Why are Abrahamic religions so violent? It's the blood.

[Twilight Hue]

Why are Abrahamic Religions so Violent?

Interesting.

All the way from Animal sacrifice to human subjugation, all Abrahamic religions revolve around blood. Actual blood.

It's a blood based religion.

Agree disagree?

 

[Rival]

Most religious practice includes sacrifice.

Greeks, Romans, Kemetics, Celts, Germanics etc. The Germanics, Celts, and Aztecs also had human sacrifice, some that continued well into the Christian era.

 

[ChristineM]

Why are Abrahamic Religions so Violent?

Interesting.

All the way from Animal sacrifice to human subjugation, all Abrahamic religions revolve around blood. Actual blood.

It's a blood based religion.

Agree disagree?

I always thought their violence stems from their holy books, the teaching, no tolerance for difference. Throughout history this has manifested itself time and again.

Never thought of it as a blood thing though

 

[Link]

Its due to the people who ruled. For example, the king that killed John the Baptist, was part of how the truth did not spread. Gog and Magog always attempt to stop truth from spreading, for whatever reasons they convince themselves, it must be stopped.

Same with Islam, Quran meaning and Sunnah was corrupted, because those who ruled the Muslims were Kahens.

So the interpretation is corrupted. This is despite Quran morals about war and peace, being the best book about it. Its properly balanced, show courage when oppressed and seek victory over the oppressors when that is possible, show patience when you cannot stop the oppressors and even forgive them in this instance and work to reform people and restrain your hands even if killed you can do Taqiya and save lives that way, and defend your people if you have the power to and prepare what you can if you gain power in the land to protect your people.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Why are Abrahamic Religions so Violent?

Interesting.

All the way from Animal sacrifice to human subjugation, all Abrahamic religions revolve around blood. Actual blood.

It's a blood based religion.

Agree disagree?

In a literal sense, sacrifice could be seen as a reconciliation to the inherent violence of life. Hunter-gatherer folks had rituals to honor the animals they killed, and agricultural folks practiced sacrifice as a way to show the cycle of life, death, and rebirth and to ensure fertilization of the crops. Blood, being recognized as a magical, life-giving substance is inherently meaningful.

 

[Rival]

Effectively, any institution is violent because humans are violent.

There are violent Buddhist groups, too.

 

[Jimmy]

Why are Abrahamic Religions so Violent?

Interesting.

All the way from Animal sacrifice to human subjugation, all Abrahamic religions revolve around blood. Actual blood.

It's a blood based religion.

Agree disagree?

Violence would still exsist unfortunately, maybe even worse, if religion did'nt exist. Religion is a convenient thing to blame.

 

[ChristineM]

Violence would still exsist unfortunately, maybe even worse, if religion did'nt exist. Religion is a convenient thing to blame.

Maybe because so much violence has been initiated in the name of religion

 

[Link]

Maybe because so much violence has been initiated in the name of religion

That maybe due to the fact, most humans believe in religion.

 

[ChristineM]

That maybe due to the fact, most humans believe in religion.

It may also be due to the fact that many holy books teach violence.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Agree disagree?

yewtree2 is embarrassing themselves. That is page is nothing but a list of accusations demonstrating no knowledge of how the religion works.

"Star wars is evil, because Jabba the Hut is in it. He is an evil frog man! I am yewtree2 and I'm, like, so knowledgeable but haven't seen the movie. Don't need to, because its evil!"

 

[Augustus]

Why are Abrahamic Religions so Violent?

Interesting.

All the way from Animal sacrifice to human subjugation, all Abrahamic religions revolve around blood. Actual blood.

It's a blood based religion.

Agree disagree?

Disagree. As it simply begs the question.

Are they more violent than the average historical belief system? Seems unlikely.

They are violent as humans are violent.

For example, early Christians were often peaceful, then militaristic cultures were Christianised and Christianity was militarised.

 

[Link]

It may also be due to the fact that many holy books teach violence.

Maybe, but you can't know just from what most humans do in the name of religion.

I find Quran the best book about war and peace. It teaches when to fight and when not to in the best manner.

 

[Jimmy]

Maybe because so much violence has been initiated in the name of religion

Like i said if religion never was you would be saying "in the name of something else"

 

[ChristineM]

Maybe, but you can't know just from what most humans do in the name of religion.

I find Quran the best book about war and peace. It teaches when to fight and when not to in the best manner.

It is true (according to computerised word analysis) that the bible is twice as violent as the Qur'an. However, there has been considerable unwarranted violence, bloodshed and terrorism carried out in the name of Allah and the Qur'an.

 

[ChristineM]

Like i said if religion never was you would be saying "in the name of something else"

And maybe i wouldn't. Maybe this world would have reconciled its differences without the bigotry of religion.

Who knows?

What i say us that the holy books teach intolerance of difference and intolerance leads to violence

 

[Jimmy]

And maybe i wouldn't. Maybe this world would have reconciled its differences without the bigotry of religion.

Who knows?

What i say us that the holy books teach intolerance of difference and intolerance leads to violence

Unfortunately i doubt reconciliation would have happened. People would have taught intolerance of difference by word of mouth if there were no books. Then you could say " in the name of people"

Lets take it another step and take away communication between people. There probably still would be hatred in there hearts if, for the sake of argument, they could only teach themselves.

Its whats in ones heart not ones page

 

[Jimmy]

And maybe i wouldn't. Maybe this world would have reconciled its differences without the bigotry of religion.

Who knows?

What i say us that the holy books teach intolerance of difference and intolerance leads to violence

The holy book i have read says be kind and dont judge so idk

 

[George-ananda]

Agree disagree?

Disagree. Peace and good behavior are the teachings. They've just been integrated into society that has its violent aspects.

 

[ChristineM]

Unfortunately i doubt reconciliation would have happened. People would have taught intolerance of difference by word of mouth if there were no books. Then you could say " in the name of people"

Lets take it another step and take away communication between people. There probably still would be hatred in there hearts if, for the sake of argument, they could only teach themselves.

Its whats in ones heart not ones page

If humanity began that way then humanity would not exist, they would have wiped each other out before we left Africa. We didn't, instead we built civilisations which flourished to the point of organised religion and the hatred of difference that comes with it.

 

[ChristineM]

The holy book i have read says be kind and dont judge so idk

You must have skipped some chapters.

And was it you judging who was and who wasn't Christmas on another thread?