The Christian "ISIS"

This blog explains the origins of this, a lawyer who knows his history. Someone challenged him on a Christian version of ISIS. He didn’t leave too many stones unturned. ]
400 Years of slave trade
Genocide of Native Americans
Genocide of Australian Aborigines
Salem Witch Trials
Spanish Inquistion
Crusades
The Lord’s Resistance Army
Central African Republic Christian Militias
American white supremacists
George Bush
KKK
Nazis
Aryan nations

Some are correct, but others are not religious motivated act…

Some are correct, but others are not religious motivated act...
The standard is, do the people doing the acts say they are religiously motivated. You will find a variety of that in the Nazis and White Supremacists, and the linked article is more careful to point it out. When discussing ISIS, I think it is the correct standard, since ISIS specifically describes its religious motivation. It is not a matter of it being "correct" based on some analysis of the religion throughout history, merely that it is declared.

While I’m not entirely certain, I’d argue about the Nazi. I always thought it was based on Protestantism, but later I found out they found Christianity was not a suitable religion for their business. They prefer for example Paganism or even Islam which is more aggressive. I’m not sure about Neo Nazi, but they seem to be not exclusively Christian.
Also slavery, racism came first. They saw the benefit from the system and then they search justification in the Bible. Not the other way around. Whether or not, they are Christians, I don’t think it played much role. They would find another justification if they don’t have the Bible.
ISIS, meanwhile, sees a caliphate as an order from God that would bring prosperity to Muslims if followed. But this is the opposite of the reality in front of their eyes where the effort to establish an Islamic state more often lead to chaos. A reality which they deny in the name of their belief.

You’re going out of your way to justify your beliefs, Sam.

While I'm not entirely certain, I'd argue about the Nazi. I always thought it was based on Protestantism, but later I found out they found Christianity was not a suitable religion for their business. They prefer for example Paganism or even Islam which is more aggressive. I'm not sure about Neo Nazi, but they seem to be not exclusively Christian.
The Catholic Church aided and abetted the Nazis leading up to and during WW II. If you have information showing otherwise please share it.
Also slavery, racism came first. They saw the benefit from the system and then they search justification in the Bible. Not the other way around. Whether or not, they are Christians, I don't think it played much role. They would find another justification if they don't have the Bible.
Everything came before religion, which a recent invention. The point is the Bible condones slavery and people have it used it to justify slavery for centuries.
ISIS, meanwhile, sees a caliphate as an order from God that would bring prosperity to Muslims if followed. But this is the opposite of the reality in front of their eyes where the effort to establish an Islamic state more often lead to chaos. A reality which they deny in the name of their belief.
Christians, meanwhile, see prosperity as a sign their god favors our country and fear angering their imaginary deity if we allow gays to marry each other, teach our children about evolution, or question god's authority. Sound familiar? The American Taliban is much closer to ISIS ideologically than either group cares to admit. Christian extremists are a far greater danger to our lives than ISIS.
This blog explains the origins of this, a lawyer who knows his history. Someone challenged him on a Christian version of ISIS. He didn't leave too many stones unturned. ] 400 Years of slave trade Genocide of Native Americans Genocide of Australian Aborigines Salem Witch Trials Spanish Inquistion Crusades The Lord's Resistance Army Central African Republic Christian Militias American white supremacists George Bush KKK Nazis Aryan nations
He ought to just say the White race is ISIS.
You're going out of your way to justify your beliefs, Sam.
While I'm not entirely certain, I'd argue about the Nazi. I always thought it was based on Protestantism, but later I found out they found Christianity was not a suitable religion for their business. They prefer for example Paganism or even Islam which is more aggressive. I'm not sure about Neo Nazi, but they seem to be not exclusively Christian.
The Catholic Church aided and abetted the Nazis leading up to and during WW II. If you have information showing otherwise please share it.
Also slavery, racism came first. They saw the benefit from the system and then they search justification in the Bible. Not the other way around. Whether or not, they are Christians, I don't think it played much role. They would find another justification if they don't have the Bible.
Everything came before religion, which a recent invention. The point is the Bible condones slavery and people have it used it to justify slavery for centuries.
ISIS, meanwhile, sees a caliphate as an order from God that would bring prosperity to Muslims if followed. But this is the opposite of the reality in front of their eyes where the effort to establish an Islamic state more often lead to chaos. A reality which they deny in the name of their belief.
Christians, meanwhile, see prosperity as a sign their god favors our country and fear angering their imaginary deity if we allow gays to marry each other, teach our children about evolution, or question god's authority. Sound familiar? The American Taliban is much closer to ISIS ideologically than either group cares to admit. Christian extremists are a far greater danger to our lives than ISIS.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
Maybe not me, but you know Christians have shot up churches, burned them, killed doctors, even bombed buildings. I guess my values are against that.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
Maybe not me, but you know Christians have shot up churches, burned them, killed doctors, even bombed buildings. I guess my values are against that.Only accurate thing here is Christians killing abortion doctors; lets remember they are very few and far between in a country of 300 million.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
Maybe not me, but you know Christians have shot up churches, burned them, killed doctors, even bombed buildings. I guess my values are against that.Only accurate thing here is Christians killing abortion doctors; lets remember they are very few and far between in a country of 300 million. You need to switch to different news sources.
While I'm not entirely certain, I'd argue about the Nazi. I always thought it was based on Protestantism, but later I found out they found Christianity was not a suitable religion for their business. They prefer for example Paganism or even Islam which is more aggressive. I'm not sure about Neo Nazi, but they seem to be not exclusively Christian.
The Catholic Church aided and abetted the Nazis leading up to and during WW II. If you have information showing otherwise please share it.
I'm using wiki, please see the citation if you think it's not reliable. Hitler and religion] "Had Hitler distanced himself or his movement too much from Christianity it is all but impossible to see how he could ever have been successful in a free election. Thus his relationship in public to Christianity—indeed his relationship to religion in general—was opportunistic. There is no evidence that Hitler himself, in his personal life, ever expressed any individual belief in the basic tenets of the Christian church". Although personally skeptical, Hitler's public relationship to religion was one of opportunistic pragmatism. Use of the term "Positive Christianity" in the Nazi Party Program of the 1920s is commonly regarded as a tactical measure. Richard Evans concluded his statements on Hitler's religious views by suggesting that the gap between Hitler's public and private pronouncements was due to a desire not to cause a quarrel with the churches that might undermine national unity." "under the leadership of Rosenberg, Bormann and Himmler—backed by Hitler—the Nazi regime intended to destroy Christianity in Germany, if it could, and substitute the old paganism of the early tribal Germanic gods with the new paganism of the Nazi extremists". Blainey wrote: "Nazism itself was a religion, a pagan religion, and Hitler was its high priest... Its high altar [was] Germany itself and the German people, their soil and forests and language and traditions" "[Hitler] himself saw Christianity as a temporary ally, for in his opinion 'one is either a Christian or a German'. To be both was impossible. Nazism itself was a religion, a pagan religion, and Hitler was its high priest... Its high altar [was] Germany itself and the German people, their soil and forests and language and traditions" "The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"
Christians, meanwhile, see prosperity as a sign their god favors our country and fear angering their imaginary deity if we allow gays to marry each other, teach our children about evolution, or question god's authority. Sound familiar? The American Taliban is much closer to ISIS ideologically than either group cares to admit. Christian extremists are a far greater danger to our lives than ISIS.
That sounds more like Americanism rather than Christianity. So far, I don't feel much threat from Christianity outside from a specific brand of US Evangelical. I found Christians in Europe are rather alright. They even supported gay marriage. Obviously for me Christians don't pose greater danger than ISIS. The only entity that poses greater threat than ISIS for me is the United States with its business kicking secular dictator out of power by financing Islamist militants and this is done by both the Taliban Christians government and the secular liberal democrats.

I’m guessing you haven’t seen the images from Syria yet.
Anyway. Your argument is that religion is just “used” by these leaders, as a way to fake out people and get them to believe in their ideology.
That’s pretty much my argument.
There are people who sincerely believe their god is going to come out of the clouds and smite the other gods or godless. There are those who just like the stories or find them useful in teaching or spreading their ideas. Their effect on the world is the same. We can’t really tell what’s is going on in their head, so sincerity is a poor measure anyway, since you can’t measure it.

You completely missed my point, Sam. I started my sentence with “The Catholic Church.” That makes them the subject of the sentence. I realize Hitler used Christianity as a means of control, as dictators have for millennia, but neither this discussion nor my post were about Hitler. My point was The Holy Roman Catholic Church worked with the Nazis before and during WW II. You know, the church whose leaders tell the world they represent the creator of the universe who rules from on high in his infinite wisdom, love and mercy. Not one word out of the Pope or his underlings condemning the Nazis.

As an apathetic agnostic, I’m hardly an apologist for any Christian group.
However, in our present day it is abundantly clear that a significant number of Muslims are performing heinous acts on a large scale and relatively high frequency. And they are specifically claiming that their religion is the basis for their actions.
That doesn’t place all of Islam at fault. Nor does it in any way excuse the many horrendous actions done in the name of Christianity in the past, or the much smaller number in the past 20-30 years.
As thinking, reasoning persons isn’t it incumbent upon us to acknowledge the actual facts of the present situation?

As an apathetic agnostic, I'm hardly an apologist for any Christian group. However, in our present day it is abundantly clear that a significant number of Muslims are performing heinous acts on a large scale and relatively high frequency. And they are specifically claiming that their religion is the basis for their actions. That doesn't place all of Islam at fault. Nor does it in any way excuse the many horrendous actions done in the name of Christianity in the past, or the much smaller number in the past 20-30 years. As thinking, reasoning persons isn't it incumbent upon us to acknowledge the actual facts of the present situation?
Which facts are you saying are unacknowledged? This is not a contest for who is the more barbarous, with the winner getting to claim their religion is peaceful. This is a response to a common argument that Christianity is somehow completely cleansed of all of it's violent past and never needs to address it again.
I’m guessing you haven’t seen the images from Syria yet.
I must have lived under a rock to not see it. But are you seriously blaming Christians on this?
Anyway. Your argument is that religion is just “used" by these leaders, as a way to fake out people and get them to believe in their ideology. That’s pretty much my argument. There are people who sincerely believe their god is going to come out of the clouds and smite the other gods or godless. There are those who just like the stories or find them useful in teaching or spreading their ideas. Their effect on the world is the same. We can’t really tell what’s is going on in their head, so sincerity is a poor measure anyway, since you can’t measure it.
It is more than just used to justify. With ISIS, it is more than that. It's the reason why they do it.
You completely missed my point, Sam. I started my sentence with “The Catholic Church." That makes them the subject of the sentence. I realize Hitler used Christianity as a means of control, as dictators have for millennia, but neither this discussion nor my post were about Hitler. My point was The Holy Roman Catholic Church worked with the Nazis before and during WW II. You know, the church whose leaders tell the world they represent the creator of the universe who rules from on high in his infinite wisdom, love and mercy. Not one word out of the Pope or his underlings condemning the Nazis.
Sorry, I guess I missed it. I did not know how far the catholic church go with that. Did they actually do something or just remain silence. I think there would be a difference between silence approval and silence disapproval. My problem with these "blame Christianity for all the bad things" thing is, to me, this is he exact same argument use by believers against atheist for the evil done by communist regime. There should be a separation between religious crime and crime done by religious people in which they use religious argument to appease their conscience.
I’m guessing you haven’t seen the images from Syria yet.
I must have lived under a rock to not see it. But are you seriously blaming Christians on this?
I was responding to this, by you:
Obviously for me Christians don’t pose greater danger than ISIS. The only entity that poses greater threat than ISIS for me is the United States with its business kicking secular dictator out of power by financing Islamist militants and this is done by both the Taliban Christians government and the secular liberal democrats.
That sentence is a bit hard to parse. At first I thought you were referring to the previous administration. So I wanted to be sure you saw the current one is seeing just as much activity. But maybe you are saying it doesn't matter which side is in power, that the US is state supported terrorism. Again, either way, you are supporting my argument. There may be differences in degree, but you don't get very far in US politics without Christian support. So yes, I'm blaming Christians for not speaking up against the the atrocities committed by our government. Some Christians do, but very very few.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
Maybe not me, but you know Christians have shot up churches, burned them, killed doctors, even bombed buildings. I guess my values are against that.Only accurate thing here is Christians killing abortion doctors; lets remember they are very few and far between in a country of 300 million. You need to switch to different news sources.How about you cite sources of Christians blowing up buildings and "shooting up" churches.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
Maybe not me, but you know Christians have shot up churches, burned them, killed doctors, even bombed buildings. I guess my values are against that.Only accurate thing here is Christians killing abortion doctors; lets remember they are very few and far between in a country of 300 million. You need to switch to different news sources.How about you cite sources of Christians blowing up buildings and "shooting up" churches. Start here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism Do you need more? Google is your friend.
No such thing as an American Taliban. Christian extremists might be a danger to your bubble-wrapped values but not to your life.
Maybe not me, but you know Christians have shot up churches, burned them, killed doctors, even bombed buildings. I guess my values are against that.Only accurate thing here is Christians killing abortion doctors; lets remember they are very few and far between in a country of 300 million. You need to switch to different news sources.How about you cite sources of Christians blowing up buildings and "shooting up" churches. Start here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism Do you need more? Google is your friend.A lot of old examples in foreign places. Nothing that supports your claim of dangerous "American Taliban". Just admit you were mistaken.