Which Has a More Violent History, Christianity, Islam or Atheism?

This comes up all the time.  It was exacerbated by 9/11.  It was implanted in U. S. minds that Islam is a violent religion.

I know lots of Muslum people.  They insist to a person Islam is a religion of peace.

People who criticize Christianity insist its history is a violent one. Christians claim atheists have no moral values.

We can all make our cases.  Nonbelievers can point to the Bible where two million innocent people were killed by God.  There were the crusades where employees of the Catholic church killed innocent Muslims.

Christians can point to world despots who claimed not to be religious and who killed vast numbers of innocent people.  Atheists can argue these were not employees of any atheist organization, like the crusade soldiers of the Catholic Church, so the philosophy of atheism is not at fault.

Hilter claimed to be a devout Catholic.  German Catholic officials are quoted as saying he was one of their own. Whether Hilter was sincere, or, whether Catholic hierarchy felt they had any choice in endorsing him remain legitimate questions.

So, we can only say the two faiths and no faith all have baggage.  There is one thing we can say for certain, however.

It is that Christians have no business saying, as they do somewhere most every day, that they have moral creditials while atheists and Muslims do not.  There are Christians, atheists and Muslims who have sound moral values and there are those in all groups who do not.

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years. There is more about me at Wikipedia.com.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

89 Responses to Which Has a More Violent History, Christianity, Islam or Atheism?

  1. entech says:

    All start with good intentions, all have people that let them down, all have people that turn out to be quite insane.
    You can’t blame Mohammad for Bin Laden.
    You can’t blame Jesus for Torquemada.
    You can’t blame Marx for Stalin.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      entech 1:16 “Torquemada”

      Now there was a “moral force for good”. I agree, you can’t blame Jesus for him.

    • josh says:

      Actually you can blame Mohammad for Bin Laden and you can blame Marx for Stalin. It’s the maliciousness of their beliefs that created Bin Laden et Stalin.

      • entech says:

        In that case Torquemada can be blamed on Jesus, you think God and Jesus are the same and it is pretty malicious to try and destroy the human race by drowning.

  2. John Solberg says:

    People come in all shapes and sizes, color, creed some are good some are not. It just depends what you are looking for. If you are looking for the good in any part of humanity you will find it and it is also true if you are looking for the bad you will find that too. I try to look for the good and I usually find it. But I am not so foolish to think that there isn’t people out there who are trouble. Any blame for abberant behavior ought always be laid at the feet of the person that perpertrated it. Blaming jesus, allah or whomever is like a small child saying ” It wasn’t me, it was him.”

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      John 2:32 Thank you for stopping by to comment. Good thoughts.

    • entech says:

      On the other hand there are some that insist that the existence of an actual evil entity, Satan, exists and since the Garden in Eden and “The Fall” there has been an ultimate excuse, an original sin which needs a constant resistance.

      As many like to do Biblical quotes:
      The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
      Ezekiel 18:20
      This would surely imply that man cannot be blamed for sin of Adam, nor can he be redeemed by a vicarious sacrifice, man is on his own.

      As you say, lay it at the feet of the perpetrator.

      (To the ladies out there, “man ” in a generic sense, human)

      • entech says:

        :oops: not “blamed for the sin of Adam” but “tainted by the sin of Adam”.

      • Adam Heckathorn says:

        (Exodus 20:5, 6) 5?You must not bow down to them nor be induced to serve them, because I Jehovah your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion, bringing punishment for the error of fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation, in the case of those who hate me; 6?but exercising loving-kindness toward the thousandth generation in the case of those who love me and keep my commandments.

      • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

        entech 5:09 Adam 11:53 re: Both addressing the question of whether one is responsible for the sins of another.

        So, is the father responsible for the sins of the son and visa versa? Here is the answer. Choose the bit of scripture that either a.) helps whatever argument you are making or b.) makes you feel morally superior to someone else, or, some other group.

        I’d like to take credit for coming up with that answer to the dilemma, but it’s actually been the answer used by the faithful for two thousand years.

        • entech says:

          If I remember rightly the even unto multiple generations is for those who have the nerve to worship a different god (not, of course, that one could possibly exist in a monotheism, but a good threat never goes astray). That seems to have widened its field over the last few thousand years, now it includes those that are, in error, heretics, or just the other.
          Everything always seems to come back to the story being written by priests for the benefit of priests, by man for man.
          Adam @ 11:53 shows that it is a perfect system of reward and punishment, not sure how a just god could punish the children in one verse and not in another – I thought justice was supposed to be consistent and clearly defined.

  3. Adam Heckathorn says:

    bringing punishment for the error of fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation,

  4. Wolfy32 says:

    To summarize, HUMANS are a violent species. Committing murder as one of their several first acts of moral decline. (if so inclined to put any trust in the bible’s historical record)

    Our minds, our bodies, our existence, is plagued by some major faults… Mental illness, subject to thought control, a desire to feel like we matter and will do anything to attain it. We’re a species unlike the animal kingdom in that we think through our desire to harm. We rationalize it, make it o.k. Religion is just one of many mechanisms we use to rationalize to hurt people. Whether it’s to judge others to make ourselves feel better.

    Or to put down others to make ourselves look better, we’re a race that like the animal kingdom attacks the weak. Singles them out and attacks them. Whether it’s being weak in standing up for ourselves, or maybe we stand up for ourselves, but others see a chink in that armor and seek to wear them down. Whatever the case may be, we are similar in attacking those we consider weaker than us, and the difference is we rationalize, deduce the person(s) deserve what’s coming to them.

    Animals, I don’t believe, think about the consequence of attacking a wolf or cow for food.. Hungry, must attack. Humans, decide someone is better or could be better, and decide it’s time to tear them down. Take them down.

    It is in this that religion just becomes a tool. A tool to rationalize, justify, and make the attack on whatever they want to tear down. If the people followed a God, not a religion, then, maybe, just maybe, there’d be less of this methodical tear down others philosophy. IF there’s a Christian, Muslim, Hindu God / creator God of any type, I do not believe, unless it is sadistic, that it would ever want us to tear down anything.

    For the most part, Christ , divine or not, worked hard to better a society a people. He may have had ulterior motives, however, his example was that of the opposite of how many use religion today. If there’s a God, I do not believe it wants any of what humanity stands for today, maybe ever. Yet, God is used for all of humanities’ selfish, self centered goals and then some.

  5. Adam Heckathorn says:

    If You believe that God is righteous Then if He is vindictive shouldn’t You as His devoted worshiper be vindictive? If He advocates for holocausts Doesn’t that make under the right conditions holocausts righteous. (1 Kings 22:19-23) 19?And he went on to say: “Therefore hear the word of Jehovah: I certainly see Jehovah sitting upon his throne and all the army of the heavens standing by him, to his right and to his left. 20?And Jehovah proceeded to say, ‘Who will fool A?hab, that he may go up and fall at Ra?moth-gil?e·ad?’ And this one began to say something like this, while that one was saying something like that. 21?Finally a spirit came out and stood before Jehovah and said, ‘I myself shall fool him.’ At that Jehovah said to him, ‘By what means?’ 22?To this he said, ‘I shall go forth, and I shall certainly become a deceptive spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ So he said, ‘You will fool him, and, what is more, you will come off the winner. Go out and do that way.’ 23?And now here Jehovah has put a deceptive spirit into the mouth of all these prophets of yours; but Jehovah himself has spoken calamity concerning you.”
    If God is deceptive Is it wrong if I to am deceptive as long as My motives are pure?(Doing Gods will). My conclusion is that religious belief tends to enable bad behavior.

  6. Adam Heckathorn says:

    I apologize for the superfluous question marks it seems the Bible program I’m using does that

  7. H.P.Drifter says:

    This stuff about Satan get thee behind me is a bunch of BS. The evil is in men’s heart, if your a good person you are a good person, if you are a bad person you are a bad person. Most people are in between these two extremes. Religion can influence people to be either. The Religious are easily manipulated, no matter whether they are Christian or Muslim generally everyone wants to cooperate, here men join the army or some other branch of service because it seems like it is a good thing to do serve their country
    Now they may have a different opinion when their obligation is up and have done multiple tours in Iraq or Afghanistan. More so if they have to do deal with the VA hospital system. Some people thrive under this atmosphere. Now as far as who is killing who at the moment it is hard to tell, we not only kill people with guns but set up countries and people to commit economic suicide.

    H.P.D.

    • entech says:

      “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.”
      ? Steven Weinberg

  8. Fr. James says:

    Hitler did not think of himself as a devout Catholic. He hated the Church, planned its elimination, and had a plan to kidnap the Pope. His table talk was full of diatribes against Christianity that are worthy of any good atheist. In the last century atheists like him, Stalin, and Mao killed over 100 million people. Many of the dead were believers. Atheists have no business claiming the moral high ground or falsely claiming Hitler was a Catholic. At the end of his life he married outside the Church, made no move to receive the sacraments or pray, and committed suicide which is contrary to the Catholic faith. I do wish atheists would not keep lying about this.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Fr. James 4:29 Thank you for coming on to comment. Your comments are welcome here.

      Your view is certainly one that could be reached. He said many things, including that Christianity is the source of good moral values. Different commentators reached different conclusions about what he believed at various times during his life.

      It certainly seems likely that early on, during his political rise, he believed. I don’t think it is at all unresonable to say this. That he wanted to use the faith for power could well have been. He may also have come to see the Church as a competitor.

      I recall reading a book written by a German fighter pilot ace. He was proud that, when visiting with people Germans had taken back from the Communists, he assured them the Reich and Hilter had no objection whatsoever to displaying the cross or a picture of Christ. People, he said, were greatful for that.

      I know it does not fit the needs of the faith to ever admit this. It is more helpful to refer to Hilter as an atheist butcher to offset the atrosities of the Church. As I point out in the blog, there are no histories without some problems.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostle%27s_Creed

      • josh says:

        Hitler was an atheist John. Tell me? Do you deny the holocaust also?

      • Fr. James says:

        Dear Jon,

        Hitler was noted for lying when it suited him, especially early one when he was hiding his real agenda. In private he stated his real views. He said, “In the long run, National Socialism and religion will no longer be able to exist together.” Also he said, “But Christianity is an invention of sick brains : one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery. A negro with his tabus is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in Transubstantiation.” That was how he spoke when he told the truth. He hated the Church and soon enough party members were told to drop their Church membership. I can post as many quotes as you like.

        The German fighter pilot was not Hitler. What he told those people was false, even though he may have believed it. I can give quotes from other German soldiers that say something very different.

        It is not a matter of fitting the needs of faith. Why does if fit the needs of atheists to be deceptive and talk about Hitler as a good Catholic? There are plenty of problems in Church history, but Hitler himself was not one of them. If he believed in any god it was himself.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Fr. James 10:18 “..especially early when he was hiding his real agenda. In private he state his real views.”

          I appreciate you skepticism of Hitler’s sometimes expressed support of Catholic beliefs. While you regard him as a frequent liar, I think it is more complicated than that. For one thing, he and his circle of people were terrible administrators. It is said the technology was present in Germany at the time to defeat the U. S. Yet, various parts of the government did not know what other parts were doing, so they government was able to put into action the advantages it had.

          I think it was very likely the pilot who gave the green light to display of Christian artifacts may well have received that policy from one part of the German government while another may not have been so friendly.

          We don’t know for sure what was in the mind of Hilter, even if he confided to someone he was an atheist. He was a politican and may have confided different things to different people.

          All of this is interesting to discuss. The point of bringing it up was do focus on the question of whether Christians hold a higher moral plain than nonChristians. I’d be interested in your thoughts on that–and if you think they do, on what basis you would that claim.

          • entech says:

            Jon, when you talk of the technology being available it reminds of something I remember reading somewhere. Of course this could be as outlandish as the Josh conspiracies, but I did read that the attempts on Hitlers life were not from any kind of idealism but to get him out of the way because his insanity was making them lose badly, if they could put up a better fight they could sue for a surrender under better terms. They would remember the onerous conditions imposed at Versaille, which gave rise to the conditions that permitted the rise of the Nazi insanity to start with.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            entech 10:59 I have read the accounts of Versaille. It certainly seems like imposing humiliating penalties handed to Hilter an opportunity he might never have had. What a lesson.

          • entech says:

            Compare to the treatment handed out to Germany and Japan after 1945, still allies nearly 70 years later.
            Not too interested in people like Aquinas but this lesson is a good example of Just War Theory, should be required study by all politicians.

          • entech says:

            Until 4:29 am the topic was pretty well on track and then Hitler crept in. now no one can deny the Nazi attempts at genocide are worse than anything Christianity or Islam has to offer, but both of these are overtly theistic organisations. The Nazis never said they were fighting to rid the world of theism, you could make a case for Hitler said and wrote many things. The end of the second chapter of Mein Kampf he said by exterminating the Jews he believed he was doing God’s work. a return to the (imagined) glory of the Teutonic Knights, the hunt for the Spear of Destiny and many other supernatural themes were not far below the surface, we even hear of attacks being delayed until the stars were right.

            If you want to introduce atheism into a violent history them you can refer to the Soviet Union, officially atheist but with an ideology that they held was the only true and meaningful way a society should be run. An ideology held with a religious like fervour. The Orthodox Church with its long association with and support for the Tsardom was a natural enemy and attempts at elimination inevitable.
            A bit like Torquemada in a way, when you look at the works of Jesus you see that the inquisition was an aberration; when you look at the works of Marx you see that Lenin and Stalin were an aberration.

            The two most egregious acts of the Church in my opinion were the boiling in oil of Pomponio Algerio, who had the misfortune to espouse Lutheran ideas when the church of Rome was fighting against the growing Protestantism, and, the hanging of Thomas Aikenhead at the insistence of the Church of Scotland, to “set an example” against blasphemy, this at the time that enlightenment thought was growing, this being ten years before the birth of David Hume. I am sure there are similar “martyrs” in the world of Islam.
            The horror, to me, is that both of these atrocities were committed to try and save the church regardless.

          • Henry says:

            entech:“Until 4:29 am the topic was pretty well on track ….”

            Ok. Here we go with the chronological master again who is about as good as a Malaisian official in providing accurate history and timeline.

          • entech says:

            “Malaisian” what an appropriate typographical error. Indeed a “Malaise ” is what is affecting you at the moment, ridiculous little nonsense things popping off the end of your keyboard. Cheer up it will soon be worse.

          • Henry says:

            Sorry. I am focusing on your atheist brethren stirring around in Crimea. Looks like they shot down one of our planes over the territory they invaded. Obamba carefully weighing out what he will do. We will have to wait until he can go golfing to clear his mind in making the proper decision.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            That disputed area over is so familiar to me. Where I grew up we talked about it all the time. We used to say frequently, “criminently”. Who would have guessed our familiarity would be so important one day. :)

          • Henry says:

            Maybe your boys can ride to the rescue with their “light brigade”.

          • entech says:

            “Atheist brethren”, Bush said he could tell Putin was a fine fellow because he wore his Grandmothers cross.
            Where is Gary Powers now that we need him. :lol:

          • entech says:

            Half a league, half a league onwards.

            A noble futility, bit like defending creationism.

          • Fr. James says:

            I don’t think it is complicated at all. Hitler lied whenever it suited him. He did not live or die as a Catholic. He hated the Church and persecuted it.

            I don’t think the pilot spoke for Hitler. The fact that one German said such things means nothing.

            The point as I stated below is not whether there were bad Christians or atheists, but what is the basis for claims to morality. You are the one who confuses the issue with standard atheist tactics.

            Our basis for morality is the concept of sacrificial love for others based on the fact that we are created in the image and likeness of God and the covenant made in Christ who gave himself for our sake.

          • entech says:

            J.J. I disagree, say whatever you like, if you base your morality on the God of Abraham it is based on a Jealous and vindictive entity.

            And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
            Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
            Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
            Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
            And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
            Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.
            Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
            Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
            But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
            For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

            It is only after all of this “Big I Am” talk is there anything of moral or ethical value.
            Did you ever read the story of the methods employed to bring them out of Egypt, culmination with the slaughter of the first born sons of all Egyptians, even those that had no say or influence.
            And if you don’t worship him to his complete satisfaction he will give you grandchildren a good kicking (at least). Is this the behaviour you would expect from an entity that was described as just and benevolent and loving. If so I would hate to fall foul of the malicious entity I describe as jealous and vindictive.

            PS. About the resting on the seventh day, perhaps a bit of extra work, probably only half an hour after breakfast would be enough considered what was achieved in six whole days, would have given a planet that was a bit more suitable for human life. Not asking for much, compared to an entire universe, just get rid of the earthquakes and volcanos that kills so many of those in his image, perhaps a more stable environment that gives regular and consistent plant growth so that not so many starve. A bit more of the planet capable of supporting life without extreme assistance (I.E. killing animals for their skin to prevent death from hypothermia in a brief time of exposure to the elements). Oh, a simple modification to the connection between the head and the body, something better than one hole for eating, breathing and talking – just to stop people choking to death, not much Santa Claus could manage that one. One last thing given this, and this is only the beginning of the beginning, could we please stop all this idiotic talk about intelligent design – a minutes observation would show a total lack of design let alone any intelligence behind it.

          • Henry says:

            All of the 5:07 commentary is confused, for within it, there is no acknowledgment of a fallen world.

          • entech says:

            I have as much belief in a fallen world as you do in an evolutionary one.

    • josh says:

      Actually Father, new research indicates that hitler did not commit suicide but did escape to South America where he lived hiding in plain site within a nazi community there. DNA evidence on the supposed remains of hitler did not match. In fact the remains had the bones of 4 different peolpe including a woman. He dies in 1965.

      • Avatar of realist realist says:

        My experience has been that when people believe one conspiracy theory, they believe many of them. Where do you think Obama was born, Josh?

        • josh says:

          Hitler escaping was no conspiracy. He was a powerful man. He had resources. His Cronies funneled trillions in todays dollars out of germany with the help of wall street.
          You don’t think he didn’t have an escape plan? That he was just going to die in a bunker? No one pursued him from the US because they didn’t really care. They’d broken germany. They had the Russinas to worry about et they were still fighting a war in the pacific. They had bigger fish to fry. Stalin never believed that Hitler was dead. Eisenhower made the statemnt in statrs and stripes, before he was told to shut up, that he didn’t believe he was dead. Jerome Corsi’s book “Hunting Hitler” is pretty compelling.

          • Avatar of realist realist says:

            Josh, Corsi is the world’s best known conspiracy theorist. In fact, the definition of a conspiracy theorists includes the name of Jerome Corsi. He’s written about Obama, Kerry and others after defrauding a bunch of investors in Minnesota who ended up losing their life savings while Corsi got off scott free. Actually, you answered my question without even realizing it.

        • Henry says:

          Barry Soetoro was born in a hospital. Specifically where is not important or required.

      • Fr. James says:

        Josh,
        Hitler killed himself in his bunker. The Soviets found his, and Eva’s, remains. They moved them several times. Finally they cremated them and tossed them into a river. They still have part of his skull though in Moscow. If he was alive trust me Mossad would have found him.

        • josh says:

          They did dna testing on the skull. It didn’t match.

          • Fr. James says:

            This goes nowhere. You don’t know it matches. You are doing no favors in debates with atheists when you propose such conspiracy theories. Hitler killed himself in his bunker, end of story.

  9. josh says:

    I know it does not fit the needs of the atheist to ever admit this. It is more helpful to refer to Hilter as catholic butcher to offset the atrosities of the atheists. Touche.

    • Wolfy32 says:

      Why does it matter whether Hitler was an Athiest or a Catholic? No Catholic, nor any Athiest is wanting Genocide as a result of their beliefs in either “religion or nonreligion”.

      Jon started the discussion, and Josh built on it, but, really does it matter what Hitler believed? He was crazy… Not unlike the Catholic Crusades, or the Muslim Jihad… Does it matter what the religion is? The last I checked murder and atrocities of war such as genocide are still illegal…

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      josh 5:38 “Touche.”

      You are correct, pointing to the evidence Hilter appeared to have been a believer, at least at times, helps the atheist argument.

      The entire debate about who killed more, the Christians with their inefficient clubs, swords and burning homes, or, the 1940′s Germans and Russians who had efficient machine guns, merely avoids the main point I made. It is that Christians have no objective basis for claiming they have superior moral values than nonbelievers or believers in other faiths.

      • josh says:

        John you’re talking about christians during the dark ages. An age of ingnorance and fear. Before the enlightenment. Atheists performed their atrocities during the modern era. They knew better.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          josh 6:16 re: dark ages

          It follows, then, that Christians have superior moral values because they used what Jesus supposedly said in the Bible to club, burn and mame?

          Sorry, you are not convincing me of superior Christian moral values. But, feel free to keep trying.

          • josh says:

            No John, they didn’t use anything that Jesus said. They were in fear of Satan, whom they thought was amongst them. When in fact it was evil atheists that were. Love how you leap to conclusions without evidence.

          • Fr. James says:

            Actually the dark ages were not so dark. It is wrong to look back in history and judge people out of context. Do we say doctors were wrong for using leeches or bleeding patients? In fact Christians also developed the first hospitals, universities, and welfare systems.

          • entech says:

            So Josh, this is some kind of full turnabout. The horrors of the inquisitions and crusades, were nothing to do with the Christians (or in the case of the crusades the Christians and the Muslims) but were caused by the “evil atheists”. The evil atheists whom they thought was Satan. All of this ended with the enlightenment ?

            On the other hand I read people saying it was the evil atheists that brought on the horrors of the enlightenment and the beginning of the downfall of religious dominance of everything.

            Josh you make it all so confusing, perhaps it is because you are confused yourself, blind hatred for — the list would be too long, just everyone who doesn’t believe as you do – but especially the evil atheist. Suggesting that all atheists are evil, as you appear to do, is the broad brush that evil atheists are alleged to use in reference to Christianity.

            Touché, indeed, perhaps you should stop touchéing yourself so much.

      • Fr. James says:

        Jon,
        Yet you are using a rather typical atheist argument. Find a really bad Christian and use him as the example. However, if we find a really bad atheist suddenly you argue that we are unfair in judging all atheists by his standard. This gets us nowhere. It is a tactic not an argument. One can always find a hypocrite. And we can always invoke Mother Teresa as a better example

        Instead focus on what Christians believe are moral values. What is the preeminent one? Love ones neighbor as oneself and even more as Christ loved us. That is self-sacrificial love that wills the good for the other. This is consonant with our understanding of human dignity which is based on the imago Dei of in each person.

        Atheists base their morals on what? And is that basis, whatever it is, superior to what Christians believe? Those are the pertinent questions.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Fr. James 10:33 “Find a really bad Christian and use him as the example.”

          I don’t believe you are reading my blogs and posts carefully. I freely admit there are bad athiests, as well as bad Christians. Also, I am not asserting that atheists have higher morals than Christians. Others may do that, I do not. Or, if I did inadvertantly write such a thing, I apologize.

          Christians regularly make the assertion they have higher morals than atheists. I am asking for evidence that is the case.

          Atheists appear to be under represented in jails and prisons. Athiests believe humans have the ability to organize and conduct themselves in manners that are not destructive to themselves and to society in general. The “preeminent” moral value, to love one’s neighbor as oneself…” is a good one. So is the principle atheists use for organizing society.

          They are equally good. Setting aside the over representation of Christians in jail, I would judge Christians to be equal in their moral behavior to atheists. I do wish any Christian who says Christians have higher moral values than atheists would provide evidence, because I don’t think there is any.

          That’s all I’m saying.

          • Fr. James says:

            I have given you a brief summation of our basis for morality. You say that atheists organize and conduct themselves in ways that are not destructive to themselves or society in general. I could ask you if all atheists agree or where such a notion comes from if you think it is a universal truth. Instead I will point out that your view is essentially negative and selfish. It is concerned with not causing unnecessary harm to self or society. There is no mention of love or concern for others based on human dignity or sacrificial love. Which is a higher moral belief? I would say ours. It is directed toward the good of others more even then oneself.

            Unfortunately you tend to veer back to behavior and who is better. I can name atheists in prison, quote Stalin and Mao, and on and on. Comparing our views of morality I don’t see any atheist Mother Teresa’s out there.

  10. josh says:

    Try this on.

    Author Jerome Corsi talked about his new book, Hunting Hitler, which explores the historical possibility that Hitler escaped Nazi Germany at the end of World War II. FBI and CIA records indicate that the U.S. government took seriously reports that Hitler had escaped to Argentina. The traditional story is that Adolf Hitler committed suicide in his underground bunker, along with his mistress Eva Braun in April, 1945. Later the Russian Army was said to discover them and photograph Hitler, making sure the bullet hole in his forehead was visible. But Corsi believes this was a Hitler “double” who, while he bore some similarities, was three inches shorter than the Fuhrer. Dental records also didn’t match, he added.

    In 2009, archaeologist Nicholas Bellantoni, working with the History Channel for a MysteryQuest documentary, was allowed by the Russians to view Hitler’s alleged skull fragments. He concluded that the skull belonged to a person who was 40 or younger (Hitler was 56 at the time of his supposed death), and the fragments indicated they came from a woman rather than a man, Corsi recounted, adding that DNA results backed up Bellantoni’s assertions.

    According to FDR’s Sec. of State, James F. Byrnes, during a meeting with Joseph Stalin in Ukraine, Stalin told him that he believed Hitler was still alive and was possibly living in either Spain or Argentina. In 1945, General Eisenhower also said he believed Hitler had escaped. Martin Bormann was said to create a special escape route into Argentina as their current regime was sympathetic to the Nazi cause. Various documents suggest that Hitler’s escape from Germany may have involved fleeing in a helicopter to Austria, then flying to Barcelona, and eventually arriving in Argentina via a German submarine. After he arrived, he lived in somewhat luxury for the next 20 years, until he died in 1965, Corsi detailed.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      josh 6:02 If they are that certain Hilter escaped to Argentina, it seems like they should have found his body there, matching teeth and all. Surely there were eyewitnesses to him and the time of his death so pin pointed in time. Argentia is a sophisticated place. Israel has had spies in there for decades ferreting out nazis.

      Honestly, it sounds a lot like the people who find a new version of Noah’s Ark every year, or Bigfoot.

      • josh says:

        Actually Isreal had a hard time getting anything done in Argentina. They had to kidnap eichmann out of there. Mengele stayed hidden the rest of his life. Do you believe that the nazi community there would have allowed his body to be found? He lived secratively on a thousand acre estate that was very inaccessable. Read Corsi’s book if you want further details.

        • Avatar of realist realist says:

          Corsi really set the hook when you took his bait. Most people have woken up to the fact that he’s a charlatan in it for the bucks he makes off the naïve.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          josh 6:22 “Do you believe the nazi community there would have allowed his body to be found?”

          Like so often in conspiracy theories, there is always some reason to not seal the deal.

          • josh says:

            Why do you call it a conspiracy theory? It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s a hypothesis gathered from available evidence. There’s been no mention of any conspiracy going on. Just a madman escaping from his avengers.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            josh 1:33 “Its not a conspiracy theory.”

            Whatever it is, there is evidence that would seal the deal. That would be more than one verifiable siting of a live Hilter in Argentina–just two or three over 40 years. It could be from dozens of people who would have provided services, people from a social circle, evidence from aircraft flying overhead, public utilities that would have been purchased, doctors, etc. Among all those people, someone would have wanted to sell a picture or a book.

            The other thing needed was a body. That body, if it ever existed, it still there. It’s a tall tale.

          • entech says:

            A conspiracy theory is an explanatory proposition that accuses one or more persons, a group, or an organization of having caused or covered up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an illegal or harmful event or situation.

            Helicopters and submarines? Sure sounds like a conspiracy to me. Next you will be telling us about how man has never been to the moon and that the actual site where Moses parted the waters has been found but the discovery quashed.

            There is some good stuff in UFO channel on Youtube, you should try:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOrGEuMpUCM&list=PL2FCBA6307127BA41
            It says that Hitler was the antichrist with a heart molded by witchcraft, first 4 minute intro should be enough for any sane person.

    • Les says:

      Josh, helicopters were in their infancy during WW2. Do you honestly think Hitler could have been wisked away to Austria in a Focke-Wulf Fw 61? LOL!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_61

      • entech says:

        Les, you forgot to mention a couple of simple facts, that helicopter was a single seat so he would have had to fly it himself, the range was barely enough to get to Austria so he would have had to carry it part of the way.

        There was another case a few (hundreds of) years earlier the lack of a body behind the boulder was the foundation of a theory that is still extant.

  11. Josh says:

    Realist, show me your sources for your allegations.

  12. H.P.Drifter says:

    Hard to comment today on the discussion, I thought we had just a couple of people on the blog of need mental services, Here along comes Josh and takes the whole cake must be sugar poisoning, another by product of Christianity. Conspiracy theorist extraordinaire. Think about it, do you think an egomaniac like Hitler could just sit back and keep his mouth shut in retirement?
    And live happily ever after on a big estate in Argentina, where the rich know each other to the extent that they do, not possible. I can see now your apple didn’t fall far from the tree of knowledge.

    H.P.D.

  13. Henry says:

    The hitler conversation that has “evolved” has little to do with the topic. One could argue the Fa 223 Drache was used, but that would only be speculation. The important thing about Hitler is that since 1945, he has stopped causing direct harm. We don’t currently hold credible evidence either way anymore. We have written eyewitness accounts that have been accepted for many years of his death in Germany in 1945. These accounts were accepted by historians at the time of the Nazi collapse. Hitler is dead. He is dead, indeed. I will side with the atheists on this issue.

  14. Raymond says:

    Despite all the arguments, let me tell you about my live experience…
    I live in an Arab country, with 85% Muslims and around 13% Christians.
    According to my vision and the history of my life, we have around 3% fanatic Christians, 10% moderate Christians, 15% fanatic Muslims, and 70% moderate Muslims…

    “Fanatic Christians may hate, insult and offend others verbally, however fanatic Muslims may hate, insult, kill and destroy”.
    The above statement is driven by statistics, not personal opinion.
    If you analyze the numbers, more than a 100 churches were attached (by weapons or explosives) during the previous couple of years. The number of mosques attacked is ZERO :) although you might find a Mosque at each stone drop…
    Not due to the weakness of Christians, since a man can through a bonnb and run, without being detected… However the corruption of a man is bounded by the limit of his own beliefs…
    So for fanatic Christians, they don’t have the option to express their hate and moral ugliness in violence, since Jesus orders are crystal clear in that part… However, for the Islam, the man has an option to perform all kind of violence to extract his hate and internal ugliness, since some orders in Isalm will prevent violence, other parts will allow it, and other parts might actually recommend it for better benefits in heaven :(

    On the other hand, by experience, most of Muslims are peaceful and loving, since they still follow their own hearts, and would choose which parts to obey in their holly book..

    So please distinguish between people and their religion…
    I believed the quote: “Muslims are better than Islam, and Christianity is better than Christians”.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Raymond 1:10 Thanks for the first time comment. Please tell us more of your life there.

    • Adam Heckathorn says:

      Raymond that is an interesting comment I live in Moorhead Minnesota right across the Red River from Fargo North Dakota It’s really just One metropolitan area. We have Muslim People settling here from a variety of places including Iraq, Bosnia Somalia and Afghanistan. I’m proud to say I and My daughters have have friends among some of these People. I may never be able to travel to many places but a little of the culture has come to Me through Our recent immigrants. I hope We will hear more from You in the future.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>