Body count: a comparative quantitative study of mass killings in history by religion and civilisation
Categories: Atheism, Atrocities, Blogging Theology Youtube, Christianity, Communism, Death, Islam
10 replies
Trackbacks
- 'Atheism Kills' - or does it? - Meerkat Musings
- ‘Atheism Kills’ – or does it? – Coalition of the Brave
Which religion has the most violent commands and laws which are valid for all times in it’s scriptures?
Probably the Bible. God advocates genocide and this has been taken as present commandment by many Christians over the centuries. This is well documented.
Probably Manghols Tengrism. They killed 10% of the human popultion in the 13th century, by sword. The destroyed Baghdad (1 million casuallties) and broke the back of Islam expansion.
or maybe the Bible has already expired scripture and no longer valid as the holy book. LOL.
You must distinguish between wars that occur in a particular socio-religious culture and wars that are caused by the beliefs of that culture. World War Two was not a clash of religions, but a clash of political ideologies: fascism and democracy. Religion was not a driving force, except if one considers the anti-Semitic aspects of Nazism, which gave rise to the huge loss of life of the Holocaust. But this was a result of Nazis dogma, not Christian.
If you are going to do this kind of analysis it might be fair to compare the loss of life caused by Islam as it expanded under the scimitar from the 8th century on against the loss of life caused by the Crusades. But who keeps those statistics? I don’t think we yet have a good historical handle on all the events, let alone the numbers.
It might also be reasonable to look at the enormous loss of life of indigenous Americans caused by European, especially Spanish, colonization, which was prosecuted under the symbol of the cross. However, when you examine the causes of mortality you frequently find the majority of deaths weren’t caused by direct conflict, but by diseases like smallpox that were unintentionally introduced into indigenous populations. Where do you draw the line?
Bottom line: the statistics, if you can elevate them to that, can be made to show whatever was the intent from the outset.
I agree with your criticism of the numbers and how they misrepresent the data. It does not take long to see the book is flawed on several levels.
I thought I got a good book for free. But it’s bad. Better invest in a decent book. Even for free its a waste of time.
Are u really ibn Malik, it’s sounds like like u are ‘ibn Milk’