Myths, Lies, and Half-Truths About Church History

[@fioschannel]

Dr. Sarfati is a very intelligent person and a very interesting speaker! Thank you CMI for this so instructive talk.

[@coolyfulgore4207]

Blaming religion for war is like blaming guns for violence. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Religion doesn't cause war, people cause war.

[@alanmcnaughton3628]

Napoleon Bonaparte said the Jes-uit-s are not the mere father abbot of a monastery, they are the military arm of the church.

[@globalcoupledances]

Some religions are violent: Crusades, 30-year war, 80-year war, jihad

[@edwardcook5282]

You're confusing institutionalized religion with personal belief . The Roman Catholic Church ruled the known world for almost 1000 years and did cause most wars directly or indirectly because of the simple fact they ENGAGED in said wars. It has been theorized that the Roman Catholic Church directly and indirectly killed more than 70 million people in its lifetime as a corporate entity

[@julesverne2509]

some religions

[@NZRic001]

But - aren't some people killing in the name of religion?

[@JonPaulTovio]

Wow, that was so much information in under 50 mins. That was cool. 😄 - Matthew 25:21 - “His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’

[@curious968]

Misinformation, you mean. There was nothing 'political' about Galileo. Galileo suggested that God's Nature was equal to scripture and to Papal authority. There was nothing "political" about it unless you mean _Papal_ politics which of course are religious in nature. This is apologetics run amok. Copernicus was on the list of banned books for centuries. So was Galileo. So, however keen one might pretend the Church was to hear these ideas, at least at first, they actually put the full weight of _religious_ authority behind condemning them. And not on "political" grounds, but religious ones. Galileo ended his life under house arrest. It was not a secular imprisonment.

[@jono64a]

@@curious968 High-ranking churchmen encouraged both Copernicus and Galileo to publish. Galileo was punished because he broke his word not to treat geokineticism as a proven fact, which it wasn't, and betraying and embarrassing the Pope who had encouraged him to publish. His sentence was house arrest in a luxury villa where he was provided with servants and scientific assistants. There he produced his best work, _Discourses and Mathematical Demonstrations Relating to Two New Sciences (Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze)._

[@curious968]

@@jono64a Oh, yes. He was treated very kindly indeed. You leave out the bit where he was shown the instruments of torture with the clear implication they might be used. That under this duress, he recanted what was actually true. That the pope was insisting on things as a matter of power and not proof. The pope didn't have it either, after all. On what grounds, beyond sheer authoritarian power, did the Pope circumscribe anything? Or the bit where the true blame lies with the Pope's censors for not catching on to the mockery of Simplicus. That "best work" or not, his researches were clearly circumscribed for the rest of his life. Others of course, entirely ignored all of this and did research as they pleased. Sure they did. We now know that the trial was a sham from end to end -- the crime was made up out of whole cloth and there was no real evidence for it, either. Today, it amounts to we would call a bill of attainder and the constitution of the US outlaws it. You can't put enough lipstick on this pig. Galileo may have been in a gilded cage, but cage it was and it mattered. Who knows what we might have learned he he been free to pursue his priorities, rather than pick from a limited papal menu? This wasn't the third bum on the left after all. It was one of the all-time greats. To pick an example -- the ancient Greeks were inches away from discovering calculus. They never did. They might have. Who knows what the Galilean equivalent to that was and whether, even now, we know what it is.

[@jono64a]

@@curious968 Being shown the instruments of torture was just a formality. The Inquisition, unlike the secular courts of the day, and unlike atheopathic communist regimes today, had strict rules about torture. E.g. never on old or sick people, and Galileo was both. And at the time, there was no such thing as freedom of speech anywhere. Galileo had not proven heliocentrism, and had to admit that. His theory of tides was fallacious, and his observations of Venusian phases were consistent with the prevailing Tychonic model. He was punished for betraying and embarrassing the Pope who had encouraged him to publish, especially after there had been assassination attempts on the Pope, and it was in the middle of the Counter-Reformation.

[@martinhaldimann]

What a wealth of knowledge. Bless CMI and all its members. This is what truth sounds like. Hallelujah.

[@stuartofblyth]

If the Earth was flat, the cats would have pushed everything off by now.

[@NinjaMaster247]

@@stuartofblyth haha, take my upvote u rascal

[@ikkarus87]

@@stuartofblyth laughed so hard right now😄

[@idontknow23100]

Indeed! 🤣

[@bevanbasson4289]

Thank you for that😂

[@Joanne-t6j]

Love it!😂😂😂

[@justinjozokos1699]

Even back when I was an atheist, I understood that historical religion vs. science debates are typically only science vs. science debates. I was and still am interested in the philosophy of science, and I remember this being one of the many interesting theses of Paul Feyerabend's 1975 book titled Against Method. It's just that the scientific "facts" of one century come to be replaced by the ones in the next century, but the latter are called science and the former called religion or superstition. Feyerabend's book was also a response to the views of contemporary philosophers of science, like Popper, Polanyi, Kuhn, Quine, and Lakatos, and he pointed to Galileo as a counter example to all their ideas about how science works. I think at times Feyerabend says some crazy things in that book, but it's great for anyone who wants to learn about Galileo while also getting an incredibly interesting perspective in the philosophy of science. I highly recommended the book. One of my favorites.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

I think it's funny when some people want to blame religion for wars and yet we look at the recent past along with the current wars going on, most of them have nothing to do with religion at all. Russia/Ukraine ie about power and geopolitics China/Taiwan is about power and territory Israel/Gaza could be blamed on religion Invasion of Iraq was about power and geopolitics Gulf war was about protecting money interests in the region The invasion of Panama was about the USA asserting its influence over the country The Vietnam war was about geopolitics Korean war was about geopolitics And these same people say that we need to get away from religion because it is keeping us in the stone ages.......

[@pigzcanfly444]

​@KrisMaertens it [could] be attributed to Islam but not religion in general. Let's be charitable with our assumptions and statements, please.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

​@@KrisMaertens just a thought.

[@eugenetswong]

I think that a person could make reasonable defense of the idea that Islam is just the Middle East's implementation of communism. Their enforcement of rules is very similar to that of the Soviet Union and China. I say this based on my discussion with an immigrant from Iran, if I recall correctly. She is Persian, if I recall correctly.

[@blchamblisscscp8476]

Even discounting wars, the death toll of atheist regimes is astronomical, beginning with the French Revolution, the Russian Revoltion and subsequent Communist regimes and Revolution in China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, Venezeula, runs into hundreds of millions. Plus the Greman death toll.

[@klouis1886]

​@@eugenetswongAll Muslim countries are capitalist

[@Heisrisin3]

According to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 121, or 6.87%, had religion as their primary cause. The single religion that has caused the most wars is Islam.

[@skouzini]

Another Christian contribution to science is Dr. Russell M Nelson and his development of open heart surgery. He cited his belief that God has created a universe of order, founded on certain laws that could be revealed to man through Him.

[@Somebodyswatching-JC]

This is good, it is about time biblical ideas are presented as the highest values that govern the universe. History explained in proper order. Thank you!

[@edbrackeen5979]

Do you hold the inspired, preserved, perfect, complete and infallible words of God in the book written in our language, that God promised us in your hands?

[@omarvazquez3355]

Jono the Goat 🐐

[@АлександрГодзиковский-ь1р]

And what number of Christians were killed and suffered just for being christians? 😢

[@jono64a]

Heaps in communist and islamist countries.

[@klouis1886]

​@@jono64aplenty of murder on both sides

[@notsure1582]

But isn't Islam a religion of peace?

[@АлександрГодзиковский-ь1р]

@@notsure1582 I’m think all religions are basically about peace and coexistence. The human nature ain’t perfect though.

[@jono64a]

@@notsure1582 Many who say so are being disingenuous. E.g. General Petraeus kept on saying so, but then he begged a Florida pastor not to burn Qurans because it would incite Muslims to attack US troops. I don't agree with that Florida Pastor, but a real religion of peace could not be incited by something on the other side of the world. Petraeus also burned Bibles in Afghanistan, knowing full well that he would get no violence from the true religion of peace, Christianity. Same goes for the BBC, which admitted they would be happy to televise a Bible being thrown into the trash can but they would never throw a Quran in the trash.

[@Joanne-t6j]

Loads of information here. One thing I had never considered: property rights 🤔

[@craigwillms61]

That was the point that struck home with me. The implication that one of the 10 commandments was thou shall not steal would equate to private property rights never crossed my mind. I think that that commandment was a codification of basic human nature.

[@jono64a]

To back up the point, even today, most of the poorest countries around the world make it very hard to get legal title for one's private property. www.washingtontimes.com/news/2000/dec/9/20001209-013443-7767r/

[@willoughby1888]

Some people don't want there to be a "God" because it makes them feel very guilty, because they would have to live correctly, and because if there's no God then they can act as rotten as they want, be bad on purpose even, and even pick on Christians and other 'good' things like that. Plus, they get to feel they can pridefully boast they are the ones with proper thinking and all else are either lost or are complete fools. "Not me me me though! I'm so cool and knowledgeable that I pity all the rest!""

[@edbrackeen5979]

When anyone says, The Church, they must clarify. Are they referring to the pagan Church buildings and their pagan membership or are they speaking of the NT church of The living God, Jesus the Christ which only includes those of us that are born again of the Holy Ghost of Jesus the Christ.

[@hwd7]

Information packed episode answering so many old chestnuts of the misotheists, to borrow a phrase from Dr Sarfati. God bless everyone at CMI

[@railwayjade]

Is the interviewer the same Content Creator as the guy who does the AI Debates? (Jon Oleksiuk Channel)

[@timhaley3459]

The religions of the world are instrumental in starting wars around the earth. For example, ancient Assyria that was the 2nd world power of Bible history (with Egypt being the 1st, see Isa 52:4), was a military power that reigned as such from early in the 8th century (see 2 Kings 15:19; 1 Chron 5:26) to 632 B.C.E., when it's capital city of Nineveh was decimated by King Nabopolassar of Babylon and Cyaxares the Mede.("book" of Nahum) The Bible encyclopedia Insight on the Scriptures, says this about Assyria: "The religion practiced in connection with these gods (such as the national god of Ashur, the chief triad of Aner, Bel and Ea, as well as Sin, the moon-god; Shamash, the sun-god; and Ramman, god of storm) was animistic, that is, the Assyrians believed every object and natural phenomenon to be animated by a spirit." "It was somewhat distinguished from other nature worship prevalent in surrounding nations in that WAR was the truest expression of the national religion. Thus, Tiglath-pileser I said of his fighting: “My Lord ASHUR urged me on.” "In his annals, Ashurbanipal says: “By command of ASSUR, SIN, and SHAMAS, the great gods my lords who protected me, into Minni I entered and marched victoriously.” (Records of the Past: Assyrian and Egyptian Monuments, London, 1875, Vol. V, p. 18; 1877, Vol. IX, p. 43)" "Sargon regularly invoked Ishtar’s (fertility goddess of ancient Babylon, also called called queen of the stars) help before going to war. The armies marched behind the standards of the gods, apparently wooden or metal symbols on poles. Great importance was attached to omens, ascertained by examination of livers of sacrificed animals, by the flight of birds, or by the position of the planets." "The book Ancient Cities, by W. B. Wright (1886, p. 25) states: “Fighting was the business of the nation, and the priests were incessant fomenters of war. They were supported largely from the spoils of conquest, of which a fixed percentage was invariably assigned them before others shared, for this race of plunderers was excessively religious.” Of ancient Babylon that was notoriously religious, Ezekiel 21:20-22 states of King Nebuchadnezzar (reigned 625-582 B.C.E.): "You should mark out one way for the sword to come against Rabʹbah of the Amʹmon·ites, and the other way against fortified Jerusalem in Judah." "For the king of Babylon stops to use divination at the fork in the road, where the two roads branch off. He shakes the arrows. He consults his idols; he examines the liver. The divination in his right hand is pointed toward Jerusalem, to set up battering rams, to give the word for slaughter, to sound the battle cry, to set battering rams against the gates, to throw up a siege rampart, to build a siege wall." The "Thirty Years War" from 1618-48, started due to religious differences between Catholics and Protestants, whereby when Holy Roman emperor Ferdinand II of Bohemia attempted to impose Roman Catholicism on his domain, the Protestant nobles of both Bohemia and Austria rose up in rebellion.(source: Encyclopedia Britannica) Of Baptists, the Review and Expositor - A Baptist Theological Journal stated: "Baptists are much better known for fighting than for peacemaking. . . . When the [American] slavery issue and other developments divided the denominations and then the nation in the nineteenth century, Baptists North and South supported the war effort as a righteous crusade and assumed that God was on their side." "Baptists also identified with the national effort in wars with England (1812), Mexico (1845), and Spain (1898), justifying the last two ‘mainly on the grounds of bringing religious liberty to oppressed peoples and opening new areas for mission work.’ The point is not that Baptists desired war rather than peace, but that, for the most part, when war became a reality Baptists supported and participated in the effort." The Age of Wars of Religion, 1000-1650-An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization stated: "Religious motivation to combat (or go to war) has been located by historians in most eras and among virtually all the world’s diverse peoples and cultures, and usually on both sides in any given war. The hoary cry that ‘the gods are on our side’ was among the earliest and most potent of incitements to battle." Both world wars started in Christendom, that cost some 80 million + lives. The German soldiers of both world wars wore belt buckles with the inscription: "Gott mit uns (God is with us)". Throughout history, the clergy of all the major religions of Christendom (Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant) have provided an endless supply of priests and chaplains to raise the morale of the troops and pray for the dead and dying-on both sides of any conflict. By this support they have condoned the bloodshed and given their blessing to all the military forces. So, the religions of the world, called Babylon the Great (Rev 17:5), in which Christendom is a major part, are in "bed" with the realm of politics, as Revelation 17:1, 2 says: "One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me: “Come, I will show you the judgment on the great prostitute who sits on many waters, with whom the kings of the earth committed sexual immorality, and earth’s inhabitants were made drunk with the wine of her sexual immorality (or the religions of the world's doctrines and practices that have their members as in sexually-drunken state, easy to manipulate them to do as their religious leaders wishes, to incite them to war, saying "God is on our side").” However, the "one faith" (Eph 4:5) that tells "the truth" (John 8:31, 32), are the ones who have done as Isaiah 2:2, 4 states: "In the final part of the days, the mountain of the house of Jehovah (or true worship of Jehovah) will become firmly established above the top of the mountains," "and it will be raised up above the hills, and to it all the nations will stream.........They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, nor will they learn war anymore."

[@dylanx9327]

The first official document ever against slavery by the institution in the world was promulgated in AD 1537: Pope Paul III opposes enslaving Native peoples. Pope Paul III issues a decree, “Sublimus Deus,” opposing the enslavement of indigenous peoples and calling them “true men.”

[@jodij2366]

Funny thing is when I was at school (the 1990s), I was taught the Dark Ages lasted from the fall of Rome to the Norman Conquest, and the Middle Ages lasted from the Norman Conquest to the fall of Constantinople - and frankly, I'm still a fan of that differentiation.

[@jono64a]

But this is very Anglocentric. Also totally wrong, as the video showed. Pre-Conquest Saxon England produced the Venerable Bede, the epic poem Beowulf, the intricate artwork of the Lindisfarne Gospels, and Sutton Hoo artistic metalwork and jewelry, and had about 5,000 watermills or 1 for every 50 households.

[@jodij2366]

@@jono64a compare that with Roman literature and technology and you have chalk and cheese. By the way, the Iliad and Odyssey dates to the Greek Dark Age. And while watermills might sound amazing, the Romans had the aeolipile (a steam engine) and the Antikythera mechanism (a predecessor to the computer, not too far removed from what Charles Babbage managed in the 19th century). Reality is, the fall of the Roman Empire did result in a multi-century decline in technological and cultural standards. Now the Middle Ages saw a recovery, and the problem is revisionist historians have merged the Dark Ages and Middle Ages together instead of keeping them separate. Keep those two eras separate and then things become much clearer. Where I agree with this video is that Christianity is not to blame for the decline in technological and cultural standards and went to considerable effort to preserve what they could. The decline was caused by the fall of the Roman Empire, which had a multitude of causes (and Christianity was not one of them).

[@jono64a]

@@jodij2366 The aelopile of Vitruvius and Heron was just a toy. There was no practical application. Many things had to come together to produce the Industrial Revolution with steam power: iron, coal, and a use for the power (pumping water out of mines and the textile industry). acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/ CMI has written on the Antikythera mechanism creation.com/antikythera-mechanism There was disruption caused by the fall of the Roman empire, note, only in the West. But it doesn't mean everything was worse. E.g. people no longer had to pay high taxes to fund the Empire. The very fact that you split the ages using the Norman Conquest shows that it's Anglocentric. That conquest had no effect on the rest of Western Europe. It also ignores the huge developments in Anglo-Saxon England that made it worth conquering.

[@Heisrisin3]

According to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 121, or 6.87%, had religion as their primary cause.

[@curtis2299]

The greater question is “what do you mean by church history?” What is never established is what Jesus refers to as His church and what religions refer to as the church. Who calls that shot?

[@RodericGurrola]

Yes I’m first.

[@Reg_The_Galah]

Congratulations my dude

[@peters6345]

I'm with the speaker on most things, but in one thing he is incorrect. Generational slavery wasn't allowed for Hebrew slaves. Not the case for other nationalities

[@WalterHildahl]

Most war are actually about greed,

[@charlesnyangagawandalo2553]

Has Sarfati ever engaged in a public debate with an unbeliever?

[@markh1011]

Once again we have the dishonest reference to the Encyclopaedia of wars. Apologists repeat this and don't even care how dishonest it is. 1. The encyclopaedia of wars does not indicate whether religion was involved or the cause of wars. 2. The authors themselves says that religion was the cause of most wars at least until the 17th or 18th century. It's in ....wait for it...the *Cyclopia of Wars.* The very book they reference debunks them. Any reference to this book from theists is sloppy or dishonest.

[@kathleennorton6108]

AH was highly influenced by Darwin.

[@curious968]

Darwin had nothing to do with Social Darwinism, despite the name. Hitler was in favor of that, not Natural Selection. They are not the same thing.

[@notsure1582]

Islam wants a two state solution...in Michigan. After all, they've always been there. No wait, maybe they're trying to divide and conquer. 😂

[@silverfire01]

As an atheist I think no ones suggesting most wars are religious driven as there can be various reasons for people doing what they do.i agree however with the late Mr Hitchins. Good people can do good things, bad people will do bad things but for a good person to do bad things that would take religion if they think are doing on behalf of their god. There is not a logical pathway if are atheist to say I am doing this because I am an atheist as there would be other reasons for their actions.

[@Sammyxxoo]

Nothing you said makes any logical sense.

[@curious968]

@@Sammyxxoo It does if you know any history at all. “Those who can make you believe in absurdities can make you commit atrocities” -- Voltaire. He was talking about religion.

[@nataliamundell6266]

Eug enics was justified by evolution, not religion There is a pertinent path for athiest doing evil The idea is if you remove the genetically predisposition of people to get inherited disability it would decrease suffering and disease and streghthen the population I shell say most athiest are peaceful and awesome people but your argument there's no logical reason is false

[@markh1011]

Did the church spread slavery? That's not the right question. The bible condones slavery. That's the problem. ..and no it wasn't employment and no it wasn't always voluntary.

[@reverentalexanderchezeley-6367]

Doctor Safari is the Guvnor.

[@alanmcnaughton3628]

You're right about most wars being "religious". Fact is they all are.

[@wayfaringstranger8256]

Nonsense - most wars are about conquest and the wealth gained from subduing people and taking their resources.

[@jono64a]

The video was right that 93% of wars had no discernable religious cause.

[@curious968]

@@jono64a Only if you work very hard at it. One of the reasons Europe is less religious than the US is that they know full well how many wars were based on religion. England was convulsed for many years by a fight, not infrequently armed, between whether it would stay protestant or whether Catholicism would make a comeback. So was continental Europe. Look up the Thirty Years War. That wasn't really a single war, but it is an umbrella term historians use to cover a long series of wars in Europe about religion. Meanwhile, the '"ethnicities" in the recent wars in Serbia and Bosnia and Kosovo are based on religion, not ethnicity as such. The people in the former Yugoslavia know this. In the US, we deliberately ignore it. And, exactly how many secular wars were reliably denounced by religion? Essentially none. The church managed to find an excuse to justify all of them. It was complicit, therefore, even in wars it did not cause. Even today, the ability of the church to halt war is negligible and their sanction against those that fight them is hardly reliable. Lincoln noted, quite correctly, that both sides in the US Civil War thought they had God on their side. That is not an anomaly. The church enabled such thinking.

[@jono64a]

@@curious968 The Thirty Years was was largely political. Sometimes Catholics joined with Protestants to fight other Catholics, e.g. against the Holy Roman Empire. Other times, Catholics joined with Protestants to fight other Protestants, e.g. against king Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden. Before that, Catholic and Huguenot peasants joined forces against the Catholic barons. If the Church has no effect against preventing war, it's not because it's against war, but because it's not listened to. Both sides may have thought that, but it doesn't logically follow that neither was right.

[@curious968]

@@jono64a Keep trying to secularize that war. It won't wash. Sure, lots of strange things happened in that war, but the impetus was religious. From Wiki: "The war can be seen as a continuation of the religious conflict initiated by the 16th-century Reformation within the Holy Roman Empire. The 1555 Peace of Augsburg attempted to resolve this by dividing the Empire into Catholic and Lutheran states, but over the next 50 years the expansion of Protestantism beyond these boundaries destabilized the settlement. However, while differences over religion and Imperial authority were important factors in causing the war, some contemporary commentators suggest its scope and extent were driven by the contest for European dominance between Habsburg-ruled Spain and Austria, and the French House of Bourbon.[20]" So, were there other factors? Of course, a multi-party war in central Europe, especially in those days, was going to have a lot of actors acting for lots of reasons, some unabashedly secular. But the reliable and repeated impulse was religious. Note that the 1555 Peace of Augsburg, _which broke down_ attempted to carve Europe into Protestant and Catholic domains. That's a religious _causus belli_ at the heart of it all. The rest is interesting, but not essential.

[@throckmortensnivel2850]

Wars have been around as long as humans have. So, no, religion isn't responsible for wars, humans are. On the other hand, religion, with it's talk of peace, has never actually prevented a war. We know this because wars continue, even amongst countries that have largely religious populations. The USA, while constitutionally not religious, has a leadership that expresses their religion almost every day. Yet they have been in countless wars, and encouraged others to take part in wars. Religion appears useless if one wants to prevent a war.

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

Religion only appears useless because you're overlooking the root problem: human nature. Religion is good if it's true, but it still cannot change human nature. Human nature, as the Bible teaches, likes to do evil while thinking of itself as being fundamentally good. That is the source of the wars.

[@klouis1886]

Man is inherently good​@@theeternalsbeliever1779

[@notsure1582]

So, without the Civil War there would still be slaves and the Gas chambers of Nazi Germany and Communist genocide in Cambodia, so you're saying let them do their thing? That sounds cowardly.

[@jono64a]

Only a minority of wars, about 3%, were religious. That leaves 97% that were not.

[@creationministriesintl]

The notion that religion cannot prevent war, because wars continue to exist is like arguing the healthy lifestyles cannot prevent negative health conditions because some people will get them either way. It can do multiple things, reduce the number of wars, and make war more humane. Of course, I would by no means attribute that to "religion" instead Christianity, for while the overwhelming majority of wars had nothing to do with religion, it was really only Christianity that led to the moral reforms in which so many abuses (including war time ones) became seen as despicable and something that she be reduced as much as possible (assuming it cannot be totally eliminated). At other times, of course war is needed regardless of whether or not one society has beliefs that make them averse to war, as hostile nations who don't share those values will attack regardless of what their victims think. So then we must ask, who is necessarily the aggressor? And expression of religiosity counts for little when the populace as a whole, and the government has in place numerous social values (including those actively taught in schools) that spit in the face of the moral standards of Christianity. They express religiosity in the loosest sense while demonizing "fundamentalists". For example, ever since Christianity began, the religion has opposed abortion (a by no means new practice) and has fought against it. Not only is the "Christian America" pro-abortion, but America has abortion laws that are some of the most radical on the planet, far more so than many nations that do not identify with Christianity. So, one must ask, do the people of that country really follow the teachings of Christ? If a man calls himself a pacifist yet beats his wife, that says nothing about pacifism, merely that the man is a phony.

[@jedde-wiltonholmes3549]

praise the lord and pass the ammunition.....

[@MaximianoXavier]

Roman Catholicism is not Christianity.

[@jono64a]

Off-topic. The video addressed critics of Christianity who group it all together.

[@WTLGPodcast]

Pre-reformation it was one of the main labels for followers of christ, so it can get confusing.

[@curious968]

No, but it shows what happens when Christianity is deeply involved in secular politics. This whole idea that Christianity is somehow "above the fray" is a peculiarly US take on history and it really won't wash in the end.

[@hello21467]

The Nazis weren't anti Christian. They got power because the protestants supported them. They drew on Luther's criticism of Jews and used him to support nationalism. Hitler himself publically supported Christianity. Also the atheistic communists worked with the Christians. Orthodox Christianns helped Stalin immensely in WW2. Many Russian revolutionaries were educated in seminaries, including Stalin himself. Lenin had serious issues with the church supporting and profiting from the Tsarist system. And on the topic of Slavery, whilst Gregory of Nyssa was the first one to call for aboltion (that we know about). He used Genesis and Greek Philosophers. Plato and the Stoics were very influencial in his view. Christians laregly ignored the anti alavery part of his writing. To combine the two, Marx was critical of Christianity. In no small part because Christians used the Bible and Paul to justify slavery. He was vehemently pro-union. None of this happens in a vacuum.

[@BeachandHills-hb2pq]

You imply the USSR was pro religous very strange. From the History channel "Joseph Stalin, as the second leader of the Soviet Union, tried to enforce militant atheism on the republic. The new “socialist man,” Stalin argued, was an atheist one, free of the religious chains that had helped to bind him to class oppression. From 1928 until World War II, when some restrictions were relaxed, the totalitarian dictator shuttered churches, synagogues and mosques and ordered the killing and imprisonment of thousands of religious leaders in an effort to eliminate even the concept of God." The “Godless Five-Year Plan,” launched in 1928,

[@jono64a]

The video addressed that. Biblical Christianity was very low in Germany. They had planned to exterminate Christianity after WW2. Hitler privately hated Christianity-imagine worshipping a Jew! Orthodox Christians helped defend the Motherland against the Nazis in WW2. Stalin had to abandon his previous persecution to get them onside. Gregory of Nyssa applied the Bible. Classical Greco-Roman culture loved slavery.

[@jono64a]

@@BeachandHills-hb2pq All you say is right.

[@eugenetswong]

Much of what you say is correct. Christians were divided into 2 groups: supporters of communism; anti-communists. The latter group fully supported Hitler because of how many churches were locked by communists. The Germans unlocked churches.

[@creationministriesintl]

Nazis planned to destroy Christianity. This would occur through states shutting down doctrinally sound churches, arresting and killing dissidents, and forcing other more compliant churches to modify their teachings. From the beginning they intended to systematically destroy the religion. Donovan’s documents (almost 150 bound volumes) were stored at Cornell University after his death in 1959, and have been posted online at the Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion (look it up). This "criminal conspiracy" involved the very top Nazis, including Adolf Hitler and propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels, as well as Hitler Youth leader and Nuremberg defendant Baldur von Schirach. They planned to infiltrate the churches from within; defame, arrest, assault or kill pastors; re-educate the congregations; and suppress denominational schools and youth organizations. As early as 1937, Protestant churches issued a manifesto objecting to Nazi policies, and the Nazis retaliated by arresting 700 pastors. The "protestants" that supported Nazism are essentially no different than modern "protestants" who support abortion and gay marriage. They are not "fundamentalists", they are not Christians who are faithful to scripture. While you find self-professing Christians who tolerate or support abortion, there is no denying that in the modern day, and throughout history, anti-abortion action has been an overwhelmingly Christian movement. The issues with slavery are effectively the same. Slavery can be found and tolerated in virtually every society without serious opposition to the practice ever arising. It is only in the Christian west where heavy opposition to slavery formed, and successfully limited, eventually erasing the institution. Slavery is not unique to the west, but aggressive abolitionist activism is a unique feature of Christian religion.

[@Wilkins_Micawber]

Yes. The Church didnt cause most wars, but god was always envoked by nefarious kings as being on both sides depending on your king's propaganda. "God for Harry, England and St George". The dark ages had nothing to do with the times following the Norman conquest. They were the years followin the retreat of Rome and the rise of Alfred the great. A time little is fully known out side the writings of St Bede.

[@jono64a]

That is an Anglocentric view. Scholars like Alcuin and Bede, epic poem Beowulf, graphic artwork of the Lindisfarne Gospels, Sutton Hoo artistic metalwork all preceded Alfred the Great.

[@curious968]

The crusades were _entirely_ religiously based. They were commenced by a particular Pope, and backed by Papal Bulls that gave absolution for sin for those who participated. Many saints preached in favor of new Crusades on a regular basis. To this day, a lot of what animates the Muslim world is the certain knowledge that they had to spend _centuries_ driving out Christian invaders. Not just Frenchmen or Brits, but people who had big crosses on their bellies and took religious oaths before showing up. Kinda obvious, don't you think? I don't know what you mean about "most" wars, but religion certainly has their hand in. They most certainly do not denounce most of them; they sanction them. The "just war" doctrine is one of the most mealy-mouthed of all religious doctrines, but it always seems to find a way to permit just about any war. So, they managed to get complicit even in the wars they didn't start.

[@jono64a]

Very Anglocentric. Also wrong, because even Saxon England produced grand epic poetry like _Beowulf,_ intricate illustrative artwork of the Lindisfarne Gospels, and the ornate metalwork jewelry of the Sutton Hoo horde.

[@jono64a]

@@curious968 The war against Hitler was a just war, so stop whinging.

[@williamgreenfield9991]

Well, we can't blame most recent wars on religion (except for the one's happening in the Middle East), but to pretend that many wars in the past were not based on religion is highly disingenuous. Christian apologists love to whitewash the bloody history of their religion and claim theirs is special. It's not. The Crusades, the Inquisitions, the 500 years of genocide perpetrated against the native people of the Western Hemisphere, and the Atlantic slave trade all prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Christianity is just as violent as any other religion. There is no hate like Christian love.

[@BeachandHills-hb2pq]

Stop lying. All the wars in the world have been counted and only 7% were religious. You hate so hard you cant even read the truth. Infact more pepole have died from Athiest leaders than all of history combnined. Athism is new all over leaders feared being Judged when they die but not the Athiest leaders. The Christian Brithish stopped slavery around the world. Took 100 years. The British Anti slaver fleets patroled the world stopping slavery. Read history. The Arabs slavers alone took 12 million slaves. The Arabs were taking Amricans as slaves in the 1800. The Arabs took so many Slavs we use there name for Slaves. The Arab slave trade finally stopped in the Middle East in the 1960s. Africans sold to the world 20 million fellow Africans as slaves so no Christians are not the worst. Stop lying

[@jono64a]

Another who didn't watch the video, which covered all that and refuted all your claims.

[@williamgreenfield9991]

@@jono64a So you pretend that the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Native American genocide, and the Atlantic slave trade didn't happen? Refuting reality is the entire point of your religion. Your own book orders you not to lie, but I guess lying for Jesus is OK.

[@jhadow1869]

Watch the video and then you can talk about it. You shows a very ignorant behavior.

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

The Crusades the Inquisition, and the other injustices that were committed in God's name were not the result of ppl practicing biblical Christianity because you don't read of Jesus doing anything of those things in the Gospel accounts. That's the thing that exposes half-baked arguments like this one for what they are: illogical and false.

[@klouis1886]

Here we go Christians justifying slavery

[@notsure1582]

Christians were many of the first slaves in history taken by Islam for their slave galleys, harems (mostly children) and to fight the wars they were too cowardly to fight themselves. Enter the Janissary. You are truly out of touch with reality. In Lipari the invading Muslims demanded a ransom of 400 Christian children before they would leave, but they ransacked, enslaved and killed the villagers anyway. When asked why the innocent were cut open and disemboweled they claimed it was the "virtue" of their religion. 1453. Barbarossa brothers.

[@thomasmyers9128]

Slavery was a world wide problem until 200 to 300 years ago…. There are more slaves right now than at any other time…. 99.9% of them in non Christian Africa, Middle East and Asia…. Western Christian countries fought at home and abroad in wars to stop it… It’s the non Christian countries that have never stopped…. Never….

[@jono64a]

Here we go, someone who criticized a video without watching. Starting at 25:15, the video shows that Christianity denounced slavery and made it unthinkable.

[@klouis1886]

@@jono64a They also supported and justified it

[@klouis1886]

@@thomasmyers9128 Africa has more Christians than any other continent

[@AlCatrraz]

It depends WHICH RELIGION…

[@jono64a]

This video addresses critics of Christianity.

[@America-TG]

you can blame anything. religion is a belief in something it does not mean God or Jesus. like the religion of evolution for instance.

[@curious968]

Evolution is not a religion, no matter how many times creationists try to say so. If science is religion, then _everything_ is religion. If you're in favor of religion, you really don't want such a wooly headed idea. Because then religion is responsible for all wars.