Is Christianity a Religion of War?

reply to post by StalkerSolent

For God so loved the world that He gave his only Begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life

I still don't get why this was necessary. He created the world without killing anything, so why did Jesus have to die for the world to be saved?

"World" here is used instead of "believers," so I'm not sure where you're coming to that conclusion.

Read that sentence again.

"For God so loved the world that He gave his only Begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life,"

He loves the world so much that only believers will be saved.

The Christian body of belief, just like the Islamic and indeed Jewish religions, is by no means monolithic.

Which means it is very much divided. And every single one of the fractured sects claims to know the absolute truth. Do you have any idea how idiotic that sounds? We can't trust any of you to know anything because you all claim to know the truth but can't agree with each other worth squat. Which logically means that none of you know the friggin' truth!

Glad we got that settled. Now we don't have to listen to any of you.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

For God so loved the world that He gave his only Begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life

I still don't get why this was necessary. He created the world without killing anything, so why did Jesus have to die for the world to be saved?

"World" here is used instead of "believers," so I'm not sure where you're coming to that conclusion.

Read that sentence again.

"For God so loved the world that He gave his only Begotten Son so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life,"

He loves the world so much that only believers will be saved.

The Christian body of belief, just like the Islamic and indeed Jewish religions, is by no means monolithic.

Which means it is very much divided. And every single one of the fractured sects claims to know the absolute truth. Do you have any idea how idiotic that sounds? We can't trust any of you to know anything because you all claim to know the truth but can't agree with each other worth squat. Which logically means that none of you know the friggin' truth!

As far as Jesus' death is concerned, the Bible insists that the shedding of blood is necessary for the remission of sins. I do realize that I just answered your question with another question, and I apologize. I don't believe the Bible explains this much further (tho I could be wrong–anyone, please feel free to correct me on this)

Yes, certainly Christians can only be saved as per (most) Christian theology (and that verse) but I was referring to the "love" part. A Christian view of what you said would be rewritten "God loved the world so much that He gave everyone the chance to be a believer."
However, even if the Bible had said that God hated the world and loved only the believers, that still would not advance any proof that Christianity is an inherently warlike religion, although it would set the stage for a lot of inter-religious tension–although, truth be told, that exists regardless. Sorry, trying to stay on topic here

Sure, I realize how idiotic it sounds! There's a lot of idiocy going around in the Christian church(es) today, at least if you ask me. (That does not logically mean that nobody knows the truth, however. Some solitary hermit in Russia could be the only guy who's stumbled on it! ) However, despite the division, the core teachings of most Christian denominations are essentially the same. (Trinity, virgin birth, crucifixion.)

Glad we got that settled. Now we don't have to listen to any of you.

I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't believe you ever had to listen to any of 'us' (?) in the first place, but if you would rather not respond to my posts in the future, I won't take offense. I personally enjoy having discussions with a wide variety of people, but each to their own.

reply to post by StalkerSolent

As far as Jesus' death is concerned, the Bible insists that the shedding of blood is necessary for the remission of sins.

That doesn't sound very benevolent to me.

Yes, certainly Christians can only be saved as per (most) Christian theology (and that verse) but I was referring to the "love" part. A Christian view of what you said would be rewritten "God loved the world so much that He gave everyone the chance to be a believer."

That's the Christians, alright. Making the best out of every tyrannical demand. Only the Christians could make a blood-thirsty demon sound like a motherly doctor.

I don't believe you ever had to listen to any of 'us' (?) in the first place, but if you would rather not respond to my posts in the future, I won't take offense. I personally enjoy having discussions with a wide variety of people, but each to their own.

That was me making a point. I get exasperated with a thousand voices all claiming to know a thousand exclusive ultimate truths, and every time someone throws their version into the mix, it's just as ridiculous as the last one...and still offers the same bargain: surrender your soul and liberties for eternal life.

Surely you can understand how it all sounds to us, right? Like walking into an asylum reserved specifically for maniacal priests promising power and eternal glory if we sacrifice ourselves to their cause. The Bible would be quite at home amongst my collection of fictional stories featuring dimension-hopping necromancers and five headed dragons.

reply to post by LABTECH767

Christianity is not a religion of war but of peace but like any belief system there are those whom choose to try to impose there own agenda

Maybe not, but the book the Christians quote from certainly is. It's a strange juxtaposition when Christians claim to be about peace and read from a book full of demands for blood and death.

I would say it's more about Christian's ignoring enough of their Bible that they can be about peace.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

As far as Jesus' death is concerned, the Bible insists that the shedding of blood is necessary for the remission of sins.

That doesn't sound very benevolent to me.

Yes, certainly Christians can only be saved as per (most) Christian theology (and that verse) but I was referring to the "love" part. A Christian view of what you said would be rewritten "God loved the world so much that He gave everyone the chance to be a believer."

That's the Christians, alright. Making the best out of every tyrannical demand. Only the Christians could make a blood-thirsty demon sound like a motherly doctor.

I don't believe you ever had to listen to any of 'us' (?) in the first place, but if you would rather not respond to my posts in the future, I won't take offense. I personally enjoy having discussions with a wide variety of people, but each to their own.

That was me making a point. I get exasperated with a thousand voices all claiming to know a thousand exclusive ultimate truths, and every time someone throws their version into the mix, it's just as ridiculous as the last one...and still offers the same bargain: surrender your soul and liberties for eternal life.

Surely you can understand how it all sounds to us, right? Like walking into an asylum reserved specifically for maniacal priests promising power and eternal glory if we sacrifice ourselves to their cause. The Bible would be quite at home amongst my collection of fictional stories featuring dimension-hopping necromancers and five headed dragons.

Yeah, that doesn't sound particularly benevolent at first blush, but I think that has more to do with justice and less with benevolence. I didn't mention earlier that the Bible says justice must be satisfied, hence the "without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins" verse. (I'm paraphrasing all of this, of course.) What's pretty amazing about that, actually, is that this theme is really consistent throughout the OT and NT.

Sure, I understand how frustrating it is. Christians (and pretty much as lot of other religions) have done a great job of being completely and utterly fractured and often pretty unwelcoming. I think if you want to make sense of what everyone's trying to say, it's best to read the Bible, then trace the historical developments that lead to the "thousand different voices."
Anyway, I'm afraid I'm prolly wandering off-topic. Despite the mess Christianity has been in the past (and continues to be in many ways) I don't think that characterizing its followers as warmongers is accurate today. Discussing the Christian God Himself is a topic for a different thread (but I'd be happy to discuss it via PM if you wish.)

reply to post by StalkerSolent


I think all of it is completely on topic. And I think if Hitler had happened 2,000 or more years ago, the reaction would have been entirely different. I actually see a lot of parallels between the Christian god and Hitler.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

I think all of it is completely on topic. And I think if Hitler had happened 2,000 or more years ago, the reaction would have been entirely different. I actually see a lot of parallels between the Christian god and Hitler.

Well, that's interesting I suppose. Are you thinking of the death toll?

I've always thought that all the accusations that accuse God of killing so-and-so many people were understated. I mean, why focus on the people that got hit by the fire and brimstone and not the ones that died slowly of cancer? IMHO, accusing God of being cruel by citing specific instances like the Flood is disingenuous. If we're going to talk about God's tendency to kill people, can we get started by agreeing on that?

reply to post by StalkerSolent


His tendency to destroy those who exercised their own will, his obsession over perfection, his insistence on rulership, his war to purify the world, his promise of peace and prosperity for all who follow him...reminds me a lot of Hitler.

In fact, Hitler dedicated a lot of his work to God's grand design. Interesting, the sort of movements God inspires. It really makes me wonder exactly what inspiration he intended to provide, that he didn't move on behalf of all the innocents brutally murdered in his name. Hmmm...

reply to post by StalkerSolent


Also I want to thank you for the respect you have shown me so far in this discussion. I really appreciate it, especially considering the sensitivity of the topic.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

His tendency to destroy those who exercised their own will, his obsession over perfection, his insistence on rulership, his war to purify the world, his promise of peace and prosperity for all who follow him...reminds me a lot of Hitler.

In fact, Hitler dedicated a lot of his work to God's grand design. Interesting, the sort of movements God inspires. It really makes me wonder exactly what inspiration he intended to provide, that he didn't move on behalf of all the innocents brutally murdered in his name. Hmmm...

edit on 15-7-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

Hmm. See, I don't see how God really has a tendency to destroy those who exercise their own will, at least the Biblical God. If He had, He would have knocked off Satan and then bumped off Eve and then maybe Adam...at any rate, none of us would have free will. He does have a tendency to punish those He deems guilty of wrongdoing, but that's not generally considered a bad attribute. (We still punish people we deem guilty of wrongdoing, after all.) People just second-guess God's choice of sins.

Now, if God is perfect, the obsession over perfection and the insistence on rulership make sense to me–I mean, why would you let some other (less perfect) guy be the ultimate ruler of the universe if he's just gonna mess it up? In short, if God is perfect as the Bible claims He is, I would expect for a desire for perfection in the universe and a desire not to let lesser beings rule. In fact, what puzzles me is why the God of the Bible allowed free will at all.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

Also I want to thank you for the respect you have shown me so far in this discussion. I really appreciate it, especially considering the sensitivity of the topic.

You're quite welcome! Thank you for doing the same.

I don't believe that Christianity is a religion of war at all.. If one were to pick a religion that would be one of war I would most definitely say that Islamism better fits that spot..

reply to post by StalkerSolent


See, I feel the emphasis on perfection misses the point of living entirely. If you cannot lose, you don't deserve to lead. You have nothing in common with your subjects and you will never understand the most important parts of what makes them worthwhile.

reply to post by MichaelPMaccabee


Yes its a religion of war.

With ones own huge Ego.

And 99% of them Loose.

- shorter i cant phrase it

regards

reply to post by TheIceQueen


Christianity has demonstrated plenty of "Islamic" behavior in the past. But now we have laws. That's the only thing stopping a lot of them.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

See, I feel the emphasis on perfection misses the point of living entirely. If you cannot lose, you don't deserve to lead. You have nothing in common with your subjects and you will never understand the most important parts of what makes them worthwhile.

edit on 15-7-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

AfterInfinity, you've made an absolutely wonderful statement.

That is what Jesus' incarnation as a man was all about. Sure, the focal point that Christians often emphasize is the final agony, the crucifixion, the death and suffering of the innocent Lamb of God for the purpose of taking away the sins of the world. But here's what the Bible has to say about your comment. "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." (Hebrews 4:15-16) And although the Bible says that Jesus was guiltless, it also says that "he [God] hath made him [Jesus] to be sin for us...that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." (2 Cor. 5:21) Jesus on the cross experienced every failure, every mistake and sin and crime that the entire world could ever commit. (See 1 John 2:2) He understood the weight of guilt because it rested squarely on his shoulders. I think it's fair to say that understands us, not just because He made us but also because He became one of us and experienced every aspect of our existence, even our very darkest moments. He didn't just redeem us, He became one of us.

I don't know any other religion that can really say that.

I don't think the weight of this really touched me until I read Phillip Reeve's Mortal Engines books (my avatar and sig are based on a character from those books.) In it, one of the main characters is preparing an assassination attempt on a dangerous warmonger. Throughout this, she is contemplating Christianity, and she wonders what allure a powerless God who allowed Himself to be nailed to a tree and die has. It is not until she herself is facing an almost certain death that she understands the power: this God had experienced the same horror and fear and agony that she had.

Well, I sense I've waxed awfully dramatic, but you said something really powerful, AfterInfinity, and I want to thank you for making that aspect of my own belief more important to me and hopefully more real to you.

I'm digging this thread, guys. I haven't posted much because I am enjoying the back and forth and really appreciating the different views. I gotta say that I am super happy that Islam, Hitler, War, Christianity, and differences of opinions on all sides have been addressed without the thread turning into a free for all. While my own opinions haven't changed, the thread has been incredibly enjoyable.

Kudos.

reply to post by StalkerSolent


But that wasn't God on the cross. It was the equivalent of his clone or avatar. He created a distinct and separate incarnation to sacrifice in his place. Why didn't he himself come down to be nailed to a cross?

and for someone so powerful, why was such a brutally round about solution even necessary? And if he offered an individual based partnership with a paced learning program and an independent study option, I might be more sympathetic towards his cause. But again, he doesn't present a lot of options. He makes it really difficult to like his business, given the lack of control he allows over his investments. Why give us hearts and brains? Just so it will hurt more when he decides to punish our attempts at independence? Oops, joke's on you. You don't have a choice! Join me or die!

fyi if you check out my posts in the atheism religion of war thread, you will see my hopes for the emotional game plan of mankind's future. Proactive self-determinism and all that. Realizing what we can achieve using only our own power, and realizing that we don't have to have a god to have hope or meaning or be great.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by TheIceQueen

 

Christianity has demonstrated plenty of "Islamic" behavior in the past. But now we have laws. That's the only thing stopping a lot of them.

By it demonstrating Islamic behavior I assume that you're referring to things that occurred during the "dark ages", etc.. Well, other religions SUCH AS Islam have done the same in forcefully making others convert and so on..

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by StalkerSolent

 

But that wasn't God on the cross. It was the equivalent of his clone or avatar. He created a distinct and separate incarnation to sacrifice in his place. Why didn't he himself come down to be nailed to a cross?

and for someone so powerful, why was such a brutally round about solution even necessary? And if he offered an individual based partnership with a paced learning program and an independent study option, I might be more sympathetic towards his cause. But again, he doesn't present a lot of options. He makes it really difficult to like his business, given the lack of control he allows over his investments. Why give us hearts and brains? Just so it will hurt more when he decides to punish our attempts at independence? Oops, joke's on you. You don't have a choice! Join me or die!

No, that definitely was God on the cross. That's one of the core tenets of Christianity: Jesus was fully God, fully man.

I think the solution was necessary because it is was necessary to demand justice. Call it Cosmic Law or "Old Magic" (C.S. Lewis) or God's Nature, but those demands had to be fulfilled, at least that is what I believe. Besides that, His death goes a long way towards satisfying your desire for Him to have walked in our shoes.

I don't know why He gave us hearts and brains. I think, I imagine it was because God desired love or companionship or something along those lines, but He had to give us free will–the ability to choose–for that to happen. (The Bible's pretty explicit on blaming humanity for humanity's woes.) At any rate, though, I am really glad I have free will and a heart and a brain. Maybe He gave us those because He knew the pain we endured when He punished our little rebellions would bring us into His love.
And just to put it in perspective, I know God gets a lot of flack for being a tyrant. I think if He was actually tyrannical (or at least a halfway decent tyrant), He would have made us self-aware automatons that had a free will but not the freedom to act on it. He didn't do that.

I do realize it sometimes seems like He didn't give us a lot of options. Actually, you hit the nail on the head, He didn't give us a lot of options! But I don't think He really had an obligation to, ya know? I mean, He made us out of the dust of the ground. The nearest comparison I can make is to humans creating AI for a video game. Sure, we can feel, physically and emotionally. But at what point does God become complicated enough that we are simple? God could be so far above us that we are to Him like ants are to us. But He doesn't treat us like that.

And the independent study option is definitely there: haven't you explored it? You've seen the world, you've probably acquainted yourself with with lots of different belief systems. You've done your own studying, I imagine. Isn't that was this conversation is about? And his curriculum is there too, that's what the Bible is. I reckon that you can set the pace yourself. And, finally, the Christian religion is based around an individual partnership between an individual and Jesus Christ. (That's why some people say "it's not a religion, it's a relationship," and I guess they're about right. That also reminds me to offer my obligatory caution not to confuse the church and God. I'm afraid that no matter how much Christians get criticized for allowing themselves to be brainwashed by God, they've always enough free will to royally mess things up–myself included.)

In the end, we don't have a choice between whether we want to "play the game" of life or not. But we do have a choice between choosing God and rejecting Him.
A lot of people get upset at the concept of God casting lots of people into hell for not believing in Him. I sympathize. I do think that people will get what is coming to them, but if God is all He says He is, wouldn't eternity without Him be hellish? Perhaps, in allowing people to reject Him, God honors their choice–honors their free will. Perhaps in the end everyone gets what they really want.

PS I checked your posts on the Atheists are Warlike thread. I think your idea is interesting and probably shared by a lot of other atheists. Do you have any threads of your own where you discuss this? I might drop in; I'm curious.