The Correlation Between Religion and Violence

[Kai]

The most violence ever seen in human history can be laid at the feet of Communism, which is explicitly non-religious. By that standard, religious people of all kinds of religions are less violent than atheist Communists, who brought us the Soviet Union, communist China, and Pol Pot, with hundreds of millions killed.

The argument religion is what leads to violence is just anti-Christian sentiment from people who want excuses for why they don’t believe in God.

I don't think this is accurate. Atheistic communism is a relatively modern development. I agree millions were killed because of it but if you compared fatalities as a percentage of current population there would certainly be more killed by religious groups than non-religious. "Christianity" has an almost endless list of atrocities throughout history. Here's one example from the Crusades
According to the Gesta Francorum, speaking only of the Temple Mount area, "...[our men] were killing and slaying even to the Temple of Solomon, where the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles..." According to Raymond of Aguilers, also writing solely of the Temple Mount area, " in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins." Writing about the Temple Mount area alone, Fulcher of Chartres, who was not an eyewitness to the Jerusalem siege because he had stayed with Baldwin in Edessa at the time, says: "In this temple 10,000 were killed. Indeed, if you had been there you would have seen our feet coloured to our ankles with the blood of the slain. But what more shall I relate? None of them were left alive; neither women nor children were spared."[24]

Christianity is to be the only religion where people "loved their enemies". This is impossible without God's love flowing through us by the infilling of the Holy Spirit. We need to say, and show by example, that Christianity forbids violence!
All through history pseudo christianity has sought to govern and thereby christianity is known by the onlooking world as another violent religion.

[Josh]

I prefer to frame the discussion as the West vs. The Islamic world rather than Christianity vs. Islam. I appreciate when outsiders do not claim the authority to define my faith and I try to extend the same courtesy to others.

Are you not an outsider to Islam seeking to define their faith?
There is disagreement within Islam whether or not it was intended to be a violent religion. I am not knowledgeable enough of the Koran to know what it teaches. Most of my opinions of Islam have been formed by how I have seen it lived out in my life and recorded history. The same is true of Muslims observing Christianity, most of them will not be familiar enough with the Bible, especially the New Testament to know what Jesus taught on the way of peace, their opinion of Christianity will be based on how they have SEEN it lived.
Muslims have every right to believe that Christianity is a violent religion. It is sad but true.

What Barnhart is saying is that the conflict is really just between different countries and cultures, not a religious war.

“The Islamic World” and “the West” are common academic terms and not religious terms, but if it makes you feel better, he could replace “The Islamic World” with “the formerly Ottoman parts of the world”

[Josh]

The most violence ever seen in human history can be laid at the feet of Communism, which is explicitly non-religious. By that standard, religious people of all kinds of religions are less violent than atheist Communists, who brought us the Soviet Union, communist China, and Pol Pot, with hundreds of millions killed.

The argument religion is what leads to violence is just anti-Christian sentiment from people who want excuses for why they don’t believe in God.

I don't think this is accurate. Atheistic communism is a relatively modern development. I agree millions were killed because of it but if you compared fatalities as a percentage of current population there would certainly be more killed by religious groups than non-religious. "Christianity" has an almost endless list of atrocities throughout history. Here's one example from the Crusades
According to the Gesta Francorum, speaking only of the Temple Mount area, "...[our men] were killing and slaying even to the Temple of Solomon, where the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles..." According to Raymond of Aguilers, also writing solely of the Temple Mount area, " in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins." Writing about the Temple Mount area alone, Fulcher of Chartres, who was not an eyewitness to the Jerusalem siege because he had stayed with Baldwin in Edessa at the time, says: "In this temple 10,000 were killed. Indeed, if you had been there you would have seen our feet coloured to our ankles with the blood of the slain. But what more shall I relate? None of them were left alive; neither women nor children were spared."[24]

Christianity is to be the only religion where people "loved their enemies". This is impossible without God's love flowing through us by the infilling of the Holy Spirit. We need to say, and show by example, that Christianity forbids violence!
All through history pseudo christianity has sought to govern and thereby christianity is known by the onlooking world as another violent religion.

Communism’s only had about a hundred years, so give it more time. It was the most lethal belief system in the 20th century.

Blaming Christianity for war and death is pretty stupid, as war and killing is a lot older than Christianity.

[Kai]

The most violence ever seen in human history can be laid at the feet of Communism, which is explicitly non-religious. By that standard, religious people of all kinds of religions are less violent than atheist Communists, who brought us the Soviet Union, communist China, and Pol Pot, with hundreds of millions killed.

The argument religion is what leads to violence is just anti-Christian sentiment from people who want excuses for why they don’t believe in God.

I don't think this is accurate. Atheistic communism is a relatively modern development. I agree millions were killed because of it but if you compared fatalities as a percentage of current population there would certainly be more killed by religious groups than non-religious. "Christianity" has an almost endless list of atrocities throughout history. Here's one example from the Crusades
According to the Gesta Francorum, speaking only of the Temple Mount area, "...[our men] were killing and slaying even to the Temple of Solomon, where the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles..." According to Raymond of Aguilers, also writing solely of the Temple Mount area, " in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins." Writing about the Temple Mount area alone, Fulcher of Chartres, who was not an eyewitness to the Jerusalem siege because he had stayed with Baldwin in Edessa at the time, says: "In this temple 10,000 were killed. Indeed, if you had been there you would have seen our feet coloured to our ankles with the blood of the slain. But what more shall I relate? None of them were left alive; neither women nor children were spared."[24]

Christianity is to be the only religion where people "loved their enemies". This is impossible without God's love flowing through us by the infilling of the Holy Spirit. We need to say, and show by example, that Christianity forbids violence!
All through history pseudo christianity has sought to govern and thereby christianity is known by the onlooking world as another violent religion.

Communism’s only had about a hundred years, so give it more time. It was the most lethal belief system in the 20th century.

Blaming Christianity for war and death is pretty stupid, as war and killing is a lot older than Christianity.

Let's not call each other stupid, it doesn't seem very non-violent

I'm just trying to get you to step outside of your box and see what Christianity looks like to the world. Of course war and killing pre-dates Christianity, but again looking from the outside how many people are going to be able to distinguish between the violence commanded of the Jews in the Old Testament and the non-violence commanded of the Christians in the New Testament? The world speaks of "Judeo-Christianity".

[ohio jones]

“The Islamic World” and “the West” are common academic terms and not religious terms, but if it makes you feel better, he could replace “The Islamic World” with “the formerly Ottoman parts of the world”

That's not really coterminous; for example, the Ottoman empire did not include Iran, Morocco, or Indonesia (now predominantly Muslim), but did include Hungary and Ukraine (less than 1% Muslim today).

[MaxPC]

The most violence ever seen in human history can be laid at the feet of Communism, which is explicitly non-religious. By that standard, religious people of all kinds of religions are less violent than atheist Communists, who brought us the Soviet Union, communist China, and Pol Pot, with hundreds of millions killed.

The argument religion is what leads to violence is just anti-Christian sentiment from people who want excuses for why they don’t believe in God.

I agree. Furthermore, violence is being perpetrated by the atheistic Chinese Communist government against Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims as well as Christians; the most recent such violence is against the Muslim Uyghur population. Even their own people have been killed if they have more than the government mandated "two-children". The "religion as a source of violence" narrative is an attempt at marketing a war against all religions, IMO. YMMV

[Ken]

Maybe it is just human nature that gets reflected through whatever ideology is handy. Communism in the 20th Century. European religious wars in the 17th and 18th Centuries. Islamic wars in the 21st Century. And so forth.

Can anyone point to a region of the world or dominant culture that is no steeped in violence throughout its history? Maybe Canada, which at least did better than the US vis-a-vis slavery, native genocides, and general violence. But is still far from perfect.

[Josh]

I don't think this is accurate. Atheistic communism is a relatively modern development. I agree millions were killed because of it but if you compared fatalities as a percentage of current population there would certainly be more killed by religious groups than non-religious. "Christianity" has an almost endless list of atrocities throughout history. Here's one example from the Crusades
According to the Gesta Francorum, speaking only of the Temple Mount area, "...[our men] were killing and slaying even to the Temple of Solomon, where the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles..." According to Raymond of Aguilers, also writing solely of the Temple Mount area, " in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins." Writing about the Temple Mount area alone, Fulcher of Chartres, who was not an eyewitness to the Jerusalem siege because he had stayed with Baldwin in Edessa at the time, says: "In this temple 10,000 were killed. Indeed, if you had been there you would have seen our feet coloured to our ankles with the blood of the slain. But what more shall I relate? None of them were left alive; neither women nor children were spared."[24]

Christianity is to be the only religion where people "loved their enemies". This is impossible without God's love flowing through us by the infilling of the Holy Spirit. We need to say, and show by example, that Christianity forbids violence!
All through history pseudo christianity has sought to govern and thereby christianity is known by the onlooking world as another violent religion.

Communism’s only had about a hundred years, so give it more time. It was the most lethal belief system in the 20th century.

Blaming Christianity for war and death is pretty stupid, as war and killing is a lot older than Christianity.

Let's not call each other stupid, it doesn't seem very non-violent

I'm just trying to get you to step outside of your box and see what Christianity looks like to the world. Of course war and killing pre-dates Christianity, but again looking from the outside how many people are going to be able to distinguish between the violence commanded of the Jews in the Old Testament and the non-violence commanded of the Christians in the New Testament? The world speaks of "Judeo-Christianity".

I’m Mennonite. I’m not “Judeo-Christian”, and as far as I know, nobody is.

Excuses for why not to follow Jesus won’t work on judgment day, and complaining “Well some people who said they were Christians were violent” isn’t an excuse for refusing to obey Jesus’ gospel of peace. Jesus told us not to kill and the Bible says to seek and pursue peace; that is enough witness for me.

[Ken]

I’m Mennonite. I’m not “Judeo-Christian”, and as far as I know, nobody is.

Excuses for why not to follow Jesus won’t work on judgment day, and complaining “Well some people who said they were Christians were violent” isn’t an excuse for refusing to obey Jesus’ gospel of peace. Jesus told us not to kill and the Bible says to seek and pursue peace; that is enough witness for me.

Mennonites in both North America and Russia/Ukraine took advantage of government policy to settle in lands that were violently cleared of their previous non-Christian and non-white inhabitants as part of a larger project of white Christian imperialism. In the United States it was called Manifest Destiny and Mennonite settlers spread into the plains on the heels of Indian wars of the 19th Century. In Russia it was part of the larger great-power conflict between Russia and the Ottoman Empire and Russian expansionism into Crimea and Ukraine under Catherine the Great. My great grandfather settled in Oregon on a farm that a generation before had been Indian territory by treaty until the Indians were violently driven off the land and into reservations.

Do you think God will hold you and everyone else blameless if you did not personally pick up the sword, but only profited when others did so on your behalf? I'm not picking on you specifically, just asking the question about historical Mennonites generally.

[Josh]

I’m Mennonite. I’m not “Judeo-Christian”, and as far as I know, nobody is.

Excuses for why not to follow Jesus won’t work on judgment day, and complaining “Well some people who said they were Christians were violent” isn’t an excuse for refusing to obey Jesus’ gospel of peace. Jesus told us not to kill and the Bible says to seek and pursue peace; that is enough witness for me.

Mennonites in both North America and Russia/Ukraine took advantage of government policy to settle in lands that were violently cleared of their previous non-Christian and non-white inhabitants as part of a larger project of white Christian imperialism. In the United States it was called Manifest Destiny and Mennonite settlers spread into the plains on the heels of Indian wars of the 19th Century. In Russia it was part of the larger great-power conflict between Russia and the Ottoman Empire and Russian expansionism into Crimea and Ukraine under Catherine the Great. My great grandfather settled in Oregon on a farm that a generation before had been Indian territory by treaty until the Indians were violently driven off the land and into reservations.

Do you think God will hold you and everyone else blameless if you did not personally pick up the sword, but only profited when others did so on your behalf? I'm not picking on you specifically, just asking the question about historical Mennonites generally.

I do not have a viewpoint where I hold people responsible for what their ancestors did; I’m not a nationalist.

Regardless of that, Mennonites are some of the most guiltless people that can be found (if one wants to get busy laying blame for problems on entire groups of people) when it comes to causing wars and using violence. But no group of people anywhere is innocent. That’s why following Jesus is an individual and not a group decision.