elusive sky

Ahah 2 mintutes of absurd laughter follow.

But seriously ...

Vorkosigan

elusive sky,

Rather than look for atheist and anti-Christian polemic with the usual massively inflated figures, lack of context and the assumption that all non-Christians were saints, why not just pick up a modern mainstream history book?

The usual nonsense from Bede. He's been getting less and less balanced as time goes on. (1)The conversation isn't about non-Christian atrocities and (2) the existence of non-Christian atrocities does not excuse Christian ones, so quit it with the non sequitors. No, forget I asked. You're more fun when displaying your usual lack of integrity and moral sense. Although it is good to see you admitting that Christianity is morally on par with the Mongols.

If you want a list of Christian atrocities, there's so many to choose from:

the Crusades

• let's not forget, as Bede conveniently did, that the Crusades also took place at home against other beliefs, like Catharism, Jews, and muslims living in Europe....

conversion of Europe to Christianity

• at swordpoint, of course, or from the top down, which is the same thing. some wonderful episodes in Scandanavia.

The conquest of north america

• the destruction of the religions of the indians, their literature and culture, etc

slavery

• a characteristic christian atrocity, done to save the souls of the poor africans

the Inquisition

• not merely the witch hunts, but the fostering of a whole atmosphere of fear, the forced conversion and expulsion of the jews and muslims with thousands of deaths....

Christian support for Facism

• the mainstream churches have been especially strong in support of right-wing facism, with Catholicism leading the way. The catholic church strongly supported Hitler, Mussolini, and Franco, and later Chiang Kai-shek. Catholic clerics ran death camps and served as dictators. Catholic priests turned jews over to the Nazis. Individual Christians may have opposed Facism, but the Churches themselves have alsways been solidly pro-authoritarian.

Christian Missionary Work

• missionary work is in itself an atrocity, wiping out local cultures and competing systems of thought and belief, stamping out other religions, teaching people to hate their own history....

Religious warfare

• the crusades, the Religious wars in Europe, Christian v. Muslims in a dozen countries, v. Hindus in India, the infighting in the 13 colonies...need we go on? Twenty centuries of violence and counting. Give us peace on earth, guys, shut your religion down.

the Oppression of Women, Homosexuals and other Unapproved

• too obvious to even comment on

Christian anti-Semitism

• too obvious to comment on, but deserves special mention

the Dark Ages

• not entirely Christianity's fault, but surely it played a major role in the destruction of Euro-Roman civilization and the subsequent disasters that befell Europe

Christian Suppression of Intellection Freedom

• book burnings, the Index, the attacks on science, humanism, progress....

I'm going to stop now. Just reviewing Christian behavior in any one section of the world should provide ample examples. What a blight on human civilization that religion is!

Vorkosigan

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: Vorkosigan ]</p>

emphryio

I read a great book about... ahh what was it. Lycantropes (werewolfs), witchcraft, and .. something or rather about .... ergo? poisioning.
Sorry I can't remember exact title.

It went into extreme gory detail about the torturing of "witches". About how "possessed" people probably had ergo? poisioning. (A type of wheat that has gone bad.)

And how mass murderers were usually considered werewolfs and tortured the same as witches.

Also talked about how witchcraft torture was usually related to certain people wanting the belongings of others. Certain people went from town to town torturing until all the money was gone.

Of course you know, none of these people were real christians. It's just a strange coincedence how so much bad has been done in its name.

I think the suppression of science is the worst evil of christianity. It is incalculable just how much harm this has done. And it is definitely exactly because of religion.

Tercel

A decent site?
It seems to be the typical biased hypotheses put together by someone who doesn't know their facts. The page seems to contain a few generally incorrect facts held together by a wad of biased and unevidenced speculation presented as fact.
It’s pretty hard to argue against unevidenced speculation, but as far as factual mistakes go in the first section:

"Jesus was crucified in 21 AD"
=&gt; Very interesting. I would put it down as a typo and think the author had meant 31, except:
"The original followers of Jesus... believed that up to forty years would follow... [which] would end with the angel Michael appearing with a heavenly host to cleanse the world of sin and corruption and instate the kingdom of God.....
Jesus was crucified in 21 AD. It follows that by 61 AD he should have returned."
=&gt; Clearly unless the author has performed three typos (he repeats the date of 61 AD) in saying 61 AD instead of 31 + 40 = 71 AD, the author appears to believe the date of 21 AD is correct...

"The campaign to restrict the reading of Christians to certain prescribed books was led by Marcion, a Christian bishop who—like many later Christians—was particularly incensed that the son of God was a Jew."
=&gt; A “Christian bishop” eh? Marcion was a heretic who was kicked out from the Church and then founded his own sect.

“Fortunately for Christianity as it is, Marcion was an unpopular man and his absurd views were rejected—but not the principle of controlling what the faithful could read. The Catholic bishops came up with their own list of approved works—all four gospels and thirteen of Paul's letters! Marcion wanted to limit the reading of Christians to eleven books, but the church leaders were so liberal, they admitted another six!”
=&gt; Um, defining what is in the Bible and what is not, is not “limiting the reading of Christians”. The author makes other factual mistakes here also: What about the rest of the NT? What about the books (eg the Shepherd of Hermas) which were deemed “profitable to be read in Churches, but not to used as a basis for doctrine”.

“Arguments like this are intended to fool the gullible and the simple minded.”
=&gt; Look who’s talking!

~sigh~ There’s too much crap there, I can’t be stuffed pointing out mistakes in the rest of it. Clearly the author knows stuff-all and is a biased anti-christian to boot.

Pretty sneaky of Bede to “go by the name” of his real name isn’t it?

Tercel

What examples pertain to Orthodox Christianity? (I ask this as a sincere question -since Orthodoxy is something I'm looking at at the moment-, not as a challenge)

Anunnaki

Tercel,
I don`t know what the deal is with the year 21. Maybe it`s a typo,but it shouldn`t matter anyway since Jesus probably never died being just mythical and all.
Why don`t you email the author of the site and ask about it. I`m sure he`d just love to hear from you.

It`s interesting that your nit picking actually has nothing to do with the atrocities mentioned on the page.
And yes. Bede was being sneaky because he never told the author of the site that he *was* Bede,but instead goes on as James H. talking about some aplogetic website and a guy named Bede.
This is hardly what I`d call honest,but it`s not surprising.

There probably are some errors on that page, I didn`t go over the whole thing. It must also contain a lot of facts though since it really seems to irritate you and your ilk. Actually it was Bede going bananas over it that caused me to quickly label it a "decent" site.

Just go with the exact opposite opinion of Bede and you can`t seem to go wrong.

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: Anunnaki ]</p>

Vorkosigan

Ya got me there. &lt;blush&gt; I wouldn't know either. But given what little I know of history about Russia and the East, and the current work of the Orthodox Church there, and the supression of science in Russia on behalf of the Church from time to time....I still can't say.

But let me put it this way: if you knew that the Communist Party in Bengal had done a sterling job in running that state, would you still hold that Communism was net evil? I would. People like you and Polycarp might be shining examples of the best Christianity has to offer, but even to get two such as you, is all the ongoing killing, oppression and other vilenesses worth it?

Vorkosigan

Toto

The Orthodox churches have a less offensive record on a lot of things because most of them have been separated from power for a long time, between suffering under the Ottoman Empire (for the Balkans) or Communism.

But you will still have to ponder Serbian Orthodox priests blessing the young Serb fighters before they went to commit atrocities in the recent unpleasantness in former Yugoslavia. Not to mention the entire phenomenon of Serbian nationalism, which is tied into the Serbian Orthodox Church.

punta

ergot poisoning was responsible for cases of mass insanity and death. ergot is a fungus containing powerful psychoactive vasoconstricting alkaloids, LSD being the most famous. it primarily afflicted rye crops.

<a href="http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1037.htm" target="_blank">rye, ergot, and witches</a>

Tercel

No doubt you know best...

I'm sure he would...

Actually I gave up reading before I got to the atrocities. In the areas I have knowledge in, the writer demonstrates extreme ignorance, bias and an attitude of treating his own unsubstanciated hypotheses as fact.
Why should I then bother even considering the writer's opinion on an area in which I do not consider myself competent to judge the validity of what he is saying?

Yeah Bede was being sneaky, no doubt about that one. I was simply amused that you'd accused him of going by the name of his real name.

What, 'cos he's a "biased, lying, sneaky" Christian Apologist?
I would beg to differ on that one. But then no doubt my opinion is worthless since I am also of the same ilk.
In all seriousness, calling yourself by another name is just a bit of fun. What I have a problem with is people who play hard and fast with the facts: Truth is hard enough to find when everyone's playing fair. That's why I don't like things like that website.
In my experience Bede gives fair and unbiased analyses. The only reason they might look biased is because the average bias of the posters here is so skewed in the anti-christian direction that mainstream opinions such as Bede's pass for biased Christian Apologetics.

Very little irritates me except mispresented facts, bad arguments and insults. The page irritates me because it contains what can only be described as propaganda: the material is misleadingly and selectively presented descending at times to outright falsity. It annoys me that alleged free-thinkers so often cannot produce anything better than biased anti-christian drivel.

Bede is an extremely knowledeable and competent poster. If he is going bananas over it, surely that might suggest that perhaps there is something wrong with the site?
In my experience, a good argument from a skeptic will generally receive a considered and careful reply. That the reply takes the form of "going bananas", it might well be considered an indication that the argument presented by the skeptic might be significantly lacking.

Why? In what cases has the opposite opinion of Bede proved to be the correct one?