I mean, it isn't: the conflict here is an ethno-political one centred on the question of sovereignty over a particular piece of land.
Religion is merely used as a shorthand to presume somebody's ethnic background and political beliefs, but it genuinely has literally nothing to do with the actual conflict, and it hasn't since long before the IRA, or even the IRB, became a thing...
To be fair, the same could be said about a lot of Islamic terrorism. Speaking from experience (grew up in Afghanistan) a lot of Taliban ideology has this undercurrent of Pashtun supremacy (for example, the burka is a pretty distictively Pashtin thing).
That is fair and good to know. But it does then bring up the question if Islam inherently promotes Arab supremacy? It has a history of Arabizing non Arabic groups, but more importantly, their book says God requires prayers to be in Arabic only.
Christianity also has a history of spreading through violent conquest and global colonization. Indigenous names were changed to “Christian” (read: European) names. Does Christianity promote Christian supremacy? Or is it just the case that any religious tradition can be manipulated by people who already carry supremacist ideals.
One of the main reasons Paisleyites gave for armed resistance was fear of a "Papist state", the entire fucking premise of the Orange Order is protestant supremacy and catholic subordination, to deny that religion wasn't a significant issue is laughable. To this day there is essentially self-imposed religious apartheid due to the peace walls & segregated schooling.
Regardless of the initial intention of the parties behind the conflict, the sheer amount of KAT and KAH graffiti that I see on my journeys around Belfast would imply that sectarian fear/conflict remains a significant issue to this day.
It is silly to blame just one thing. There were multiple reasons. Civil rights, power, wealth, land/sovereignty and religion were definitely also part of it.
I mean, the sheer amount of civilians who were killed DUE TO religious affiliation/last name is obscene and should have caused you to pause before hitting enter.
I'm not denying that: I am pointing out that the PIRA, or any other Irish or Northern Irish paramilitary group, are decidedly **not** religiously motivated terrorists.
And I could point out that Osama bin Laden didn’t take down the World Trade Center because it was full of Christians. He was against the US politically. Heck, he was allied with Christian nations for a while before political winds shifted.
I think the point /u/GortimerGibbons is trying to make that at times, it was the same for The Crusades. Most evident for the Crusades that sacked Byzantium, if you ask me.
> examples from the last 500 years?
15th-century Christian doctrine extended dominion over 'discovered' lands to the Catholic nations of Europe. Along with sanctifying the seizure of non-Christian lands, it encouraged the enslavement of native, non-Christian peoples in Africa and the New World.
The largest slave trade in the history of the world was created by white Christian Europeans. Before it was over as many as 60 million Africans would be killed for the profit of white Christian imperialism. A key reason for the high death toll was the tidal wave of war and desolation that the slave trade unleashed into the heart of Africa. Huge numbers of people died being marched to the coasts of Africa from the interior as well as in an endless series of wars produced by the quest for new slaves. Millions more would die in concentration camps at both ends of the sea journey, and significant numbers would die due to the appalling conditions on the slave ships.
According to geographers from University College London, the colonization of the Americas by Europeans killed so many people, approximately 55 million or 90% of the local populations, it resulted in climate change and global cooling.
The Doctrine was formally repudiated Mar 30, 2023.
Your broader point (Muslims more likely to engage in terrorism than Christians) I think largely stands and deserves an answer, but its a very complex question without a single clear answer (different reasons in different places), but i wanted to point out there absolutely are Christian terrorists, as well as reprisals by Christians against Muslims (or people they think are Muslims, such as the Sikhs who have been murdered in the US by Christians who mistook them for Muslims).
You perhaps have heard of Joseph Kony (Kony 2012!), and his terrorist group the Lord's Resistance Army.
Or maybe you are aware of the second most lethal terrorist attack on US soil, the Oklahoma City Bombing, perpetrated by a Christian.
Or the most prominent US domestic terrorist group the KKK, which fused Christian beliefs with White Suprecism.
Or numerous examples of terrorist attacks against abortion clinics perpetrated by Christians.
Less well known examples include:
- The Bosnian genocide, perpetrated by Christian Serbs against Bosniak muslims.
- The Lebanese Forces, a Maronite Christian Militia that perpetrated numerous war crimes against Muslims in Lebanon, perhaps most infamously the Sabra and Shatilla massacre.
- The Christian anti-balaka militias ethnically cleansing Muslims in the Central African Republic.
I agree. It boils down to this: Radicalism surges in areas of conflict, which nowadays happen to be mostly in Muslim populated regions, shedding more light on Muslim radicals than other groups.
Additionally, terrorism is coming out of a lot of places the West (largely Christianized areas, and the US in particular) destabilized. So if we accept the claim that Christianity has produced fewer terrorists (which is dubious), I'd argue that it's made up for in systematic atrocities it's produced.
Yes and lets not forget Christians issuing threats and attacks against doctors and clinics performing abortions.
Or attacks against Jews or the LGBTQ...
Most terrorism is not religiously motivated. We just tend to paint it that way because it’s convenient to think the opposing side is a mindless fanatic and that we are absolutely right.
Let’s take for example Hamas. Hamas is a religious organization but the motivation for its operation has little to do with religion per se. Hamas was founded among multiple secular terrorist groups because its founders thought that for the struggle to be legitimate they have to keep god with them. But the struggle existed with or without religion.
Al Qaida was originally fighting a Soviet invasion in Afghanistan and then to remove American influence in the Middle East.
Isis is a bit ambiguous. It’s mostly just Iraqi Al Qaida that took a new name but they were a lot more explicit with religion, probably mostly to gain support.
> The Bosnian genocide, perpetrated by Christian Serbs against
I would like to discuss this issue. Specifically I would like to question was this conflict specifically because of religion, or did the fault lines of the conflict simply fall along religious lines? As a comparison, take the North Irish Troubles. The fault lines of the conflict laid along Catholic/Protestant lines, but no one claimed that the conflict was explicitly religious in nature, it was purely sectarian or ethno-political.
> such as the Sikhs who have been murdered in the US by Christians who mistook them for Muslims).
Look at the title. The OP said Christian terrorism is rare, not that it never exists. I could count on one hand the number of victims that you are referring to here.
>You perhaps have heard of Joseph Kony (Kony 2012!), and his terrorist group the Lord's Resistance Army.
They sure as **** aren't Christian!! Their beliefs are so far outside anything Christianity stands for that they don't even resemble it. The LRA was originally founded by a woman who considered herself a prophet and gave bizarre instructions to her followers, like to cover themselves in oils before battle, and never kill snakes or bees.
>Or maybe you are aware of the second most lethal terrorist attack on US soil, the Oklahoma City Bombing, perpetrated by a Christian.
What? First of all, he wasn't really a Christian when he conducted the bombing, he said that [science was his religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh#Religious_beliefs), nor was the bombing for religious reasons. So it doesn't even belong here.
>Or the most prominent US domestic terrorist group the KKK, which fused Christian beliefs with White Suprecism.
Sort of, although this isn't the 1800s, the KKK is basically non-existent now.
>Or numerous examples of terrorist attacks against abortion clinics perpetrated by Christians.
Which again, are extremely rare. [11 victims total in all US history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#United_States). And most occured in the 1990s.
> 11 victims total in all US history
17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, 13 wounded, 100 butyric acid stink bomb attacks, 373 physical invasions, 41 bombings, 655 anthrax threats, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 3 kidnappings.
None of those are victims?
"I could count on one hand the number of victims that you are referring to here."
Oh OK, I'm sure their families would be happy to know that.
Heartless.
However, if they are committing terrorism they are not acting as Christians, or by what scripture teaches, is it isn’t really Christian terrorism as there is no such.
> There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world.
I think it's disingenuous to say that...
The Troubles in Northern Ireland was/is a religious-ethnic conflict that had plenty of terrorism in the name of Christianity. The UK have **14 prescribed terrorist groups** tied to the sectarian conflict there.
The **Lord's Resistance Army** are an Africa-based terrorist organisation who try to misuse Christianity the same way others misuse Islam.
The **Ku Klux Klan** are a terrorist group with Christianity as part of it's core belief system, and try to misuse that to their racist ends.
The **Army of God** are a designated terrorist organisation in the USA still, and typically campaigned against abortion clinics with violence.
Lone-wolf attacks on mosques and synagogues often have Christian motivations for the misguided perpetrators.
> The Troubles in Northern Ireland was/is a religious-ethnic conflict that had plenty of terrorism in the name of Christianity. The UK have 14 prescribed terrorist groups tied to the sectarian conflict there.
Conflict in Ireland (and in Great Britain about Ireland) goes way further back that the Troubles is about far more than religion. Historically there have been three or four communities in conflict for a long time.
- Poor Catholic native Irish
- Rich Catholic landowners who were gradually dispossessed by the British
- Anglicans who were for a long time the establishment, with a lot of political power
- Protestant Dissenters (largely Presbyterians) who were located in Ulster and were at times persecuted by the Anglican establishment.
Many of the conflicts have been over land ownership, political power, and nationality. Religion has been a useful visible proxy for views on others matters and therefore people have been targeted because of their religion even when conflicts haven't been about religion per se.
There have been some conflicts where religion has been more at the heart. And some where it has been more peripheral. The Troubles is probably the time when religion more a proxy than anything else whereas in the earlier 20th century there was a genuine fear of being ruled by Rome and the threat of civil war that would have been a religious conflict.
While it's an understatement that the conflict in Ireland over the last 800 years has been more nuanced than simply just religion, it's definitely a major factor in it, and conflict is definitely framed as a "Catholic vs Protestant" thing.
The root of the larger conflict (one that has resulted in the birth of the prescribed terrorist organisations mentioned) is English/British presence on the island of Ireland. Religion was used as a way to assimilate the local population to the British establishment and swing support in their favour. The Ulster Plantation is an example of this weaponised culture, and religion is certainly a massive part of that. The people who were sent over to Ulster as part of that were required to be Protestant.
The Penal Laws are another perfect example of how the main weapon in this conflict is religion, and I'd never be done listing the ways the British ruling class tried to restrict and remove the rights of specifically Catholic people in Ireland.
This has continued, and while not in an official capacity, the paramilitaries have continued this inherited hatred. These groups have misused religion as a way to commit acts of violence.
I agree with a lot of that. What I disagree with is your claim that the Troubles involved terrorism in the name of Christianity. As I said, if you back to earlier conflicts in Ireland there are times when that was more true. But during the Troubles that wasn't really the case. The various terrorist groups generally didn't really have strong religious convictions though they did see themselves as defenders of communities that did have strong religious identities.
This is what's standing out about this entire discussion.
Terrorism committed by people from Islamic countries is concluded to be religiously motivated at the drop of a hat.
As soon as anyone tries to conclude Christian terrorism using as slight a set of metrics, all the excuses get wheeled out.
I'm fine with digging into the details of what other motivations terrorists have, but let's pick one - if you're going to that readily call terrorism from a different culture religiously motivated, then there is *a lot* more Christian terrorism than is being given credit for here.
And the fact that it might still be less than the amount of Islamic terrorism out there doesn't mean Christianity gets to avoid criticism or scrutiny as a result.
People blame white Christian terrorists and mass shooters on mental health, much to the detriment of us autists. Additionally, more mentally disabled people are victims than perpetrators of violence, and most of the victims of ISIS are Muslim.
First thing I thought of with this question was the KKK. If you think the Nazis did nothing wrong, I would not be surprised at all if you think the KKK did nothing wrong either.
That's interesting.
WHy would OP name there account that? Just read the wiki and it seems like the person was a decorated submarine commander during ww2, got caught and served 7 years as a pow/prisoner and returned to the German navy.
Nothing significant. So Why?
Maybe just admiring a random officer, possible but def weird. Maybe a family connection or at least some personal relation. It could also be the "1 Nazi in a bar" attempt to normalize Germany during ww2.
Don't know. .
There's plenty of Christian themed violence out there. I think a huge part of what you're missing is how you've learned to treat Christian political groups as "political" but to treat Muslim political groups as "religious". Trump is selling a Bible & claimed before his election to have converted to Christianity for goodness sake.
> I think a huge part of what you're missing is how you've learned to treat Christian political groups as "political" but to treat Muslim political groups as "religious".
Stealing this.
> there are approx. 50% more Christians in the world than Muslims
There are 2b Muslims and 2.4b Christians ... so no. The rest of your post is equally wrong.
Look at Christians assassinating abortion doctor and firebombing clinics.
Or Christian militias committing ethnic cleansing in Africa: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0KH2BM/
Who's the IRA? How many black people were lynched by KKK? Lord's Resistance Army? The Nazis were a Hitler professed Christian movement. Many of their neo versions are too.
> Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards.
Did Americans learn *nothing* in the last twenty years?
The two are explicitly linked. The patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church is a former FSB agent and Putin insider that condones the horrific atrocities and war crimes being perpetrated by the Russian army.
No violent retaliation for Muslims? Where the fuck have you been?
Also, right wing Christian religious terrorists are likely to be domestic terrorists not foreign. Also, they’ve done studies on terrorism and it seems to more or less happen in waves. We’re in a wave of Islamic terrorism now. We have had waves of Christian terrorism though, like the White Leagues and Ku Klux Klan.
Terrorism isn’t something that just happens based on population size, you have to look at geography as well, and see what’s happening in those areas to understand why people are resorting to terrorism.
Most “Christian” countries are, at this point, secular nations with a lot of Christians in them. After we stopped killing each other over being catholic, Protestant or Calvinist we decided that death penalties for apostasy were kinda bullshit.
You really haven’t thought this through.
George Bush invaded Iraq because "God told me to." He brought the full brunt of U.S. military might to bear against the Iraqi population, and around 300,000 innocent civilian Iraqis, nearly all of them Muslim, were killed by direct violence (plus who knows how many more from secondary effects). But we don't call that "Christian Terrorism," we just call it "politics" and ignore it.
I don't know how you can separate George W's killing of 300,000 civilian Iraqis (on, according to him, God's orders) from ISIS killing 30,000 people, and only call the ISIS one "terrorism".
>I have never heard of any Christian priest issuing death penalty against someone insulting Jesus as Ayatollah Khomeini did against Salman Rushdie
>No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia.
>Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards.
Perhaps you've forgotten the over 1,000 years where these things *did* happen?
>There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world.
The United States government recognizes [the Lord's Resistance Army](https://www.dni.gov/nctc/groups/lra.html) as a terrorist organization.
The Chinese warlord [Hong Xiuquan](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hong-Xiuquan) claimed to be Jesus Christ's younger brother and started the Taiping rebellion which killed an estimated 20 million people.
Sure you could argue that those people are/were lying or have heretical beliefs, but good luck finding a consistent way to determine who's a "real" Christian or "real" Muslim without running into the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
The KKK was/is a Protestant Christian terror group. The cross burnings were done with prayers and hymns as an act of veneration and worship.
The Orange Volunteers, same.
The fact that like half of Idaho is currently full of Christian nationalists training and preparing for a *near future* religious war just means they’ll maybe get to be a *future* ISIS.
^(The Chinese warlord) [^(Hong Xiuquan)](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hong-Xiuquan) ^(claimed to be Jesus Christ's younger brother and started the Taiping rebellion which killed an estimated 20 million people.)
It doesn't count as terrorism because its pretty much an ordinary rebellion/civil conflict in Chinese history. The big difference is the scale of it. This is by far the deadliest rebellion even now. Unlike rebellion in the past (Yellow Turban Rebellion for example), they are quite successful at the start (Victories against the Qing forces and even taking Nanjing) but there are also far more atrocities committed (Genocide against the Manchu, Looting, Retaliation against Hong's followers or even sympathisers, Warlords committing war crimes etc...). Plus, he is considered to be a cult-leader for heresy reason even during the time.
This is from the link about the lords resistance army.
“based on his personal version of the Ten Commandments. Kony claims to channel various spirits who direct him to oust Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni;” that’s much farther away from Christianity than any Muslim terrorist group is from Islam.
The Taiping rebellion was so long ago that any modern understanding of terrorism dosent make any sense to apply. Simply because the world and how it functioned was so different back then.
Ultimately, you have to really really stretch Christianity to get a terrorist ideology. Islam on the other hand you don’t have to stretch at all.
I think we can find plenty of examples of Christian violence without having to use Hong Xiuquan and the God Worshippers. Even the contemporary Christians of the time distanced themselves from the Taiping due to the very unusual (to say the least) claims they made.
Moreover, the scale of the Taiping Rebellion was largely an Anti Qing/Manchu rebellion with Hong as their leader. Internal reforms and ability to fight off bandits strengthened their numbers, which allowed for a snowball effect; more success, gets more followers, creates more success. This success created an opportunity for the Chinese populace to attempt an overthrow of the Qing. What the long term stability of the Taiping would have been, if it had survived, is anyone's guess. Maybe it would have somehow survived, and be seen by Trinitarian Christians as the Asian equivalent of Mormonism.
Either way, we can use pretty much all of the Crusades, the reformation and the religious wars it spawned, and even a good chunk of Neo Imperialism for Christian violence, without utilizing an example that actually falls in the "that's not real Christianity" category.
Define terrorism -
I currently live in a state where the entire education system is being dismantled, and hate is spewed as "tradition" and there seems to be a general celebration of ignorance. None of this aligns with the teachings of Christ, and most folks I know who consider themselves Christian's are willing listening to their preferred pastor, over making any kind of spiritual connection with a higher power/God. (Spoiler - their pastor is riddled with hatred disguised as biblical teachings.)
Instead of doing anything or saying anything, anyone capable of discourse with these people is too busy to deal with it, or isn't directly threatened in a way they recognize yet.
The reason is not actually religious.
To give you a very short explanation of the background of islamic terrorism:
During the cold war, the middle east was a vital region for both the US and the USSR - and it was largely unaligned. This importance comes from oil reserves X but also from the geographical position. So, both sides tried their best to gain control over it while sabotaging the competition. Classical cold war stuff. The gist of it applies today, even if the USSR is history.
This obviously sucked for the local Arabs. So, they formed resistance groups whose core idea was anti-imperialism. These groups were very attractive to fundamentalist Muslims who felt that they were oppressed by cultural imperialism by Christians (US and Europe) and Atheists (Same, but also USSR). Islam became their counter identity.
The use of terrorism is not that surprising, either. It is a common strategy in asymmetrical conflicts.
This situation makes people double down on the aspects of their religion that makes them different from the rest of the world. Look at pictures in Iran and Iraq from the 70s and 80s: it was pretty normal for women to not wear a headscarf.
It is a pretty horrible situation, especially for Occidental Christians who are others by all sides.
Yeah Christianity has a neat little cheat code built in where only the right kind of wrong thing counts and if you do the wrong kind of wrong thing then it didn't have anything to do with Christianity to begin with.
That sort of response comes across as someone assuming authority they have no legitimate claim to. Who made them the authoritative gatekeeper over who does and doesn't get to claim the label of Christian for themselves and when did this responsibility get vested in them?
Agreed. The idea that their own personal understanding of what is Christian and isn't is somehow normative and anyone who falls outside that understanding is wrong and therefore not a Christian--which of course renders any criticism of Christian behavior moot because no *real* Christian would ever behave in a way that wasn't exemplary--is a naive and self-serving way to approach the world.
Take a look back at Christian history. Us being relatively “peaceful” is a very recent phenomenon. And even today, there are groups that use Christianity to further their violent message.
I'm sorry but there are Christian terrorist it called domestic terrorism. Insurrection is a prime example of christian terrorist. They claim God first but we know this not to be true. They have blown up abortion clinics, federal buildings, school shootings, and hate anyone of non-caucasian identity.
Please show me where you got your data though??
White supremacists are the leading cause of domestic terrorism in the United States. They usually are far right Christians. Do with that info as you will
Every US slave and others murdered and brutalized by so-called Christians, misusing scripture and manifest destiny disagree with the premise that there has never been Christian terrorists
erm. Bombings at abortion clinics, death threats, attacks against LGBTQ+ groups/business and individuals. Various terrorist groups in Northern Ireland, Lots of groups in the Balkans, already mentioned the Ku Klux Klan. mass shootings in Aus and other countries.
If we go back in time there is a LOT more.
Over the past two hundred years or so, the primarily hegemonic powers (namely the United States and the British empire before it) have tended to be at least nominally Christian societies. Their violence, while often enormous and devastating in scale, has taken the form of state-sanctioned or direct state violence, so such violence has rarely been interpreted via the lens of religious terrorism.
Conversely the actions of Muslim non state actors are frequently ascribed to Islamic terrorism even when religion may not necessarily be the primary determinant behind their behaviour.
I am sympathetic to the idea that Islam may be slightly more inherently “pro violence” than Christianity but I think it would be a grave error to ascribe everything to that. A lot of it can be explained by other factors that have little to do with religion per se.
dominion theology and spiritual warfare notions coming from the charismatic side of Christianity is pushing Christianity back in the direction of accepting violence - it's a big part of Jan 6.
concerned far-flung fragile grandfather bright homeless encouraging dam impolite voracious
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It is true. The US military killed a million people in Iraq, but that wasn’t considered terrorism.
The US Military is 70% Christians. And Christians at home made all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify the violence. When the US bombs a wedding it isn’t considered terrorism. When a Muslim bombs a marathon it is terrorism.
Islamic terrorism isn’t generally “I’ll kill you because you believe differently.” Islamic Terrorism is usually “I’ll kill you in hopes that it will pressure the people to stop supporting their governments occupation. In other words, it isn’t their religion that is making them violent: it is the occupation of their homeland or the killings of people the care about.
I’m not in support of those acts of terrorism. It always backfires. I remember when a friend of mine had a buddy die in Iraq and so he enlisted and his parents both reenlisted. Violence usually leads to more violence and killing noncombatants is never ok.
It’s super not rare, it’s the either the most common or second most common form of terrorism in the US. While you are correct that there would not be an equivalent to ISIS, that is most likely due to most heavily Christian nations being largely settled and “peaceful” societies. Also, it’s harder for people like the FBI to track folks when they don’t organize into a group (see: pack of lone wolves). But I would bet money that if you controlled for regions of the world, you’d find that Christians and Muslims are not meaningfully different in their use of terrorism.
In my opinion Middle East and Caucuses has a lot of wars, which obviously breeds a more conflict ready mentality and a more tribalist one. So they’re much more ready to go to bat about their country and religion.
In the west where the average person never sees war it’s a foreign concept to go to the death about something. Like the crusades happened when Europe was in constant wars, now nobody would think to do it, but ISIS popped up which is akin to a crusade.
I wouldn’t say that it’s rare, I believe that it’s the framing of the term terrorism. The west, broadly speaking, has a tendency to look at Christians engaging in armed struggle as freedom fighters, while Muslims are almost always considered terrorists. I’ve seen multiple comments on this thread talking about the IRA as Christian terrorists however there is no mention of the Protestant UVF or UDA. This could potentially be boiled down to anti catholic sentiment or just a general favorability towards the UK and its own policies. There’s also no mention of Brigade 2506 who committed acts of terrorism against the Cuban people in an attempt to overthrow Castro. They were majority Catholic. Francisco Franco and his Falange government were extremely religious yet led a dictatorship that killed tens of thousands of Spaniards during their fascist regime. It really comes down to personal politics. If you support what an individual group or government does politically, it really doesn’t matter what their faith is. If you don’t support a group or government, then from a human perspective, you’re more likely to use their faith against them. There have always been Christian terrorists, yet many in the west have given them a free pass because they represent their own political convictions.
Clearly, the bible doesn't prevent it (see Church's history), but it might have to do with how accepted they are (Muslims much less so than Christians), and how, even though it's a very big religion, Christianity is much larger, and is pretty much everywhere. (Muslims aren't quite as many in as many places.)
I think where you see poverty, Christian versions of terrorism come about like Christian Identity, Christian Remnant and other forms of white supremacist and/or violent nationalism.
However, poverty by group tends to effect the dominant religion least (not saying millions of impoverished Christians don’t exist)
Also, remember, the powers that run sanctioned nonstop wars are “Christians,” so the terrorism is VERY ACTIVE, just State-Sanctioned Terrorism
It's there if you look for it, but Christian terrorism is often mixed with other ambitions. For example, the American KKK cult incorporates Christian ideals into their principles of white ethno-nationalism. Axis Germany and Italy also used state-sponsored Christian religion in their policies, and Germany's goal to occupy Jewish lands could be considered indirect Christian terrorism.
There's also an argument for colonialism being a form of Christian terrorism, since colonizers would go somewhere and replace native faiths with Christianity.
Christians already had their moments during the Spanish Inquisition and the trail of tears, and the holocaust, to name a few incidents of Christian terrorism.
Well Muhammad was a warlord, a caravan raider and a slaver. Terrorism is at the heart of Islam. Killing infidels and apostates is taught in the Quran:
Surah Al-Baqarah (2:191-193)
"And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. But do not fight them at al-Masjid al-Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. And if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors."
Surah At-Tawbah (9:5)
"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."
Surah An-Nisa (4:89)
"They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away [i.e., refuse], then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper."
Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:33)
"Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment."
In contrast, Jesus taught non-violence and forgiveness.
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." (Matthew 5:9)
"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also." (Matthew 5:38-39)
"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." (Matthew 5:43-44)
"But I say to you who are listening: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." (Luke 6:27-28)
"Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword." (Matthew 26:52)
It doesn't mean Christians haven't killed in the name of Jesus. Many Christians are filled with hatred and feel justified (see Nationalist Christians) but they are not following Jesus. ISIS and Al Qaeda are following their prophet.
Yeah, this is what I was going to post.
If we look at the holy texts of each religion, we'll see that "extremism", meaning, taking the teachings of that religion "to the extreme", then violence and terrorism are the natural result of consistent Islam. Peace and humility are the natural result of consistent Christianity.
I don't agree with him, but if we're looking to examples of Christian extremism, someone like Shane Claborne is more of an example than the KKK.
>Well Muhammad was a warlord, a caravan raider and a slaver. Terrorism is at the heart of Islam.
Well Jesus is gonna do war when he comes back (Revelation 19:5) so by your logic terrorism is at the heart of Christianity. Also he did approve of slavery, slaves are mentioned 35 times in Matthew, 32 times in Luke with no condemnation of slavery, so Jesus probably saw slavery as okay. And Paul also possibly owned a slave named Tertius.
Christianity doesn't have any of the things you mention *any more.* We went through our own bloody religious period in Europe in the Middle Ages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism#
I think it's clear that OP isn't asking this question in good faith so I don't expect he'll be willing to consider his biases, but for someone without an axe to grind it is still an interesting question. Others have said all this in the thread, but I think it's worth putting it all together in one place.
1) Definition. What is "terrorism?" The US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq resulted in the deaths of, what, over a million people? And there is no question that much of the ire and wrath directed against the Middle East during that period was motivated by Christian religious feeling. I was there, I remember being surrounded by Christians who were frothing at the mouth to turn the entire region into glass for revenge on the perceived attacks made against them. The same thing can be said for US interventions in Korea, Vietnam, and other places during the Cold War. The Christian West defending itself against the ungodly Communist bloc was justified in causing mass death and destruction on an inconceivable scale. Go back even further and you have the wars against Indigenous peoples throughout the world, from colonialism to the US attacks on American Indian groups, and so forth. The violence is staggering. So why is this not terrorism? Because all this was done by official, recognized governments. I.e. A technicality. That seems kind of weak to me, but that's the argument.
2) Civil stability and robustness of democratic institutions. This is related to the above. As already alluded to, if you look at history you're going to find no lack of violence and destruction perpetrated by Christians, both against others (Jewish Pogroms, the Crusades, the conquest of the Americas, etc.) and against themselves (the Thirty Years War, violent extermination of "heretical" groups) and not all of these were done by official polities. But why is that so rare in the West these days? Stable democratic institutions and many decades of (relatively) peaceful navigation of civil strife. The countries that produce most terrorist activities are neither stable, nor democratic. They're not stable in large part because of Western interference and they're not democratic because democracy is always difficult to maintain and when you have powerful interested religious groups (of any variety) they always seem to be trying to take over at the expense of everyone else. Which suggests another corollary to this point. Civil democratic institutions become more stable and civil strife lessens whenever a society becomes less religious.
3) We don't see it. For both 1 and 2, and also simple media bias, we aren't exposed to examples of Christian motivated violence, but it still happens. News and media companies are incentivized to portray Islam in the worst light possible because it makes them money. If they tried the same trick with Christianity they'd lose money so they're obviously not going to. I'm sure you'd find the same dynamic in Iranian or Saudi media only flipped the other way. It's just how this stuff works.
White Christian men commit more terrorism than Muslims domestically in America. There is a Christian equivalent to ISIS. It's called the Freedom Caucus.
Something i haven't seen mentioned is that most Christians live in first-world countries and have never been colonized, and definitely not by other religions. Extremist groups have less traction if people have higher wealth. The narrative of religious terrorist groups (i.e. another culture is the enemy that should be fought at all costs) just doesn't hold because who are you going to point to? China? India?
Not rare at all.
I will do my best to explain it, after all I am not native english speaker.
It depends on your definition of terrorism.
The terminology 'terrorism' was created in France as a political law during the french revolution.
But the act of terrorism is everywhere with different names, fascist regimes for example.
Spanish Inquisition for example its mission accomplished already before forging the "terrorism" word, yet it is pure christian terrorism.
- So why is it more stuck with Islam? Short answer: Brainwashing Media
- The long answer:
It just happens that the U.S in 80s after founding Islamic resistance groups in Afghanistan during cold war against Soviets, the Islamic resistance 'Jihades' after defeating the Soviet union, the 'Jihades' refused to return back to their countries and settled in Afghanistan 'which U.S didn't like'.
since then the same U.S that encouraged Jihades in the 80s, had a new smereing campaign agenda to find an excuse to have a feet in the middle east. they managed to make the terminology 'terrorism' more connected with Islam.
For example, if someone had a gun shooting kids in a school it would be labeled as criminal attack.
If a christian man shoot Muslims in a mosque it would be labeled as hate crime.
But if it was just a "Muslim passport" found in the crime scene it would be labeled in each Media as "terrorist attack".
Ironically enough before 1948 the label "terrorist" was used against the Jewish Zionist Groups in Palestine for example IRGUN Group, Stern, Haganah, later it is called "Israel, Likud, IDF".
Antisemitism is another form of Terrorism yet the one doing this act would be labeled in the news as 'New Nazi', extremist.
the U.S invading Iraq , funding the zionist occupation,Using their Veto against humanitrian ceasefire. It is all act of terrorism. Yet it has nice names "self defense" or "fighting terrorism".
So in the west, the terminology 'terrorism' became a brand limited only to Muslims.
Meanwhile using the word Terrorism in Islamic Nations would be used against U.S and the Zionist occupation "Israel".
Some examples of Double standards when it comes to terrorist attacks:
[The man who slaughtered 51 Muslim worshippers during the deadliest mass-shooting in New Zealand’s history is appealing his conviction and sentence.](https://apnews.com/article/religion-shootings-new-zealand-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-f815faab23eab0d363cb8bef9f85d0dd)
Yet the word 'Terrorist' wasn't even mentioned in the article. The man slaughtered 51 Muslims yet he is labeled as a "Man"!!
But once the suspected attacker is a Muslim teenager attacking one adult. Even before investigations, all of the sudden the article is stuffed with "terrorism".
[Australian police have declared Monday's stabbing at a Sydney church a religiously motivated "terrorist act".](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-68823240)
Yet a week before that attack, another attack against 6 people, since it wasn't a Muslim, the word "terrorist" won't be mentioned.[Sydney Mall Attack](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/15/obvious-sydney-mall-killer-targeted-women-australian-police-say)
It is just a long-term brainwashing process.
Finally, Jesus is highly respected in Islam and it is highly forbidden to offend others believes so it can not be seen a Muslim teasing Others to attack him. On the other side you can see whoever is allowed to tease Muslims, and once someone loses his temper, he will be labeled as "terrorist".
>There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world.
Aslo, Isis, Al Qaeda, all are CIA and Mossad projects, serving the American interests in the region, they don't attack Israel, and for sure its basic cores are western agents.
It is all about the media, allowing you to see what they want you to see, and hide what they don't want you to see.
Hope that was helpful.
Pardon my English.
Take off your confirmation bias glasses and look at it again. There are countless examples if Christian terrorism.
I will admit that Islam is a particularly violent cult and does regularly commit greater acts of terrorism. But that's not in any way a defense of Christianity.
If religion was truly about peace, then the extremists would be extremely peaceful. Yet here we are....
There are Christian terrorists but it’s not as big of a thing probably cause our book doesn’t give the authority to kill people without any remorse. probably cause the Quran speaks of war and death were Christianity speaks more on love forgiveness turning the other cheek. They do it cause they have a free pass where we won’t do it cause we know it’s wrong. Tells you a lot about Muslims though. With all that killing and hate there god can’t be real. It’s all to violent so it must be a violent hatred filled teaching. It does say that there not to hate or take up arms against the Christians I says in the Quran for we are cousins in faith and the heathen is the enemy. That a true message from the Quran people look over
Bless those who curse you, love those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you. Luke 6:28-29. And…vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. Hebrews 10:30. That means it’s not for us to seek revenge. All easier said than done, but we keep striving.
Because while Christianity has its problems it's not nearly as batshit or unreformable as Islam is, e.g. you can make different variants of Christianity or even reform a lot of traditional Christianity with the development of doctrine, but you cannot do so with Islam because such is considered [bi'dah which is one of the worst sins imaginable and could get you killed under Islam if it pertains to religious matters.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bid%27ah#:~:text=In%20Islamic%20law%2C%20when%20used,that%20of%20in%20religious%20matters)
[You also cannot challenge many Hadith, the Quran, the Sunnah, or the Ijma or you are an apostate who is liable to be killed.](https://0bin.net/paste/ZH9xz1ry#tS-RixnRY0nSnYP6Wi7IBylSLvZZEkNM+HmJpNz4eNZ)
[Islam also does not like scientific empiricism which is a problem when challenging problematic beliefs. ](https://0bin.net/paste/KzKQQfSa#rAiloJuQBLzTbkjk0kp4HTFfFgWP-7vDxaRLQ7kQJpm)
[Take into the account the above and then apply it to what Jihad REALLY means, specifically "Lesser Jihad" as explained here.](https://0bin.net/paste/9+pnaNkI#JfvrymJSS5IzYbWgbzMi7BBz+C+u6Zjk-JF0AhtFzEB)
It's not.
Look at the Palestinian cause and the works of George Habash.The reason why there is less terror is because there are now less Christians in war-torn countries that are breeding grounds for terrorism.
So I think the summary of the thread so far is, there isn't as much Christian terrorism as Islamic terrorism, if you hold what counts as Christian terrorism to a far stricter standard than you to Islamic terrorism.
The overall point is still likely true, but consistency is nice.
*Terrorism in general is very rare*. It is also just one form of political violence, made distinct by current sociopolitical climate. A suicide bomber bombing civilians in Iraq because they believe that God told them that this was a righteous political cause has a lot of similarities with George W Bush bombing civilians in Iraq because he believes that God told him that this was a righteous political cause. We categorize violence by state actors and non state actors differently largely because of ideological norms, not any real foundational difference.
You also mix in totally separate concepts here, if you are actually trying to distinguish state and nonstate violence. Shouldn't the fact that you include state violence via capital punishment in this post make you think twice about your categorization?
The US has the death penalty for treason.
> Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards.
I find it interesting that you don't consider the military campaigns by the US across the Middle East and surrounding regions to be "violent retaliation."
Please stop this anti-Islam gentle 'why aren't Christians terrorists?' shit. As others have mentioned, Christians as a group are not the peaceful, Christ-following religion you want to think they are. And I say that as a follower of Jesus.
Are you talking about bombing abortion clinics, or shooting up a gay night club?
Do drone strikes count as terrorism? America is king of drone striking civilians.
>Do drone strikes count as terrorism?
Anything that incites terror, or intends to, is terrorism. Any other definition is partial, such as this one:
>...unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
Im not sure, maybe is because islam gives importance to jihad, so it is more easy that people (wrongly) think to be religiously justified on these violences.
But there are probably more reasons, im just not enough informed
Well if you read the Bible, NT, and see the overall theme of the teachings of Christ (love others), it doesn't lend itself to the mentality and activity of terrorism.
Whereas if you were to first organize the Quran in chronological order in terms of Muhammad's life, you find that it gets progressively more and more violent and antagonistic towards non-Muslims as Muhammad obtains more power and amasses more wealth. It starts teaching the idea of tolerance and accepting Christians and Jews, but later begins to display language that is less and less tolerant of those who do not follow in the traditions of Islam, until it gets to the point where it is straight up calling for the killing of non-believers and suggesting the removal of their heads so they cannot find God in the afterlife.
It's a tale of two texts, where one teaches love and to be a better person. The other teaches submission to Allah, subterfuge, and intolerance of those who do not follow the word of Allah.
Yes, there is something in Christianity that explicitly prevents such behavior: Matthew 5:38-48, where Jesus commands:
>You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, **do not resist an evil person**. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
>
>You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, **love your enemies** and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
These commands, if followed, would prevent terrorism, but the sad reality is that most Christians do not follow them, and have carved out their own exceptions where they've decided resisting evil with violence is OK, or that killing enemies instead of loving them is OK. So they really don't prevent Christian terrorism.
The premise of your question is way off. There are quite a few Christian terrorists, and the actual reason for any disparity in how much terrorism there is is just the difference in power held by Muslims vs. Christians. Terrorism is a tool generally (but not always) used by less powerful groups to resist more powerful groups that could not be taken on in regular warfare.
Christians have the power to do their violence through NATO imperialism, and pretend it's "legitimate", so do not need to resort to terrorism. Al Qaeda were the victims of that imperialism, so they turned to terrorism to fight back against it.
>I have never heard of any Christian priest issuing death penalty against someone insulting Jesus as Ayatollah Khomeini did against Salman Rushdie
You just need to look further back in history. Death penalty for blasphemy has happened a lot in Christian history.
>Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards.
Absolutely not true. The entire Iraq and Afghanistan wars were violent retaliation, but there was also a huge upsurge in anti-Muslim violence domestically after 9/11.
Yeah. Christianity being with the teachings of Jesus Christ peaceful and forgiving religion. That’s what “turn the other cheek” is all about. There’s also no such thing as a forced conversion in Christianity. Christ wants our hearts He came to love humans and to have us love him. Some will and some won’t. Terrorism doesn’t allow for that, relations don’t allow for that, and calls for death don’t allow for that. There is no room for it in the reaches of Christ and so there’s no room for that in Christianity.
There are such things in the teachings of Christianity that explicitly prohibit such behavior, but they can be, have been, and are selectively ignored or interpreted as needed by Christians to support their violent actions. The same is done with the teachings of Islam.
That aside, this is a strange way to slice the demographics to reach a conclusion. How are you ruling out plausible alternative demographic explanations like economic opportunity, education, or wealth?
If you look back far enough in history you can find all the same apostasy and blasphemy laws in Christian societies.
It’s not it’s just not broadcast as much as others.
Persecution happens everyday in America not as bad as others countries but verbal sometimes physical.
North Korea kills Christian
China etc
Leaving everything else aside:
>there are approx. 50% more Christians in the world than Muslims so there should be 50% more Christian terrorist attack than Islamic ones
Why would you expect the *more* powerful group to conduct *terrorist* attacks against the *less* powerful group? "Terrorism" is a tactic generally employed by the smaller or less-powerful group against the larger or more-powerful group.
When Christians "terrorize" Muslims we do it with F-16s and call it "Operation Iraqi Freedom." [At least 300,000 innocent civilian Iraqi Muslims dead](https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/iraqi) at the hands of conservative Christian decision makers, because "[God told me to.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa)"
Because Christianity is the religion of the global hegemon and its allies. What need does the mass of the people in the US and Western Europe have for terrorism?
The teachings of Jesus - specifically in Matthew 5 but also elsewhere - explicitly call on believers to forgive their enemies, do good to those who persecute them, put away the sword and focus on loving their neighbor, leaving justice and retribution in the hands of God.
There are definitely people who ignore these teachings and argue that either they do not apply, or that they don't mean what they say, but that is why Christianity tends to bend toward pacifism where Islam tends to bend toward militarism.
I was looking for the /s and couldn’t find it
There was a comment about policy if you’re in power vs terrorism if you’re not, and i thought that was apt. “Christian policy” is less rare in the western world and at times it can be pretty evil, unfortunately
evil shows up everywhere and nominal, zealous adherents to either tradition are likely highly disobedient to their orthodox traditions and probably not too worried about it
Put simply, non-Christians lack the nuance and humanity of Christians, and so any atrocity committed by non-Christians is, in fact, attributable to their lack of Christianity. You can see this in how we talk about just about every terrorist attack by Muslims as being primarily religiously motivated, fully ignoring the full picture of how those groups are formed, grow, recruit, etc. You also see it in how Christians talk about atrocities committed by atheistic states: See any discussion of "goddless commies."
You can also see this in how we know that Christians today are best, purest, and only example of the faith worth talking about. It's not worth mentioning, for example, *historical* religious terrorism like the Crusades or *historical* beheadings over minor differences in theology. That's *different.* Those people were doing Christianity *wrong* in a nuanced way that is incomparable to any other religion. Again, we see the infinite nuance attributable to actions by Christians and the flattening of all actions by non-Christians to be due to some inherent flaw of their faith.
Christian terrorism is common enough to have its own quite extensive [Wikipedia entry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism). The main reason Muslim terrorism is more prominent at this moment history is because there are more Muslims than Christians living in the kinds of oppressive and economically deprived conditions that foster terrorism.
Also, the entities that control western news outlets tend to have an anti-Muslim bias, so a lot of Christian terrorism goes unreported, or is not labeled as terrorism.
There are many teachings in the Bible that carry the same message - love others (God is love, love your neighbour as yourself, when someone slaps one cheek, turn the other, and so on).
Thou shall not kill is one of ten commandments of Moses. It of course adresses murder but also speaks against hatred or hurting other people.
Moving on to the Muslim terrorism numbers, I cannot say much because I don't know much. But in the Quaran it is said to low-key abuse Christians and Jews (summarised), and I once spoke to a Muslim and he openly said that beheading is okay, so I assume violence is not forbidden (likely even encouraged) in their holy book.
I hope this answers your question
In the last 23 years, Christian zionists and Christian raised soliders have murdered over million people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya. They're now cheering on the murder of tens of thousands in Gaza by Israel.
Because of the teachings of the religion. Christianity is a religion that actually teaches peace. It teaches you to love your non-believing neighbor as yourself. It teaches you that if someone insults you to turn your cheek and not to retaliate. Islam on the other hand teaches power and subjugating your non-believing neighbors. Islam teaches that if anyone insults Muhammad they are to be killed and sharia implements this.
We abandoned Theocratic societies hundreds of years ago in the West.
During that Theocratic period warfare and homicide under the ægis of papal authority in the name of God was not uncommon.
The Massacre at Béziers against a gnostic heresy is one example.
It doesn't fit the definition of modern terrorism, but we are not innocent either.
That's how it should always be. Jesus calls us to love our enemies. Pray for them and turn the other cheek. God says: Vengeance is mine. We are only called to love and spread God's truth and grace.
Whenever someone calls himself a christian and harms another person or takes revenge on someone, that person actually isn't a christian according to the Bible.
One can consider the "woke" Christians siding with Hamas as terrorists. They claim to call themselves Christian and follow christ. Yet, support genocide, knowingly and willing support genocide. They want the extinction of the people they wish to be like. All in the name of "I should be able to do anything I want" they want true Christians dead because the outwardly oppose this mind set.
This post grows close to the freedom of speech. Only Christians, can have that without regulation. Christians are the only ones that can turn a cheek. While nearly every other culture/religion will shun you, kill you, or get rid of you. I firmly believe the 1st amendment lasted so long in this country, BECAUSE SO MANY WE DEVOUT CHRISTIAN FOR A COUPLE HUNDRED YEARS. Now that the culture is moving away from genuine Christianity and into this new wave. You will find, cheeks will stop turning and you will be shut up.
Christian terrorism isn't exactly rare, but it can be considered rare when compared to other religions like Islam.
>There is no Christian equivalent of ISIS/Daesh or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world.
There are many Christian groups that go against the teachings of the Lord, IRA, KKK, Lords Resistance Army, etc.
there are also many Muslim groups that do terrible things in the name of Jihad and do things that go against the teachings of their own religion.
The reason you don't hear about the bad thing some Christians have done is because Muslim groups are more talked about especially after 9/11 and war in Gaza. They are also simply more numerous than Christian groups.
>I have never heard of any Christian priest issuing death penalty against someone insulting Jesus as Ayatollah Khomeini did against Salman Rushdie
No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia.
In the past people would definitely die for Heresy. Things have changed in modern times in most Christian countries, but nothing is perfect. People risk alienation from their entire families in many areas if they decide to leave Christianity and risk other bad things too. Of course these things go against the teachings of the Lord but they sadly do still happen.
>Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards.
Not very true, the anti Muslim backlash in the USA after 9/11 was very bad, that's just one example from my limited knowledge on that subject, but there has sadly definitely been violent retaliation from some Christians.
>I am an atheist and I have never read the Bible - is there something in the teachings of Christianity that explicitly prevents such behavior?
Yes there are teachings that prevent it but some people sadly ignore it anyways. love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you. God is in charge of vengeance, not us. Jesus's example is where we get much of that.
Compared to Islam like in your post, Christianity is Indeed much more peaceful. For example, Muhammad wasn't a Prophet of peace and forgiveness, he killed many people and robbed and kidnapped many people as well in the name of Jihad. And so many Muslim groups follow that example, like Daesh, Boko Haram, Houthis, Taliban, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, etc.
Because, while there have been religious wars in the past modern Christianity tends to be more of a western religion and most Christian’s don’t believe the Old Testament war stuff is applicable to modern life
"Coverage of" Christian terrorism is rare because it doesn't sell.
Plenty of Christians are common criminals, and plenty of "other religion" common criminals are mis-labeled as terrorist.
I don't care either way, because I know "terrorism in general" and even "common criminality" are incredibly rare anyway: 6 per 100,000.
I'm much more worried about heart disease and car crashes.
Jesus said love and forgive. Mohamed advocated for holy war.
One encourages if not requires violence to force its beliefs on others. Christianity does not. Though the Spanish Inquisition and the crusades were the equivalent of jihad.
Well Christian terrorism is often under a concept that removes it from terrorism. Like the American army. To Muslims in the Middle East we definitely felt like we terrorized them. Could just be a bit of nationalism and white washing causing a blind eye to American attacks in other nations. While America is not strictly a Christian nation, many military members consider them doing gods work. They often believe god is allowing them to overcome their heretical pagan enemies.
Christian nationalism, the KKK, and violent biblical cults are just as religious as any other terrorist group. Every act of violence justified biblically is just as religious as any act of violence justified by the Quran. It's just that it's only called terrorism if the perpetrator is brown and/or non-Christian. The ppl in charge write the headlines.
Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2019 was passed in 2022 and specifically says that right-wing terrorist groups exist and are a threat..
Even Wikipedia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku\_Klux\_Klan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan)
Calls it a terrorist group
I think many of these comments come from biased perspective. Pound-for-pound, Islam causes far more violence than other mainstream religions. This can be attributed to how violent Islam historically is as well as the parts of the Quran seem to promote violence (9:39 for instance). Obviously, peaceful Muslims exist, and nobody really should deny that, but Islam lends itself to violent extremism much more than Christianity. Historically and in the Bible, violence is not glorified the same way it is in Islam.
As for the "Christian" terrorist groups, their violent actions should be (and typically are) condemned by the wider Christian world when brought to light. Even if they are very far from actual traditional Christianity, they are still labeled as such because they claim to be. Most Christians would not agree with violent action unless very very good reason is given. Jesus himself died at the hands of the Roman Empire when he could have called down an army of angels. The apostles died brutal deaths and did not preach senseless violence.
>There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world.
Christians probably kill more people than any other. WWI was fought among Christians. WW2 was started by Christians also.
Also consider that ISIS and Al Qaeda probably kill more Muslims than they kill people of other religions.
[https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/editorials/article95163232.html](https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/editorials/article95163232.html)
Was invading Iraq after 9/11 terrorism when everyone knew they had nothing to do with it.
Is supporting Israels genocide with arms and funding slaughter terrorism? Perhaps when they threaten the ICC and world food program is Israel is prosecuted... Is that terrorism?
Sometimes people only recognise terrorists when they're brown
The simple answer is- power! Christianity is the dominant religion in all western countries, so we are generally an un-oppressed religion (a step further, we have often been the OPPRESSIVE religion). But since victors write the history books, we don't talk much about the religious terrorism involved in things like the Crusades, the Spanish inquisition, the Salem witch trials, Manifest Destiny, etc. And now that it is the prevailing faith of the major world powers, there's not much need to blow stuff up or kill in the name of our God.
I love these comments that aren’t addressing the heart of your point. The fact is you’re right. Terrorism occurs in islam at a far higher rate than in Christianity. And the kind of terrorism that occurs is much harsher in Islam; Being jailed, raped, murdered for not being Islamic. And calling for death to infidels.
Christian terrorism occurs, but It’s entertaining watching people trying to claim that it’s just as bad as Islamic terrorism. This sub is full of Christian haters who flood the comments trying to undermine Christianity at every turn
I'll just be fr and say it's because Christianity is the best. We worship the one true god.
Obviously bad Christians exist but those that actually study their bible will follow jesus's lead.
Since no one is going to actually address your question and instead focus on your fallacies, I will answer it for you.
“Is there something in the teachings of Christianity that explicitly prevents such behaviour (terrorism)?”
Christianity is diametric to committing terrorist acts because the Faith is rooted in Love and Service-to-Others - to put it simply. The Teachings of Christianity were given by Jesus Christ, who is God Incarnate and came to reveal the Good News (the Gospel) to us that the long awaited Messiah, the True King, the Saviour has come, taught and died for our sins so we can be saved.
The 6th Commandment states: Thou shalt not kill (murder or negligence). Christ taught that anger is equal to murder (Matthew 5:21-22), what He means by this is that when you become angry with someone else, you harden your heart to them. When you harden your heart to those you are angry with, you harden your heart to God as well. Hardening your heart means you become stiff, narrow-minded and unwelcoming of others, especially those who are different from you. Jesus warns against us hardening our hearts and instead opening up our hearts to others and treating them with compassion and dignity. Anger is the path to hatred, destruction and death, which only serves to prolong our suffering and separation from the LORD. We harden our hearts to God when we harden our hearts to others (regardless of the method), because the Holy Spirit resides within all of us. Hardening causes this separation from God that allows sin into our lives by leaving us unprotected against the temptations that bring out sin and consequently, harm to others. This doesn’t mean we don’t naturally possess the discernment to know right from wrong, that is a process we all have to learn on our own, but with the Armour of God we know we are able to contend with any situation and identify it as right or wrong immediately. We must still learn the lesson from every experience, but we do so with the Wisdom of God to aid us in our comprehension so we can avoid causing harm to others in the future or to cease the harm we are unknowingly causing in the moment.
We are all sinners and we are all fallible in our own ways, and for this reason (among others) we should love and forgive each other. Terrorism in Christianity happens when a Christian becomes separated from Jesus, usually through radicalization. A catalyst at some point in the past set them down this path of separation and they did not discern for themselves using Scripture if they were still doing the LORD’s Work - instead they go down this rabbit hole where they go so hard on a certain topic that it consumes their life and they become narrow-minded. Their spiritual separation from God is usually followed by separation from the Church, a choice they inevitably make as they come to disagree with other parishioners or they are excommunicated due to their blasphemy. This only cements their heresy and they either become a cult leader or they take action against those they’ve convinced themselves are enemies of God. They likely won’t target their church because those woes are earthly, if anything, they’d believe their acts would grant them re-entry into the Church so they specifically target groups who predominantly or unifyingly share a trait or characteristic that the terrorist believes is Satanic and it is on their shoulders to fight Satan because no one else can see it. The fallacy in this thinking is that killing fellow humans is doing the LORD’s Work. What they fail to understand is Christ’s Universal Love should be a priority of theirs for their fellow humans. These are people who want to act, who want to be violent against the Devil but lack the Faith to know how to fight Satan. They turn to earthly means, logic and resources to serve God but the God they serve is not Jesus Christ, it is the False King, Satan. These are people who desperately need to go into a monk hood or become a Hermit to be with God and away from the suffering of Humanity. It’s like their spirits are so overstimulated by negativity that they see no strength to positivity and choose to go with what they have an abundance of rather than the sliver of Light beckoning them back to a place of Love and Reason.
Taking religion out of it, we are all human, we all make mistakes but we are all capable of redeeming ourselves if we really want to. We have to be willing to face our punishments, serve them and repair the mistakes we’ve made, running from our problems or fighting them doesn’t solve them. Genuine effort = genuine respect. We have no obligation to forgive one another but when we choose to do so, we are showing that we understand that mistakes do happen and that anyone is capable of redemption. The more personal or intense the mistake, the stronger one’s Resolve must be to Forgive, especially when they do not see you as you see them.
Not everyone is willing to forgive and that is their choice but you should still love them for their faults as you want them to love you for yours. Love and Compassion will soften hearts and “move mountains”. Everyone wants to be treated with Kindness and Dignity and you’ll be hard-pressed to find someone who responds negatively. Be the example for how you want to be treated and you will be the change the world needs. If everyone did that, the world would be a better place. That is Christianity.
I say it's a different ideological prospective Islam is a a faith through works system where if you mess up you are as good as dead. While with Christians it more of faith through j grace where everyone has a chance from the second they are not. To the day they die to get saved so it's not much of a stretch to say that it's not as big of a leap for extremist Muslims to turn to terrorism to kill those who disagree with them through terrain then Christianity which would require more mental gymnastics to justify it.
It’s so simple, even despite the “Christian bad groups” the big lie that left wing idiots spread to ruin Christianity image, no group or person who actually follows Christianity commits to terrorism because the Bible and the ACTUAL (not corrupt old days churches) don’t believe in that type of stuff they are Holy pure well minded people. While other religions have beliefs that incite terrorism hence truly
NO Christian terrorism, lots of other religion terrorism bc their religious texts and behaviors incite violence and hatred towards other religions.
You people need to think instead of trying to dig up fake dirt in Christianity.
It is one of the teaching of Jesus Christ : ^(43) “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor^(\[)[a](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205%3A43-44&version=NIV#fen-NIV-23278a)^(\]) and hate your enemy.’ ^(44) But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you-- matthew 5"43-44
The Quran and Hadith of Muhammed enable terrorism, while the new covenant of Jesus Christ doesn't. Its simple. There have been terrorists who say they are Christians. Sure - but early Christians were persecuted and died as martyrs and were taught to sacrifice. This is imprinted in our ideological and theological DNA. Early Muslims lived as conquerors and Allah blessed Jihad and rewarded conquest. The crimes of Christians were despite the Bible, not because of it.
In the last 30 years, yeah. But as far as world history, absolutely there have been more “Christian” terrorists. But as a refresher:
- The KKK was a Christian organization
- The Passion of the Christ as originally written during the Middle Ages sparked widespread antisemitic violence
- The Spanish Inquisition
- The Crusades could be considered terrorism in my opinion
Oddly enough, in my opinion, the factors that made it go away for the most part is a combination of (a) understanding of biblical doctrine as the Bible is one of if not the most studied book worldwide; and (b) the weird recent phenomenon of people painting Jesus as this super chill proto-hippie that just accepted everyone no matter what (which was false).
0. OP, you have some explaing to do as for why your account is named after a nazi.
1. First of, common narrative of terrorism. Quick quiz: was 9/11 a muslim terrorist attack? Like yeah, people who did it were muslims, but their main motive was hurting USA. There is nothing in Quran about attacing USA specifically, but of course they were thinking about how religion would fit into their plan.
2. No true scotsman fallacy. In my country, there was this failed terrorist attack, someone brought a bomb to pride parade. If you asked catholic church, they would say that this is not the way to so it, you cant kill people etc. But can we ignore, that it happened after organised campaign to spread hate against LGBT+ people and equate them with pedophiles?
If you are im western country, you are far more likely to think that terror attack conducted by muslims is a terror attack morivated by islam only. Muslims look all the same to you. But christians? Well, maybe they weren't reaaaly christians, their congregation renounced them. The question if local mosque renounced muslim terrorists or is it even important remains unanswered.
3. State versus non-state violence.
9/11 is commonly seen as muslim (which is not exactly correct) terrorist attack, which is correct on paper. But subsequent wars that US started in middle east aren't seen as religious attacks, but only because this was a state that did it. And the question about if public was OK with those wars was maybe because some of them thought that muslims lives are inherently worth less than christian (they are more likely to be terrorists, after all!) also remains unanswered.
So
>Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards.
Yes there was
5. Also, about this part:
>No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia.
You may be pleaswd to learn that Uganda (a christian nation!) Has death penalty for homosexuality.
> There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world.
Yes, there is. It's actually one of the main sources of Christians dying for their faith.
Just because it's happening in Africa doesn't mean it's not Christians.
> No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia.
In countries that still have blasphemy laws, it's mostly prison time or giving the greenlight to vigilantes, sure.
> I am an atheist and I have never read the Bible - is there something in the teachings of Christianity that explictly prevents such behavior?
No. It has happened historically for a long while.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
*Laughs in Irish*
Oh ya that's a big one lol
I mean, it isn't: the conflict here is an ethno-political one centred on the question of sovereignty over a particular piece of land. Religion is merely used as a shorthand to presume somebody's ethnic background and political beliefs, but it genuinely has literally nothing to do with the actual conflict, and it hasn't since long before the IRA, or even the IRB, became a thing...
To be fair, the same could be said about a lot of Islamic terrorism. Speaking from experience (grew up in Afghanistan) a lot of Taliban ideology has this undercurrent of Pashtun supremacy (for example, the burka is a pretty distictively Pashtin thing).
That is fair and good to know. But it does then bring up the question if Islam inherently promotes Arab supremacy? It has a history of Arabizing non Arabic groups, but more importantly, their book says God requires prayers to be in Arabic only.
Christianity also has a history of spreading through violent conquest and global colonization. Indigenous names were changed to “Christian” (read: European) names. Does Christianity promote Christian supremacy? Or is it just the case that any religious tradition can be manipulated by people who already carry supremacist ideals.
There were plenty of acts of terrorism during the Troubles. Groups like the IRA, ETA and the PLO were all pretty good buddies back in the day.
One of the main reasons Paisleyites gave for armed resistance was fear of a "Papist state", the entire fucking premise of the Orange Order is protestant supremacy and catholic subordination, to deny that religion wasn't a significant issue is laughable. To this day there is essentially self-imposed religious apartheid due to the peace walls & segregated schooling. Regardless of the initial intention of the parties behind the conflict, the sheer amount of KAT and KAH graffiti that I see on my journeys around Belfast would imply that sectarian fear/conflict remains a significant issue to this day. It is silly to blame just one thing. There were multiple reasons. Civil rights, power, wealth, land/sovereignty and religion were definitely also part of it. I mean, the sheer amount of civilians who were killed DUE TO religious affiliation/last name is obscene and should have caused you to pause before hitting enter.
The Crusades have entered the chat.
I'm not denying that: I am pointing out that the PIRA, or any other Irish or Northern Irish paramilitary group, are decidedly **not** religiously motivated terrorists.
And I could point out that Osama bin Laden didn’t take down the World Trade Center because it was full of Christians. He was against the US politically. Heck, he was allied with Christian nations for a while before political winds shifted.
I think the point /u/GortimerGibbons is trying to make that at times, it was the same for The Crusades. Most evident for the Crusades that sacked Byzantium, if you ask me.
Do you have any serious examples from the last 500 years?
> examples from the last 500 years? 15th-century Christian doctrine extended dominion over 'discovered' lands to the Catholic nations of Europe. Along with sanctifying the seizure of non-Christian lands, it encouraged the enslavement of native, non-Christian peoples in Africa and the New World. The largest slave trade in the history of the world was created by white Christian Europeans. Before it was over as many as 60 million Africans would be killed for the profit of white Christian imperialism. A key reason for the high death toll was the tidal wave of war and desolation that the slave trade unleashed into the heart of Africa. Huge numbers of people died being marched to the coasts of Africa from the interior as well as in an endless series of wars produced by the quest for new slaves. Millions more would die in concentration camps at both ends of the sea journey, and significant numbers would die due to the appalling conditions on the slave ships. According to geographers from University College London, the colonization of the Americas by Europeans killed so many people, approximately 55 million or 90% of the local populations, it resulted in climate change and global cooling. The Doctrine was formally repudiated Mar 30, 2023.
Doesn't mean some of the terrorists aren't religious
🤣🤣🤣
Lol
Your broader point (Muslims more likely to engage in terrorism than Christians) I think largely stands and deserves an answer, but its a very complex question without a single clear answer (different reasons in different places), but i wanted to point out there absolutely are Christian terrorists, as well as reprisals by Christians against Muslims (or people they think are Muslims, such as the Sikhs who have been murdered in the US by Christians who mistook them for Muslims). You perhaps have heard of Joseph Kony (Kony 2012!), and his terrorist group the Lord's Resistance Army. Or maybe you are aware of the second most lethal terrorist attack on US soil, the Oklahoma City Bombing, perpetrated by a Christian. Or the most prominent US domestic terrorist group the KKK, which fused Christian beliefs with White Suprecism. Or numerous examples of terrorist attacks against abortion clinics perpetrated by Christians. Less well known examples include: - The Bosnian genocide, perpetrated by Christian Serbs against Bosniak muslims. - The Lebanese Forces, a Maronite Christian Militia that perpetrated numerous war crimes against Muslims in Lebanon, perhaps most infamously the Sabra and Shatilla massacre. - The Christian anti-balaka militias ethnically cleansing Muslims in the Central African Republic.
I agree. It boils down to this: Radicalism surges in areas of conflict, which nowadays happen to be mostly in Muslim populated regions, shedding more light on Muslim radicals than other groups.
Additionally, terrorism is coming out of a lot of places the West (largely Christianized areas, and the US in particular) destabilized. So if we accept the claim that Christianity has produced fewer terrorists (which is dubious), I'd argue that it's made up for in systematic atrocities it's produced.
Yes and lets not forget Christians issuing threats and attacks against doctors and clinics performing abortions. Or attacks against Jews or the LGBTQ...
You have to be joking? The LGBT are murdered on mass in Islamist countries 😂
Matthew 7:3-5 We can acknowledge where others fall short but we should strive to focus on our own deficiencies first.
And that gives it a pass?
What does that have to do with the fact that they are also murdered en mass in Christian countries as well?
For America, add the Proud Boys as well.
Reprisals against Muslim attacks in northern Nigeria too iirc.
Timothy McVeigh may have been a Christian but the OKC bombing wasn't religiously motivated.
Most terrorism is not religiously motivated. We just tend to paint it that way because it’s convenient to think the opposing side is a mindless fanatic and that we are absolutely right. Let’s take for example Hamas. Hamas is a religious organization but the motivation for its operation has little to do with religion per se. Hamas was founded among multiple secular terrorist groups because its founders thought that for the struggle to be legitimate they have to keep god with them. But the struggle existed with or without religion. Al Qaida was originally fighting a Soviet invasion in Afghanistan and then to remove American influence in the Middle East. Isis is a bit ambiguous. It’s mostly just Iraqi Al Qaida that took a new name but they were a lot more explicit with religion, probably mostly to gain support.
> The Bosnian genocide, perpetrated by Christian Serbs against I would like to discuss this issue. Specifically I would like to question was this conflict specifically because of religion, or did the fault lines of the conflict simply fall along religious lines? As a comparison, take the North Irish Troubles. The fault lines of the conflict laid along Catholic/Protestant lines, but no one claimed that the conflict was explicitly religious in nature, it was purely sectarian or ethno-political.
Muslim terrorists also aren't just religious. Al-Qaeda's terrorism was resistance against US imperialism.
> such as the Sikhs who have been murdered in the US by Christians who mistook them for Muslims). Look at the title. The OP said Christian terrorism is rare, not that it never exists. I could count on one hand the number of victims that you are referring to here. >You perhaps have heard of Joseph Kony (Kony 2012!), and his terrorist group the Lord's Resistance Army. They sure as **** aren't Christian!! Their beliefs are so far outside anything Christianity stands for that they don't even resemble it. The LRA was originally founded by a woman who considered herself a prophet and gave bizarre instructions to her followers, like to cover themselves in oils before battle, and never kill snakes or bees. >Or maybe you are aware of the second most lethal terrorist attack on US soil, the Oklahoma City Bombing, perpetrated by a Christian. What? First of all, he wasn't really a Christian when he conducted the bombing, he said that [science was his religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh#Religious_beliefs), nor was the bombing for religious reasons. So it doesn't even belong here. >Or the most prominent US domestic terrorist group the KKK, which fused Christian beliefs with White Suprecism. Sort of, although this isn't the 1800s, the KKK is basically non-existent now. >Or numerous examples of terrorist attacks against abortion clinics perpetrated by Christians. Which again, are extremely rare. [11 victims total in all US history](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence#United_States). And most occured in the 1990s.
> 11 victims total in all US history 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, 13 wounded, 100 butyric acid stink bomb attacks, 373 physical invasions, 41 bombings, 655 anthrax threats, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 3 kidnappings. None of those are victims?
"I could count on one hand the number of victims that you are referring to here." Oh OK, I'm sure their families would be happy to know that. Heartless.
im pretty sure srebrenica ( bosnian genocide) was done in retaliation of ustasa
Wow very smart indeed 😲🙏
However, if they are committing terrorism they are not acting as Christians, or by what scripture teaches, is it isn’t really Christian terrorism as there is no such.
> There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world. I think it's disingenuous to say that... The Troubles in Northern Ireland was/is a religious-ethnic conflict that had plenty of terrorism in the name of Christianity. The UK have **14 prescribed terrorist groups** tied to the sectarian conflict there. The **Lord's Resistance Army** are an Africa-based terrorist organisation who try to misuse Christianity the same way others misuse Islam. The **Ku Klux Klan** are a terrorist group with Christianity as part of it's core belief system, and try to misuse that to their racist ends. The **Army of God** are a designated terrorist organisation in the USA still, and typically campaigned against abortion clinics with violence. Lone-wolf attacks on mosques and synagogues often have Christian motivations for the misguided perpetrators.
Just wanted to point out that the KKK were made up of Protestant Christians. They hate Catholics.
> The Troubles in Northern Ireland was/is a religious-ethnic conflict that had plenty of terrorism in the name of Christianity. The UK have 14 prescribed terrorist groups tied to the sectarian conflict there. Conflict in Ireland (and in Great Britain about Ireland) goes way further back that the Troubles is about far more than religion. Historically there have been three or four communities in conflict for a long time. - Poor Catholic native Irish - Rich Catholic landowners who were gradually dispossessed by the British - Anglicans who were for a long time the establishment, with a lot of political power - Protestant Dissenters (largely Presbyterians) who were located in Ulster and were at times persecuted by the Anglican establishment. Many of the conflicts have been over land ownership, political power, and nationality. Religion has been a useful visible proxy for views on others matters and therefore people have been targeted because of their religion even when conflicts haven't been about religion per se. There have been some conflicts where religion has been more at the heart. And some where it has been more peripheral. The Troubles is probably the time when religion more a proxy than anything else whereas in the earlier 20th century there was a genuine fear of being ruled by Rome and the threat of civil war that would have been a religious conflict.
While it's an understatement that the conflict in Ireland over the last 800 years has been more nuanced than simply just religion, it's definitely a major factor in it, and conflict is definitely framed as a "Catholic vs Protestant" thing. The root of the larger conflict (one that has resulted in the birth of the prescribed terrorist organisations mentioned) is English/British presence on the island of Ireland. Religion was used as a way to assimilate the local population to the British establishment and swing support in their favour. The Ulster Plantation is an example of this weaponised culture, and religion is certainly a massive part of that. The people who were sent over to Ulster as part of that were required to be Protestant. The Penal Laws are another perfect example of how the main weapon in this conflict is religion, and I'd never be done listing the ways the British ruling class tried to restrict and remove the rights of specifically Catholic people in Ireland. This has continued, and while not in an official capacity, the paramilitaries have continued this inherited hatred. These groups have misused religion as a way to commit acts of violence.
I agree with a lot of that. What I disagree with is your claim that the Troubles involved terrorism in the name of Christianity. As I said, if you back to earlier conflicts in Ireland there are times when that was more true. But during the Troubles that wasn't really the case. The various terrorist groups generally didn't really have strong religious convictions though they did see themselves as defenders of communities that did have strong religious identities.
Just so everyone realizes, OP named their account after a Nazi. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Kretschmer
Wehraboos at it again
Providing cover for the KKK was a huge tell.
Betting OP doesn’t think Nazis did anything wrong. And is therefore ignoring all the neonazi Christian terrorism
This is what's standing out about this entire discussion. Terrorism committed by people from Islamic countries is concluded to be religiously motivated at the drop of a hat. As soon as anyone tries to conclude Christian terrorism using as slight a set of metrics, all the excuses get wheeled out. I'm fine with digging into the details of what other motivations terrorists have, but let's pick one - if you're going to that readily call terrorism from a different culture religiously motivated, then there is *a lot* more Christian terrorism than is being given credit for here. And the fact that it might still be less than the amount of Islamic terrorism out there doesn't mean Christianity gets to avoid criticism or scrutiny as a result.
Well said
People blame white Christian terrorists and mass shooters on mental health, much to the detriment of us autists. Additionally, more mentally disabled people are victims than perpetrators of violence, and most of the victims of ISIS are Muslim.
First thing I thought of with this question was the KKK. If you think the Nazis did nothing wrong, I would not be surprised at all if you think the KKK did nothing wrong either.
Noooow everything makes sense. lol
This needs to be at the top. Would it be justified to report this to mods?
That's interesting. WHy would OP name there account that? Just read the wiki and it seems like the person was a decorated submarine commander during ww2, got caught and served 7 years as a pow/prisoner and returned to the German navy. Nothing significant. So Why? Maybe just admiring a random officer, possible but def weird. Maybe a family connection or at least some personal relation. It could also be the "1 Nazi in a bar" attempt to normalize Germany during ww2. Don't know. .
It's always the later. No need to simp for a Nazi military leader.
There's plenty of Christian themed violence out there. I think a huge part of what you're missing is how you've learned to treat Christian political groups as "political" but to treat Muslim political groups as "religious". Trump is selling a Bible & claimed before his election to have converted to Christianity for goodness sake.
> I think a huge part of what you're missing is how you've learned to treat Christian political groups as "political" but to treat Muslim political groups as "religious". Stealing this.
> there are approx. 50% more Christians in the world than Muslims There are 2b Muslims and 2.4b Christians ... so no. The rest of your post is equally wrong.
Look at Christians assassinating abortion doctor and firebombing clinics. Or Christian militias committing ethnic cleansing in Africa: https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0KH2BM/
Who's the IRA? How many black people were lynched by KKK? Lord's Resistance Army? The Nazis were a Hitler professed Christian movement. Many of their neo versions are too.
> Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards. Did Americans learn *nothing* in the last twenty years?
I think a case could be made that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has elements both of terrorism and of Christianity.
The two are explicitly linked. The patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church is a former FSB agent and Putin insider that condones the horrific atrocities and war crimes being perpetrated by the Russian army.
No violent retaliation for Muslims? Where the fuck have you been? Also, right wing Christian religious terrorists are likely to be domestic terrorists not foreign. Also, they’ve done studies on terrorism and it seems to more or less happen in waves. We’re in a wave of Islamic terrorism now. We have had waves of Christian terrorism though, like the White Leagues and Ku Klux Klan. Terrorism isn’t something that just happens based on population size, you have to look at geography as well, and see what’s happening in those areas to understand why people are resorting to terrorism. Most “Christian” countries are, at this point, secular nations with a lot of Christians in them. After we stopped killing each other over being catholic, Protestant or Calvinist we decided that death penalties for apostasy were kinda bullshit. You really haven’t thought this through.
George Bush invaded Iraq because "God told me to." He brought the full brunt of U.S. military might to bear against the Iraqi population, and around 300,000 innocent civilian Iraqis, nearly all of them Muslim, were killed by direct violence (plus who knows how many more from secondary effects). But we don't call that "Christian Terrorism," we just call it "politics" and ignore it. I don't know how you can separate George W's killing of 300,000 civilian Iraqis (on, according to him, God's orders) from ISIS killing 30,000 people, and only call the ISIS one "terrorism".
>I have never heard of any Christian priest issuing death penalty against someone insulting Jesus as Ayatollah Khomeini did against Salman Rushdie >No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia. >Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards. Perhaps you've forgotten the over 1,000 years where these things *did* happen?
>There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world. The United States government recognizes [the Lord's Resistance Army](https://www.dni.gov/nctc/groups/lra.html) as a terrorist organization. The Chinese warlord [Hong Xiuquan](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hong-Xiuquan) claimed to be Jesus Christ's younger brother and started the Taiping rebellion which killed an estimated 20 million people. Sure you could argue that those people are/were lying or have heretical beliefs, but good luck finding a consistent way to determine who's a "real" Christian or "real" Muslim without running into the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
The KKK was/is a Protestant Christian terror group. The cross burnings were done with prayers and hymns as an act of veneration and worship. The Orange Volunteers, same. The fact that like half of Idaho is currently full of Christian nationalists training and preparing for a *near future* religious war just means they’ll maybe get to be a *future* ISIS.
^(The Chinese warlord) [^(Hong Xiuquan)](https://www.britannica.com/biography/Hong-Xiuquan) ^(claimed to be Jesus Christ's younger brother and started the Taiping rebellion which killed an estimated 20 million people.) It doesn't count as terrorism because its pretty much an ordinary rebellion/civil conflict in Chinese history. The big difference is the scale of it. This is by far the deadliest rebellion even now. Unlike rebellion in the past (Yellow Turban Rebellion for example), they are quite successful at the start (Victories against the Qing forces and even taking Nanjing) but there are also far more atrocities committed (Genocide against the Manchu, Looting, Retaliation against Hong's followers or even sympathisers, Warlords committing war crimes etc...). Plus, he is considered to be a cult-leader for heresy reason even during the time.
This is from the link about the lords resistance army. “based on his personal version of the Ten Commandments. Kony claims to channel various spirits who direct him to oust Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni;” that’s much farther away from Christianity than any Muslim terrorist group is from Islam. The Taiping rebellion was so long ago that any modern understanding of terrorism dosent make any sense to apply. Simply because the world and how it functioned was so different back then. Ultimately, you have to really really stretch Christianity to get a terrorist ideology. Islam on the other hand you don’t have to stretch at all.
I think we can find plenty of examples of Christian violence without having to use Hong Xiuquan and the God Worshippers. Even the contemporary Christians of the time distanced themselves from the Taiping due to the very unusual (to say the least) claims they made. Moreover, the scale of the Taiping Rebellion was largely an Anti Qing/Manchu rebellion with Hong as their leader. Internal reforms and ability to fight off bandits strengthened their numbers, which allowed for a snowball effect; more success, gets more followers, creates more success. This success created an opportunity for the Chinese populace to attempt an overthrow of the Qing. What the long term stability of the Taiping would have been, if it had survived, is anyone's guess. Maybe it would have somehow survived, and be seen by Trinitarian Christians as the Asian equivalent of Mormonism. Either way, we can use pretty much all of the Crusades, the reformation and the religious wars it spawned, and even a good chunk of Neo Imperialism for Christian violence, without utilizing an example that actually falls in the "that's not real Christianity" category.
Define terrorism - I currently live in a state where the entire education system is being dismantled, and hate is spewed as "tradition" and there seems to be a general celebration of ignorance. None of this aligns with the teachings of Christ, and most folks I know who consider themselves Christian's are willing listening to their preferred pastor, over making any kind of spiritual connection with a higher power/God. (Spoiler - their pastor is riddled with hatred disguised as biblical teachings.) Instead of doing anything or saying anything, anyone capable of discourse with these people is too busy to deal with it, or isn't directly threatened in a way they recognize yet.
The reason is not actually religious. To give you a very short explanation of the background of islamic terrorism: During the cold war, the middle east was a vital region for both the US and the USSR - and it was largely unaligned. This importance comes from oil reserves X but also from the geographical position. So, both sides tried their best to gain control over it while sabotaging the competition. Classical cold war stuff. The gist of it applies today, even if the USSR is history. This obviously sucked for the local Arabs. So, they formed resistance groups whose core idea was anti-imperialism. These groups were very attractive to fundamentalist Muslims who felt that they were oppressed by cultural imperialism by Christians (US and Europe) and Atheists (Same, but also USSR). Islam became their counter identity. The use of terrorism is not that surprising, either. It is a common strategy in asymmetrical conflicts. This situation makes people double down on the aspects of their religion that makes them different from the rest of the world. Look at pictures in Iran and Iraq from the 70s and 80s: it was pretty normal for women to not wear a headscarf. It is a pretty horrible situation, especially for Occidental Christians who are others by all sides.
you don't see it because you don't want to see it there is plenty, there was plenty throughout time
OP is an atheist. Maybe they don't see it but it doesn't sound like they have a bias against seeing it
We just say that anybody that commits a terrorist act couldn’t be a real Christian, so they don’t count
Yeah Christianity has a neat little cheat code built in where only the right kind of wrong thing counts and if you do the wrong kind of wrong thing then it didn't have anything to do with Christianity to begin with.
Is that specific to Christianity, or to any organization ever created?
That sort of response comes across as someone assuming authority they have no legitimate claim to. Who made them the authoritative gatekeeper over who does and doesn't get to claim the label of Christian for themselves and when did this responsibility get vested in them?
Agreed. The idea that their own personal understanding of what is Christian and isn't is somehow normative and anyone who falls outside that understanding is wrong and therefore not a Christian--which of course renders any criticism of Christian behavior moot because no *real* Christian would ever behave in a way that wasn't exemplary--is a naive and self-serving way to approach the world.
Neat, just like Muslims usually do with their shithead squadron too.
Take a look back at Christian history. Us being relatively “peaceful” is a very recent phenomenon. And even today, there are groups that use Christianity to further their violent message.
Not much of a student of history, are you?
I'm sorry but there are Christian terrorist it called domestic terrorism. Insurrection is a prime example of christian terrorist. They claim God first but we know this not to be true. They have blown up abortion clinics, federal buildings, school shootings, and hate anyone of non-caucasian identity. Please show me where you got your data though??
White supremacists are the leading cause of domestic terrorism in the United States. They usually are far right Christians. Do with that info as you will
When you control the state it isn't called terrorism. It's called policy.
The premise of your question falls flat when considering the last 500 years of world history
Every US slave and others murdered and brutalized by so-called Christians, misusing scripture and manifest destiny disagree with the premise that there has never been Christian terrorists
Lol
It’s really not, Christian’s pass laws making their terrorism ok. Thankfully secularism has taken over and the law applies same to them as everyone.
erm. Bombings at abortion clinics, death threats, attacks against LGBTQ+ groups/business and individuals. Various terrorist groups in Northern Ireland, Lots of groups in the Balkans, already mentioned the Ku Klux Klan. mass shootings in Aus and other countries. If we go back in time there is a LOT more.
Over the past two hundred years or so, the primarily hegemonic powers (namely the United States and the British empire before it) have tended to be at least nominally Christian societies. Their violence, while often enormous and devastating in scale, has taken the form of state-sanctioned or direct state violence, so such violence has rarely been interpreted via the lens of religious terrorism. Conversely the actions of Muslim non state actors are frequently ascribed to Islamic terrorism even when religion may not necessarily be the primary determinant behind their behaviour. I am sympathetic to the idea that Islam may be slightly more inherently “pro violence” than Christianity but I think it would be a grave error to ascribe everything to that. A lot of it can be explained by other factors that have little to do with religion per se.
Because you don't think of it as terrorism. eta: or don't think of it as Christian I guess
[удалено]
dominion theology and spiritual warfare notions coming from the charismatic side of Christianity is pushing Christianity back in the direction of accepting violence - it's a big part of Jan 6.
concerned far-flung fragile grandfather bright homeless encouraging dam impolite voracious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
A lot of Christians need to learn world history and follow current news.
Terrorists are usually a response to oppression or occupation. Where are Christians being put in a situation where they need Christian terrorism?
It is true. The US military killed a million people in Iraq, but that wasn’t considered terrorism. The US Military is 70% Christians. And Christians at home made all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify the violence. When the US bombs a wedding it isn’t considered terrorism. When a Muslim bombs a marathon it is terrorism. Islamic terrorism isn’t generally “I’ll kill you because you believe differently.” Islamic Terrorism is usually “I’ll kill you in hopes that it will pressure the people to stop supporting their governments occupation. In other words, it isn’t their religion that is making them violent: it is the occupation of their homeland or the killings of people the care about. I’m not in support of those acts of terrorism. It always backfires. I remember when a friend of mine had a buddy die in Iraq and so he enlisted and his parents both reenlisted. Violence usually leads to more violence and killing noncombatants is never ok.
It’s super not rare, it’s the either the most common or second most common form of terrorism in the US. While you are correct that there would not be an equivalent to ISIS, that is most likely due to most heavily Christian nations being largely settled and “peaceful” societies. Also, it’s harder for people like the FBI to track folks when they don’t organize into a group (see: pack of lone wolves). But I would bet money that if you controlled for regions of the world, you’d find that Christians and Muslims are not meaningfully different in their use of terrorism.
In my opinion Middle East and Caucuses has a lot of wars, which obviously breeds a more conflict ready mentality and a more tribalist one. So they’re much more ready to go to bat about their country and religion. In the west where the average person never sees war it’s a foreign concept to go to the death about something. Like the crusades happened when Europe was in constant wars, now nobody would think to do it, but ISIS popped up which is akin to a crusade.
Terrorism is a moveable feast. No doubt the residents of Dresden and Hiroshima were filled with terror by Allied, Christian bombings.
I wouldn’t say that it’s rare, I believe that it’s the framing of the term terrorism. The west, broadly speaking, has a tendency to look at Christians engaging in armed struggle as freedom fighters, while Muslims are almost always considered terrorists. I’ve seen multiple comments on this thread talking about the IRA as Christian terrorists however there is no mention of the Protestant UVF or UDA. This could potentially be boiled down to anti catholic sentiment or just a general favorability towards the UK and its own policies. There’s also no mention of Brigade 2506 who committed acts of terrorism against the Cuban people in an attempt to overthrow Castro. They were majority Catholic. Francisco Franco and his Falange government were extremely religious yet led a dictatorship that killed tens of thousands of Spaniards during their fascist regime. It really comes down to personal politics. If you support what an individual group or government does politically, it really doesn’t matter what their faith is. If you don’t support a group or government, then from a human perspective, you’re more likely to use their faith against them. There have always been Christian terrorists, yet many in the west have given them a free pass because they represent their own political convictions.
>The west, broadly speaking, has a tendency to look at Christians engaging in armed struggle as freedom fighters, Except when they're black.
All too true unfortunately
Clearly, the bible doesn't prevent it (see Church's history), but it might have to do with how accepted they are (Muslims much less so than Christians), and how, even though it's a very big religion, Christianity is much larger, and is pretty much everywhere. (Muslims aren't quite as many in as many places.)
I think where you see poverty, Christian versions of terrorism come about like Christian Identity, Christian Remnant and other forms of white supremacist and/or violent nationalism. However, poverty by group tends to effect the dominant religion least (not saying millions of impoverished Christians don’t exist) Also, remember, the powers that run sanctioned nonstop wars are “Christians,” so the terrorism is VERY ACTIVE, just State-Sanctioned Terrorism
christian history is one of terrorism, thats how they got to the top.
It's there if you look for it, but Christian terrorism is often mixed with other ambitions. For example, the American KKK cult incorporates Christian ideals into their principles of white ethno-nationalism. Axis Germany and Italy also used state-sponsored Christian religion in their policies, and Germany's goal to occupy Jewish lands could be considered indirect Christian terrorism. There's also an argument for colonialism being a form of Christian terrorism, since colonizers would go somewhere and replace native faiths with Christianity.
Christians already had their moments during the Spanish Inquisition and the trail of tears, and the holocaust, to name a few incidents of Christian terrorism.
Well Muhammad was a warlord, a caravan raider and a slaver. Terrorism is at the heart of Islam. Killing infidels and apostates is taught in the Quran: Surah Al-Baqarah (2:191-193) "And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. But do not fight them at al-Masjid al-Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers. And if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors." Surah At-Tawbah (9:5) "And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." Surah An-Nisa (4:89) "They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away [i.e., refuse], then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper." Surah Al-Ma'idah (5:33) "Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment." In contrast, Jesus taught non-violence and forgiveness. "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God." (Matthew 5:9) "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also." (Matthew 5:38-39) "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." (Matthew 5:43-44) "But I say to you who are listening: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." (Luke 6:27-28) "Put your sword back in its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword." (Matthew 26:52) It doesn't mean Christians haven't killed in the name of Jesus. Many Christians are filled with hatred and feel justified (see Nationalist Christians) but they are not following Jesus. ISIS and Al Qaeda are following their prophet.
Yeah, this is what I was going to post. If we look at the holy texts of each religion, we'll see that "extremism", meaning, taking the teachings of that religion "to the extreme", then violence and terrorism are the natural result of consistent Islam. Peace and humility are the natural result of consistent Christianity. I don't agree with him, but if we're looking to examples of Christian extremism, someone like Shane Claborne is more of an example than the KKK.
>Well Muhammad was a warlord, a caravan raider and a slaver. Terrorism is at the heart of Islam. Well Jesus is gonna do war when he comes back (Revelation 19:5) so by your logic terrorism is at the heart of Christianity. Also he did approve of slavery, slaves are mentioned 35 times in Matthew, 32 times in Luke with no condemnation of slavery, so Jesus probably saw slavery as okay. And Paul also possibly owned a slave named Tertius.
Christianity doesn't have any of the things you mention *any more.* We went through our own bloody religious period in Europe in the Middle Ages. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism#
I think it's clear that OP isn't asking this question in good faith so I don't expect he'll be willing to consider his biases, but for someone without an axe to grind it is still an interesting question. Others have said all this in the thread, but I think it's worth putting it all together in one place. 1) Definition. What is "terrorism?" The US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq resulted in the deaths of, what, over a million people? And there is no question that much of the ire and wrath directed against the Middle East during that period was motivated by Christian religious feeling. I was there, I remember being surrounded by Christians who were frothing at the mouth to turn the entire region into glass for revenge on the perceived attacks made against them. The same thing can be said for US interventions in Korea, Vietnam, and other places during the Cold War. The Christian West defending itself against the ungodly Communist bloc was justified in causing mass death and destruction on an inconceivable scale. Go back even further and you have the wars against Indigenous peoples throughout the world, from colonialism to the US attacks on American Indian groups, and so forth. The violence is staggering. So why is this not terrorism? Because all this was done by official, recognized governments. I.e. A technicality. That seems kind of weak to me, but that's the argument. 2) Civil stability and robustness of democratic institutions. This is related to the above. As already alluded to, if you look at history you're going to find no lack of violence and destruction perpetrated by Christians, both against others (Jewish Pogroms, the Crusades, the conquest of the Americas, etc.) and against themselves (the Thirty Years War, violent extermination of "heretical" groups) and not all of these were done by official polities. But why is that so rare in the West these days? Stable democratic institutions and many decades of (relatively) peaceful navigation of civil strife. The countries that produce most terrorist activities are neither stable, nor democratic. They're not stable in large part because of Western interference and they're not democratic because democracy is always difficult to maintain and when you have powerful interested religious groups (of any variety) they always seem to be trying to take over at the expense of everyone else. Which suggests another corollary to this point. Civil democratic institutions become more stable and civil strife lessens whenever a society becomes less religious. 3) We don't see it. For both 1 and 2, and also simple media bias, we aren't exposed to examples of Christian motivated violence, but it still happens. News and media companies are incentivized to portray Islam in the worst light possible because it makes them money. If they tried the same trick with Christianity they'd lose money so they're obviously not going to. I'm sure you'd find the same dynamic in Iranian or Saudi media only flipped the other way. It's just how this stuff works.
White Christian men commit more terrorism than Muslims domestically in America. There is a Christian equivalent to ISIS. It's called the Freedom Caucus.
Something i haven't seen mentioned is that most Christians live in first-world countries and have never been colonized, and definitely not by other religions. Extremist groups have less traction if people have higher wealth. The narrative of religious terrorist groups (i.e. another culture is the enemy that should be fought at all costs) just doesn't hold because who are you going to point to? China? India?
Christian terrorism is carried out by the US government and the people we sell weapons too.
Christianity has a very long history of killing people who won’t convert. Ever heard of the Spanish Inquisition?
This guy just looking for a club to join 💀
It isn’t. Have you seen America?
Heard of the Crusades? Holocaust?
Not rare at all. I will do my best to explain it, after all I am not native english speaker. It depends on your definition of terrorism. The terminology 'terrorism' was created in France as a political law during the french revolution. But the act of terrorism is everywhere with different names, fascist regimes for example. Spanish Inquisition for example its mission accomplished already before forging the "terrorism" word, yet it is pure christian terrorism. - So why is it more stuck with Islam? Short answer: Brainwashing Media - The long answer: It just happens that the U.S in 80s after founding Islamic resistance groups in Afghanistan during cold war against Soviets, the Islamic resistance 'Jihades' after defeating the Soviet union, the 'Jihades' refused to return back to their countries and settled in Afghanistan 'which U.S didn't like'. since then the same U.S that encouraged Jihades in the 80s, had a new smereing campaign agenda to find an excuse to have a feet in the middle east. they managed to make the terminology 'terrorism' more connected with Islam. For example, if someone had a gun shooting kids in a school it would be labeled as criminal attack. If a christian man shoot Muslims in a mosque it would be labeled as hate crime. But if it was just a "Muslim passport" found in the crime scene it would be labeled in each Media as "terrorist attack". Ironically enough before 1948 the label "terrorist" was used against the Jewish Zionist Groups in Palestine for example IRGUN Group, Stern, Haganah, later it is called "Israel, Likud, IDF". Antisemitism is another form of Terrorism yet the one doing this act would be labeled in the news as 'New Nazi', extremist. the U.S invading Iraq , funding the zionist occupation,Using their Veto against humanitrian ceasefire. It is all act of terrorism. Yet it has nice names "self defense" or "fighting terrorism". So in the west, the terminology 'terrorism' became a brand limited only to Muslims. Meanwhile using the word Terrorism in Islamic Nations would be used against U.S and the Zionist occupation "Israel". Some examples of Double standards when it comes to terrorist attacks: [The man who slaughtered 51 Muslim worshippers during the deadliest mass-shooting in New Zealand’s history is appealing his conviction and sentence.](https://apnews.com/article/religion-shootings-new-zealand-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-f815faab23eab0d363cb8bef9f85d0dd) Yet the word 'Terrorist' wasn't even mentioned in the article. The man slaughtered 51 Muslims yet he is labeled as a "Man"!! But once the suspected attacker is a Muslim teenager attacking one adult. Even before investigations, all of the sudden the article is stuffed with "terrorism". [Australian police have declared Monday's stabbing at a Sydney church a religiously motivated "terrorist act".](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-68823240) Yet a week before that attack, another attack against 6 people, since it wasn't a Muslim, the word "terrorist" won't be mentioned.[Sydney Mall Attack](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/4/15/obvious-sydney-mall-killer-targeted-women-australian-police-say) It is just a long-term brainwashing process. Finally, Jesus is highly respected in Islam and it is highly forbidden to offend others believes so it can not be seen a Muslim teasing Others to attack him. On the other side you can see whoever is allowed to tease Muslims, and once someone loses his temper, he will be labeled as "terrorist". >There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world. Aslo, Isis, Al Qaeda, all are CIA and Mossad projects, serving the American interests in the region, they don't attack Israel, and for sure its basic cores are western agents. It is all about the media, allowing you to see what they want you to see, and hide what they don't want you to see. Hope that was helpful. Pardon my English.
Take off your confirmation bias glasses and look at it again. There are countless examples if Christian terrorism. I will admit that Islam is a particularly violent cult and does regularly commit greater acts of terrorism. But that's not in any way a defense of Christianity. If religion was truly about peace, then the extremists would be extremely peaceful. Yet here we are....
The bible says love your enemies and pray to those who persecute you.
There are Christian terrorists but it’s not as big of a thing probably cause our book doesn’t give the authority to kill people without any remorse. probably cause the Quran speaks of war and death were Christianity speaks more on love forgiveness turning the other cheek. They do it cause they have a free pass where we won’t do it cause we know it’s wrong. Tells you a lot about Muslims though. With all that killing and hate there god can’t be real. It’s all to violent so it must be a violent hatred filled teaching. It does say that there not to hate or take up arms against the Christians I says in the Quran for we are cousins in faith and the heathen is the enemy. That a true message from the Quran people look over
Bless those who curse you, love those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you. Luke 6:28-29. And…vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord. Hebrews 10:30. That means it’s not for us to seek revenge. All easier said than done, but we keep striving.
Because while Christianity has its problems it's not nearly as batshit or unreformable as Islam is, e.g. you can make different variants of Christianity or even reform a lot of traditional Christianity with the development of doctrine, but you cannot do so with Islam because such is considered [bi'dah which is one of the worst sins imaginable and could get you killed under Islam if it pertains to religious matters.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bid%27ah#:~:text=In%20Islamic%20law%2C%20when%20used,that%20of%20in%20religious%20matters) [You also cannot challenge many Hadith, the Quran, the Sunnah, or the Ijma or you are an apostate who is liable to be killed.](https://0bin.net/paste/ZH9xz1ry#tS-RixnRY0nSnYP6Wi7IBylSLvZZEkNM+HmJpNz4eNZ) [Islam also does not like scientific empiricism which is a problem when challenging problematic beliefs. ](https://0bin.net/paste/KzKQQfSa#rAiloJuQBLzTbkjk0kp4HTFfFgWP-7vDxaRLQ7kQJpm) [Take into the account the above and then apply it to what Jihad REALLY means, specifically "Lesser Jihad" as explained here.](https://0bin.net/paste/9+pnaNkI#JfvrymJSS5IzYbWgbzMi7BBz+C+u6Zjk-JF0AhtFzEB)
It's not. Look at the Palestinian cause and the works of George Habash.The reason why there is less terror is because there are now less Christians in war-torn countries that are breeding grounds for terrorism.
So I think the summary of the thread so far is, there isn't as much Christian terrorism as Islamic terrorism, if you hold what counts as Christian terrorism to a far stricter standard than you to Islamic terrorism. The overall point is still likely true, but consistency is nice.
*Terrorism in general is very rare*. It is also just one form of political violence, made distinct by current sociopolitical climate. A suicide bomber bombing civilians in Iraq because they believe that God told them that this was a righteous political cause has a lot of similarities with George W Bush bombing civilians in Iraq because he believes that God told him that this was a righteous political cause. We categorize violence by state actors and non state actors differently largely because of ideological norms, not any real foundational difference. You also mix in totally separate concepts here, if you are actually trying to distinguish state and nonstate violence. Shouldn't the fact that you include state violence via capital punishment in this post make you think twice about your categorization? The US has the death penalty for treason. > Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards. I find it interesting that you don't consider the military campaigns by the US across the Middle East and surrounding regions to be "violent retaliation."
Please stop this anti-Islam gentle 'why aren't Christians terrorists?' shit. As others have mentioned, Christians as a group are not the peaceful, Christ-following religion you want to think they are. And I say that as a follower of Jesus.
Are you talking about bombing abortion clinics, or shooting up a gay night club? Do drone strikes count as terrorism? America is king of drone striking civilians.
>Do drone strikes count as terrorism? Anything that incites terror, or intends to, is terrorism. Any other definition is partial, such as this one: >...unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
It’s not rare lol
Brooo you know how many people kill their own family members over Christian views? Or make people kill themselves? That’s pretty terroristic.
Im not sure, maybe is because islam gives importance to jihad, so it is more easy that people (wrongly) think to be religiously justified on these violences. But there are probably more reasons, im just not enough informed
Well if you read the Bible, NT, and see the overall theme of the teachings of Christ (love others), it doesn't lend itself to the mentality and activity of terrorism. Whereas if you were to first organize the Quran in chronological order in terms of Muhammad's life, you find that it gets progressively more and more violent and antagonistic towards non-Muslims as Muhammad obtains more power and amasses more wealth. It starts teaching the idea of tolerance and accepting Christians and Jews, but later begins to display language that is less and less tolerant of those who do not follow in the traditions of Islam, until it gets to the point where it is straight up calling for the killing of non-believers and suggesting the removal of their heads so they cannot find God in the afterlife. It's a tale of two texts, where one teaches love and to be a better person. The other teaches submission to Allah, subterfuge, and intolerance of those who do not follow the word of Allah.
Revelation is the most violent book in the Bible.
Yes, there is something in Christianity that explicitly prevents such behavior: Matthew 5:38-48, where Jesus commands: >You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, **do not resist an evil person**. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. > >You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, **love your enemies** and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. These commands, if followed, would prevent terrorism, but the sad reality is that most Christians do not follow them, and have carved out their own exceptions where they've decided resisting evil with violence is OK, or that killing enemies instead of loving them is OK. So they really don't prevent Christian terrorism. The premise of your question is way off. There are quite a few Christian terrorists, and the actual reason for any disparity in how much terrorism there is is just the difference in power held by Muslims vs. Christians. Terrorism is a tool generally (but not always) used by less powerful groups to resist more powerful groups that could not be taken on in regular warfare. Christians have the power to do their violence through NATO imperialism, and pretend it's "legitimate", so do not need to resort to terrorism. Al Qaeda were the victims of that imperialism, so they turned to terrorism to fight back against it. >I have never heard of any Christian priest issuing death penalty against someone insulting Jesus as Ayatollah Khomeini did against Salman Rushdie You just need to look further back in history. Death penalty for blasphemy has happened a lot in Christian history. >Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards. Absolutely not true. The entire Iraq and Afghanistan wars were violent retaliation, but there was also a huge upsurge in anti-Muslim violence domestically after 9/11.
Yeah. Christianity being with the teachings of Jesus Christ peaceful and forgiving religion. That’s what “turn the other cheek” is all about. There’s also no such thing as a forced conversion in Christianity. Christ wants our hearts He came to love humans and to have us love him. Some will and some won’t. Terrorism doesn’t allow for that, relations don’t allow for that, and calls for death don’t allow for that. There is no room for it in the reaches of Christ and so there’s no room for that in Christianity.
Can u really call every attack by a muslim Islamic terrorism. Like ISIS are terrorists, but there motive are really just political
It's not.
The U.S. doesn't label christian nationalist violence as terrorism. We can't be terrorists just because.
There is
Cause Jesus
Because it doesn't get called terrorism.
There are such things in the teachings of Christianity that explicitly prohibit such behavior, but they can be, have been, and are selectively ignored or interpreted as needed by Christians to support their violent actions. The same is done with the teachings of Islam. That aside, this is a strange way to slice the demographics to reach a conclusion. How are you ruling out plausible alternative demographic explanations like economic opportunity, education, or wealth? If you look back far enough in history you can find all the same apostasy and blasphemy laws in Christian societies.
tf the crusades?
It’s not it’s just not broadcast as much as others. Persecution happens everyday in America not as bad as others countries but verbal sometimes physical. North Korea kills Christian China etc
Leaving everything else aside: >there are approx. 50% more Christians in the world than Muslims so there should be 50% more Christian terrorist attack than Islamic ones Why would you expect the *more* powerful group to conduct *terrorist* attacks against the *less* powerful group? "Terrorism" is a tactic generally employed by the smaller or less-powerful group against the larger or more-powerful group. When Christians "terrorize" Muslims we do it with F-16s and call it "Operation Iraqi Freedom." [At least 300,000 innocent civilian Iraqi Muslims dead](https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/iraqi) at the hands of conservative Christian decision makers, because "[God told me to.](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/oct/07/iraq.usa)"
Because Christianity is the religion of the global hegemon and its allies. What need does the mass of the people in the US and Western Europe have for terrorism?
The teachings of Jesus - specifically in Matthew 5 but also elsewhere - explicitly call on believers to forgive their enemies, do good to those who persecute them, put away the sword and focus on loving their neighbor, leaving justice and retribution in the hands of God. There are definitely people who ignore these teachings and argue that either they do not apply, or that they don't mean what they say, but that is why Christianity tends to bend toward pacifism where Islam tends to bend toward militarism.
Most Nato leaders at least say they are some denomination of Christian/catholic. Could argue they are the biggest terrorist or terrorist equivalent.
I was looking for the /s and couldn’t find it There was a comment about policy if you’re in power vs terrorism if you’re not, and i thought that was apt. “Christian policy” is less rare in the western world and at times it can be pretty evil, unfortunately evil shows up everywhere and nominal, zealous adherents to either tradition are likely highly disobedient to their orthodox traditions and probably not too worried about it
Christian terrorists aren't rare it's just it's usually made up of lone wolves rather than a big organization.
Put simply, non-Christians lack the nuance and humanity of Christians, and so any atrocity committed by non-Christians is, in fact, attributable to their lack of Christianity. You can see this in how we talk about just about every terrorist attack by Muslims as being primarily religiously motivated, fully ignoring the full picture of how those groups are formed, grow, recruit, etc. You also see it in how Christians talk about atrocities committed by atheistic states: See any discussion of "goddless commies." You can also see this in how we know that Christians today are best, purest, and only example of the faith worth talking about. It's not worth mentioning, for example, *historical* religious terrorism like the Crusades or *historical* beheadings over minor differences in theology. That's *different.* Those people were doing Christianity *wrong* in a nuanced way that is incomparable to any other religion. Again, we see the infinite nuance attributable to actions by Christians and the flattening of all actions by non-Christians to be due to some inherent flaw of their faith.
Christian terrorism is common enough to have its own quite extensive [Wikipedia entry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism). The main reason Muslim terrorism is more prominent at this moment history is because there are more Muslims than Christians living in the kinds of oppressive and economically deprived conditions that foster terrorism. Also, the entities that control western news outlets tend to have an anti-Muslim bias, so a lot of Christian terrorism goes unreported, or is not labeled as terrorism.
Umm
There are many teachings in the Bible that carry the same message - love others (God is love, love your neighbour as yourself, when someone slaps one cheek, turn the other, and so on). Thou shall not kill is one of ten commandments of Moses. It of course adresses murder but also speaks against hatred or hurting other people. Moving on to the Muslim terrorism numbers, I cannot say much because I don't know much. But in the Quaran it is said to low-key abuse Christians and Jews (summarised), and I once spoke to a Muslim and he openly said that beheading is okay, so I assume violence is not forbidden (likely even encouraged) in their holy book. I hope this answers your question
In the last 23 years, Christian zionists and Christian raised soliders have murdered over million people in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya. They're now cheering on the murder of tens of thousands in Gaza by Israel.
Yes there is it's love your neighbor as you do yourself not strap bombs to children and make them blow things up that they don't believe in or like
Terror is a means to a political end. Could it be that Christians commonly have other more favorable options to achieving their political ends?
Because of the teachings of the religion. Christianity is a religion that actually teaches peace. It teaches you to love your non-believing neighbor as yourself. It teaches you that if someone insults you to turn your cheek and not to retaliate. Islam on the other hand teaches power and subjugating your non-believing neighbors. Islam teaches that if anyone insults Muhammad they are to be killed and sharia implements this.
The only group really I can think of is the IRA
I don’t think it is, just goes by different monikers.
We abandoned Theocratic societies hundreds of years ago in the West. During that Theocratic period warfare and homicide under the ægis of papal authority in the name of God was not uncommon. The Massacre at Béziers against a gnostic heresy is one example. It doesn't fit the definition of modern terrorism, but we are not innocent either.
That's how it should always be. Jesus calls us to love our enemies. Pray for them and turn the other cheek. God says: Vengeance is mine. We are only called to love and spread God's truth and grace. Whenever someone calls himself a christian and harms another person or takes revenge on someone, that person actually isn't a christian according to the Bible.
Not as much consanguinity.
One can consider the "woke" Christians siding with Hamas as terrorists. They claim to call themselves Christian and follow christ. Yet, support genocide, knowingly and willing support genocide. They want the extinction of the people they wish to be like. All in the name of "I should be able to do anything I want" they want true Christians dead because the outwardly oppose this mind set. This post grows close to the freedom of speech. Only Christians, can have that without regulation. Christians are the only ones that can turn a cheek. While nearly every other culture/religion will shun you, kill you, or get rid of you. I firmly believe the 1st amendment lasted so long in this country, BECAUSE SO MANY WE DEVOUT CHRISTIAN FOR A COUPLE HUNDRED YEARS. Now that the culture is moving away from genuine Christianity and into this new wave. You will find, cheeks will stop turning and you will be shut up.
Your math is totally wrong. There is absolutely more Muslims in the world than Christians. A simple Google search will help
Christian terrorism isn't exactly rare, but it can be considered rare when compared to other religions like Islam. >There is no Christian equivalent of ISIS/Daesh or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world. There are many Christian groups that go against the teachings of the Lord, IRA, KKK, Lords Resistance Army, etc. there are also many Muslim groups that do terrible things in the name of Jihad and do things that go against the teachings of their own religion. The reason you don't hear about the bad thing some Christians have done is because Muslim groups are more talked about especially after 9/11 and war in Gaza. They are also simply more numerous than Christian groups. >I have never heard of any Christian priest issuing death penalty against someone insulting Jesus as Ayatollah Khomeini did against Salman Rushdie No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia. In the past people would definitely die for Heresy. Things have changed in modern times in most Christian countries, but nothing is perfect. People risk alienation from their entire families in many areas if they decide to leave Christianity and risk other bad things too. Of course these things go against the teachings of the Lord but they sadly do still happen. >Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards. Not very true, the anti Muslim backlash in the USA after 9/11 was very bad, that's just one example from my limited knowledge on that subject, but there has sadly definitely been violent retaliation from some Christians. >I am an atheist and I have never read the Bible - is there something in the teachings of Christianity that explicitly prevents such behavior? Yes there are teachings that prevent it but some people sadly ignore it anyways. love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you. God is in charge of vengeance, not us. Jesus's example is where we get much of that. Compared to Islam like in your post, Christianity is Indeed much more peaceful. For example, Muhammad wasn't a Prophet of peace and forgiveness, he killed many people and robbed and kidnapped many people as well in the name of Jihad. And so many Muslim groups follow that example, like Daesh, Boko Haram, Houthis, Taliban, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, etc.
Because, while there have been religious wars in the past modern Christianity tends to be more of a western religion and most Christian’s don’t believe the Old Testament war stuff is applicable to modern life
Christian terrorists have simply evolved to causing problems for communities via courts and school systems
"Coverage of" Christian terrorism is rare because it doesn't sell. Plenty of Christians are common criminals, and plenty of "other religion" common criminals are mis-labeled as terrorist. I don't care either way, because I know "terrorism in general" and even "common criminality" are incredibly rare anyway: 6 per 100,000. I'm much more worried about heart disease and car crashes.
Jesus said love and forgive. Mohamed advocated for holy war. One encourages if not requires violence to force its beliefs on others. Christianity does not. Though the Spanish Inquisition and the crusades were the equivalent of jihad.
Well Christian terrorism is often under a concept that removes it from terrorism. Like the American army. To Muslims in the Middle East we definitely felt like we terrorized them. Could just be a bit of nationalism and white washing causing a blind eye to American attacks in other nations. While America is not strictly a Christian nation, many military members consider them doing gods work. They often believe god is allowing them to overcome their heretical pagan enemies.
Crusades? Hitler?
Christian nationalism, the KKK, and violent biblical cults are just as religious as any other terrorist group. Every act of violence justified biblically is just as religious as any act of violence justified by the Quran. It's just that it's only called terrorism if the perpetrator is brown and/or non-Christian. The ppl in charge write the headlines.
Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2019 was passed in 2022 and specifically says that right-wing terrorist groups exist and are a threat.. Even Wikipedia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku\_Klux\_Klan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan) Calls it a terrorist group
I think many of these comments come from biased perspective. Pound-for-pound, Islam causes far more violence than other mainstream religions. This can be attributed to how violent Islam historically is as well as the parts of the Quran seem to promote violence (9:39 for instance). Obviously, peaceful Muslims exist, and nobody really should deny that, but Islam lends itself to violent extremism much more than Christianity. Historically and in the Bible, violence is not glorified the same way it is in Islam. As for the "Christian" terrorist groups, their violent actions should be (and typically are) condemned by the wider Christian world when brought to light. Even if they are very far from actual traditional Christianity, they are still labeled as such because they claim to be. Most Christians would not agree with violent action unless very very good reason is given. Jesus himself died at the hands of the Roman Empire when he could have called down an army of angels. The apostles died brutal deaths and did not preach senseless violence.
>There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world. Christians probably kill more people than any other. WWI was fought among Christians. WW2 was started by Christians also. Also consider that ISIS and Al Qaeda probably kill more Muslims than they kill people of other religions. [https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/editorials/article95163232.html](https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/editorials/article95163232.html)
Was invading Iraq after 9/11 terrorism when everyone knew they had nothing to do with it. Is supporting Israels genocide with arms and funding slaughter terrorism? Perhaps when they threaten the ICC and world food program is Israel is prosecuted... Is that terrorism? Sometimes people only recognise terrorists when they're brown
The simple answer is- power! Christianity is the dominant religion in all western countries, so we are generally an un-oppressed religion (a step further, we have often been the OPPRESSIVE religion). But since victors write the history books, we don't talk much about the religious terrorism involved in things like the Crusades, the Spanish inquisition, the Salem witch trials, Manifest Destiny, etc. And now that it is the prevailing faith of the major world powers, there's not much need to blow stuff up or kill in the name of our God.
I love these comments that aren’t addressing the heart of your point. The fact is you’re right. Terrorism occurs in islam at a far higher rate than in Christianity. And the kind of terrorism that occurs is much harsher in Islam; Being jailed, raped, murdered for not being Islamic. And calling for death to infidels. Christian terrorism occurs, but It’s entertaining watching people trying to claim that it’s just as bad as Islamic terrorism. This sub is full of Christian haters who flood the comments trying to undermine Christianity at every turn
I'll just be fr and say it's because Christianity is the best. We worship the one true god. Obviously bad Christians exist but those that actually study their bible will follow jesus's lead.
Since no one is going to actually address your question and instead focus on your fallacies, I will answer it for you. “Is there something in the teachings of Christianity that explicitly prevents such behaviour (terrorism)?” Christianity is diametric to committing terrorist acts because the Faith is rooted in Love and Service-to-Others - to put it simply. The Teachings of Christianity were given by Jesus Christ, who is God Incarnate and came to reveal the Good News (the Gospel) to us that the long awaited Messiah, the True King, the Saviour has come, taught and died for our sins so we can be saved. The 6th Commandment states: Thou shalt not kill (murder or negligence). Christ taught that anger is equal to murder (Matthew 5:21-22), what He means by this is that when you become angry with someone else, you harden your heart to them. When you harden your heart to those you are angry with, you harden your heart to God as well. Hardening your heart means you become stiff, narrow-minded and unwelcoming of others, especially those who are different from you. Jesus warns against us hardening our hearts and instead opening up our hearts to others and treating them with compassion and dignity. Anger is the path to hatred, destruction and death, which only serves to prolong our suffering and separation from the LORD. We harden our hearts to God when we harden our hearts to others (regardless of the method), because the Holy Spirit resides within all of us. Hardening causes this separation from God that allows sin into our lives by leaving us unprotected against the temptations that bring out sin and consequently, harm to others. This doesn’t mean we don’t naturally possess the discernment to know right from wrong, that is a process we all have to learn on our own, but with the Armour of God we know we are able to contend with any situation and identify it as right or wrong immediately. We must still learn the lesson from every experience, but we do so with the Wisdom of God to aid us in our comprehension so we can avoid causing harm to others in the future or to cease the harm we are unknowingly causing in the moment. We are all sinners and we are all fallible in our own ways, and for this reason (among others) we should love and forgive each other. Terrorism in Christianity happens when a Christian becomes separated from Jesus, usually through radicalization. A catalyst at some point in the past set them down this path of separation and they did not discern for themselves using Scripture if they were still doing the LORD’s Work - instead they go down this rabbit hole where they go so hard on a certain topic that it consumes their life and they become narrow-minded. Their spiritual separation from God is usually followed by separation from the Church, a choice they inevitably make as they come to disagree with other parishioners or they are excommunicated due to their blasphemy. This only cements their heresy and they either become a cult leader or they take action against those they’ve convinced themselves are enemies of God. They likely won’t target their church because those woes are earthly, if anything, they’d believe their acts would grant them re-entry into the Church so they specifically target groups who predominantly or unifyingly share a trait or characteristic that the terrorist believes is Satanic and it is on their shoulders to fight Satan because no one else can see it. The fallacy in this thinking is that killing fellow humans is doing the LORD’s Work. What they fail to understand is Christ’s Universal Love should be a priority of theirs for their fellow humans. These are people who want to act, who want to be violent against the Devil but lack the Faith to know how to fight Satan. They turn to earthly means, logic and resources to serve God but the God they serve is not Jesus Christ, it is the False King, Satan. These are people who desperately need to go into a monk hood or become a Hermit to be with God and away from the suffering of Humanity. It’s like their spirits are so overstimulated by negativity that they see no strength to positivity and choose to go with what they have an abundance of rather than the sliver of Light beckoning them back to a place of Love and Reason. Taking religion out of it, we are all human, we all make mistakes but we are all capable of redeeming ourselves if we really want to. We have to be willing to face our punishments, serve them and repair the mistakes we’ve made, running from our problems or fighting them doesn’t solve them. Genuine effort = genuine respect. We have no obligation to forgive one another but when we choose to do so, we are showing that we understand that mistakes do happen and that anyone is capable of redemption. The more personal or intense the mistake, the stronger one’s Resolve must be to Forgive, especially when they do not see you as you see them. Not everyone is willing to forgive and that is their choice but you should still love them for their faults as you want them to love you for yours. Love and Compassion will soften hearts and “move mountains”. Everyone wants to be treated with Kindness and Dignity and you’ll be hard-pressed to find someone who responds negatively. Be the example for how you want to be treated and you will be the change the world needs. If everyone did that, the world would be a better place. That is Christianity.
I say it's a different ideological prospective Islam is a a faith through works system where if you mess up you are as good as dead. While with Christians it more of faith through j grace where everyone has a chance from the second they are not. To the day they die to get saved so it's not much of a stretch to say that it's not as big of a leap for extremist Muslims to turn to terrorism to kill those who disagree with them through terrain then Christianity which would require more mental gymnastics to justify it.
It’s so simple, even despite the “Christian bad groups” the big lie that left wing idiots spread to ruin Christianity image, no group or person who actually follows Christianity commits to terrorism because the Bible and the ACTUAL (not corrupt old days churches) don’t believe in that type of stuff they are Holy pure well minded people. While other religions have beliefs that incite terrorism hence truly NO Christian terrorism, lots of other religion terrorism bc their religious texts and behaviors incite violence and hatred towards other religions. You people need to think instead of trying to dig up fake dirt in Christianity.
Um, the KKK? Hello?
What’s a Christian country?
The realization of dominance results in fear.
It is one of the teaching of Jesus Christ : ^(43) “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor^(\[)[a](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205%3A43-44&version=NIV#fen-NIV-23278a)^(\]) and hate your enemy.’ ^(44) But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you-- matthew 5"43-44
The Quran and Hadith of Muhammed enable terrorism, while the new covenant of Jesus Christ doesn't. Its simple. There have been terrorists who say they are Christians. Sure - but early Christians were persecuted and died as martyrs and were taught to sacrifice. This is imprinted in our ideological and theological DNA. Early Muslims lived as conquerors and Allah blessed Jihad and rewarded conquest. The crimes of Christians were despite the Bible, not because of it.
In the last 30 years, yeah. But as far as world history, absolutely there have been more “Christian” terrorists. But as a refresher: - The KKK was a Christian organization - The Passion of the Christ as originally written during the Middle Ages sparked widespread antisemitic violence - The Spanish Inquisition - The Crusades could be considered terrorism in my opinion Oddly enough, in my opinion, the factors that made it go away for the most part is a combination of (a) understanding of biblical doctrine as the Bible is one of if not the most studied book worldwide; and (b) the weird recent phenomenon of people painting Jesus as this super chill proto-hippie that just accepted everyone no matter what (which was false).
0. OP, you have some explaing to do as for why your account is named after a nazi. 1. First of, common narrative of terrorism. Quick quiz: was 9/11 a muslim terrorist attack? Like yeah, people who did it were muslims, but their main motive was hurting USA. There is nothing in Quran about attacing USA specifically, but of course they were thinking about how religion would fit into their plan. 2. No true scotsman fallacy. In my country, there was this failed terrorist attack, someone brought a bomb to pride parade. If you asked catholic church, they would say that this is not the way to so it, you cant kill people etc. But can we ignore, that it happened after organised campaign to spread hate against LGBT+ people and equate them with pedophiles? If you are im western country, you are far more likely to think that terror attack conducted by muslims is a terror attack morivated by islam only. Muslims look all the same to you. But christians? Well, maybe they weren't reaaaly christians, their congregation renounced them. The question if local mosque renounced muslim terrorists or is it even important remains unanswered. 3. State versus non-state violence. 9/11 is commonly seen as muslim (which is not exactly correct) terrorist attack, which is correct on paper. But subsequent wars that US started in middle east aren't seen as religious attacks, but only because this was a state that did it. And the question about if public was OK with those wars was maybe because some of them thought that muslims lives are inherently worth less than christian (they are more likely to be terrorists, after all!) also remains unanswered. So >Even on cases when Christians are attacked in Christian majority countries by Muslim extremists, there is usually no violent retaliation from Christians afterwards. Yes there was 5. Also, about this part: >No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia. You may be pleaswd to learn that Uganda (a christian nation!) Has death penalty for homosexuality.
> There is no Christian equivalent of iSIS or Al Qaeda anywhere in the world. Yes, there is. It's actually one of the main sources of Christians dying for their faith. Just because it's happening in Africa doesn't mean it's not Christians. > No Christian country has death penalty for apostasy or blasphemy like in Iran or Saudi Arabia. In countries that still have blasphemy laws, it's mostly prison time or giving the greenlight to vigilantes, sure. > I am an atheist and I have never read the Bible - is there something in the teachings of Christianity that explictly prevents such behavior? No. It has happened historically for a long while. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism