FACT: Christianity has almost solely been spread through the sword

Buddhism was originally spread because a conquering empire picked it up as its religion. In India itself it was later absorbed into Hinduism, it largely still exists because of successful Buddhists missions to eastasia.
 
Underworld King Star said:
Buddhism was originally spread because a conquering empire picked it up as its religion. In India itself it was later absorbed into Hinduism, it largely still exists because of successful Buddhists missions to eastasia.
Click to expand...

Which is the way most religions expand their territory: it happens that the conquerors were of a certain religion so the religion spreads as a consequence. Christianity 'conquered' the western territories of the US in 1700-1800's in the same way.

Note how silly that is. Had the settlers been atheists, one could say atheism 'conquered' the territory or that atheism was 'spread by the sword'. But you can't score any points against religion that way, so there's that.

With militant Islam, the objectives for conquering are singularly religious: they take land and subjugate people's because their holy book commands them to. NOT because their holy book can be cherry picked to justify it. The Moderates are the cherry pickers in Islam.

Remove Islam from the equation and there's no conquring. In contrast, remove Christianity in the prior instance with the early settlers and they still had a need [or at least a desire] to expand their territory westward just had they would if they'd been atheists or Zorastarians or Scientologists.

But leftists refuse to grasp that distinction because Christianity is supposed to be 'the bad religion'; or failing that mark, Christianity is 'at least as bad as Islam'. They do it all the time. It's the reason Obama made the facile remark about not getting on our 'high horses' in condemning radical Islam.
 
Last edited:
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Which is the way most religions expand their territory: it happens that the conquerors were of a certain religion so the religion spreads as a consequence. Christianity 'conquered' the western territories of the US in 1700-1800's in the same way.

Note how silly that is. Had the settlers been atheists, one could say atheism 'conquered' the territory or that atheism was 'spread by the sword'. But you can't score any points against religion that way, so there's that.

With militant Islam, the objectives for conquering are singularly religious: they take land and subjugate people's because their holy book commands them to. NOT because their holy book can be cherry picked to justify it. The Moderates are the cherry pickers in Islam.

Remove Islam from the equation and there's no conquring. In contrast, remove Christianity for the prior instance with the early settlers and they still had a need [or at least a desire] to expand their territory westward just had they would if they'd been atheists or Zorastarians or Scientologists.

But leftists refuse to grasp that distinction because Christianity is supposed to be 'the bad religion'; or failing that mark, Christianity is 'at least as bad as Islam'. They do it all the time. It's the reason Obama made the facile remark about not getting on our 'high horses' in condemning radical Islam.
Click to expand...

As I said before, Islam did NOT conquer territory to enforce conversion. It was in fact comparatively rare.
 
go read the bible


there is plenty of evil in there for anyone to exploit.



the world will be better when mankind has given up these silly myths and goes with FACTS.


Mankind is full of compassion


Its the nature of mankind



your religious myths need to die off so the sociopaths you guys always let rise in your religions cant talk you mythers into killing people for myths.



I will fight for your right to believe in those myths


YOU can not force people to give them up with guns or candy



people have to come to reality themselves.



You cant kill ideas


you cant just kill everyone who believes a certain thing



even though you religious people always want to
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Which is the way most religions expand their territory: it happens that the conquerors were of a certain religion so the religion spreads as a consequence. Christianity 'conquered' the western territories of the US in 1700-1800's in the same way.

Note how silly that is. Had the settlers been atheists, one could say atheism 'conquered' the territory or that atheism was 'spread by the sword'. But you can't score any points against religion that way, so there's that.

With militant Islam, the objectives for conquering are singularly religious: they take land and subjugate people's because their holy book commands them to. NOT because their holy book can be cherry picked to justify it. The Moderates are the cherry pickers in Islam.

Remove Islam from the equation and there's no conquring. In contrast, remove Christianity in the prior instance with the early settlers and they still had a need [or at least a desire] to expand their territory westward just had they would if they'd been atheists or Zorastarians or Scientologists.

But leftists refuse to grasp that distinction because Christianity is supposed to be 'the bad religion'; or failing that mark, Christianity is 'at least as bad as Islam'. They do it all the time. It's the reason Obama made the facile remark about not getting on our 'high horses' in condemning radical Islam.
Click to expand...

What about the Huns, Vikings, Visigoths or Vandals? What about Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Cyrus and Ashoka? What religions did they spread as a result of their conquests?
 
every damn one of the major organized religions want to be the last one standing.



they ALL think they will be.


so they kill people in the other religions


face reality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top