A Second Martyrdom Likely?

Post Reply New Topic

What do you think?

Martyrdom doesn't actually mean the mass killing of Christians. A martyr is some one who doesn't will his own death (for that would be a sin), but dies for his cause. This is according to many Christians and Muslims. I'm an atheist. Martyrdom is often used as an excuse by terrorists to justify suicide bombers, like you get to chose to be a martyr and most importantly guarantee you'll reach paradise.

btw which mass killing of Christians where you talking about? There have been several. It depends on which scale you mean 'mass'. Are you talking exclusively Christian or where other people killed as well?

Not in the west I can tell you that much!

Considering their kind of the majority by ALOT.
Unless there was some sort of wierd inter-sect purge, which this being a modern age I don't see happening either.

So yeah, not gonna happen.

no...the christians are the ones who've been doing all the genocides lately.


well...the muslims too but to a lesser extent.

Nah, they'll just die off on their own.
No help is needed. Like other religions
well past their time, Christianity is going
to fall.

I think religion was incidental, and not the motivating factor, in genocides perpetrated by predominantly Christian groups for the last 70 years or so. The Nazis thought of Jews not as a religion, but a race (I heard that biologically speaking, there are no races within the human species, the genetic differences are too small to qualify). Mao killed millions during the Great Leap Forward, the invasion and occupation of Tibet and the cultural revolution, Stalin killed millions in an artificially generated famine and in the labour camps, but that was power politics and megalomania, not religion. The same is true for the Cambodian genocide. The Indonesian Genocide following the invasion in East Timor was actively supported by the USA and Britain for reasons of geopolitics. The Vietnam war, with its indiscriminate killing of civilians in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia had enough noncombatant victims that some people consider it a genocide, but that was geopolitics again. The Serbs targeted the mostly Catholic Croats as much as the Muslims in bosnia and Kosovo, so I don't see that as Christians against other religions. The Rwandan genocide was mostly portrayed as an ethnic conflict, though I have seen one analysis that it had a big element of a resource conflict. Darfur is a resource conflict, probably the first to be caused by global warming.

Religious conflict occurs between Christians of different denominations in Northern Ireland, between Christians and Muslims in Nigeria, Shia and Sunni in Iraq and Pakistan, Muslims and Hindus in India, Muslims and Buddhists in Malaysia and Thailand, but none of them are genocides. And for all that al Quaida aspires to genocide (not just of Christians, but even all Muslims who are not Wahhabists), they haven't got the means yet. Though current US policy seems designed to make the West so reviled in the Muslim world that extremists eventually could take over Pakistan. Well done, Dubya and Dick. If Chuchulainn's fears ever come true, Bush and Cheney will have done the most to make that happen.

Gromit

Religion is dying rapidly in most of the first-world countries. Every year we are becoming more like the Roman empire; goddless and depraved. While religious people from poorer countries may survive, I don't believe there will be any wide-spread martyrdom of any religion, as those people will be the minority.