Which religion is the MOST harmful?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2002-10-13 09:14pm

I should say "potentially harmful," since it might be unfair to dismiss these religions as unavoidably harmful.

I would go with a three-way tie between Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism; Christianity and Islam probably have an about equal track record of slaughter and violence, and the caste system of Hinduism makes Jim Crow look like racial paradise.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-10-13 09:15pm

I dunno much about Hinduism...but yes, I agree with you on the Catholic/Christian and Muslim/Islam tie.

Post by **Kuja** » 2002-10-13 09:16pm

Definately a Christian/Islam tie, with Hindu a little behind.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2002-10-13 09:35pm

I wouldn't call Hinduism "dangerous." Catastrophically unfair, perhaps, but not dangerous. It actually leads to a very stable hierarchical society (which is virtually impossible to modernize, but I digress).

The Judeo-Christian-Muslim trinity is definitely the most dangerous. Monotheism has inherently been a 'war' religion. (In polytheism, you can respect other people's gods and incorporate them into your pantheon... in Monotheism they are all sinners being led astray by hellish demons.)

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-10-13 09:38pm

Black paganism (again, as opposed to White and Grey/Red) can be bad...

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-13 10:12pm

Christianity

It takes the Hate of Judisim, Refeins it and leaves enough loose ends unlike Islam so that anything can be justifed through the Bible
The Koran at least containts a DEFINATE set of Rules and Regs for the Muslims to live by

Meanwhile the Bible leaves everything up in the air, like I said so that anythign can be justfied and specifcly provides that
Jews
Witchs
Homosexuals
Adulters
Rapests and thier Victums
All manor of Crimals
Belivers of other faiths
Are to be killed Via Burning/Stoning/Free-style

Also the Bible provides that taking Slaves is Ok

And beating slaves to Death is OK to as long as they don't die the same day of the Beating

What other religion says not only is it ok to kill anyone who is not a memeber but you can ALSO take them as Slaves if you want?

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-10-13 10:15pm

Mr Bean wrote:Also the Bible provides that taking Slaves is Ok

On the other side of the coin, it also seems that taking slavess is also NOT ok...I think...New Testament references...?

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-13 10:32pm

This is where we provide quotes Verilon

For example I say
It be ok to take Slaves

You say not it not

I say its ok and I provided quotes

Joshua, Chapter 9
9:23
Now therefore ye are cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen, and hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my God

Genesis, Chapter 9
9:25
And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

9:26
And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

9:27
God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

Exodus, Chapter 21
21:2
If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

21:3
If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

Exodus, Chapter 21
21:16
And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

That last one loose a bit in translation but its ment to be he that stealth ANOTHer man's man but they take it out to look nice

Exodus, Chapter 21
21:20
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.

21:21
Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.

22:11
But if the priest buy any soul with his money,

Leviticus

25:45
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

25:46
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.

Colossians, Chapter 3
3:22
Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God;

Annd you Verilon?

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-13 10:34pm

verilon wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:Also the Bible provides that taking Slaves is Ok
On the other side of the coin, it also seems that taking slavess is also NOT ok...I think...New Testament references...?

Nope, nothing.

The New Testament took the position that the slave could be comforted by the fact that he/she is the moral superior to his/her master, IIRC, but does not outright condemn the issue of slavery.

Both the abolitionists and the apologists (mostly Southern) in the years leading up to and in the Civil War played such a game with the Bible, and neither side gained a decisive advantage.

In the end, what decided the issue was not scripture, but a combination of Lincoln's "terrible arithmetic" and Sherman's March to the Sea.

Post by **Steve** » 2002-10-13 10:34pm

And yes, my last post was off-topic, sorry.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 2002-10-13 10:35pm

Problem is I'm a catholic *prepares for beating

. Well yea christians have been responsible for a LOT of things- eh crusades, inquisition, forced conversion of native americans, various massacres, etc. And this is the tip of the Iceberg Hinduism is self contained and limited to india and the countries around it. Islam is tolerant compared to christianity, in the old times. Of course it has it's share. Really depends on who is ruling the muslim world (Arabs, Turks, etc.). Christianity at it's early stages was certainly an improvement over the roman religion. However later it became intolerant once it assumed power. It's easily abused. I realize christianity is illogical, but I cling to it anyways. Of course if you are talking about which has DONE the most harm, instead of doctrine, then yea christianity is the most harmful, especially with these "born again christians" popping up. Doctrine varies according to which denomination you follow.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-10-13 10:36pm

Okay, you made your point...So I'm not a friggin Bible-thumper and I don't have one with me 24 hrs a day (mostly because of the whole PAGAN thing), but I was a Catholic at one point...

So please don't continue trying to toast me over minor issues that are really not of our concern any more.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2002-10-13 10:43pm

Fundy Muslims and Fundy christians.

Both have their moderates that are ok people. But between them they've produced some of the worst relgiously inspired atrocities.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-13 10:47pm

Okay, you made your point...So I'm not a friggin Bible-thumper and I don't have one with me 24 hrs a day (mostly because of the whole PAGAN thing), but I was a Catholic at one point...

I do and I'm not a thumper in any sense of the Word

However I do happen to have the SKEPTICS online version
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
Always ready to go

Good site I use it alot

Now onto John's Beating

And this is the tip of the Iceberg Hinduism is self contained and limited to india and the countries around it.

Nosenysical statment, Hindiusm is as wide Spread as Christainty it just has quite a few followers in the same place but it got as much Spread as Christantiy did once China(And susquently India) Re-opened to the West

Islam is tolerant compared to christianity

Very much so, Mohhamd says honor those of other religions it was Mearly God Revling himself and them loosing it somewhere along the way(A fair assumption from his point of view considering the close similatries of most religions)
Meanwhile the Bible as I stated above says not only to kill those of other faiths but take them as slaves if you want

Say Islam is tolerant compared to Christanity is quite true
Just like saying the Dali Lama is Tolerant Compared to Jerry Falwell

Christianity at it's early stages was certainly an improvement over the roman religion.

Christanity was still raciest even during the earily stages and remeber that they where using a Book that still contained all the Murder and Carnage referances, they never striped it out did they?

However later it became intolerant once it assumed power

No it was intolerant before however it could not do anything about it

Good comparsion if I have a gun and you don't and you happen to want me dead, much you can do about it?
No
But if YOU have the gun...
At it tells us is that Earily Christians where smarter than Todays Christian Fundmentlists even though they belived the same things

Of course if you are talking about which has DONE the most harm, instead of doctrine, then yea christianity is the most harmful

The Doctrine of Christanity was used to JUSTIFY the Harm they did. Do you not get that? The Bible Specficly says its ok to KILL ANYONE OF OTHER RELIGIONS AND TAKE ANYONE YOU WANT AS A SLAVE IS THERE ANY WAY TO GET WORSE?

Kill everyone who does not belive what you do
Can you seriously offer me some other religion that is worse than that?

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-10-13 10:51pm

My point was that I don't look to the Bible for any excuses of mine, or any justification...I thought this thread was to be taken from a secular view, and I think it is...but I don't really like people quoting the Bible to make a point.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-13 10:52pm

but I don't really like people quoting the Bible to make a point

I could quote my Dog. Do you trust him?

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-10-13 11:00pm

Even less. Stop bugging me about it. That's just my opinion and I really can't do anything about it, so quote the damned Bible all you want.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 2002-10-14 12:43am

Mr Bean wrote:
Okay, you made your point...So I'm not a friggin Bible-thumper and I don't have one with me 24 hrs a day (mostly because of the whole PAGAN thing), but I was a Catholic at one point...
I do and I'm not a thumper in any sense of the Word

However I do happen to have the SKEPTICS online version
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
Always ready to go

Good site I use it alot

Now onto John's Beating

And this is the tip of the Iceberg Hinduism is self contained and limited to india and the countries around it.
Nosenysical statment, Hindiusm is as wide Spread as Christainty it just has quite a few followers in the same place but it got as much Spread as Christantiy did once China(And susquently India) Re-opened to the West

Islam is tolerant compared to christianity
Very much so, Mohhamd says honor those of other religions it was Mearly God Revling himself and them loosing it somewhere along the way(A fair assumption from his point of view considering the close similatries of most religions)
Meanwhile the Bible as I stated above says not only to kill those of other faiths but take them as slaves if you want

Say Islam is tolerant compared to Christanity is quite true
Just like saying the Dali Lama is Tolerant Compared to Jerry Falwell

Christianity at it's early stages was certainly an improvement over the roman religion.
Christanity was still raciest even during the earily stages and remeber that they where using a Book that still contained all the Murder and Carnage referances, they never striped it out did they?

However later it became intolerant once it assumed power
No it was intolerant before however it could not do anything about it

Good comparsion if I have a gun and you don't and you happen to want me dead, much you can do about it?
No
But if YOU have the gun...
At it tells us is that Earily Christians where smarter than Todays Christian Fundmentlists even though they belived the same things

Of course if you are talking about which has DONE the most harm, instead of doctrine, then yea christianity is the most harmful
The Doctrine of Christanity was used to JUSTIFY the Harm they did. Do you not get that? The Bible Specficly says its ok to KILL ANYONE OF OTHER RELIGIONS AND TAKE ANYONE YOU WANT AS A SLAVE IS THERE ANY WAY TO GET WORSE?

Kill everyone who does not belive what you do
Can you seriously offer me some other religion that is worse than that?

True true. Oh and about Hinduisim my mistake, I was thinking geographically instead of the population.
Eh I'm ignorant of my own religion since I am looking at from an indoctrinated christian's point of view. I'm really am more leaning toward an agnostic/ignore all religious texts approach to religion. The old testament was written by crazy dudes and the new testament had it's contents decided a couple hundred years after christianity began.

Of course I don't think normal early christians followed the bible word for word. Most of them were taught the new testament beliefs. I think so. Dunno, kind of ignorant.

I don't think really deeply about anything unless I am daydreaming

MattTheSkywalker · Post by **MattTheSkywalker** » 2002-10-15 01:45pm

Pablo Sanchez wrote:
The Judeo-Christian-Muslim trinity is definitely the most dangerous. Monotheism has inherently been a 'war' religion. (In polytheism, you can respect other people's gods and incorporate them into your pantheon... in Monotheism they are all sinners being led astray by hellish demons.)

It is perhaps not monotheism alone that makes Islam / Christianity so dangerous, rather, the belief in an afterlife whose nature depends on your earthbound behavior especially your adherence to the dogma of that religion .

Both Christianity and Islam believe that "martyrs" will be granted eternal life in in paradise. Christianity's first martyr was St. Stephen, for example.

This belief system, coupled with abject poverty of most of the followers, is what leads to Crusades, the Holocaust, and terrorism.

By contrast, Jews are monotheistic, but their view of afterlife is entirely different. Jews basically view this life as 'all there is' and are forbidden from seeking converts. History is not replete with examples of Jews initiating war on other religions. Jews are fierce, and some would say warlike, given the climate in the Middle east, but they are not fighting Muslims over which God to worship.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-15 02:30pm

History is not replete with examples of Jews initiating war on other religions. Jews are fierce, and some would say warlike, given the climate in the Middle east, but they are not fighting Muslims over which God to worship.

Need I remind you of Levictus? Or Exdos? The acts of Moses and David?

Clue in, when the Jews had power, they abused it as much as possible, they KILLED AND ENSLAVED thier neighbors when they got back to the promised land

Now look at thier actions today in Isreal

Last week one afternoon, six palenstiean youths all under the age of fifteen where killed by a TANK Crew's Coaxial Machine-gun

Now kindly tell me where anyone where kids under 16 throwing rocks can HURT A TANK

The Coaixl gun BTW is the one inside the tank not the one on top meaning the gunner(Safe behind a foot of steel or two) decided that some kids merited death for throwing rocks at his tank

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2002-10-15 03:13pm

Problem is I'm a catholic *prepares for beating . Well yea christians have been responsible for a LOT of things- eh crusades, inquisition, forced conversion of native americans, various massacres, etc.

The Christian religion in responsible for more deaths through the history of mankind than any other organization.

Christianity at it's early stages was certainly an improvement over the roman religion.However later it became intolerant once it assumed power. It's easily abused. I realize christianity is illogical, but I cling to it anyways.

Hardly. When the Romans took over a country, they would take that country's gods and put them in their Parthenon to more easily assimilate their culture. The Christian religion forced everyone to follow it, and all the atrocoties that resulted from Christianity's rise to power were not because of the fact that it became corrupted with power, but because of its beliefs.

Singular Quartet · Post by **Singular Quartet** » 2002-10-15 03:19pm

Mr Bean wrote:
History is not replete with examples of Jews initiating war on other religions. Jews are fierce, and some would say warlike, given the climate in the Middle east, but they are not fighting Muslims over which God to worship.
Need I remind you of Levictus? Or Exdos? The acts of Moses and David?

Clue in, when the Jews had power, they abused it as much as possible, they KILLED AND ENSLAVED thier neighbors when they got back to the promised land

Now look at thier actions today in Isreal

Last week one afternoon, six palenstiean youths all under the age of fifteen where killed by a TANK Crew's Coaxial Machine-gun

Now kindly tell me where anyone where kids under 16 throwing rocks can HURT A TANK

The Coaixl gun BTW is the one inside the tank not the one on top meaning the gunner(Safe behind a foot of steel or two) decided that some kids merited death for throwing rocks at his tank

Let's not forget the rocket attacks. Or how about the fact that most palestinian children have lost any number of friends to Israeli soldiers, namely because they shoot them on sight?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 2002-10-15 06:16pm

Yeah the thing is that Judaism focuses more on the OT, while christians , except fundies, born agains, and people exploiting religion to justify actions, have the NT to offset it slightly. However even so, christianty has done more harm. My personal view is that since the bible was written by humans, it can't be too trusted. BTW are the palestinians descendents of the phoenicians/philistines/etc. who were brought in by the romans and picked up arabic after the muslim conquest, or were they just arabs who immigrated in after the conquest?

MattTheSkywalker · Post by **MattTheSkywalker** » 2002-10-15 06:58pm

Mr Bean wrote:
History is not replete with examples of Jews initiating war on other religions. Jews are fierce, and some would say warlike, given the climate in the Middle east, but they are not fighting Muslims over which God to worship.
Need I remind you of Levictus? Or Exdos? The acts of Moses and David?

Clue in, when the Jews had power, they abused it as much as possible, they KILLED AND ENSLAVED thier neighbors when they got back to the promised land

Now look at thier actions today in Isreal

Last week one afternoon, six palenstiean youths all under the age of fifteen where killed by a TANK Crew's Coaxial Machine-gun

Now kindly tell me where anyone where kids under 16 throwing rocks can HURT A TANK

The Coaixl gun BTW is the one inside the tank not the one on top meaning the gunner(Safe behind a foot of steel or two) decided that some kids merited death for throwing rocks at his tank

The "actions of Moses and David"? Are you basing this purely on the Old testament (you mentioned Leviticus and Exodus) or have you done some research? David's "kingdom" was a tiny regional outpost, far less glorious than the Bible makes it out to be. Shortly after David, they were overrun by the Assyrians. The "kingdom" would have been destoyed even sooner (while under King Hezekiah) but there was a plague that pushed the would be conquerors away. 10 of the other 11 tribes were conquered and enslaved. (The "Lost Tribes"; only Israel and Judah survived)

Archeologists have now proved that Israelites never wandered in the desert either. Much of the Old Testament has been proven historically inaccurate, as such, I discuorage you from leaning on it too much to support your position.

The middle east violence committed currently by Israel is more political than religious. On the Palestinian side, maybe not, but the Israelis are fighting for secular and political reasons, not religious ones.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-10-15 07:44pm

Archeologists have now proved that Israelites never wandered in the desert either. Much of the Old Testament has been proven historically inaccurate, as such, I discuorage you from leaning on it too much to support your position.

Your confusing Historical Accurasys with what THEY said he did.. They say Jesus was the Son of God(Plus that Holy Ghost Guy.. whoever he is)
They all so David was a mass-murdering Genocidal Manice who turned entire races into nothing more than Slaves for the Jews and killed others

Wiether he did it or not DOES NOT MATTER
The Fact that many Biblical personages say they are not only proud of what David did BUT APROVE
I've met school-children who love David cause he quote *Umm its.. slew the big guy, um golatah or somthing he was real cool

Yes the Bible says he killed that Nasty Giant, Then he went on to kill a couple hundred more people and burn over twenty citys to the ground, But ten citys to the sword(Man,woman, child born yesterday and the livestock as well) and you can find MANY a person who reviers and thinks David was a good guy!

According to New and Old Testmate Jesus APROVED of his actions(Besides the fact that Jesus also happend to be Racist as is born out also in the New and Old Testmates

Anyway the simple point its, It does not matter if "David" was a pot scrobber and did none of the things they say he did, The fact that they SAY he did them and APROVE of what he did is one of the greatest Evils in the Bible, Preformed and helped by their God.