Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

TexasScientist said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

“Islam's borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.” pic.twitter.com/uCwYJsa15u

— Mark W. (@DurhamWASP) May 29, 2025

---

Their religion is their culture.

---

Good point

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

Of course it's an opinion poll. But there is plenty of research into who is the most violent. I will let you do your own homework on that subject.

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Realitybites said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Are you that ignorant of history? To think Muslims just out of nowhere invaded parts of Europe before the Crusades?

---

That is precisely what they did.

---

It was absolutely not out of nowhere. Islam spread the least in Europe. And then many Muslim invasions were the same people who had a history of conquest, but now a new religion.

My point is you cannot blame the religion for the invasions into Europe, when most of these peoples had been invading far before Islam.

---

The Muslims spread the least in Europe because they were stopped. Charlemagne's grandpa (Charles Martel) stopped them at tours in southern France but they still controlled Iberia for centuries. The Hapsburg stopped them at the gates of Vienna twice in the 16th & 17th centuries but the occupied much of the Balkans for centuries after. The Ottomans were in gradual decline for well over a century and their empire collapsed by being on the losing side in WWI.

---

Both religions have violent histories.

---

Every religion in history has a violent history. It's human nature. However, Jesus Christ never taught violence or hatred. Just the opposite. Those Christian's resorting to violence are generally acting against His teachings (just war, self defense, etc are also Christian doctrines).

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

"Never trust a person who doesn't like dogs. But always trust a dog that doesn't like a person"

PBS released a 30 minute documentary on “How Muslims influenced Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers” without even once mentioning the Barbary slave trade. You live in the most propagandized society in history. pic.twitter.com/3zLRuDHlqH

— Roman Helmet Guy (@romanhelmetguy) June 19, 2025

Thomas Jefferson & John Jay wrote this report of their meeting with a Muslim ambassador from Tripoli in 1786. Tripoli was enslaving American sailors at the time. Even though it is one of the only documents where Thomas Jefferson mentions Islam, PBS omits it entirely from their… https://t.co/gvB9SnQM6r pic.twitter.com/kiSQ8X7Hlm

— Roman Helmet Guy (@romanhelmetguy) June 20, 2025

20 actual laws in Iran 🧵

1. Apostasy (Leaving Islam)

Punishable by death, especially for men who publicly renounce Islam. Women can face life in prison.

These laws are real. This isn’t history — it’s Iran in 2025.

Share this thread to expose the truth.

— Matt Tardio (@angertab) June 20, 2025

Under a dictatorship the people have little to no freedom. In essence, they are slaves. It does not matter what ideology the tyrants use to propagandize the people and justify their crimes. Inevitably the result is the same.

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

Violence is not the way to spread Christianity. The first century church set the example, especially with the missionary work of Paul and others. Centuries later, when Christian's tried to use force to spread Christianity, following the example of Muhammad, they were not following the teachings of Christ. They were more motivated by imperialism, greed, power politics, etc. They might have even lied about their motives (to themselves & others) about it. That also is unchristian behavior. Christian's are not perfect. No one is. But Christian's should always seek to obey Christ's two greatest commandments: love God with one's entire being and love one's neighbor as oneself.

Unlike all other religions, including atheism, Christianity is based upon love and sacrifice.

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

Martin Niemöller too

historian said:

---

Violence is not the way to spread Christianity. The first century church set the example, especially with the missionary work of Paul and others. Centuries later, when Christian's tried to use force to spread Christianity, following the example of Muhammad, they were not following the teachings of Christ. They were more motivated by imperialism, greed, power politics, etc. They might have even lied about their motives (to themselves & others) about it. That also is unchristian behavior. Christian's are not perfect. No one is. But Christian's should always seek to obey Christ's two greatest commandments: love God with one's entire being and love one's neighbor as oneself.

Unlike all other religions, including atheism, Christianity is based upon love and sacrifice.

---

A friend shared this regarding the Wurzburg Witch trials, and I thought it is germane to the discussion of Christian violence:

I am always intrigued to listen to the views of another person, to try to get inside his/her head and see the world as he/she sees it. Here is a letter by the Chancellor of the Prince-Bishop of Wrzburg, written in 1629 during the infamous Wrzburg Witch Trials. Take a minute and enter into his worldview which should (hopefully) be different than yours. I wonder if he ever found that devilish book he was looking for.
"As to the affair of the witches, which Your Grace thinks brought to an end before this, it has started up afresh, and no words can do justice to it. Ah, the woe and the misery of itthere are still four hundred in the city, high and low, of every rank and sex, nay, even clerics, so strongly accused that they may be arrested at any hour. It is true that, of the people of my Gracious Prince here, some out of all offices and faculties must be executed: clerics, electoral councilors and doctors, city officials, court assessors, several of whom Your Grace knows. There are law students to be arrested. The Prince-Bishop has over forty students who are soon to be pastors; among them thirteen or fourteen are said to be witches. A few days ago, a Dean was arrested; two others who were summoned have fled. The notary of our Church consistory, a very learned man, was yesterday arrested and put to the torture. In a word, a third part of the city is surely involved. The richest, most attractive, most prominent, of the clergy are already executed. A week ago, a maiden of nineteen was executed, of whom it is everywhere said that she was the fairest in the whole city, and was held by everybody a girl of singular modesty and purity. She will be followed by seven or eight others of the best and most attractive persons … And thus, many are put to death for renouncing God and being at the witch-dances, against whom nobody has ever else spoken a word.
"To conclude this wretched matter, there are children of three and four years, to the number of three hundred, who are said to have had intercourse with the Devil. I have seen put to death children of seven, promising students of ten, twelve, fourteen, and fifteen. Of the noblesbut I cannot and must not write more of this misery. There are persons of yet higher rank, whom you know, and would marvel to hear of, nay, would scarcely believe it; let justice be done …
"P.S.Though there are many wonderful and terrible things happening, it is beyond doubt that, at a place called the Fraw-Rengberg, the Devil in person, with eight thousand of his followers, held an assembly and celebrated mass before them all, administering to his audience (that is, the witches) turnip-rinds and parings in place of the Holy Eucharist. There took place not only foul but most horrible and hideous blasphemies, whereof I shudder to write. It is also true that they all vowed not to be enrolled in the Book of Life [In Judaism, Christianity and Islam (Angels) the Book of Life is a book in which God records, or will record, the names of every person who is destined for Heaven and the world to come.], but all agreed to be inscribed by a notary who is well known to me and my colleagues. We hope, too, that the book in which they are enrolled will yet be found, and there is no little search being made for it."
We can all wonder if a few hundred years from now (if the human race make it to such a time), the people of the future will read with amazement or horror our views of current events.

Consider what happened to pagan believers after Christianity was institutionalized as the only lawful state religion of the Roman Empire.

Atheism is not a religion. It is a disbelief in gods. There is no shared common set of beliefs.

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

---

The Catholic Church is by far the largest Christian denomination, around 1.3 billion. Hardly a small percentage.

Atheism is not what drove their political ideologies. Their atrocities were committed in the name of their political goals, not in the name of atheism or a lack of belief in God. They used violence and oppression to achieve the goals of consolidating power and and establishing a certain kind of society. Unlike religion, atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to use to justify violence or intolerance. On the other hand, religion has been used to justify violence and oppression.

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

---

The Catholic Church is by far the largest Christian denomination, around 1.3 billion. Hardly a small percentage.

Atheism is not what drove their political ideologies. Their atrocities were committed in the name of their political goals, not in the name of atheism or a lack of belief in God. They used violence and oppression to achieve the goals of consolidating power and and establishing a certain kind of society. Unlike religion, atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to use to justify violence or intolerance. On the other hand, religion has been used to justify violence and oppression.

---

"you are speaking of such a small percentage fo Christians" - that's not 1.3 billion whatsoever. On the other hand, the aethists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot murderedd millions of Christians, has nothing to do with anything but their hatred for any organized religion

During his rule in the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin orchestrated a brutal campaign against religion and religious leaders, targeting both Christians and Jews. This campaign was driven by several factors:
1. Ideology of Atheism:

• Stalin's regime was committed to militant atheism, viewing religion as a hindrance to a socialist society.
• Stalin believed a "socialist man" should be an atheist, free from the constraints of religion which he saw as connected to class oppression.
• The Soviet state actively promoted atheism, viewing it as the only scientific truth and a fundamental ideological goal.

2. Political Control:

• Stalin saw religion as a potential threat to his power and the Communist Party's authority.
• He believed religious followers' loyalty to a higher power undermined his own authority.
• The persecution of religious leaders and institutions was a way to eliminate both real and perceived political opposition.

3. Suppression of Religious Institutions:

• The government actively destroyed churches, synagogues, and mosques.
• Religious leaders were persecuted, harassed, imprisoned, and executed.
• Organized religious education and public religious activities were largely prohibited.
• The state confiscated church property, viewing it as a private enterprise and a source of wealth.

4. Specific Targeting of Jews:

• While initially not solely focused on Jews, Stalin's anti-religious policies increasingly targeted Jews, particularly after the establishment of Israel in 1948.
• Stalin became suspicious of Soviet Jews' ties to the West and the new state of Israel, viewing it as a threat.
• This suspicion led to the "Doctors' Plot," a fabricated conspiracy accusing Jewish doctors of acting against the state.

5. Elimination of Potential Threats:

• The persecution of religious groups was, at least officially, framed as a reaction to their perceived resistance to the state's broader anti-religious campaign.
• Stalin's regime used terror tactics, propaganda, and fabricated charges to target religious believers, portraying them as subversive or criminal elements.

Here is another atheist
https://www.heritage.org/china/commentary/the-legacy-mao-zedong-mass-murder

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

---

Atheism is not what drove their political ideologies. Their atrocities were committed in the name of their political goals, not in the name of atheism or a lack of belief in God. They used violence and oppression to achieve the goals of consolidating power and and establishing a certain kind of society. Unlike religion, atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to use to justify violence or intolerance. On the other hand, religion has been used to justify violence and oppression.

---

[Bolshevik ethics explicitly began and ended with atheism. Only someone who rejected all religious or quasi-religious morals could be a Bolshevik because, as Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin, and other Bolshevik leaders insisted, the only standard of right and wrong was success for the Party. The bourgeoisie falsely claim we have no ethics, Lenin explained in a 1920 speech. But what we reject is any ethics based on God's commandments or anything resembling them, such as abstract principles, timeless values, universal human rights, or any tenet of philosophical idealism.

For a true materialist, Lenin maintained, there can be no Kantian categorical imperative to regard others only as ends, not as means. By the same token, the materialist does not acknowledge the supposed sanctity of human life. All such notions, Lenin insisted, are "based on extra human and extra class concepts" and so are simply religion in disguise. "That is why we say that to us there is no such thing as a morality that stands outside human society; that is a fraud. To us morality is subordinated to the interests of the proletariat's class struggle," which means to the Party.

Aron Solts, known as "the conscience of the Party," explained: "We . . . can say openly and frankly: yes, we hold in prison those who interfere with the establishment of our order, and we do not stop before other such actions because we do not believe in the existence of abstractly unethical actions."]

--"Among the Disbelievers: Why atheism was central to the great evil of the 20th century", published in Commentary magazine. The essay, reviewing Victoria Smolkin's book A Sacred Space Is Never Empty: A History of Soviet Atheism

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

The plan was to always move against the Catholic Church

Atheism or some kind of revived Germanic paganism was the goal

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

---

The Catholic Church is by far the largest Christian denomination, around 1.3 billion. Hardly a small percentage.

Atheism is not what drove their political ideologies. Their atrocities were committed in the name of their political goals, not in the name of atheism or a lack of belief in God. They used violence and oppression to achieve the goals of consolidating power and and establishing a certain kind of society. Unlike religion, atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to use to justify violence or intolerance. On the other hand, religion has been used to justify violence and oppression.

---

"you are speaking of such a small percentage fo Christians" - that's not 1.3 billion whatsoever. On the other hand, the aethists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot murderedd millions of Christians, has nothing to do with anything but their hatred for any organized religion

During his rule in the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin orchestrated a brutal campaign against religion and religious leaders, targeting both Christians and Jews. This campaign was driven by several factors:
1. Ideology of Atheism:

• Stalin's regime was committed to militant atheism, viewing religion as a hindrance to a socialist society.
• Stalin believed a "socialist man" should be an atheist, free from the constraints of religion which he saw as connected to class oppression.
• The Soviet state actively promoted atheism, viewing it as the only scientific truth and a fundamental ideological goal.

2. Political Control:

• Stalin saw religion as a potential threat to his power and the Communist Party's authority.
• He believed religious followers' loyalty to a higher power undermined his own authority.
• The persecution of religious leaders and institutions was a way to eliminate both real and perceived political opposition.

3. Suppression of Religious Institutions:

• The government actively destroyed churches, synagogues, and mosques.
• Religious leaders were persecuted, harassed, imprisoned, and executed.
• Organized religious education and public religious activities were largely prohibited.
• The state confiscated church property, viewing it as a private enterprise and a source of wealth.

4. Specific Targeting of Jews:

• While initially not solely focused on Jews, Stalin's anti-religious policies increasingly targeted Jews, particularly after the establishment of Israel in 1948.
• Stalin became suspicious of Soviet Jews' ties to the West and the new state of Israel, viewing it as a threat.
• This suspicion led to the "Doctors' Plot," a fabricated conspiracy accusing Jewish doctors of acting against the state.

5. Elimination of Potential Threats:

• The persecution of religious groups was, at least officially, framed as a reaction to their perceived resistance to the state's broader anti-religious campaign.
• Stalin's regime used terror tactics, propaganda, and fabricated charges to target religious believers, portraying them as subversive or criminal elements.

---

You're missing the point. Yes those guys were atheists. Atheism itself is not a dogma or a belief system that mandates or justifies violence and oppression, unlike most religions.

Their actions were driven by their communist/totalitarian ideology. Under their Marxist ideology, they sought to destroy established institutions, social structures and religions they viewed as threat to a socialist society and state control. There is a distinction between atheism and actions driven by political ideology. Unlike religion atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to justify intolerance, or system of beliefs to justify harmful actions.

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

---

The Catholic Church is by far the largest Christian denomination, around 1.3 billion. Hardly a small percentage.

Atheism is not what drove their political ideologies. Their atrocities were committed in the name of their political goals, not in the name of atheism or a lack of belief in God. They used violence and oppression to achieve the goals of consolidating power and and establishing a certain kind of society. Unlike religion, atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to use to justify violence or intolerance. On the other hand, religion has been used to justify violence and oppression.

---

"you are speaking of such a small percentage fo Christians" - that's not 1.3 billion whatsoever. On the other hand, the aethists like Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot murderedd millions of Christians, has nothing to do with anything but their hatred for any organized religion

During his rule in the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin orchestrated a brutal campaign against religion and religious leaders, targeting both Christians and Jews. This campaign was driven by several factors:
1. Ideology of Atheism:

• Stalin's regime was committed to militant atheism, viewing religion as a hindrance to a socialist society.
• Stalin believed a "socialist man" should be an atheist, free from the constraints of religion which he saw as connected to class oppression.
• The Soviet state actively promoted atheism, viewing it as the only scientific truth and a fundamental ideological goal.

2. Political Control:

• Stalin saw religion as a potential threat to his power and the Communist Party's authority.
• He believed religious followers' loyalty to a higher power undermined his own authority.
• The persecution of religious leaders and institutions was a way to eliminate both real and perceived political opposition.

3. Suppression of Religious Institutions:

• The government actively destroyed churches, synagogues, and mosques.
• Religious leaders were persecuted, harassed, imprisoned, and executed.
• Organized religious education and public religious activities were largely prohibited.
• The state confiscated church property, viewing it as a private enterprise and a source of wealth.

4. Specific Targeting of Jews:

• While initially not solely focused on Jews, Stalin's anti-religious policies increasingly targeted Jews, particularly after the establishment of Israel in 1948.
• Stalin became suspicious of Soviet Jews' ties to the West and the new state of Israel, viewing it as a threat.
• This suspicion led to the "Doctors' Plot," a fabricated conspiracy accusing Jewish doctors of acting against the state.

5. Elimination of Potential Threats:

• The persecution of religious groups was, at least officially, framed as a reaction to their perceived resistance to the state's broader anti-religious campaign.
• Stalin's regime used terror tactics, propaganda, and fabricated charges to target religious believers, portraying them as subversive or criminal elements.

---

You're missing the point. Yes those guys were atheists. Atheism itself is not a dogma or a belief system that mandates or justifies violence and oppression, unlike most religions.

Their actions were driven by their communist/totalitarian ideology. Under their Marxist ideology, they sought to destroy established institutions, social structures and religions they viewed as threat to a socialist society and state control. Their is a distinction between atheism and actions driven by political ideology. Unlike religion atheism has no intrinsic dogma or principles to justify intolerance, or system of beliefs to justify harmful actions.

---

Apparently you didnt read it;

• Stalin's regime was committed to militant atheism, viewing religion as a hindrance to a socialist society.

Redbrickbear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

The plan was to always move against the Catholic Church

Atheism or some kind of revived Germanic paganism was the goal

---

See response to Assassin.

Redbrickbear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

The plan was to always move against the Catholic Church

Atheism or some kind of revived Germanic paganism was the goal

---

See response to Assassin.

The record on Hitlers Christianity is sufficient to demonstrate his belief by his own words.

"Besides that, I believe one thing: there is a Lord God! And this Lord God creates the peoples." [1] ~Adolf Hitler

"We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations; we have stamped it out" [2] ~Adolf Hitler

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice…For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people." [3]

"The greatness of Christianity did not arise from attempts to make compromises with those philosophical opinions of the ancient world which had some resemblance to its own doctrine, but in the unrelenting and fanatical proclamation and defense of its own teaching." [4]

"His [the Jew's] life is of this world only and his mentality is as foreign to the true spirit of Christianity as is character was foreign to the great Founder of this new creed two thousand years ago. And the Founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of His estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God; because then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. But at that time Christ was nailed to the Cross for his attitude towards the Jews…" [5]

[ol]

Max Domarus & Patrick Romane. The Essential Hitler: Speeches and Commentary. Bolchazy-Carducci. (2007). P. 499.

Adolf Hitler. Speech in Berlin. October 24, 1933.

Norman H. Baynes. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler. Vol.1. Oxford University Press (1942). pp. 19-20.

Adolf Hitler. Mein Kampf. Hurst and Blackett Ltd. (1939). p. 275.

Ibid. 240.

[/ol]

The better approach would be to assess the Nazi's horrendous treatment of the Jews in light of Christian history.

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

You are speaking of such a small percentage of Christians that it's impossible to take your arguments seriously. Better to think of the atheists like Stalin, Maoist China, and Pol Pot's Cambodia where millions and millions died

---

Atheism is not what drove their political ideologies. Their atrocities were committed in the name of their political goals, not in the name of atheism or a lack of belief in God. They used violence and oppression to achieve the goals of consolidating power and establishing a certain kind of society.

---

Yea.....the main goal of which was a society that was atheistic

TexasScientist said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

The German Evangelical Church was the one that helped the Nazis. However it was basically created by the Nazis. Hardly a good way to show that Christians persecuted the Jews. Almost every other church in Germany hated the Nazis. See Deitrich Bonhoffer is you want to know more.

---

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.

---

The plan was to always move against the Catholic Church

Atheism or some kind of revived Germanic paganism was the goal

---

See response to Assassin.

---

I saw the response....and it was not accurate.

[TexasScientist said:

Except they were Christians. And the Catholic Church was in part supportive and at best complacent, many helping hide or facilitate the escape of war criminals.]

The highest ranking Nazis were essential atheists or playing with some form of neo-paganism.

The Catholic Church was not supportive of the Nazis in terms of its hieriarcy...."Pope Pius XI and Cardinal Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII), publicly criticized Nazi ideology, particularly its racism and totalitarianism, through encyclicals like Mit brennender Sorge" nor its rank and file voters.

Catholic majority areas consistently voted for other parties besides the Nazi party

Lutherans were the main church in Gernany. During Hitler's reign of terror:
- The Confessing Church: This movement emerged as a dissenting faction within the German Evangelical Church, actively opposing the Nazi-backed "German Christians" and their attempt to align Protestantism with Nazi ideology. Many Lutherans joined the Confessing Church and resisted the Nazi regime, often at great personal cost.
- Individuals: Prominent Lutheran figures like Martin Niemöller and Dietrich Bonhoeffer became outspoken critics of Nazi interference in the Church and faced imprisonment and even execution for their resistance.
- The "German Christians": It is crucial to acknowledge the existence of the "German Christians," a pro-Nazi group within the German Evangelical Church that supported Hitler's policies and sought to integrate Nazi ideology into the church.

Wrapup of Dietrich Bonhoeffer

What was Dietrich Bonhoeffer accused of?

He soon joined the German resistance movement, even the plot to assassinate Hitler. In April 1943, shortly after becoming engaged to be married, Bonhoeffer was arrested by the Gestapo. Evidence implicating him in the plot to overthrow the government came to light and he was court-martialed and sentenced to die.

More at:

https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/april-9/defiant-theologian-dietrich-bonhoeffer-is-hanged

Following the Christ of christianity is never the cause of violent overthrows.

I agree with Scientist that christianity has a dogma or underlying belief system.

Christ tell us.

In the King James Version of the Bible, Jesus teaches his followers to "love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you". This teaching is found in both Matthew 5:44 and Luke 6:27

'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these."

Matthew 5:39 (NIV) states: "If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

14 Make every effort to live in peace with everyone and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord.

Expanding the first verse above.

"But I say to you who hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you. To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also, and from one who takes away your cloak do not withhold your tunic either. Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them. ...

Those that mistreat people in the name of Christ, do so against the teaching of Christ.

Have people done such acts in the past, sure they have, but they are not following the way of Christ, they are turning to their own desires and emotions to justify any abuse of others.

He thinks that a hijab alone is not ‘modest’ enough, so he carries a niqab to give to women to cover their faces.

How do you even fix this mentality? pic.twitter.com/fgXBrYphFS

— Dr. Maalouf ‏ (@realMaalouf) June 24, 2025

the last 200 years erased the previous 1200 https://t.co/cKF1IJOrW2

— Razib 🥥 Khan 🧬 📘✍️📱 (@razibkhan) June 29, 2025

TexasScientist said:

---

historian said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Assassin said:

---

What research says!! pic.twitter.com/OXQ0kXXrgN

— Emilia Henderson (@Emilia__writes) May 27, 2025

---

That's an opinion poll, not research into which religion is most violent.

---

From the start, Christianity was spread through missionary activity at great personal risk by missionaries, like Paul, who generally ended as martyrs. In contrast, Muhammad spread Islam through ruthless conquest and his successors continued that policy for most of the past 1400 years.

With Christianity, violence is not the preferred method of outreach. With Islam it always has been. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions but the contrasts are real and stark.

---

Explain that to the Native Americans. Or the Jews and others during the inquisitions. Or the 'heretical" scientists who presented evidence contrary to established church dogma. Or the Reformation, Crusades etc.

---

Cherry picking history again.

Christianity has brought to the world far more good than any other facet of human existence.

And it's not remotely close.

Excellent point. Great example: slavery has existed throughout human history with every people group on both sides of the equation. It was Christian's in Western Europe that began the process of eliminating it. No one else. It still exists in one form or another in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, & elsewhere. In the west it still exists because of human sex trafficking.

Curious that here in the US the party who likes to talk about it the most is the party that has always been most involved in slavery: the "Democrats" were the party of slavery, Jim Crow, the KKK, lynchings, etc. Today Biden, Harris, Mayorkas, etc did we very thing they could to keep the borders open for illegal workers (slave wages) and child sex slaves and did nothing to protect or help those kids. The Dems (fascists) are still fighting tooth & nail to keep them all here and in their current state of servitude.

It fits in perfectly with their Marxism since "socialism is slavery."