Anonymous #1 9w

Hey, that’s all of the big three religions. Don’t let them steal Jewish valor

-4

Anonymous OP 9w

No one has definitely done it a lot more than the others

0

Anonymous #1 9w

Trying to insinuate one of the big three is somehow morally worse, or better, than the others would be an ahistorical and unfactual thing to say

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

Not at all. Christianity in its Catholic and Protestant forms is responsible for some of the worst crimes in history through its adherents and the justifications provided. It’s an extremely viable case to make. With orthodox and oriental orthodox that’s less the case

4

Anonymous #2 9w

Ok well they all bomb ppl too

1

Anonymous OP 9w

Did I ever suggest otherwise?

1

Anonymous #1 9w

If you have a christocentric view of history maybe. Not downplaying what they did, they just weren’t special in doing it

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

No just in terms of sheer numbers Christians are the most violent ppl in history

8

Anonymous OP 9w

Ofc Christians have been around longer than the mongols for ex

2

Anonymous OP 9w

Everybody sucks and lwk it’s only until recently that Judaism got to be all colonial. Don’t ask a Muslim how their religion spread so fast, it’s a touchy subject. Or a Christian how many ppl they killed in the Americas.

-2

Anonymous #2 9w

Did I say you did?

0

Anonymous #2 9w

Judaism was pretty colonial before Christianity ngl

-1

Anonymous #2 9w

Just wrong

-1

Anonymous #1 9w

Not exactly? They occupied largely just the Levant up until the Romans put them into diaspora. Not nearly as colonial as the Romans, Egyptians, or Carthaginians.

-1

Anonymous OP 9w

What is wrong there? I didn’t say anything that is not backed up historically. The Jews have been in diaspora for much of their existence, only until recently acting as an ethnostate and mildly colonial power. Islam spread through violent military conquest and subsequent trade networks, forcing conversion through Jizya. Christians are some big offenders for genocidal tendencies, especially when it comes to the colonial era. Judaism, had it not been stunted by diaspora, would be like the others.

0

Anonymous #2 9w

Ig if we’re splitting hairs here comparing ancient kingdom borders to modern "colonialism" is just anachronistic altogether. Colonial empires of extraction are a relatively recent European phenomenon that can’t really be projected on to prior history. Those were empires of conquest in antiquity of a different system. The Israelites were pretty genocidal according to their own history to their neighboring peoples, they just never had the historical headwinds of other empires

1

Anonymous #2 9w

Well that’s just wrong historically, my field of study is history with classics and Middle Eastern studies. Islam as a civilizational force spread like any other empire via conquest of its neighboring empires, the religion itself though, as borne out from the data by any actual historian in the field shows that it didn’t spread via the sword (unlike Christianity in Europe and recently globally). Donner and Lapidus do a good job detailing how the Umayyad elite actually discouraged conversion

0

Anonymous #2 9w

And that most of the Middle East w North Africa in the zone this Islamicate civilization had taken up didn’t convert for hundreds of years as it was more of a Sufi missionary enterprise than state interest. The jizya was exempt from certain communities and was variable by dynasty, it didn’t have a role in conversion either at any scale, was often to comparable to the Muslims’ own tax zakat system (higher during ummayad period, flat tax so elite non Muslims paid less than elite Muslims at times)

1

Anonymous #2 9w

This isn’t to say they weren’t extremely violent though, it was again an empire for which power structures bent toward a favored minority running the empire (Muslims, Arab Muslims specifically) but to say all those systems were the same or spread religiously by the sword would be false. Islamicate society generally spread civilizationally by force, religiously not so much. Judaism post Romans yeah just didn’t have the opportunity for any of that. Christianity via Europe is a diff story

1

Anonymous #2 9w

My pet theory is that this is because they’re all Hellenist weebs who picked up their pederasty alongside the philosophy, some habits die hard

1

Anonymous #2 9w

Middle eastern Christians don’t seem to share the genocidal flair of their European counterparts though so that’s an interesting side group. There were also Christians in India since the first century who have been comparatively more peaceful historically, until the European/Portuguese Christian encounter at least. So that’s why I specifically outlined European Christian forms as particularly violent

1

Anonymous #3 9w

Well that’s a form of bombing, and the people who bomb the most and kill the most are Christians

1

Anonymous #1 9w

That’s a stark difference between blowing other people up and blowing yourself up in order to get others

1

Anonymous #3 9w

Yeah I’d say there is a pretty big difference between murdering hundreds of millions of people and living to throw parties vs like a thousand at most and dying in the process for sure

1

Anonymous #2 9w

One of them is known for molesting hundreds of thousands of children over the course of just a few recent decades bc we have access to the data (with a lot more before the era we have access to), the other two simply don’t have that problem to the same scale. Fun fact my mom’s hometown in France had a priest disappeared, let’s just say my uncles and guys their age weren’t very fond of the guy but he was fond of them when they were younger

1