? I don't even know where Hitler gets into this because he never declared himself as a Christian, and Jones Town was a cult and the source of the teachings didn't come from the Bible.

So all of a sudden because of these events Anti-Theist blame Christians, the Bible, and our God for everything, even though our God never commanded such things.

How is this fair? Is it even rational?

Ideologies (like the more preachy version of atheism) are powerful psychological belief systems, which distort and alter reality to support the tenets.

 

[TuxAme]

Nero did the same thing, and that was his justification for his genocide against Christians. Maybe those making these claims don't realize just how those attitudes can inspire (or "justify") violence (and it occurs to me that Hitler probably had Nero as his own inspiration).

 

[HTacianas]

A lot of Anti-Theists who believe that religion is bad blame Christianity for wars, terror, and oppression. For example the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Jones Town, Shooters, Hitler, Slavery, etc.

I read the Bible and Jesus never told us to kill in his name, oppress others. So is this even fair we are blamed for the atrocities along with our God being blamed as well? I don't even know where Hitler gets into this because he never declared himself as a Christian, and Jones Town was a cult and the source of the teachings didn't come from the Bible.

So all of a sudden because of these events Anti-Theist blame Christians, the Bible, and our God for everything, even though our God never commanded such things.

How is this fair? Is it even rational?

The most violent and destructive wars in history had nothing to do with religion.

 

[Halbhh]

The most violent and destructive wars in history had nothing to do with religion.

Good point. Many of the worst in terms of killing high percentages of large populations were intra-Chinese wars for power.

 

[Danielwright2311]

Its called disinformation, its a tool used for war.

The ones doing it now want war, thats there goal, do you think the ones who are supporting the down fall of Christians are Americans?

No, there not, there from other counties posing as Americans to make Christians look bad. so they can kill us.

This has been going on for years now.

 

[hedrick]

A lot of Anti-Theists who believe that religion is bad blame Christianity for wars, terror, and oppression. For example the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Jones Town, Shooters, Hitler, Slavery, etc.

First, some of these reflect mainstream Christianity, but some don't. Jonestown and Hitler weren't mainstream Christians.

On the others, it really was Christians, at least in some areas. So I think you have to ask, have modern Christians fixed the things that led to them?

* Crusades? Have we actually abandoned the idea of spreading Christian culture by force? Mostly, but incidents do happen. The Crusades were sponsored by some of the popes, so they really were about Christianity. More recently, it's been Christian countries spreading their culture and influence. Not as overt, but it's still a danger.

* The Inquisition. Have we abandoned forcing Christian orthodoxy on our own population? In the really overt form of the Inquisition, yes. But the culture wars in the US are about how imposing a culture that one side or the other considers Christian on the population by law.

* Slavery. I don't think we're in danger of legalizing slavery of the kind that was present in the Southern US. But slavery in one form or another remains a problem, even in advanced countries. The broader question, however, was using a literal interpretation of the Bible to justify unjust actions. I think this is a very real issue today.

Hitler and his inner circle were by no reasonable definition Christian. However a population that was almost entirely Christian put him in power and supported him. Have Christians actually changed? This is a controversial question. In my view Christians in the US and Europe are still at risk for supporting far right leaders who aren't quite as overt as Hitler.

 

[Chesterton]

A lot of Anti-Theists who believe that religion is bad blame Christianity for wars, terror, and oppression. For example the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, Jones Town, Shooters, Hitler, Slavery, etc.

I read the Bible and Jesus never told us to kill in his name, oppress others. So is this even fair we are blamed for the atrocities along with our God being blamed as well? I don't even know where Hitler gets into this because he never declared himself as a Christian, and Jones Town was a cult and the source of the teachings didn't come from the Bible.

So all of a sudden because of these events Anti-Theist blame Christians, the Bible, and our God for everything, even though our God never commanded such things.

How is this fair? Is it even rational?

For the record, Jones Town (People's Temple) was a Marxist communist group. Nothing to do with Christianity other than Jones calling himself a reverend, and calling it a temple for public relations and recruiting purposes.

 

[Rescued One]

Many people who say they are Christians can't even tell a Christian from a non-Christian.

1 John 4
20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21 And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.

 

[Basil the Great]

Slave owners justified their actions by the outright endorsement of slavery in the Old Testament and the implied endorsement of slavery in the New Testament, when Paul issued that famous command, "Slaves be obedient to your masters". It took quite a while before Christianity fully repudiated slavery, for it existed in the American South up to the end of the Civil War and no one on this website can deny that many of the American slave owners were religious men and most claimed to be Christians. (Mostly Evangelical Protestants, except for in Catholic Louisiana.)

As far as the Crusades, while it is true that the Catholic Church cannot be held directly responsible for the many abuses and horrific crimes that were committed by some of the Crusaders, it is also true that the various Popes sanctioned the Crusades and there should be a debate as to whether any of the Crusades met Augustine's Definition of the Just War Doctrine. It would appear that at least one of the Crusades probably failed to meet the definition of a just war and that is the Albigensian Crusade in France. That crusade ended with a horrific massacre of civilians.

Now, as to the Holy Office of the Inquisition, aka the Holy Inquisition, aka the Inquisition..... Pope Innocent IV authorized the use of torture in 1252. The last person put to death by any of the several Inquisitions was in 1826 in Spain, when a school teacher was hanged for reportedly teaching Deist principles. I do not know if torture was used in this case or when torture was last used in any of the Inquisitions. The Spanish Inquisition ended on July 15, 1834 by royal decree. The last noteworthy act of the Roman Inquisition is when authorities legally took a six year-old Jewish boy from his home in Bologna, Papal States, in 1858. This happened because a Catholic maid had baptized the boy when he was deathly ill, without the permission of his Jewish father. Forgetting how many people were executed or lost their homes in the various Inquisitions, I think we should be more concerned with the authorization of torture in 1252. Sadly, Pope Innocent IV's Papal decree could have been revoked by any number of Popes over the next six centuries, but not a single Pope saw fit to annul the authorization of torture. What does this tell us when the largest Christian body on Earth officially authorized the use of torture to obtain confessions for at least 600 years? For those of you who are Protestants or Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox and might feel that this black mark of Christianity's history belongs solely to the Catholic Church, I strongly disagree. All of Christianity shares the stain of the several Inquisitions and the authorization of the use of torture.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Christians can and absolutely must be held accountable for their evils. Our religion says as much and it's to the point where are none are guiltless, even some of the greatest and most holy Saints.

The new atheist recognizes we are hypocrites to which we say, ask 'and?' We know we are sinners, we know we are in need of conforming to the moral law and often fail to do so.

What the new atheists blame on religion should really be blamed on human nature in general. Luckily I think this thought of condemning religion is a minority amongst atheists, many of whom are seeing the need these days for at least some sort of cultural expression of Christianity to keep society from completely collapsing.

If they want to try their hand and argue Christianity is uniquely evil, let them try and let them fail.

 

[RDKirk]

For the record, Jones Town (People's Temple) was a Marxist communist group. Nothing to do with Christianity other than Jones calling himself a reverend, and calling it a temple for public relations and recruiting purposes.

They weren't "Marxist communist." They had many problems, but Jim Jones' actual form of "government" was more classical fascist (as described by Mussolini and Hitler in their own doctrines).

Any group of Christians that actually does behave like the 1st century congregations will be called "Marxist communist" by American mainline Christians.

 

[RDKirk]

Slave owners justified their actions by the outright endorsement of slavery in the Old Testament and the implied endorsement of slavery in the New Testament, when Paul issued that famous command, "Slaves be obedient to your masters". It took quite a while before Christianity fully repudiated slavery, for it existed in the American South up to the end of the Civil War and no one on this website can deny that many of the American slave owners were religious men and most claimed to be Christians. (Mostly Evangelical Protestants, except for in Catholic Louisiana.)

However, Christianity had repudiated any scriptural justification for slavery long before then, and had been rather tolerated under Romans 13 as an authorized right of kings rather than as something Christians should go out and accomplish as an act of righteousness.

In America, Christians were arguing against slavery even as it was first being established. Slaveholders themselves admitted it was a sin.

Until the cotton gin made slavery exceedingly lucrative.

But something else to be noted from Southern writings is that the South was actually attempting to recreate classical Greek society, including slavery. In doing so, they revived the concept of a "slave class"--people intended by the gods to be slaves-- which is not in any way supported by scripture.

So they had to make up that "curse of Ham" thing, which is false on its face by anyone who actually reads the bible. Black Africans, scripturally, are descendants of Kush. The "curse of Ham" was against Canaan.

 

[RDKirk]

Christians can and absolutely must be held accountable for their evils. Our religion says as much and it's to the point where are none are guiltless, even some of the greatest and most holy Saints.

The new atheist recognizes we are hypocrites to which we say, ask 'and?' We know we are sinners, we know we are in need of conforming to the moral law and often fail to do so.

What the new atheists blame on religion should really be blamed on human nature in general. Luckily I think this thought of condemning religion is a minority amongst atheists, many of whom are seeing the need these days for at least some sort of cultural expression of Christianity to keep society from completely collapsing.

If they want to try their hand and argue Christianity is uniquely evil, let them try and let them fail.

The finger of guilt most difficult to evade for Christians is that as a Body we don't act the way the New Testament tells us to act.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

The finger of guilt most difficult to evade for Christians is that as a Body we don't act the way the New Testament tells us to act.

True and we should readily admit as much. What do they do then? Accuse us of being imperfect and sinning against God? We already knew as much and didn't need their astute observations.

 

[RDKirk]

True and we should readily admit as much. What do they do then? Accuse us of being imperfect and sinning against God? We already knew as much and didn't need their astute observations.

What they do is to be expected. It's up to us to make sure any accusations of evildoing are lies.

For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry. They are surprised that you do not join them in their reckless, wild living, and they heap abuse on you.
....
If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. However, if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name. -- 1 Peter 4

Counsel ourselves. Repent and do right.

 

[JohnB445]

Just read an article where an atheist ranted about the flood about how it was so "Horrible".

They understand absolutely nothing, the Nephilim corrupted the genetics of man and if the genetics of man were hybrid with fallen angels than Jesus would not be able to come, he had to come from a pure human bloodline, and only Noah was human and not a hybrid. So the flood had to happen.

Jesus died for mankind not demons sorry atheists.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

It may not be fair. It may not even be rational. But, they won't ever stop doing it. Unbelievers have to blame something and don't want to blame their love of money and power and sin.

 

[Chesterton]

They weren't "Marxist communist." They had many problems, but Jim Jones' actual form of "government" was more classical fascist (as described by Mussolini and Hitler in their own doctrines).

According to their leader, they were. Doesn't really matter, fascism is just a form of socialism.

Any group of Christians that actually does behave like the 1st century congregations will be called "Marxist communist" by American mainline Christians.

Not true. I think you need to brush up on your Marx.

 

[RDKirk]

According to their leader, they were. Doesn't really matter, fascism is just a form of socialism.

The critical factor of fascism is that it will always concentrate power into a single individual, called by Hitler the fuhrerprinzip. As Hitler and Mussolini described the process of fascism:

1. Organicism. Organicism is the principle that there is a national will that is greater than the will of the individuals. Individuals of the nation (the volk) must give up their individual wills and let themselves be subsumed into the national will. This is what the film "Triumph of the Will" was all about--the sublimation of the wills of the German people into the will of the German volk.

2. Absolutism. Absolutism is the principle that the will of the volk can be represented by a single individual leader, the Fuhrer. The Fuhrer is the embodiment of the will of the volk and therefore the will of the people.

3. Irrationalism. With the will of the people being given over to the volk and the will of the volk represented by the Fuhrer, then there is no need for individuals to express their own wills. There is no need for them to be given a rationale for anything the Fuhrer tells them, they only need obey.

Now within this framework, yes, the heads of corporations will also be part of the volk and thus obedient to the Fuhrer. But fascism is a whole lot more than just a command economy. It's much more than how the economy is handled. It's a completely different way of thinking of one's relationship to the nation and the government.

Not true. I think you need to brush up on your Marx.

I've studied Marx professionally for decades, and unlike academic pundits, my study was for real-world implications: How"Marxist" governments actually behave instead of ivory tower theorism...because we were fighting them.

The confinement of all power to a single individual never happens in a true Marxist government. A true communist or socialist government will be committee governed. That's why Stalinist USSR, Maoist China, and Kim-led North Korea are/were fascist governments, not true Marxist governments. The USSR under Khrushchev began to be more Marxist, and China after Mao became more Marxist. North Korea is very, very much a pure fascist government.