Is Christianity really more peaceful than Islam?

Is Christianity really more peaceful than Islam?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Ln5fVgM0gLQ
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No, but its followers are

Yes but it doesn't make any meaningful difference in how their followers behave because every culture adapts its religious practices to suit its needs at any given time.

>in how their followers behave
in terms of how violent they are, I mean. Obviously shit like holidays and customs are different between religions.

Every religion is more peacful than Islam.

It has very violent passages, it talks about destroying other gods temples and salting the land at moments.

Now, culturally, and currently, yeah. But also did a lot of questionable stuff across Europe and very questionable stuff in all of the Americas.

Overall I just find it very hard to trust Abrahamic religions, the whole thing is just very instrumentalized. Stuff like Anti-Christ feel too much like a tool.

This man gets it.

No. German and Russia were both predominantly Christian nations at the time of the Holocaust and the Purges (respectively).

Also, centuries of war in Europe in general.

If you kill someone in an unprovoked act of aggression, you are contradicting the words of Jesus Christ, but you'd be emulating Mohammed.

You'd also be emulating God.

OP those quotes are taken so out of context, and bad translations. Reading the surrounding text makes the connotation more clear in the Qur'an.

"Say to those who have disbelieved that if they cease hostilities, what has previously occurred will be forgiven for them. But if they return to hostility - then the precedent of the former rebellious peoples has already taken place."

There are way worse verses in the Bible, anyone can verify. The old testament is horrible.

t. ahmed

God =/= Religious scripture and how its followers are supposed to act

I wonder?

Huh, I'm going to go ask the Cathars, because I'm wondering what they think of this.

On the way, ask the Iraqi Shiite

Other nations were just as warlike, the difference was technological advancement making killing far far easier.

is man not made in the image of god?

OK then, I'll just turn south at the Saxons sacred tree, and then later on pass by the Serapeum on the way there.

I think the biggest difference between Christianity and Islam in terms of violence

is if a christian does something bad its out of their own will and rarely do they do it in gods name.

When a Muslim does something bad they almost ALWAYS do it in gods name.

therefor when a christian does something wrong one blames it on the person

when a Islamist does something wrong, blame it on the religion

Also Christians mostly profess to the new testament which is WAY more relaxed compared to the Quran and the old testament.

Which is a shame really. Deus Vault has such a nice ring, and is definitely better than allah ackbar. Yet you never hear it out of /pol/ and r/the_donald

Would Jesus condone Deus Vault? Would Mohammad praise what ISIS is doing today?

I don't know anything about islam, do they really command to kill every thing that isn't islam?

The teachings of Christ are to at the very most, shake the dust off your feet as if you're ridding the individual from your presence. To render unto caeser that which is caeser, to spread the Gospel to the gentile through love, if he rejects, shake the dust off your feet.

Then that's the individuals fault, not the teachings.

That's like claiming all pizza is terrible because the guys at dominoes didn't give you your
>pineapple topping

It's the individuals fault. Not pizza's fault. Pizza didn't do anything other then be delicious when done right.

Mohammad believe it or not, yes

youtube.com/watch?v=Ln5fVgM0gLQ

but yeah dues vault is the equivalent of Allah ackbar

Can someone explain to me who mohamed was to ismael?

Christianity was created by a literal Son of God. Islam was created by an Arab pedophile warlord. This is the only difference you need to know.

Simply put, Christianity is a civilizing force, and Islam is not.

Hello Cenk.

>colonizing the planet
>setting up schools where you beat the language and culture out of natives until they worship your God
>starting the most deadly wars in history
>created the first weapons that could legitimately wipe out human kind (and probably will one day)

so peaceful, tolerant and civilizing

So if the violence in the Bible and Quran are comparable, then why is Christianity peaceful and Islam violent today?

Not being sarcastic, I'm genuinely asking.

In all of human history, the 7 years war really wasn't THAT long ago.

Better than living in the dark ages for centuries. We adapted and changed, they didn't. The only reason they've spread is because they work like an invasive species, outcompeting and in some cases killing off the native population. We were conquerers, they were parasites.

>describing something that's not even Christianity

Good point m8.

You're comparing the most loving passage of the Christian Bible to an extreme passage from a biography of Muhammad (not even from the Quran).
The New Testament is pretty mild, except when it comes to describing the tortures awaiting in the afterlife for people that don't accept Christ. But Christians also revere the Old Testament, which contains some pretty vicious stories.

the west has progressed, muslims still stone and behead people who dare criticize muhammad.

Somebody should dig up the chinese scholars and ask them their opinion

People who post nazi lolis are basically echoing nazi beliefs but are ultimately working against simply because they are "degenerate" versions of it.

The same happened to Christianity, people echo it a lot, but no one would be able to endure the Christianity from the middle ages.

Islam just needs to get degenerated. Shiite is a very small degeneration and it is already a bit less maniacal than the Sunni faith. That is why they are so scared of western presence.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army

Why are people so dense? It has to be laziness.

The teachings of Christianity to spread the Gospel are to do so in love, if you're rejected, shake your feet off and walk away.

Lol that's literally it.

Yet you refuse to go to the source and instead you opt to look at how man carries the flag and then have the nerve to criticize the source material. It's as if those same teachings that teach how to spread the Gospel, don't point out the flaws and troubles that plague man.

It's like everyone is just lazy and loves pointing fingers at people who do wrong, in order to look good in front of a group of people. That would be vanity.

It's like a nightmare, everyones just lazy and vain, they only pretend to care when it's convenient and if they can look like they just made a clever snarky point.

Religion is little more than a reflection of the culture practicing it. When the culture is violent, the practice of religion is also violent. If the culture evolves to be more peaceful, then the religion will likewise evolve to be more peaceful. What the religion was like in its original form is largely irrelevant to how it is practiced today.

Christianity is more peaceful today than it was in the middle ages because European culture became tremendously prosperous and evolved to embraced pacifism, not because Christians decided to start following Christ's teachings more closely. Islam is more violent today than it was even just 100 years ago because of the many wars that have taken place there, especially since the start of the cold war, as part of geopolitical strategies between the west and its enemies.

>Christianity was created by a literal Son of God
No it wasn't, stop getting high off your own supply shit for brains.

Nice one example.

Every action is ultimately up to the individual, but you're just lying to yourself if you don't think religions act as an enabler for certain types of behavior.

#NotAllSuicideBombers

>religions act as an enabler for certain types of behavior
It doesn't matter if the behavior contradicts the teachings.

You're blaming the science of engineering for your pos car, instead of blaming the manufacturer and the people responsible for putting it together.

I honestly have no idea what islam teaches though. I do however know what Christianity teaches.

>Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah

A METAPHOR

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

This is sarcasm I hope

Deus Vult is cringey. Especially in Anglo accent where you pronounce Latin things like fags.

A full throated allahu akbar is plain scary.

Yes, but neither Regimes were Christian, at all.

The Soviets were a blatantly atheist state, and Germany only used its native Christianity to exploit the bigotry of its population.

Hitler was a Christ-hating, Mehmet adoring, Thor-fucker.

The old testament might be worse but its close. New testament is certainly nowhere as violent.

>predominantly christian nations
>time of the holocaust
>russia litterally banned religions
>hitler belived in indian religions so much his symbol comes from jainism

Google the 'Khawarij'

ISIS is basically the modern version of the Kharijites, who attacked the Four supposedly rightly-guided Caliphs.

There's a reason ISIS has an abysmal approval rating in Islamic countries

>tfw Amerifats pronounce Deus as Dooz

replace that with "insert religon here"

If we're talking abut "True" Christianity (Christ's teachings according to the Bible) and "True" Islam (the Quran), then yes, Christianity is a more peaceful religion than Islam.

However, if every Christian had practiced True Christianity and followed all of Christ's teachings to the letter, Christianity would never have spread as far as it did. If Cortes and his men hadn't conquered the mesoamerican civilizations, for example, then the native americans and hundreds of millions of their descendants would have never even had the chance to make it to heaven.

Practicing True Christianity dooms to hell all non-Christian societies who won't be convert though preaching, and it especially dooms the innumerable still-innocent descendants of these societies, people who could still become Christians if their society was conquered by Christians and forced to learn Christianity. True Islam does not.

they didn't do it in the name of Christianity, did they?

Christianity: In my opinion it is a reformation of the overly strict and literal practice of Judaism. Christianity posed God as more loving and accepting figure that simply by accepting what Jesus taught anyone could go to heaven as long as they were honest in their faith. Judaism had a whole bunch of rituals and practices that are almost endless and even inconvenient. Christianity is a more fundamental, accessible and less necessary form of Judaism, necessary in the sense that Judaism was a defense mechanism for the nomad and minority group known as the Jews, it kept them in line and provided a unique identity which allowed them to preserve. Anyway, the first few hundred years Christianity was scattered about the middle east and Mediterranean in little peaceful communities not all too different to the communes hippies dwell in today. Lots of people start becoming Christian as it is a promising religion that requires nothing more than faith and observance of a peaceful/pacifistic life style and it is accessible to anyone regardless of anything really. Anyway it becomes so popular that the Romans made it the state religion and started using it as a vice to maintain and expand their influence through sanguinary means. Dark ages happen due to the repressive nature inherently in Christianity coupled with its use as a form of governance. It wasn't until the reformations and enlightenment in Europe that Christianity lost its grip on society and people and instead of being the core of society it became an optional off shoot thus the lack of religious fanaticism (by this i don't just mean becoming a suicide bomber i mean shit like in saudi arabia witch craft is still punishable by death, pretty fucking fanatical if you ask me) in the same vein as that found in the middle east. I will make another reply talking about why Islam has and is to this day inherently more violent than Christianity. Not saying either are good but in the contemporary world one is evidently worse.

Islam: Considering the main religious text the Quaran. It is the literal irrefutable (if one is to be a Muslim) word of God. I have read the Quaran and am shocked how anyone with a slither of rationality could consider this book to be the word of God as it is full of contradictions and trivialities, further more how relevant is it relevant at all in the 21st century. Mohammed used his revelations as a means of justification to wage a series of military campaigns which would establish the first Caliphate. So Islam's origins arise from bloodshed unlike the early christian communities who dwelt on peace. Fast forward alot and Islam never go's through a reformation or renaissance to the same degree that Christian Europe did. Some governments became secular by Muslim standards in the 19th 20th century but in comparison to western secularism it is quite religious still. So Islam grew from war, has a religious text to be interpreted literally that condones killing and severe punishments for any denial or deviance from Islam whether the person is a Muslim or not and it never separated religion from government. This "Islam is a religion of peace" thing as well, bullshit. The people saying this are second gen Muslims living in western countries who have never experienced the tyranny of their parents home land. Their parents also left because they felt oppressed under Islamic law derived from the instruction manual on how to be a Muslim. So technically speaking they aren't Muslims as they aren't obeying everything in the Quaran which is near impossible due to the amount of contradictions but hey, maybe that's part of the reason the middle east is such a fuck fest even before Europeans intervened, because of the convoluted nature of the Quaran. Jesus said pray for those who don't know God, Mohammed said kill them. Again I'm not condoning either religion I despise them both but the origins and current state of Islam are much more violent than Christianity.

Both these are real rough due to character limit and all, could literally write essays for days on this. Just a rough outline of my current position on both. Im not so much concerned with God dosnt equate to religion thats an entirely different thing. Simply put, religions get their teachings from certain text that make it clear and concise as how to be this religion, if you really believe god is nothing but love go do that but no need to put a hypocritical and institutional banner above it. Islam is prescribed in the Quaran, Christianity has the benefit of not taking the entire bible literally as it is acknowledged most of it was written by people not presented to them on stone tablets by an angel as the narrative of Mohammed go's. Further more its simply centuries of these underpinning attitudes and its effects on society is interesting not the legitimacy of their God/Gods.

First off, it's simply incorrect to talk about a religion as a singular entity when, in the history of any religious group on earth, there has never been a working definition of the group that applies to all people practicing that religion. For example, saying "Muslims believe x" usually isn't possible, since literally every aspect of the religion has been implemented and interpreted in a number of ways by countless different incarnations.

The only unifying factor in Judaism/Christianity/Islam is the worship of a particular text (however even this isn't necessarily accurate since, due to translational errors, the messages in these texts have never remained completely true to the original moment of revelation). When you say you've read the Qur'an, unless you've somehow managed to learn Arabic and get a hold of a genuine Quranic scroll from a mosque, you simply cannot claim to have read what is believed to be Mohammed's original words (and of course these scrolls aren't his words either, but they're certainly closer than any translation.)

Islam isn't a religion of peace because it isn't a religion of anything. Islam (just like any other faith) isn't a noun with clearly defined boundaries, it's an activity that has been done in different ways every day for centuries.

t. Someone currently in graduate school for religious studies

>worship of a particular text
>they worship a text
I have serious doubts about you being in graduate school.

True true but generally speaking, would you not agree in the history of Islam both old and new there is quite a prolific enactment of violence on behalf of the religion. Yes I understand that to really understand the Quaran you need to read it in Arabic which I cant, I can do ancient Greek though, and I understand more or less that diversity exists within Islam like any religion. But the fact remains, there is a book that is the main text of the religion, this book being tampered with or not by later clerics. There seems to be alot of people from diverse takes on this religion agreeing on the fanatical points in the Quaran. So although I know not all Muslims believe everything in the Quaran and interpret it differently, there is an explicitly violent aspect to the Quaran that in Arabic would not be all too different to an English version. I'm not trying to debate the finer points, I'm sticking to the question which one is more violent, this is why I think Islam is more violent today. Its holy book is considered to be the literal word of God, not by all Muslims but by a considerable and worrying amount. Even though the Quaran I have read was in English, I doubt the promotion of divine violence which is advocated quite alot in the Quaran is something we can say isn't all too prevalent within the religion as if you look at its history and the current state of this religion, its riddled with violence. Some Muslims might wear different veils, or interpret the nature of alms differently. Even differences in Quaranic interpretation has been the cause of more Muslim on Muslim violence than Muslim on non - Muslim violence. Because one party thinks this interpretation is right and God wants me to kill those who disagree. What I'm trying to point out is that no not all Muslims can be neatly categorized into a homogeneous group.

But the violent aspect of the religion has taken traction in many parts of the Islamic world, its hard to deny a correlation between what the book says and why they do what they do. Things like dress, food and marital law can be interpreted differently. Then it says kill those who dont follow these rules. Muslim group A interprets rules about divorce differently to group B, they can both agree though that each must die as each is wrong in regard to this sacred text which is apparently right.

...regard to this sacred text which is apparently right and they have understood it right too.

Muslims worship the Qur'an.

>communist russia
>predominantly Christian
How retarded can someone be?

its DEUS VULT, heathens

>Is Christianity really more peaceful than Islam?

Yes, because it was castrated after the wars in Europe.
It is now a shadow of its former self and can't do violence, even if it wanted.

Islam is dangerous because its strong. It needs to be ""reformed"" the same way Christianity was, into a corpse of a religion, so people can stop killing for it.

So practicing Christianity right means you're practicing it wrong?

The population was still predominantly Christian.

That said, OP is still retarded because obviously the government was atheist and anti-religious and so religion didn't figure into their political decisions.

>cherry picking quotes
When will this meme die?

Christianity was outlawed, but it was only on paper. It continued to be a prevalent culture in USSR, and you can see it
The state started purging, saw a culture war is imminent, and stopped purging. Then it continued to quietly ignore religion, acting as if it was all purged away, while letting people worship.
You can see similar experiments and conclusions for abortions (made free, noticed population decline, abolished), marriage (abolished, saw culture issues, reinstated), inheritance (abolished, saw culture issues, reinstated) and so on.
The USSR tried a lot of things based on ideology, saw it can't get them right in the current post-war situation, and just told itself it will revisit them later when the situation is better, and never did. Thats why people will claim that communism was never tried, because the USSR failed on so many of its aspects and stopped pursuing them. Secularism was one of those. Religion was likely stronger in the USSR than it was in western Europe in the later parts of the Cold War.
Read a fucking book, do some research, and don't get your history from internet blogs.

>Forced Secularization in Soviet Russia: Why an Atheistic Monopoly Failed
>The Russian Church and the Soviet State
>Demokratizatsiya: The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization

This, the difference between Christianity and Islam is that people still believe in Islam. Christianity is just a few holidays on a calender, Islam is true faith.

Its sadly funny how people dedicate their lives to study the Quran and it's teachings while a 15 year old comes and picks quotes (half of a verse) and throw it. As for your original question, one simply cant know because Christianity went into a ton of versions and reformations that you dont even know what it is or what it was, Christianity isnt even Christianity anymore, how ever Islam is the same since it started and you cant change it to adapt western beliefs. Thats why we have this clash

People only look on their own religion, but Ahmed Deedat, a muslim preacher dedicated 30 years of his life studying Christianity and the bible , you must watch atleast a couple of his videos, wether you are athiest christian or muslim

I know it's still cherry picking but why not use the last words they have before they die as all men change over time
'Thus a man should not enter politics before he is 30 due to how turbulent his mind is' guess who that's a paraphrase of

Stalin's purges aren't very consequential when you consider the hundreds of millions of lives were saved by his necessary consolidation of power.

I think you're underplaying the religion itself

>its the hindus that did it
the swastika is a simple symbol to make you retard, which is why it has been found in different cultures across different periods of time.

Jesus wasn't a pacifist, when God's temple was desecrated he fashioned a whip and drove the merchants out by force.
He commanded those without a sword to sell their cloak to buy one.

Jesus became Jingo

>Quran
>Isn't a quote from the Quran

How do people fuck up this much. It's almost like they're trying to look stupid.

other user here: i don't

Just from the comparison of bible and Quran, I'd say no. However, Christianity went through some major changes (reformation etc) which tamed it quite a bit. Islam hasn't which is probably caused by it not having a religious leader like a pope.

i'm sure your graduate school applies the same rigor in its coursework as do science and engineering schools and isn't completely built off apologetics, goalpost mobility, and pushing diversity.

jk you and your peers bastardized the concept of the university

>Just from the comparison of bible and Quran, I'd say no.
Where'd you get that Qu'ran?

>However, Christianity went through some major changes (reformation etc) which tamed it quite a bit.
>Reformation
>REFORMATION

How do I know you know nothing about either Islam or Christianity?

>Stalin's purges aren't very consequential when you consider the hundreds of millions of lives were saved by his necessary consolidation of power.
>... the hundreds of millions of lives were saved by his necessary consolidation of power.
>... by his necessary consolidation of power.

Get real, fag. Stalin's consolidation of power were not neccesary. He was just a power hungry sociopath. If wouldn't have been so power hungry we would not have the Russian Federation by today, but instead a lot of smaller republics where Russia should be.

Yeah, and half of them terrorist shitholes ran by strongman despots warring on their neighbors.
Exactly what the world needs more of.

Stalin would be in power even if he killed 10% of who was killed, probably even just 1%.

Hindsight+speculation c-c-c-comboooo x2

This is fucking Russia, I mean. If you are in power here, no matter how retarded are you, you will be carried until the fucking end.

The only real threat was from members of a party. How many of those was in the Soviet Union? Just do calculations, user.

You see, the movement of communism was rotten from the core from the beginning.

I wish the whites won. Perhaps Russia's and USA's roles would be reversed by today, with USA being a backwards "democracy" and Russia being the "muh freedoms" world police.

But instead we have Russian Empire today. Funny, how Russia didn't grant independence to its colonies like the rest of the world did.

> Russia didn't grant independence to its colonies
It granted... Did you miss collapse of the USSR or something? Siberia isn't really a colony more than California is colony of the United States.

You're just butthurt because he didn't just mindlessly bash Muslims

>Funny, how Russia didn't grant independence to its colonies like the rest of the world did.

But it did, thats why the butthurt belt exists in Europe.

>Siberia isn't really a colony more than California is colony of the United States.

Just because it is not overseas, doesn't mean that it is not a colony. And the colonial states of the other colonial nations had a lot of independence aswell. Main purpose of colonies was to get dem sweet resources cheaply without having to import them from other nations.

Russian Federation still displays similar function. Its "colonies" are the cheap resource extraction sites that feed the Russian Heartlands around Moscow.

Christianity's Bible is Full Of Killings and bestiality
and weird things
This Image Is just very stupid
I mean he got a good verse from the bible along with that Cute green background
and trying to show its "Peaceful"
and Ibn Ishaq 992 is Not Quran
That alone shows the Ignorance of this Image

Mohammed argued within the Suras of Quran that a sizeable portion of humankind had been marked by Allah to usher into wickedness from the first moments of their existence.

In effect, Islam established a vague, arbitrary caste of subhumans who need to be fought by any means necessary. Fragmentation of Islam regarding the interpretation of such plights limits its murderous capabilities, however.

Butthurt belt were not a colony. They were conquests, you illiterate fag.

> get dem sweet resources cheaply
So... Texas is colony too, because there exist an oil that USA can extract? Siberia have more GDP per capita than most European parts of a Russia, so it isn't really a colonial exploitation.

no, they are both semitic religions that have a lot of violence in their texts.

If christians lived in a shithole like the middle east they would be violent too