How can the followers of a religion that emphasizes and encourages pacifism and a peaceful lifestyle reconcile those...

>How can the followers of a religion that emphasizes and encourages pacifism and a peaceful lifestyle reconcile those beliefs with self-defense and self-preservation?

Christianity isn't inherently pacifist; you do not need to be a pacifist to be a Christian. You can find all sorts of works from the ancient Church to today about war and self-defence.

>Is it wrong for them to defend themselves?

No

>Should they do as the martyrs did in the Colosseum?

They can, but as far as I know there is no moral principle that says you have to die a martyr's death if the opportunity appears.

>abrahamic religions
Into the trash.

Zoroaster is the only way forward

>praying is as bad as beheading people

Is this a "redneck" thing? I'd imagine christians from New England to California and everything in between supported this until it was deemed unconstitutional in the 1950s.

>conquistadores dindu nuffin they good christian boys
>westboro dindu nuffin

>be christian community
>raise your kids christian
>democratically decide prayer in schools is okay for your community
>faggot coastal elites tell you you're not allowed to
yeah whatever

yeah, the faggy coastal elites who wrote the constitution

They would if they could.

>Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion

Nobody is telling you you can't pray in schools, but you can't tax other people to pay for it.

and that's why conservatives seem set on eliminating all public schools

...

You're kidding, right? Rednecks like hunting, fishing, cars and trucks. They wouldn't stone women and behead homosexuals if they could. Redneck is a social category. Not a political ideology.

Nice, got any more asspull hypotheticals we could ponder?

See Redneck means a poor rural white man. I'm a redneck myself and I happen to be atheist/agnostic. But there's no such thing as a muslim atheist.

>Hillbillies/rednecks are on par with terrorist who bomb civilians every other day
This is why I'll never take liberals seriously

>Redneck means a poor rural white man
Not the way I see it. I know plenty of working class and middle class people who live a redneck lifestyle.

Poor rural white men have a chance to be rednecks but the terms aren't mutual.

The followers of Drumph and it's ilk are on an entirely different level from the Jihadis. More on par with the Nazis or Stalin era Soviets in their genocidal intent. Hillbillies are just poorfags, from shitsville.

>Dylan Roof kills some black grandmas
Why is it always A WHITE CHRISTIAN MALE doing this shit? We need to do something about these WHITE CHRISTIAN MALES!

>muslims blow up shit like every week
IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM! WHY AREN'T WE FOCUSING ON WHITE MALES INSTEAD?

>The term redneck is a derogatory term chiefly used for a rural poor white person of the Southern United States.

>redneck-a working-class white person, especially a politically reactionary one from a rural area.

yeah, the same constitution that supports communities praying if they like to. Literally why they wrote it.

So you admit I was right?

its*
also i disagree, Trump followers are more like other americans except that they voted for Trump. Only worthy comparison

Working class doesn't imply economically poor in my book. Also what about people who own alot of land that's of value but still act like rednecks? Are they no longer rednecks because they have things of great value? I suppose you were right in that "middle-class".... I guess can't be rednecks? So a lower middle class family can't be a redneck in any possible way? Seems like an academic definition which is very detached from reality.

Rich people by definition cannot be rednecks.

I didn't say rich. Working class and lower middle class.

>congress shall make no law
>congress

By declaring for something beyond the individual soul, in this case the Church or the Ummah. While Christianity and Islam do promote a degree of passive resistance at best for its followers individually, it's with the adoption of the greater community of believers as a special entity all its own that violence and religious imperialism becomes relevant. Though there are spiritual rewards for the martyr of course, the true purpose of sacrifice and activism is to galvanize fellow believers to action and more clearly segregate themselves as a group from the nonbelievers. These actions are deemed necessary for the preservation and propagation of the faith.

I'm a conquistador and I can assure you that I didnt do anything.

I lived with rednecks and near rednecks for a good 7 years of my life. No, they don't and wouldn't.

Are you seriously fucking saying that Westboro is a greater threat than combined Islamic terrorism?

Not an argument

You missed out the crusades! You HAVE to mention the crusades

The conquistadors brought civilization to Indian tribes that were always at war.

Since the Spanish came south and central American populations have exploded and quality of life raised.

You're free to hate westboro though they are protestants

It supports them doing so of their own vocation, not having it mandated.

>How can the followers of a religion that emphasizes and encourages pacifism and a peaceful lifestyle reconcile those beliefs with self-defense and self-preservation?

Hypocracy.

>Is it wrong for them to defend themselves?

Hard as it is to say...yes.

>Should they do as the martyrs did in the Colosseum?

Yes. Non-resistance to evil was Jesus' message. His buddy tries to defend him, and chops off a guard's ear. Does Jesus fry the guy with lightning? No, he heals the ear.

There is nothing wrong with beheading people

Fuck off Robespierre

I see you share the same opinion about beheading being alright.

>Brought civilization
Brought diseases* and also lead violent wars, took all the gold, enslaved the natives and didn't even consider them human until some clergyman proposed the idea.

From a certain perspective, Christians could be encouraged not to defend themselves. Beyond the simply non-violent nature of the religion, there's the matter of trust in God. Christianity teaches that God will provide, and that you shouldn't overexert yourself in the care of your own life. If you have true faith, God will be with you, and he'll either protect you, or bring you to Heaven if you die. Defending yourself could be seen as a sign of insufficient faith in the Lord.

>yeah, the faggy coastal elites who wrote the constitution
Protip: The Constitution was originally written to apply to the federal government only not the state. That's why it's 2017 and you're complaining about prayer in schools, instead of not doing so as is the case with other things that are not cultural norms . Until very recently in America's history no one thought the idea of praying was unAmerican.

At the same time though, perfect faith has never been demanded of Christians. There's a reason why martyrs are made such a big deal of.

All Christians are called to be saints. They may fail or succeed, but they're called to try, at least. "Be perfect, as your Heavenly Father is perfect."

They're called to try, but they're not expected to succeed. Christianity has always been "Do the Best you Can: The Religion".

Lol what a gross simplification

Christian inspired Europe literally IS modern culture. In fact at no time in history has one cultural group come so far in such a short amount of time

His point still stands.

The level of expectation varies, anabaptists take that shit pretty seriously.

>they're not expected to succeed

Oh, really?

Serbs still suffer from butthurtitis, you know.
t. serb

*Hipocricy

Not an argument

Stupid savages deserved it desu

>brought diseases
Yeah, they intentionally brought them just to kill off the natives because they were racist.

You know they liberated the entirety of south america from an actual genocidal empire right?

I never said that lil boy, what I'm saying is that bringing "civilization" (which is questionnable) is not really a worth it when it happens that your arrival in america also ends up killing an enormous part of the population and enslaving the rest. It would be like me offering you a nice box of chocolates and also sorry but NOW YOU HAVE CANCER.

>Comes to pillage your land
>Enslaves you
>Rapes the women
>Destroy a civilization
>Not a savage

>rapes
>kills
>enslaves

"It's okay guys you are free now"

I'ld hardly be able to fault you if I got cancer form your gift of chocolates if that wasn't your intended effect, especially considering we'ld both be completely ignorant about this new way of getting cancer. Yet somehow this is a mark against the dudes with no concept of what germ theory is.

The only peaceful muslim is a dead muslim.

Again I'm not saying the conquistadors are RESPONSIBLE for this, I'm just saying that claiming they brought civilization is a bit of an hypocrit point of view. Of course it's not your fault if someone dies because you gave him a box of chocolates that sadly gave him cancer. But you'll agree that guy probably would have prefered not eating chocolates and not having cancer.

if your religion doesn't make you change your behavior, you don't actually believe shit.

it's real simple with these omnipotent monotheism cases. if you actually believe this all-powerful presence cares about you then this kind of caveat is pretty fucking unnecessary.

>hey those aztecs arent very nice are they lads?
>nah here have 250000 troops so you can get rid of them
>alri lad

>he thinks that happened
I thought this was a history board. It was a widely diffidently affair depending on tribe, region or place.

>walk the narrow path
>many called but few are chosen
Oh, your frame of knowledge stops at feel good modern Christianity?

The best thing a Christian can do is throw his life down for his friends. Christians defending themselves is complety legitimate from a Christian standpoint.

funny how the US administration literally did the opposite of what you describe during the quebec mosque shooting.

Giving his life to a cause is different than killing others for self-interest. War might start as "self defense" if the enemy is seen as a threat (eg 'they have weapons of mass destruction'). Any war can be justified; no war is morally justifiable.

Europe became Islamic in all but name after Al-Andalus.