The Instigator
A341
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
CountCheechula
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

In Our Modern World Fundamentalist Christianity is More Dangerous Than Fundamentalist Islam

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/4/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,372 times Debate No: 62632
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (33)
Votes (0)

 

A341

Pro

First round is for acceptance only.
CountCheechula

Con

I accept your debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
A341

Pro

I should first point out that this debate has nothing to say about whether or not the claims of Jesus of Nazareth are correct or incorrect nor do I think the intentions of either fundamentalist Christians or fundamentalist Muslims are ill I just think they are misguided, often dangerously so.

Definitions:

Fundamentalist: "Fundamentalism is the demand for a strict adherence to orthodox theological doctrines, usually understood as a reaction to Modernist theology."

Christianity: "the religion based on the person and teachings of Jesus Christ, or its beliefs and practices."

Islam: "the religion of the Muslims, a monotheistic faith regarded as revealed through Muhammad as the Prophet of god."

Dangerous: Dangerous will be decided by the potential for members of this belief system to kill or cause harm to others in the near future (say 2-3 decades).

Various Terrorist Groups

While Islam does seem to be winning in news coverage giving the illusion that there are no or very few Christian terrorist groups operating in the world this is simply not the case, here are a few:

Anti balaka
Lords resistance army (LRA)
Klu Klux Klan (KKK)
National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT)
Tigers Militia (of Lebanon)
Lebanese Front
Iron Guard
Lancieri
Army of God
Hutaree
The Covenant
The Sword
The Arm of the Lord
Defensive Action
The Freemen Community
National Liberation Army (Columbia)

But that aside the damage done by terrorist organisations will not be my main point in fact I think the real danger posed by Christianity comes from the United States.

Christian Voting Block In The US And The Damage It Causes

When you give a man with beliefs from the 4th century weapons from the 21st century what happens?

Eleven years ago in a so called crusade [1] coalition forces invaded Iraq. This has lead to over a decade of violence, hostility and instability as well as a substantial drop in the standard of living of the Iraqi people when compared to their neighbours [2]. Furthermore the collapse of Iraqi society after the invasion of 03 has lead to the rise of many terrorist organisations who have exploited the instability in Iraq (the ultimate form of this being the Islamic State).

Because these organisations are in almost all cases fundamentalist Islamic Islam is shown to be the problem. This is not the case. Political instability brings violence in almost all cases (with the possible exception of Belgium) this is the same regardless of wether or not this happens in a majority Christian nation [3] or an Islamic one [4]. We have to look at the root causes of the conflict and that is the election of a right wing war hawk (George Bush) who was majority supported by fundamentalist Christians (even in his later days) [5] [6].

The real problem is that extreme Christians make up a significant enough portion of the vote in the US that they can influence the elections significantly. Unfortunately they tend to vote for the most warlike candidates they can find.

Conclusion

While fundamentalist Islam is dangerous and is rightly considered so fundamentalist Christians have massive influence over the worlds largest war machine and are constantly attempting to use it, usually with devastating consequences that could never be achieved by the fundamentalist Muslims.

[1] https://www.youtube.com... (ignore the laughter in the background, that just seems to be par for the course with Bush)

[2]http://en.wikipedia.org...

[3] http://www.nydailynews.com...

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...

[5] http://www.christianitytoday.com...

[6] http://www.oakhill.ac.uk...
CountCheechula

Con

Definitions of fundamentalist, Christianity and Islam are agreed upon both parties and should be agreed also by the floor.

Rebuttals for the assertion of Christan Terror groups:
Anti Blaka: A militia group stemming from the Central African Republic first used a community watch group to prevent Muslim terror attacks on innocents. After the Christian President was killed by a short coup of Muslim Fundamentalists, the group took charge and finally restoring order to the CAR.
Lords Resistance Army (LRA): Another militia group in Uganda, they are not fundamental Christians because they believe the Ten Commandments directly tells them to rule over Uganda, also the are heavily influenced by African Traditional and Mystic components.
KKK: Not an official Christian Hate Group. They are very anti-immigration anti-black and anti-drinking alcohol. Most members claim to be Christian but teach hate on all levels for preserving "American way of Life". KKK is not approved by the Catholic Church and shamed by almost all Protestant and Evangelican Churches. They believes also contradicts Jesus' teachings by killing, and believing in Darwins' Superior Race Complex.
NLFT: This very small group is not really even a terrorist group, only labeled by Hindu India as terrorists. No other country recognizes this point. They participated in a small riot for peaceful succession from India. Main goals are peace and spreading gospel.
Tigers Militia: Died out in 1980. Was supported by the USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan and Egypt.
Lebanese Front: A combo of almost all sub-christian groups trying to survive the horrific Muslim induced, backed, and latter winners of the Modern Lebanese Civil War. Only reasons for uniting is for support from Israel Defense Forces and to basically not all be persecuted by the Islamic Extremists.
Iron Guard: Died out in 1941, born out of the mass slaughter of orthodox russians by the party of Lenin and Stalin.
Lancieri: Also a non-existent group. Very evil and statical, anti-Semitic and clashed with the Iron Guard. Cannot be fundamentalist because the supported the murder of Jews that is not in the teaches of Jesus either.
Army of God: An American non violent group whose main and sole issue is to stop abortion.
Hutaree: An Adrian, Michigan anti-police group that was raided and taken down in 2010. Jesus says to respect your authority along with St.Paul. Also remember any form of violence mental or physical cannot be counted as fundamentalist Christianity.
The Covenant, The Sword and The Army of the Lord: Founded by James Ellison, was a Social Darwinist superior race complex group focused only on the progress of the Aryan Race, also a polygamist group going against the Old and New Testaments.
Defensive Action: Another anti-abortion group willing to use force (killing) to stop the killing of unborn children.
The Freeman Community: I have never heard of such groups and some research of mine tells me this is very small or does not exist at all. Please supply direct links tot heir main database if possible, thanks.
NLA: Not a christian group but actually anti-religion roots from Marxism policies.

So from your list there seems to be little transparency. These groups are not Fundamentalists according to your definitions and the ones that are are peaceful or literally defending themselves from Muslims but really should choose to die and be baptized in blood for the truth.
So lets take a look at The religion of Peace shall we?
The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.

Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.

The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God, however this can work both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.

Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

These are just a few of hundred of violent provoking verses just in the Qur'an not even counting other holy books.
See ya next round!

Sources:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...
http://fas.org...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
A341

Pro

Look please address my main argument. I provided you with a few examples of Christian terrorist groups (yes all of them are Christian terrorist groups).

Run Through of Terrorist Groups

"Anti Blaka: A militia group stemming from the Central African Republic first used a community watch group to prevent Muslim terror attacks on innocents. After the Christian President was killed by a short coup of Muslim Fundamentalists, the group took charge and finally restoring order to the CAR."

Restoring law and order through the lynching of innocent Muslims [1]?

"Lords Resistance Army (LRA): Another militia group in Uganda, they are not fundamental Christians because they believe the Ten Commandments directly tells them to rule over Uganda, also the are heavily influenced by African Traditional and Mystic components."

They are Christian fundamentalists, they interpret the bible differently for instance when the bible says to kill non-believers [2] they think it says kill non-believers.

"KKK: Not an official Christian Hate Group. They are very anti-immigration anti-black and anti-drinking alcohol. Most members claim to be Christian but teach hate on all levels for preserving "American way of Life". KKK is not approved by the Catholic Church and shamed by almost all Protestant and Evangelican Churches. They believes also contradicts Jesus' teachings by killing, and believing in Darwins' Superior Race Complex."

The only way you can claim the KKK are not Christian is with the no true scotsman argument which you deployed here.

"NLFT: This very small group is not really even a terrorist group, only labeled by Hindu India as terrorists. No other country recognizes this point. They participated in a small riot for peaceful succession from India. Main goals are peace and spreading gospel."

I have never heard of a peaceful group that guns down hindu leaders before [3].

"Tigers Militia: Died out in 1980. Was supported by the USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan and Egypt."

Which means it wasn't Christian?

"Lancieri: Also a non-existent group. Very evil and statical, anti-Semitic and clashed with the Iron Guard. Cannot be fundamentalist because the supported the murder of Jews that is not in the teaches of Jesus either."

No no no no no, fundamentalist Christians have killed Jews for centuries (ever heard of deicide?).

"NLA: Not a christian group but actually anti-religion roots from Marxism policies."

They think they are Christian [4].

Also as you have found some bad verses in the Koran here are some from the bible:

"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." [5]

"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." [6]

"The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name." [7]

"When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to [slavery] and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the Lord your God gives you from your enemies. This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.

However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites"as the Lord your God has commanded you. Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the Lord your God." [8]

Look the bible is as bad as the Koran and neither side really follows their holy books literally (not even ISIS).

Please address my main argument next time. For reference here is is again:

When you give a man with beliefs from the 4th century weapons from the 21st century what happens?

Eleven years ago in a so called crusade coalition forces invaded Iraq. This has lead to over a decade of violence, hostility and instability as well as a substantial drop in the standard of living of the Iraqi people when compared to their neighbours. Furthermore the collapse of Iraqi society after the invasion of 03 has lead to the rise of many terrorist organisations who have exploited the instability in Iraq (the ultimate form of this being the Islamic State).

Because these organisations are in almost all cases fundamentalist Islamic Islam is shown to be the problem. This is not the case. Political instability brings violence in almost all cases (with the possible exception of Belgium) this is the same regardless of wether or not this happens in a majority Christian nation or an Islamic one . We have to look at the root causes of the conflict and that is the election of a right wing war hawk (George Bush) who was majority supported by fundamentalist Christians (even in his later days).

The real problem is that extreme Christians make up a significant enough portion of the vote in the US that they can influence the elections significantly. Unfortunately they tend to vote for the most warlike candidates they can find.

[1] http://www.hrw.org...

[2] Deuteronomy 13:7-12, Deuteronomy 13:13-19 (nice book Deuteronomy).

[3] http://www.stephen-knapp.com...

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org... (Christian Marxism)

[5] 2 Chronicles 15:12-13

[6] Numbers 31 17-18

[7] Exodus 15:3

[8] Deuteronomy 20:10-18
CountCheechula

Con

CountCheechula forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
A341

Pro

Well I'll re open this debate.
CountCheechula

Con

Christian - follower of Christ.
Fundamentalism - ideology linked to literal interpretation of texts and words believed to be 100% authentic.

Restoring law and order through the lynching of innocent Muslims [1]?
* These men were warriors, not murders. These men were in an actual war and the people they killed would have killed them.

They are Christian fundamentalists, they interpret the bible differently for instance when the bible says to kill non-believers [2] they think it says kill non-believers.
*They must be mentally challenge and if they read the Bible they would know it would be a psalm or war cry hymn. Verses like that could be directly by God telling the Israelites to do that to obtain the Promise Land some three thousands years ago.

The only way you can claim the KKK are not Christian is with the no true scotsman argument which you deployed here.
*I Stand.

I have never heard of a peaceful group that guns down hindu leaders before [3].
* They never gunned down Hindus. They were in small riot the rioters couldn't be armed gun laws in India are strict. Not everything is America

Which means it wasn't Christian?
* You have two choices, be killed via crucifixion, decapitations, car bomb, landmine, gunshot. Or try to gather together and try to survive. They have no way out, this is there home. I wish the Arabic countries could have all the land they want and be happy. I see Qatar and some other Gulf states are doing better.

No no no no no, fundamentalist Christians have killed Jews for centuries (ever heard of deicide?).
*You do not understand what Fundamentalism means. Homework, find me one quote of Jesus Christ telling either just his disciples or a multitude to kill Jews.

They think they are Christian [4].
*Thank you, you answered it. They think but there thinking is wrong.

"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman." [5]
*If you look at history, BCE and CE. Before Common Era, the world was different. God was still on His first plan let Israel be the Beacon of the world. And be the nation of prophets and mass converters. Also this would be true because in all hopes people would all have been converted gentiles anyways. By the way this quote is a prayer from Asa to God. No God's word.

"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves." [6]
*These were the Gods commands to the Jews after they would and did destroy the Midianites. These people worshiped Balaam they were strong believers in open sexual rituals and sacrifices of children and no morals. Non believers and by the way they needed the promised land. And Survive.

"The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name." [7]
* You must understand that this is Judaism. Do the Jews constantly go to war for God. NO. Theses are instructions to Moses for strategy to get to the holy land. CONTEXT. The Qur'an has man verses the do not signify the correct time or correct context some even in future tense.

Sorry Computer problems I have no time left. See ya next round!
Debate Round No. 4
A341

Pro

Please adress the main argument and not the preamble.

Christian Voting Block In The US And The Damage It Causes


When you give a man with beliefs from the 4th century weapons from the 21st century what happens?

Eleven years ago in a so called crusade coalition forces invaded Iraq. This has lead to over a decade of violence, hostility and instability as well as a substantial drop in the standard of living of the Iraqi people when compared to their neighbours. Furthermore the collapse of Iraqi society after the invasion of 03 has lead to the rise of many terrorist organisations who have exploited the instability in Iraq (the ultimate form of this being the Islamic State).

Because these organisations are in almost all cases fundamentalist Islamic Islam is shown to be the problem. This is not the case. Political instability brings violence in almost all cases (with the possible exception of Belgium) this is the same regardless of wether or not this happens in a majority Christian nation or an Islamic one. We have to look at the root causes of the conflict and that is the election of a right wing war hawk (George Bush) who was majority supported by fundamentalist Christians (even in his later days).

The real problem is that extreme Christians make up a significant enough portion of the vote in the US that they can influence the elections significantly. Unfortunately they tend to vote for the most warlike candidates they can find.
CountCheechula

Con

You seem to discus anger towards the USA and Iraqi policies.
The problem was when after ww1 Britain and France ambassadors drew random lines on a map and implemented Zionism and stupidity. First they should separated nation states by religion not nationality.
Kurdistan should exist with two states in Iraq one for Sunni and one for Shiite. They then can have there own only religion party government and hopefully not go to war with any opposing neighbors. Since they took it by nationalities some got split
ex. Syria, Iraq.
The unrest is from government but the issue is religion and true Islam. They must establish a caliphate according to the Qur'an and Sharia Texts are laws and values for the caliphate.

Jesus preaches peace and to never wage war be part of it or support it. True Christians never stand for war and should be pacifist like Jesus from personal to national standards. George Bush and his followers are mainly Evangelical Christians. These are the folks of the Westboro Baptist Church and many other super conservative Christians. They put America before God an lose sight. But trust me Fundamentalist Christians are the closet people to acting the way of Jesus, fundamentalist Muslims follow the life style of Muhammad a poly gamer, serial rapist and killer. He leas crusades and established a Caliphate and ISIS is doing the same thing, Muhammad is saying good for them from the pits of Hell.
Who is more dangerous folks?
A bunch of people like Jesus or ISIS?

I would like to thank my opponent and once more an apology for the computer issues I suffered.
Debate Round No. 5
33 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by CountCheechula 2 years ago
CountCheechula
Seriously no one voted?
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
republicofdhar
Just read through the argument again and I take back what I said about wishing that Pro had approached it differently. I am very eagerly awaiting Con's response to the voting power of fundamentalist Christians as compared to that of fundamentalist Muslims.
Posted by A341 2 years ago
A341
@mightbenihilism

Just to make it cleat I have no love for democracy and see it as a sort of two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch situation.

To me it seems American elections don't need to be rigged, the system set up more or less allows for the one with more money (often gained from over-powerful corporations) to win (something like 90% of the time the one with more money wins) but the people do seem to have a say.

Also we can see that the US is democratic because:

a) Candidates pander to the electorate.
b) Independent election polls are accurate (to a degree).
c) When the majority of the US wants something incumbent representatives will change there positions (example: gay marriage).
Posted by mightbenihilism 2 years ago
mightbenihilism
A341, not to debate or anything but I'd like a few paragraphs from you on why you think American elections are determined by actual votes, rather than media-manipulation and back-room agreements involving corporate and military interests?

I won't reply. I just sincerely want to know.
Posted by republicofdhar 2 years ago
republicofdhar
This is a very very interesting topic!! Except I wish that Pro had approached it from a different angle.
Posted by mightbenihilism 2 years ago
mightbenihilism
I'm not used to anarchists (of any variety) who believe in the integrity of American Democracy to truly elect a President based upon popular vote (or electoral college). I have always been under the assumptions most anarchists were suspicious of the validity of American elections at best, or, at worst, viewed them as being definitely rigged by financial and military interests. A rigged election, of course, makes fundamentalist Christian voting blocs --- or any voting blocs, for that matter --- a moot point.

I guess there is a first for everything. Whooda thunk it?
Posted by mightbenihilism 2 years ago
mightbenihilism
I hope A341 doesn't use the all-too-common "cuisine argument". It is true that fundamentalist Christian cooking is usually sub-par, whereas the Middle Eastern cooking is almost always delightful, and it is also true that Islamic fundamentalism brought coffee to the world whereas Christian fundamentalism only brought us disgusting Pepsi. However, that's not enough to establish equivalent danger.

Or maybe, for your sake CountCheechula, I do hope he uses that argument. It will be easier to smack down and you'll win for sure --- even though he's not the kind of anarchist to have pink hair and an assortment of bother upper and lower lip-rings.
Posted by CountCheechula 2 years ago
CountCheechula
Excited.
Posted by mightbenihilism 2 years ago
mightbenihilism
If that is true, A341, I take back my ad hominem attacks. You are a blessing to your people.
Posted by A341 2 years ago
A341
@mightbenihilism Don't know where you get your stereotypes from. Personally I go for the short back and sides and have never worn facial jewelry (the same with every other male anarchist I have ever met).
No votes have been placed for this debate.