{"product":{"product_id":"0816028516","title":"Encyclopedia of Wars - 3 Volume Set (Facts on File Library of World History)","price":"234.0","image_url":"https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41dIy7FifXL._SL500_.jpg","url":"https://www.amazon.com/dp/0816028516"},"comments":[{"body":"Why an article? It's a published oxford book and peer reviewed: \r\nAccording to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 123, or 6.98%, had religion as their primary cause.\r\n\r\nYou can buy it here: https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516\r\n\r\nYou're pretty stupid attempting to turn back on me something I have proof about. Also error on my part, meant to say 93% of wars were caused by people like you. I correct my error.","subreddit_name":"prolife","author":"Bejeweled_Bird"},{"body":"“According to the Encyclopedia of Wars, out of all 1,763 known/recorded historical conflicts, 123, or 6.98%, had religion as their primary cause.[1]”\r\n\r\nThe book is called “The Encyclopedia of Wars Volume 3” by Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod. \r\n\r\n\r\nhttps://www.amazon.ca/Encyclopedia-Wars-Set-Charles-Phillips/dp/0816028516#byline_secondary_view_div_1598275765296","subreddit_name":"funny","author":"HockeyPls"},{"body":"I once met a person who believed Dan Brown was an Illuminati and the Da Vinci code was he spilling some beans disguised as fiction.\r\n\r\nAs a world without religion, we don't have to imagine how it would be. Just look at the atheist communist regimes in the XX century and see what the \"wise, illuminated leaders\" did without religion: About 100 million of dead.\r\n\r\n\"But relijuns cause wars\". Really?\r\n\r\nIn this[book](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Volume-Library-History/dp/0816028516/ref=sr_1_1?s=books\u0026amp;ie=UTF8\u0026amp;qid=1334497708\u0026amp;sr=1-1) the researcher studied 1763 conflicts.  Among all of them, only 123 were \"holy wars\" - less than 7%. Worthy of note is the fact that the \"religion of peace\" promoted 66 of those.","subreddit_name":"conspiracyundone","author":"Zybbo"},{"body":"I can source it. It's from the [Encyclopaedia of Wars](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Library-World-History/dp/0816028516). Why does it sound like BS to you? Think about ancient history, or indeed medieval and modern history. The vast majority of wars were carried out for land expansion, securing of trade routes, increase in wealth, political goals (e.g. independence). I know the people on /r/atheism (and other idiots like George Carlin) push the idea religion is the main cause of wars as fact all all over the internet, and as such it has come to be taken as that, but it's not true in the slightest. And yes, this includes wars with both political and religious motivations (e.g. the Crusades).","subreddit_name":"The_Donald","author":"bubby963"},{"body":"Interesting how he links to his [source](http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Library-World-History/dp/0816028516/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-1730309-3117525?ie=UTF8\u0026amp;s=books\u0026amp;qid=1181259328\u0026amp;sr=8-2), which has a review stating that it is \"un-Christian\" because it uses the BCE/CE dating method, rather than BC/AD.\r\n\r\nAlso, what's this guy's definition of an \"atheist war\"? Did Stalin one day decide to wake up and kill millions of people, specifically because the Bible told him not to? And that's assuming that what Stalin did was counted as a \"war.\"\r\n\r\n\"Fortunately, there are only five nations governed by atheist worldviews remaining in the world today, of which three are presently occupied with murdering a portion of their citizenry with the explicit goal of exterminating religion, North Korea, China and Laos.\"\r\n\r\nYeah. That's their one, sole motivation. Not political or military power or any silly things like that. Mao just woke up one morning and decided to destroy religion.","subreddit_name":"atheism","author":"AFineWayToDie"},{"body":"why speculate?  the [encyclopedia of wars](http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Library-World-History/dp/0816028516/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8\u0026amp;qid=1289064785\u0026amp;sr=8-1) puts the % of all known wars that were religious at a shade under 7%   \r\n\r\nbut realistically, religion is a poor tool to motivate people to war.  read julius caesar, sun tzu, vegetius, clausewitz, maurice; none of them have so much as a peep to say with regards to religion being useful","subreddit_name":"atheism","author":"wolfsktaag"},{"body":"highest estimate for spanish inquisition death toll was 2000, not 2mil.  that is most definitely not my number, mah dear boi  \r\n\r\nreligious conflicts have historically been a little less than 7% of all wars, according to the [encyclopedia of wars](http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Library-World-History/dp/0816028516/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8\u0026amp;s=books\u0026amp;qid=1274304984\u0026amp;sr=8-3-spell)  ","subreddit_name":"WTF","author":"wolfsktaag"},{"body":"Warning: OP's argument has invoked the [Bullshit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit#Bullshit_asymmetry_principle) asymmetry principle. So.... wall of text.\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; Religion accounts for only 7% of wars and 2% of deaths in war - Encyclopedia of Wars\r\n\r\nSeems OP was too lazy to copy/paste the longer version of this argument....\r\n\r\nNow, to advance the idea/claim that most wars and death was caused by \r\natheism and not by religion, there is an apologetic argument that states\r\n (roughly):\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; In the [Encyclopedia of Wars, Phillips and \r\nAxelrod](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516)\r\n document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 \r\nwars only 121/123 (7%) (and less than 2 percent of all people killed in \r\nwarfare) have been classified to involve a religious cause, ....\r\n\r\nAnd on the face of this argument, it is a good one. However......\r\n\r\nFrom the  introduction to Encyclopedia of Wars:\r\n\r\n*Wars have always arisen, and arise today, from territorial disputes, \r\nmilitary rivalries, conflicts of ethnicity, and strivings for commercial\r\n and economic advantage, and they have always depended on, and depend on\r\n today, pride, prejudice, coercion, envy, cupidity, competitiveness, and\r\n a sense of injustice.* ***But for much of the world before the 17th \r\ncentury, these “reasons” for war were explained and justified, at least \r\nfor the participants, by religion.*** *Then, around the middle of the \r\n17th century, Europeans began to conceive of war as a legitimate means \r\nof furthering the interests of individual sovereigns.* (Emphasis mine).\r\n\r\nFor the people who started war, many/most wars post 17th century, mostly\r\n were not started as a overt (more of this below) consequence of \r\nTheistic Religion. However, for the people fighting them, they, \r\narguably, mostly have been based, at least in part, on Religion and \r\nReligious beliefs.\r\n\r\nIn the case of the oft used The Encyclopedia of Wars argument, the \r\nsummary of the wars listed follows the format in this \r\n[IMAGE](https://imgur.com/a/3l6ch) (a screen shot of from my copy of The\r\n Encyclopedia of Wars - ***I am sure OP can verify this screenshot in THEIR copy of the Enc of Wars. Surely.***). In the case of the specific war I presented to \r\nshow the entry format, I picked one where a Theistic Religious cause was\r\n blatantly identified.  While I personally did not go through the three \r\nvolume set, I will not contest that only '123, or 7%, of the 1763 wars \r\ndocumented show a direct and blatantly obvious Theistic Religious \"MAJOR\r\n ISSUES AND OBJECTIVES\" cause or involvement.\r\n\r\nHowever, what the entries of each war do not address is that the \r\nmorality upon a great many of these wars is based is Theistic Religions \r\nin nature - from the Theism informed morality of the various governments\r\n and participants to justify the wars/military conflict - to - the \r\nanti-Religious Theism inherent in the advancement of many non-Theistic \r\nideologies resulting in wars/military-type actions.\r\n\r\nSo while not an overt/obvious cause of most wars since the 17th century,\r\n an implicit contributing cause is Theistic Religion and the morality \r\nexpressed therein - with emphasis upon the initiators of the war.\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; Nothing compares to the 100M-110M slaughtered by the atheists Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot,\r\n\r\nWell at least OP did not attempt to make the strawman that Hitler and the Nazi party was atheistic and not Really Good Christians.\r\n\r\nWith the usual reference to Stalinism/Communist Party of \r\nthe Soviet Union, the Communist Great Leap Forward and the Cultural \r\nRevolution in China, and the Khmer Rouge/Communist Party of Kampuchea in\r\n Cambodia, the argument is attempting to promote the often presented \r\n**ignorant and disingenuous fallacy of conflating/equivocating an** \r\n***anti-theistic ideology/movement***, that happens to have replaced \r\nTheism/Gods with a Theism-like ideology **with that of the stance of \r\natheism** (in which there are no tenets within atheism that inform \r\natheists to advance atheism).\r\n\r\nThe atrocities associated with Stalin'Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot, were \r\nnot atheistic (or used atheism) *for the sake of advancing the atheistic\r\n position*; their actions are designed/intended specifically to advance \r\nanother ideology and the resultant *anti-theistic* agenda was used as \r\nsupport for these other idiologies and not being or using atheism, or \r\nsupporting atheism, for the sake of advancing atheism.\r\n\r\nPlease do not conflate the anti-theism of the ideologies (that replace \r\n\"God(s)\" with the State) of which you presented a few examples:\r\n\r\n* Stalinism; Joseph Stalin\r\n\r\nStalin's anti-theistic policies were not to violently and/or forcibly \r\npropagating their atheistic worldview to support the advancement of \r\natheism for the sake of atheism, rather these anti-theist activities \r\nimplemented to support another ideology, you know Stalinism (for which \r\nthere is actual evidence).\r\n\r\nThis anti-theism was just one method to promote, by Stalin and his \r\ncadre, the governing and related policies implemented in the Soviet \r\nUnion which included: state terror, rapid industrialization, the theory \r\nof socialism in one country, a centralized state, collectivization of \r\nagriculture, cult of personality, and subordination of interests of \r\nforeign communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet \r\nUnion—deemed by Stalinism to be the most forefront vanguard party of \r\ncommunist revolution at the time. The presence of the cultural and \r\nsocietal ideology of Theistic Religions was seen as an obstacle to the \r\nimplementation of totalitarian socialism.\r\n\r\n* Communist China; Mao [Mao Zedong/Mao Tse-tung]\r\n\r\nThe actions of Chairman Mao (Mao Zedong/Mao Tse-tung), an \"atheist\" in \r\nan \"atheist\" government, that is held accountable for 49 to 78 million \r\ndeaths, was not for the advancement of atheism; rather the deaths (most \r\nby famine) were the result of the promotion of the Great Leap Forward \r\nand the Cultural Revolution, for example, to bring Communist China \r\neconomic and political position in line with that of the other world \r\nleaders.\r\n\r\n* Khmer Rouge/Communist Party of Kampuchea in Cambodia; Pol Pot\r\n\r\nSimilar to Mao's actions.\r\n\r\nMany governmental bodies, other groups and individuals, who happen to \r\nnot be based upon (or contain) a claim of some Divine Theistic mandate, \r\nhave pursued anti-theistic genocide and other violent atrocities in the \r\nname of some ideology (and let's not overlook the various Theistic \r\nregimes engaging in anti-theism based violence against other Theisms); \r\nbut unless you can show that *these actions are intended to support the \r\nadvancement of atheism for the sake of atheism*, rather than as a means \r\nto an end to support other purposes/ideologies/dogma, then the above \r\nquoted statement is a red herring and a strawman.\r\n\r\nHaving ranted, I will concede that any ideology has the potential to \r\nintrinsically be, or change into, a hyper-authoritarian government is \r\ncapable of producing large scale violence, murder, and death. \r\n\r\nThis seems like a good place for a famous quote:\r\n\r\n*Let the eye of vigilance never be closed.*  -- Thomas Jefferson\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; Nothing compares to the 100M-110M slaughtered by the atheists Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot, **and much less recently than the Crusades.**\r\n\r\nGood point OP, there has not really been any atrocities more recently than the Christian Crusades. /snort.\r\n\r\nBut using just Christianity let's take a look at the atrocities  - and, for fun (in the grossest most reprehensible sense) let's start with Christianity back in the good old days of the beginning when Christianity started to become popular.\r\n\r\nOP - review the events that solely occurred on command of church \r\nauthorities or were committed in the name of Christianity - and were \r\nbased, in large part or totality, upon Christian moral \r\ndogma/tenets/beliefs.  \r\n\r\nWarning, this is a long list:  [VICTIMS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH by \r\nKelsos](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/b7ixd6/christianity_does_not_deserve_more_hate_than/ejs6xlw/)\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; the track record of these 5 atheists demonstrated\r\n\r\n\"5\"??  \"Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and Pol Pot\"  hmmm... counting is hard. Who did I miss OP?\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; **Nothing** compares to the 100M-110M slaughtered by the atheists...\r\n\r\n\"Nothing\" you say?  With, for example, the great authoritarian God YHWH, the God that is in control and Sovereign, the Alpha and Omega, not a sparrow shall fall....., even if one accepts (for the sake of argument only), these are pussy numbers compared to the killing/murder by the God YHWH *by just one technique for killing/murder* - YHWH caused spontaneous abortion. \r\n\r\nYHWH, under which all things are set on their path in accordance with \r\nthe WILL and PURPOSE of God; where nothing happens without the expressed\r\n Will of YHWH, the Alpha and Omega, then the authoritarian regime of \r\nYHWH should be considered when discussion \"killing\" of humans in \r\naccordance with the Will and Direction of the authoritarian Leader \r\n(notwithstanding the non-evidential and non-credible claim of some \r\nChristians that God created humans directly).\r\n\r\nIt is estimated that [108 Billion people have been born \r\nalive/lived](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population). Actual \r\ncredible evidence also shows that 30 to 50% of all contemporary \r\nconception events end in spontaneous abortions (and that this percentage\r\n may have been higher historically with poorer nutrition, harsher \r\nenvironmental conditions, and less medical knowledge, for the woman to \r\ncarry the baby to term). Since Christianity (and other popular \r\nreligions) claims the Willful God of Everything - the Will of God \r\nresults in *God killing 46 Billion to 108 Billion human babies!* for the\r\n sake of God's Will where humans were specifically created to worship \r\nGod (talk about an oppressive narcissistic authoritarian ruling regime).\r\n  [Humans need to up their game to get God's killing \r\nnumbers!](https://i.imgur.com/x9dUvCu.jpg)","subreddit_name":"DebateAnAtheist","author":"TooManyInLitter"},{"body":"\u0026gt; What are some examples of actual wars where deaths occurred, actually involve religious motivation? \r\n\r\nI am going to take \"wars\" to mean 'group/organization pre-mediated violent action' - cause I have a recent post I can use! heh.\r\n\r\nI'll use Christianity as an example because I recently made a comment submission concerning events that solely occurred on command of church authorities or were committed in the name of Christianity - and were based, in large part or totality, upon Christian moral dogma/tenets/beliefs.  \r\n\r\nWarning, this is a long list:  [VICTIMS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH by Kelsos](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/b7ixd6/christianity_does_not_deserve_more_hate_than/ejs6xlw/)\r\n\r\nNow, to advance the idea/claim that most wars and death was caused by atheism and not by religion, there is an apologetic argument that states (roughly):\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; In the [Encyclopedia of Wars, Phillips and Axelrod](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516) document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 wars only 121/123 (7%) (and less than 2 percent of all people killed in warfare) have been classified to involve a religious cause, ....\r\n\r\nAnd on the face of this argument, it is a good one. However......\r\n\r\nFrom the  introduction to Encyclopedia of Wars:\r\n\r\n*Wars have always arisen, and arise today, from territorial disputes, military rivalries, conflicts of ethnicity, and strivings for commercial and economic advantage, and they have always depended on, and depend on today, pride, prejudice, coercion, envy, cupidity, competitiveness, and a sense of injustice.* ***But for much of the world before the 17th century, these “reasons” for war were explained and justified, at least for the participants, by religion.*** *Then, around the middle of the 17th century, Europeans began to conceive of war as a legitimate means of furthering the interests of individual sovereigns.* (Emphasis mine).\r\n\r\nFor the people who started war, many/most wars post 17th century, mostly were not started as a overt (more of this below) consequence of Theistic Religion. However, for the people fighting them, they, arguably, mostly have been based, at least in part, on Religion and Religious beliefs.\r\n\r\nIn the case of the oft used The Encyclopedia of Wars argument, the summary of the wars listed follows the format in this [IMAGE](https://imgur.com/a/3l6ch) (a screen shot of from my copy of The Encyclopedia of Wars). In the case of the specific war I presented to show the entry format, I picked one where a Theistic Religious cause was blatantly identified.  While I personally did not go through the three volume set, I will not contest that only '123, or 7%, of the 1763 wars documented show a direct and blatantly obvious Theistic Religious \"MAJOR ISSUES AND OBJECTIVES\" cause or involvement.\r\n\r\nHowever, what the entries of each war do not address is that the morality upon a great many of these wars is based is Theistic Religions in nature - from the Theism informed morality of the various governments and participants to justify the wars/military conflict - to - the anti-Religious Theism inherent in the advancement of many non-Theistic ideologies resulting in wars/military-type actions.\r\n\r\nSo while not an overt/obvious cause of most wars since the 17th century, an implicit contributing cause is Theistic Religion and the morality expressed therein - with emphasis upon the initiators of the war.","subreddit_name":"DebateAnAtheist","author":"TooManyInLitter"},{"body":"The idea that the Holocaust wasn't racially motivated is absurd. Demonstrating that Nazi Germany was majority Christian does not demonstrate that the Holocaust was a relgious undertaking. Would the Nazis spare secular or christian jews? The answer is obviously not, it was primarily a racial phenomenon. I'm not denying that christians can and do bad things.\r\n\r\nRegarding, the Islamic conquests of India, again they're likely on the higher side of things I did say as high as 80 million and not 80 million definitively. But they're most certainly higher than 50,000 and the fact that White didn't include it is proof of his bias in selection. The fact that you have to jump into apologetics and begin to defend against claims Islam I've never even made (as opposed to strictly defending White's scholarship) is indicative of your bias (considering your profile only ever seems to talk about Islam, this likely isn't very far off from the truth). Your point on the amount of people killed by Europeans and Americans isn't material to the topic of Religious Killings either; considering the fact that you got your [statistics from a Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_violence#Statistics), I'm going to remain incredulous to your claim about Islam and crime. Seeing as that wasn't the original endeavour of my post I frankly don't care to discuss it .\r\n\r\nThe entire population of India at the time of the conquests [was about 200 million;](https://books.google.co.za/books?id=HmBuAAAAMAAJ\u0026amp;redir_esc=y).  lower estimates of the death toll but it around 30 million (which would still put it first on the list). Rougly [100,000 slaves](https://www.britannica.com/event/Battle-of-Delhi-1398) were executed on the orders of Timur (a Sunni Muslim) but this event didn't even make the list. The fact that White leaves out the inumerable Islamic holy wars is indicative of his bias, you not only failed to refute this point but you had the gall to accuse me of being biased. In the *Encyclopedia of Wars by Alan Axelrod* roughly [half of all religious wars (66 out of 124)](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Volume-Library-History/dp/0816028516) were wage in the name of Islamc. According that same book, roughly 620,000 people were killed during the Armenian revolt against the Ottoman empire (this didn't make the cut either).","subreddit_name":"Whatifalthist","author":"Lilac_Catkins"},{"body":"https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516","subreddit_name":"PoliticalCompassMemes","author":"primal-instinct-854"},{"body":"[Here’s the source for the chart btw](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516)","subreddit_name":"PoliticalCompassMemes","author":"primal-instinct-854"},{"body":"[https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516)","subreddit_name":"StAugustine","author":"The_Spindrifter"},{"body":"OP, MickeyBarnyard, from your post history, it appears you identify as a Christian. Why do I bring this up? Because, to me (based upon inductive reasoning resulting from responding to many many Theists to defend their Theistic Religion via alleging that other ideologies do bad [which \u0026lt;arm waving\u0026gt; means that the Theistic Religion being protected is \"good\"]) you are attempting to somehow support, in yourmind at least, that *your* Theistic Religion is \"good\" and is nearly blameless for the egregious about of harm and pain \u0026amp; suffering from violence and atrocities in the world.\r\n\r\nNow in regard to your low effort attempt at disparaging atheism and Islam (which makes Christianity better somehow - am I right? - by arguing the fallacy of relative privation), it appears you are using a variant of the oft repeated but refuted argument based upon the listed *primary* reasons/issues that lead to war as listed in the Encyclopedia of Wars, by Phillips and Axelrod. \r\n\r\nThe usual argument is oft presented as the following (and I provided a source because I am not a lazy low-effort debater):\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;\u0026gt;\u0026gt; In the [Encyclopedia of Wars, Phillips and Axelrod](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516) document the history of recorded warfare, and from their list of 1763 wars only 121/123 (7%) (and less than 2 percent of all people killed in warfare) have been classified to involve a religious cause, ....\r\n\r\nAnd on the face of this argument, it is a good one. However......\r\n\r\nFrom the introduction to Encyclopedia of Wars:\r\n\r\n*Wars have always arisen, and arise today, from territorial disputes, \r\nmilitary rivalries, conflicts of ethnicity, and strivings for commercial\r\n and economic advantage, and they have always depended on, and depend on\r\n today, pride, prejudice, coercion, envy, cupidity, competitiveness, and\r\n a sense of injustice.* ***But for much of the world before the 17th \r\ncentury, these “reasons” for war were explained and justified, at least \r\nfor the participants, by religion.*** *Then, around the middle of the \r\n17th century, Europeans began to conceive of war as a legitimate means \r\nof furthering the interests of individual sovereigns.* \r\n\r\n[Emphasis mine].\r\n\r\nFor the people who started war, many/most wars post 17th century, mostly\r\n  were not started as a overt (more of this below) consequence of \r\nTheistic Religion. However, for the people fighting them, they, \r\narguably, mostly have been based, at least in part, on Religion and \r\nReligious beliefs.\r\n\r\nIn the case of the oft used The Encyclopedia of Wars argument, the \r\nsummary of the wars listed follows the format in this \r\n[IMAGE](https://imgur.com/a/3l6ch) (a screen shot of from my copy of The\r\n Encyclopedia of Wars). In the case of the specific war I presented to \r\nshow the entry format, I picked one where a Theistic Religious cause was\r\n blatantly identified.  While I personally did not go through my copy of\r\n the three volume set, I will not contest that only '123, or 7%, of the \r\n1763 wars documented show a direct and blatantly obvious Theistic \r\nReligious \"MAJOR ISSUES AND OBJECTIVES\" cause or involvement.\r\n\r\nHowever, what the entries of each war do not address is that the \r\nmorality upon a great many of these wars is based is Theistic Religions \r\nin nature - from the Theism informed morality of the various governments\r\n and participants to justify the wars/military conflict - to - the \r\nanti-Religious Theism inherent in the advancement of many non-Theistic \r\nideologies resulting in wars/military-type actions.\r\n\r\nSo while not an overt/obvious cause of most wars since the 17th century,\r\n an implicit contributing cause to war is Theistic Religion and the \r\nmorality expressed therein, a morality which informs leaders of their \r\nactions.\r\n\r\nAnd while not necessarily \"war,\" Theistic Religion, and ancillary \r\nmorality, has informed the actions of many that conduct atrocities. \r\n\r\nIn the link provided below, a listed of atrocious events that solely \r\noccurred on command of church authorities or were committed in the name \r\nof Christianity.\r\n\r\n* [VICTIMS OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH by \r\nKelsos](https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/b7ixd6/christianity_does_not_deserve_more_hate_than/ejs6xlw/)\r\n\r\nWarning, this is a long list.  Which I am sure that you, OP, will review with due diligence in order to make a credible rebuttal.\r\n\r\n\u0026gt;  For money, for greed, for women, for politics, for racial superiority, these concepts are all derived from a word outside of religion.\r\n\r\nOutside of Theistic Religion you say? Using your listed Theistic Religion of Christianity as an example OP:\r\n\r\n* Prosperity theology and the Holy Scripture from the Holy Bible which supports the Prosperity theology.  But you say, those are not True ~~Scotsman~~ Christians^TM , or are \"misinterpreting the Truth of the Gospels because these other verses say....\" - and I say if the bible can be used to both support, and not support, Prosperity theology (as well as moral positioning on other social issues), what good is the Bible as a reference for morality? \r\n\r\n* Misogyny, bigotry, slavery (including a foundational moral stance that women and children are property) based upon skin color and/or adherence to different Gods are hallmarks of both OT and NT moral verses and tenets.\r\n\r\n* The message of Jesus, as depicted in the narratives of the Gospels, taught an exclusionary (e.g., you are with YHWH, or you are against YHWH, and if you are against YHWH, things will be bad for you [including Holy Wars of Genocide; see Joshua 10] apocalyptical message where one literally lives for death against the non-evidential threat of post-death judgment and existence.","subreddit_name":"DebateAnAtheist","author":"TooManyInLitter"},{"body":"\u0026gt; I see religion as a threat to humanity, it oppresses us, commands absurd things, causes wars, kills people, tells them they're broken and there's only one cure, steals money from them, demands it. How am I wrong on my view, and why shouldn't I be an atheist anti-theist?\r\n\r\nThis reads more as anti-religion than anti-theism.  While a nit (as Theism usually results in Religion), would you still be an anti-theist if a religion included tenets and a morality that was opposed to the items (and other similar actions) that you listed?  \r\n\r\nSince this is a debate subreddit let me ask - can you support that the historical and contemporary collective negatives of Religion outweight the positives of Religion? Where the positives are, arguably, the study and understanding of nature, or natural philosophy (a precursor to Godless science), as nature is part of God's domain and to understand nature is to better understand God and God's Works; the accumulation of wealth and intelligent people to allow for the development of non-hand to mouth communities to explore and advance the arts, literature, natural philosophy/science, medicine, architecture, abstract morality and moral systems, war and the principles in fighting a war, etc., which is the foundation upon which contemporary society rests; a relatively codified morality that forms the basis for a common societal jurisprudence system; attempts to identify and answer the Big Questions of \"WHY?\"; etc. Keep in mind that we only have a actual example of long term history in which Theism and Religion is present; we do not have a long term history of a non-God/non-Religion history to use in order to a comparison of outcome.\r\n\r\nAnd for the great many historical and contemporary persons that have achieved great advances in knowledge - how do you address and apply anti-theism to their Theistic beliefs and Religious practices against the positive benefits the advancement of knowledge (with the associated increase in the human condition and standard of living) where this knowledge is not derived from some Religious text or belief?\r\n\r\nFinally, and specially related to the claim that Religion \"causes war,\" and which is an argument that has been presented in this forum a number of times - from the extensive list of violent actions and wars listed in the [Encyclopedia of Wars - 3 Volume Set](https://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Wars-Facts-Library-History/dp/0816028516/ref=sr_1_2?s=books\u0026amp;ie=UTF8\u0026amp;qid=1529869690\u0026amp;sr=1-2\u0026amp;keywords=Encyclopedia+of+Wars), of the chronicled 1,763 wars that have been waged over the course of human history, of these wars only 123 (about 7%) as being religious in nature as to a cause; and the remainder, 93%, have had secular non-religious causes. And, based upon the secular non-religious caused wars account for an overwhelming number of deaths compared to religious caused wars. With these statistics, how do you defend the claim that Religion \"causes war\" on any meaningful level compared to secular causes of wars?\r\n\r\nPlease keep in mind OP,  Disastrous Blueberry (heh, good name. [I picture Violet Beauregarde, from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, post bubble gum](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/1vmaNE5cfXU/hqdefault.jpg), rolling down a hill causing massive destruction), that the pro-Religious views (both explicit and implicit) represented in the above debate questions are not necessary supported nor condoned by atheists.  I am merely curious how you, a self-identified anti-Theist, responds.\r\n \r\n","subreddit_name":"DebateAnAtheist","author":"TooManyInLitter"}]}