• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Soldier Who Killed 16 Afghans feels guilt and fear [W:63]

It isn't a yes or a no, your question was loaded and had nothing to do with your initial claim. You want to take the Old Testament on its own to show what Christianity says about killing homosexuals and ignore the new Testament that clearly states that your interpretation is bogus. I mean, maybe you should be arguing this with people who are Jewish or Muslim as their religious texts don't significantly change the Old Testament with later revelations, but your ignorant focus on the Old Testament as Christian law is false.



Again, it is stupid because you are taking the old law and trying to apply it to Christians who have a New Testament to guide them. As my Matthew quote clearly shows the Old Testament "Eye for an Eye" is not the law for Christians.



Ummm... you seem to have a problem with the English language. You want to claim it is a "fact" that Christianity killed millions of people and then argue that you can't prove it because it is speculative.

I shouldn;'t have to explain this to you, but... speculation isn't fact.



You can't present evidence that the book cited actually says what he is claiming, I am telling you the historical FACTS about the Battle of Belgrade. Muslims attacked the Christian City of Belgrade and were routed. This is not a Christian atrocity as the nimrod you quoted wants to claim.



No, you can't. You are trying to prove the rule with exceptions. It's a logical dead end.

1. You stated Christians don't believe in the Old Testament, so I'm asking do they preach from it. It's not loaded it's a completely logical question you are refusing to answer because you know you're wrong. Do gay bashing Christians quote he Old Testament?

2. So why include the Old Testament into the bible

3. I say that it has killed the most people aside from disease is speculative, but there is ample proof to the claim that Christianity has killed millions of people

4. I really don't care as I have said ample times. I said he gives a reference be a scholar and do your research. This is literally one claim you went against over all the other ones I'm not refuting you at all

5. I can't want? Blaine atheism for he deaths in the ussr and Maoist china? Yes I can considering they were both athiests and communism hates religion because it divides the masses. I'm not making any exception. It's a very logical claim
 
You have made a habit of stating many unverified claims as fact (aka "lying"), that doesn't make them true.




You didn't read my source so stop pretending that you did. You are looking foolish. The outbreaks of the plague throughout Europe have been linked to trade with the Far East. Rats could not be the vector for wide spread plague because the rats and their flees die too quickly from the plague to be a vector. All you are doing is trying to defend an unsupported claim through assumptions about a document you haven't read. That is no way to make a compelling point.



Do you really not see that YOU are that very someone who "really hates the church" and is making crap up to support their beliefs?



You can't support the claim but it's true anyway? Your anti-Christianity is looking more like your religion with every post!



You are making a QUANTITATIVE claim that you admit you can not back up, stop digging yourself a deeper hole by moving the goalposts.

1. Did you read what I said, I said I can not say it's true because history is speculative and subjective in certain instances especially such broad history as Christianity... I never said it was fact. Please quote me where I say it's a fact Christianity has killed 250 million people or communism has killed 100 million please show me

2. Your source says trade and gerbils spread the Black Plague. That's basically the summary of your source..., you're straw manning my point. My point is, someone could say the Catholic Church is the reason because of the cats, I'm not say that, what I'm saying is in terms of death tolls through history it is very speculative and subjective, how about this... The entire genocide of the Native American population through disease is the result of Christianity because the Spanish who brought the disease came in the name of Christ.... I am not saying that I am blaming the church but I am telling you "history is subjective and speculative at times"

3. Ummm no I don't think I hate religion I really don't care what a person believes, but when someone suggests only Islam condones the murdering of people I say that is false and Christianity and Judaism in the past both have and they both have certain sects to this day that condones it. You like to try to prove that when I say "probably killed more people throughout history" as not being a fact, then I say I know it's not a fact because I can't prove it to be true, however a lot of people have died from history and looking at the numbers throw speculative glasses creates reason to believe it very likely could be true literally translates to "probably" then you say I'm lieing, which I'm not considering history is subjective

4. Please answer the question
 
Last edited:
Do I also have to explain to you what a parable is?

Here I'll make your response easy

1. Does Christianity preach from the Old Testament, which gives people the right to kill homosexuals and murderers

2. If no why does the Christian bible include it

3. Has Christianity caused millions of people to lose their lives

4. Yes, please explain to me what a parable is and how "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.'" Can not in any way make a believer of Christianity think it's ok to kill
 
It would work just fine to do that if people abroad didn't hate us. ISIS wants to kill EVERYBODY AND DOMINATE EVERYBODY just like Hitler did.
I don't know if you are aware, but.. once upon a time Arabs dominated most of Europe and Northern Africa, and now ISIS thinks that they can do it again and dominate the entire world. This cancer will spread if we don't kill it and if we don't kill it, will kill us.

With that level of justification..... we can justify taking over the world now can't we?

At what point do we expect the people in the regions most threatened to stand up for themselves?

Hell, why would anyone bother having their own Military when they have the good ole U.S. eh?

We need to put an end to foreign nations' dependance on the U.S. military to defend them.
 
With that level of justification..... we can justify taking over the world now can't we?

Fostering democracy does not equal taking over the world, and the justification for fostering democracy should be self evident.

At what point do we expect the people in the regions most threatened to stand up for themselves?

When the people have regrown the physical, intellectual and social capital stripped from them by tyrants.

Hell, why would anyone bother having their own Military when they have the good ole U.S. eh?

And they say there are no stupid questions; they're wrong.

We need to put an end to foreign nations' dependance on the U.S. military to defend them.

That's what we're doing, through world freedom.
 
1. You stated Christians don't believe in the Old Testament, so I'm asking do they preach from it. It's not loaded it's a completely logical question you are refusing to answer because you know you're wrong. Do gay bashing Christians quote he Old Testament?

I said no such thing, the rest of your statement falls apart from there.

2. So why include the Old Testament into the bible

Why don't history books only cover current events? Why do science textbooks cover Copernicus, Newton and Galileo? Why can't you understand basic concepts?

3. I say that it has killed the most people aside from disease is speculative, but there is ample proof to the claim that Christianity has killed millions of people

You lie and then use a lesser claim that you still can't prove as evidence of your lie. Clearly the person you are most trying to convince is yourself.

4. I really don't care as I have said ample times. I said he gives a reference be a scholar and do your research. This is literally one claim you went against over all the other ones I'm not refuting you at all

So you really don't care about the evidence you provided and make claims you agree are unsupported by evidence? You are on a roll. :roll:

5. I can't want? Blaine atheism for he deaths in the ussr and Maoist china? Yes I can considering they were both athiests and communism hates religion because it divides the masses. I'm not making any exception. It's a very logical claim

So you could more logically argue that atheism is responsible for more deaths than any other ideology. You choose Christianity for your claim against the evidence and only on the weight of your own ignorant bigotry.
 
1. Did you read what I said, I said I can not say it's true because history is speculative and subjective in certain instances especially such broad history as Christianity... I never said it was fact. Please quote me where I say it's a fact Christianity has killed 250 million people or communism has killed 100 million please show me

You clamin it as "probable" which presumes some compelling evidence for your claim. Since you KNOW there is no compelling evidence you are simply lying.

2. Your source says trade and gerbils spread the Black Plague. That's basically the summary of your source..., you're straw manning my point. My point is, someone could say the Catholic Church is the reason because of the cats, I'm not say that, what I'm saying is in terms of death tolls through history it is very speculative and subjective, how about this... The entire genocide of the Native American population through disease is the result of Christianity because the Spanish who brought the disease came in the name of Christ.... I am not saying that I am blaming the church but I am telling you "history is subjective and speculative at times"

Gerbils spread plague in Asia, rats in Europe died from the plague, the outbreaks of plague in Europe were traced to the arrival of foreign traders, not a drop in the cat population.

3. Ummm no I don't think I hate religion I really don't care what a person believes, but when someone suggests only Islam condones the murdering of people I say that is false and Christianity and Judaism in the past both have and they both have certain sects to this day that condones it. You like to try to prove that when I say "probably killed more people throughout history" as not being a fact, then I say I know it's not a fact because I can't prove it to be true, however a lot of people have died from history and looking at the numbers throw speculative glasses creates reason to believe it very likely could be true literally translates to "probably" then you say I'm lieing, which I'm not considering history is subjective

Mohammed spread Islam across the Middle East by the sword, and is responsible for killing many people, Jesus not so much. Christianity spread for 800 years peacefully throughout the near east and Europe.

To put in in perspective, when Charlemagne was named the first Holy Roman Emperor Islamic armies had already been rampaging through Western Europe for a century.

4. Please answer the question

What is the point? You are simply trying to cover for a lie by changing your argument. You are intellectually dishonest.
 
Here I'll make your response easy blah blah blah

The quote you posted was made by a fictitious character in a parable. Trying to use that to prove Jesus ordered people to kill is idiotic.
 
Sounds to me like this guy is nothing but a damned mass murderer who got nailed for it, and now finds he doesn't like being in the clink very much. Too bad. The guilt and fear he says he feels have nothing to do with whether he was fairly tried for his crimes and fairly sentenced.
 
The quote you posted was made by a fictitious character in a parable. Trying to use that to prove Jesus ordered people to kill is idiotic.

1. Do Christians teach from the Old Testament yes or no

2. If no why is it included in the bible

3. Has Christianity caused millions of people to lose their lives yes or no

4. Yes, explain what a parable is and also explain to me how a Christian interpreting the bible could never use that parable as Christianity condoning murder
 
Last edited:
And not all Muslims are encouraged to kill either..... just the radicals.

Some are being radicalized in the mosques so it appears to be backed by the religion itself. That is the point. Muslim clerics have formed armies in the middle east. What we see is a militant religion that goes completely out of control with the radicals. Are we beginning to get through yet?
 
1. Do Christians teach from the Old Testament yes or no

You are arguing that an out-of-context quote from the Old Testament proves your assertion that Christians teach people to kill, I pointed out that the NEW Testament changes the Old Testament law and that CHRISTIANS follow the NEW Testament which is the teachings of CHRIST (the hint in in the name CHRISTian). This is a fact.

2. If no why is it included in the bible

Why do science classes teach Newtonian Physics?

3. Has Christianity caused millions of people to lose their lives yes or no

Your assertion was that Christianity has killed more people than anything except disease. When pressed on your baseless assertion you started talking about how the evidence isn't their but you stand by your assertion. In your idiotic "subjective" world view there can be no yes or no answers. You hold others to a standard your don't hold yourself to.

4. Yes, explain what a parable is and also explain to me how a Christian interpreting the bible could never use that parable as Christianity condoning murder

Parable: a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels.

In the parable of the Ten Minas Jesus is illustrating the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven in the Rapture. The two parts of the parable teach that you should not squander the gifts God has given you, but use them to grow God's kingdom, and that those who oppose God's kingdom will not have eternal life.

Death in Jesus' parables is not physical death but spiritual, the loss of eternal life, in fact when ever Jesus was called on to condone the physical death of sinners (stoning of the adulterer for example) Jesus specifically told those who wanted to kill in God's name that they themselves were unfit in God's eyes and that no one is fit to carry out God's judgement. Because of this Jesus explicitly puts the burden of carrying out God's judgement on God alone. What does God intend for US to do here on Earth? Jesus had this to say:

Matthew 19: 17-19: “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’


Seems pretty clear.
 
Moderator's Warning:
"U.S. Soldier Who Killed 16 Afghans feels guilt and fear" is the topic here. Let's focus on that please.
 
You are arguing that an out-of-context quote from the Old Testament proves your assertion that Christians teach people to kill, I pointed out that the NEW Testament changes the Old Testament law and that CHRISTIANS follow the NEW Testament which is the teachings of CHRIST (the hint in in the name CHRISTian). This is a fact.



Why do science classes teach Newtonian Physics?



Your assertion was that Christianity has killed more people than anything except disease. When pressed on your baseless assertion you started talking about how the evidence isn't their but you stand by your assertion. In your idiotic "subjective" world view there can be no yes or no answers. You hold others to a standard your don't hold yourself to.



Parable: a simple story used to illustrate a moral or spiritual lesson, as told by Jesus in the Gospels.

In the parable of the Ten Minas Jesus is illustrating the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven in the Rapture. The two parts of the parable teach that you should not squander the gifts God has given you, but use them to grow God's kingdom, and that those who oppose God's kingdom will not have eternal life.

Death in Jesus' parables is not physical death but spiritual, the loss of eternal life, in fact when ever Jesus was called on to condone the physical death of sinners (stoning of the adulterer for example) Jesus specifically told those who wanted to kill in God's name that they themselves were unfit in God's eyes and that no one is fit to carry out God's judgement. Because of this Jesus explicitly puts the burden of carrying out God's judgement on God alone. What does God intend for US to do here on Earth? Jesus had this to say:

Matthew 19: 17-19: “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

18“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’


Seems pretty clear.

1. so that's a yes, christians teach the word of god through the old testament
2. We learn about newton because it gives us a foundation of an evolving science, like physics. Christians teach the old testament because it is the word of god
3. So thats a yes, christianity has killed millions of people. You refuse to answer because it proves my initial point that the interpretation of christianity in a religious sense is just as capable of killing as islam
4. You gave me your interpretation of the parable, is there any way some one else can interpret that parable as god allowing people to kill non christians?

Seems pretty clear to your own subjective understanding of christianity, yet it differs with everyone else. This seriously means that ISLAM IS NOT THE ONLY RELIGION CAPABLE OF CONDONING MURDER which is my entire point to begin with.

Considering i said "probably" it litterally does not mean its a fact, and i never claimed it was a fact. However it is not an illogical to claim considering Christianity has killed millions of people, and you know this as well which is why you refuse to answer with a yes or no.
 
1. so that's a yes, christians teach the word of god through the old testament

You haven't been following the argument very well, obviously.

2. We learn about newton because it gives us a foundation of an evolving science, like physics. Christians teach the old testament because it is the word of god

False. The Bible is the story of the evolving relationship between man and God. We learn the history of the old ways to better understand the new ways as taught by Jesus. Your interpretation that the Old Testament teaches Christians how to act is patently false.

3. So thats a yes, christianity has killed millions of people. You refuse to answer because it proves my initial point that the interpretation of christianity in a religious sense is just as capable of killing as islam

I am not refusing to answer, just trying to keep you on your statement that Christianity has killed more people than any ideology. Whether Christianity has or hasn't killed "millions" does nothing to support your ignorant point.

The list of the world's greatest genocides and deadliest wars indicate you are full of crap.

Likewise, Your attempt to paint Christianity and Islam as coequals in the killing department is also absurdly false per those same sources. The Ottoman empire has 3 atrocities ranking in the top 4 all time, and Tamerlane conducted a war of Conquest in the name of Islam that ranks #1 in religious wars with between 7 million and 20 million dead. The Crusades didn't even make the list.

Also, your "Christians killed most" argument is patently false compared to Islam as I have demonstrated, but even Islam is a distant #2 to the list of Chinese wars and atrocities. So, the most deadly ideology in the world appears to be "Not Christian".

4. You gave me your interpretation of the parable, is there any way some one else can interpret that parable as god allowing people to kill non christians?

All signs point to No. Can you show me evidence that someoine has used that parable to justify murder? It's your assertion that it has been used to justify murder, contrary to the actual meaning in the context of Jesus' teachings. So prove it. Or is this one of those proofs that you want to claim is "subjective" and open to interpretation? :roll:

Seems pretty clear to your own subjective understanding of christianity, yet it differs with everyone else. This seriously means that ISLAM IS NOT THE ONLY RELIGION CAPABLE OF CONDONING MURDER which is my entire point to begin with.

You keep making the same claim and not backing it up. It is actually YOUR interpretation of the Bible that is the outlier. The Bible doesn't condone murder, and Jesus didn't preach or use murder as a tool for spreading his word. Mohammed, on the other hand, did.

Considering i said "probably" it litterally does not mean its a fact, and i never claimed it was a fact. However it is not an illogical to claim considering Christianity has killed millions of people, and you know this as well which is why you refuse to answer with a yes or no.

Stating something is "Probable" means you have evidence that makes your guess the most likely position to be true. You lack any evidence, you claim you have no definitive evidence, therefor your claim of "probable" is a lie.

I have shown that your claim that Christianity has "probably" killed more people than anything except disease (an argument you hilariously tried to augment by attributing a disease to Christianity) is laughably untrue, and that you don't only lack the evidence to claim your view is "probably" but that the evidence actually shows your claim is untrue.


Leaving the discussion there. Back to the thread topic.
 
Fostering democracy does not equal taking over the world, and the justification for fostering democracy should be self evident.



When the people have regrown the physical, intellectual and social capital stripped from them by tyrants.



And they say there are no stupid questions; they're wrong.



That's what we're doing, through world freedom.

America_0e1f64_2124703.jpg
 
Some are being radicalized in the mosques so it appears to be backed by the religion itself. That is the point. Muslim clerics have formed armies in the middle east. What we see is a militant religion that goes completely out of control with the radicals. Are we beginning to get through yet?

So... then.... why aren't there daily suicide bombings in our major cities that have mosques?
 
So... then.... why aren't there daily suicide bombings in our major cities that have mosques?

I have no idea nor do I think it has anything to do with what I said.
 
I have no idea nor do I think it has anything to do with what I said.

You said the religion itself is turning people into radicals.

So why isn't it happening here?

By "the religion" I assume you believe every Muslim worship center is somehow "linked in" with all the others across the world or something?
 
We think we are desensitized from violence by the sanitized version shown on TV, video games, and even our own imagination. I seriously doubt that's true. One need only ask a soldier after the battle is done (for him) or the cop who's killed or the driver whose actions have cost lives or the person who has taken a life in self-defense.

One of my CCW instructors ate his way out of the torment he felt by gaining 200 pounds. His body count is 61 with his service weapon and countless with his bombing raids. It is the one-on-ones that haunt him most. He says he can remember each of them. The pop-pop-pop, the smell of gunpowder, the blaze of the muzzle...everything switching to slow motion as if it were a movie reel...the recoil...the blood...the life preparing to leave his enemy...and, finally, the 'off switch' being set.

Tom has told me sketchy details of his best buddy's Vietnam Nam tour. A marine, he was constant point man on missions -- because he trusted no one else for the job. He was a ruthless killing machine after a while. No details here. He fought not so much for his country as he fought for the men at his side. He is a changed man, needless to say. Never married or had kids. But a very nice man to the peaceful world. He, though, doesn't think so.

We are hard wired to find killing each other abhorrent. Anyone who thinks they can kill another human being and simply chalk it up to "It was either him or me," has watched too many cop shows.

As to "what price Democracy," my answer would still be "Whatever it takes."

I wonder if PTSD has a lot to do with the purpose of combat as well. For instance, it someone like your instructor killed all Nazi's, would it be as bad since the Nazi's had to be stopped at all costs. WW2 vets are all heroes and no one, or very few, question what they had to do to accomplish victory. But these pre-emptive wars and attempts to stop terrorists aren't nearly as clean cut, leaving so many in our country to question everything that goes wrong, and I think that can way heavily on someone's mind had they seriously hurt or killed someone.
 
With that level of justification..... we can justify taking over the world now can't we?

At what point do we expect the people in the regions most threatened to stand up for themselves?

Hell, why would anyone bother having their own Military when they have the good ole U.S. eh?

We need to put an end to foreign nations' dependance on the U.S. military to defend them.

I did two tours each in Afghanistan and Iraq and I don't mind to go back and do it all over again.

If you don't want to stop the beheadings and atrocities that ISIS have done to Christians and people who decline to join ISIS
and you don't want to get involved, I suggest you to write to 0bama and tell him to make the 450 soldiers that he sent recently to return asap and pull completely out from there and all over the world since (according to you) we don't need any troops abroad and policing the world, all troops should come back and stay home.

You also got a good reply from ecofarm.
 
You haven't been following the argument very well, obviously.



False. The Bible is the story of the evolving relationship between man and God. We learn the history of the old ways to better understand the new ways as taught by Jesus. Your interpretation that the Old Testament teaches Christians how to act is patently false.



I am not refusing to answer, just trying to keep you on your statement that Christianity has killed more people than any ideology. Whether Christianity has or hasn't killed "millions" does nothing to support your ignorant point.

The list of the world's greatest genocides and deadliest wars indicate you are full of crap.

Likewise, Your attempt to paint Christianity and Islam as coequals in the killing department is also absurdly false per those same sources. The Ottoman empire has 3 atrocities ranking in the top 4 all time, and Tamerlane conducted a war of Conquest in the name of Islam that ranks #1 in religious wars with between 7 million and 20 million dead. The Crusades didn't even make the list.

Also, your "Christians killed most" argument is patently false compared to Islam as I have demonstrated, but even Islam is a distant #2 to the list of Chinese wars and atrocities. So, the most deadly ideology in the world appears to be "Not Christian".



All signs point to No. Can you show me evidence that someoine has used that parable to justify murder? It's your assertion that it has been used to justify murder, contrary to the actual meaning in the context of Jesus' teachings. So prove it. Or is this one of those proofs that you want to claim is "subjective" and open to interpretation? :roll:



You keep making the same claim and not backing it up. It is actually YOUR interpretation of the Bible that is the outlier. The Bible doesn't condone murder, and Jesus didn't preach or use murder as a tool for spreading his word. Mohammed, on the other hand, did.



Stating something is "Probable" means you have evidence that makes your guess the most likely position to be true. You lack any evidence, you claim you have no definitive evidence, therefor your claim of "probable" is a lie.

I have shown that your claim that Christianity has "probably" killed more people than anything except disease (an argument you hilariously tried to augment by attributing a disease to Christianity) is laughably untrue, and that you don't only lack the evidence to claim your view is "probably" but that the evidence actually shows your claim is untrue.


Leaving the discussion there. Back to the thread topic.

You're not even engaging in any substantial debate, you litterally strawman the **** out of what I am saying

Answer the questions yes or no

1. Do Christian preachers preach from the Old Testament
2. It's not evolving it's a moral code given to us by god... When was the last time it evolved if it is evolving like physics
3. Have millions of people died because of Christianity yes or no
4. It's patently false to you, not everyone. Is there Christian extremism yes or no?
5. Did I try to augment it to disease? No, you and I both know this, I'm saying the "belief of something killing someone else in history is subjective" can you please disprove that it is subjective. No you can not. You are arguing against strawman that you build, or you just focus on something completely off topic and pretend like you are proving my ascertion that Christianity has bred some of the most violence in history as wrong. But then when I make a logical valuable point you ignore it and refuse to answer questions I pose.

Let me guess your strawman your going to build

1. No point in answering that question because it doesn't matter
2. It evolves because people still believe in it, or something of the like
3. It doesn't matter how many people died because your assertion is not a fact, when this point has nothing to do with my normative statement you so desperately try to prove as not being a fact when I say " it's a normative statement"
4. No because they aren't Christians
5. I can't disprove anything to you. Because morality, religion, and theory all are based on the inner personal subjective ness. But I'll pretend like I disprove you with some off topic response
 
I wonder if PTSD has a lot to do with the purpose of combat as well. For instance, it someone like your instructor killed all Nazi's, would it be as bad since the Nazi's had to be stopped at all costs. WW2 vets are all heroes and no one, or very few, question what they had to do to accomplish victory. But these pre-emptive wars and attempts to stop terrorists aren't nearly as clean cut, leaving so many in our country to question everything that goes wrong, and I think that can way heavily on someone's mind had they seriously hurt or killed someone.

Well I think some people would have severe conscious and others would have severe detachment. Those with the conscious probably arent able to hold back those lacking in conscious much. While those with severe detachment of conscious force it upon those who have one. Just a theory im not an expert in these matters.
 
Back
Top Bottom