Religion Being Winsome and Nice Won’t Cut It Anymore, Christian

[Abhorsen]

The idea that people cannot be won over is frankly dumb and self defeating. Seriously, I was raised as a leftist. I'm now an AnCap. There are so many examples of people changing their minds on things.

Christianity hasn't won people over recently because it fights stupid losing fights, and it stopped evangelizing. Take a page out of the Mormons book, start going door to door. As for the stupid losing fights, the big one is gay marriage. What other people do shouldn't have been the business of the churches: it should have been fine, go be sinful, but leave us outta it. In contrast, it's fight for abortion was super successful. It knew it was in for a long haul, ID'd a problem that was their and everyone's business, and knew how to win and fought to win that. The trans kid stuff is a great opportunity to fight this, but don't get sucked into blaming trans adults leaving kids alone. Deal with problem that harm you, not problems others have with their own lives.

Harmful problems come with a group of harmed people who will always be angry about X. In contrast, people harming themselves won't, all you'll do is alienate people sympathetic to those with that problem.

 

[King Arts]

The idea that people cannot be won over is frankly dumb and self defeating. Seriously, I was raised as a leftist. I'm now an AnCap. There are so many examples of people changing their minds on things.

Christianity hasn't won people over recently because it fights stupid losing fights, and it stopped evangelizing. Take a page out of the Mormons book, start going door to door. As for the stupid losing fights, the big one is gay marriage. What other people do shouldn't have been the business of the churches: it should have been fine, go be sinful, but leave us outta it. In contrast, it's fight for abortion was super successful. It knew it was in for a long haul, ID'd a problem that was their and everyone's business, and knew how to win and fought to win that. The trans kid stuff is a great opportunity to fight this, but don't get sucked into blaming trans adults leaving kids alone. Deal with problem that harm you, not problems others have with their own lives.

Harmful problems come with a group of harmed people who will always be angry about X. In contrast, people harming themselves won't, all you'll do is alienate people sympathetic to those with that problem.

There is a lot wrong with what you said but what?
You want Christians to go and say go be sinful have fun? Are you joking lol?
Umm you can make the argument that we should not get involved into the legislative government but if you are unable to accept something is a sin and that you have to avoid that sin because God commands it, then Christianity is not for you. To be saved requires more than saying "I believe in Jesus." You have to turn away from your sin and accept and obey God.

 

[Abhorsen]

You want Christians to go and say go be sinful have fun? Are you joking lol?

No. I think christians should tell people who are sinful they are being bad. But not use government when the only person being harmed is the adult doing it. I clearly phrased this badly.

Basically, you don't stop sin by physically preventing it, as the person still wants to do it, and the desire itself is still sinful (at least in Catholicism, IDK Protestantism much). What you can stop by physically preventing it is the harm it would cause to others (abortion being a classic example here). So if two adults have gay sex, or want to have a civil marriage, it's not the Church's business (other than telling them don't, and kicking them out if they do and are members).

 

[Bigking321]

All I know is that Christians were 100% right about the slippery slope.

And here we are where objecting to grown near naked men looking like demons dancing in front of kids as a school trip is considered bad by democrats.

We have fallen hard and fast. More like a slippery cliff.

 

[Syzygy]

Your thoughts, ladies and gentle of the Sietch?

Impassioned exaggerations aside, I do agree; Christianity is incredibly defanged and impotent. A more concerted effort among communities spearheaded by the church to oppose progressive trends would do a great deal in stemming the rising tide, especially if practitioners genuinely adhere to their faith. Sad to say, but piety in the west, and particularly in America, suffered tremendously from ongoing fractures that dilutes it almost beyond recognition as anyone with the will and means can slap Christian elements on whatever they're peddling to the masses without consequence to themselves yet grievous harm to the faith. Catholic bias coming through, but I do believe immutable doctrine prevents the average joe from making things up as he goes (and yes, the Catholic church is struggling to uphold its own doctrine, much as I am ashamed to admit). The dam broke with rampant secularism pushing church and religion out of the public eye and into a corner that shrinks with every generation. A diminishment that many, clergyman and laymen alike, did little to oppose. No one will take it seriously if its followers don't.

Christianity needs teeth, it needs to be unashamed of what it is and straightforward on what it represents. Most importantly, it needs to be uncompromising. Watering down the faith is a disservice to the church and the people it attempts to convert. I do not advocate wholesale violence. However, a harsh response to genuine attacks on adherents - not church property, or scripture, but the living people - is absolutely necessary. I do not like the immediate lethality of Islamic retaliation, but I won't deny how effective a deterrent their responses can be. Muslims are not easy targets, and the whole world damn well knows.

We are likely due to have another religious awakening in the 2040s, my money your seeing the foundation of that movement happening right before your eyes.

I have no doubt about that. I do wonder whether it will change anything though; most spiritual revivals bubble up into the cultural zeitgeist and quickly pop. Hopefully the general population will recognize it as a genuine response to very real concerns rather than pearl-clutching over imaginary fears, though previous scares weren't nearly so imaginary as most would like to believe; symptoms trends don't just spontaneously manifest.

I don't know what to think. we are to give ourselves willingly to death yet suicide is considered dishonorable...I just I DON'T UNDERSTAND!!!

It's a common misunderstanding, one frequently perpetuated by christians themselves, that is a consequence of the aforementioned dilution. Martyrdom isn't suicide, it is adherence to faith against all opposition when no other option is feasible, and that includes violent rebellion. "Turn the other cheek" is not a command to lay down and die, much as snide progressives and edgy atheists would love you to believe. It is a commandment of restraint; you don't flay a man, much as one might like to, over a non-lethal attack. "Thou shalt not kill" isn't a wholesale repudiation of killing, it is a denial of unjustified murder. Everything dies, the world is fallen, and so is man; killing isn't just a consequence, it's an expectation. The idea is to limit it whenever possible.

What churches need to do is throw large celebrations that DRAW people in.

It certainly helps. I've attended plenty of festivals, both recently and during childhood, organized by churches and put together by parishioners. I have noticed a lack compared to what I remember, but that hardly surprises me. The last twenty years has done a tremendous job of isolating people, and I mean cultural trends before the arrival of covid, which ironically helped spur some communities to counteract that isolation.

What other people do shouldn't have been the business of the churches: it should have been fine, go be sinful, but leave us outta it.

I agree with this, and don't. The subject itself is complicated, and I for one advocate the freedom of others to do as they please, even if I consider it a grievous sin. The problem that arises is when the majority decides it is no longer a sin, or even oddity, but a virtue to be celebrated. Religion relinquished so much of its influence that many of the more extreme vices sprung out of the fertile fields of secularism and spread without opposition. Now those same sins the church decided were to be shut out and left alone for the sake of tolerance and freedom are banging down the doors to be let in, and not out of any heartfelt desire to convert.

For the life of me, I can't understand how anyone would think subverting religious institutions by morphing them into organized secularism is a good idea, on both ends of the conflict. Demanding to be let into a church that actively scorns you is like an animal forcing its way into a slaughterhouse; the whole point of leaving was to live your life. Arguments against it always fall into the paradox of religious power. Religion is somehow the most powerful force in the world that suppresses human freedom, whist simultaneously a silly superstition no one genuinely believes anymore. It is an existential threat that holds no power outside of its own doors.

 

[DarthOne]

The FBI can't imagine where all of this anti-Catholic bias is coming from

The FBI can't imagine where all of this anti-Catholic bias is coming from

Back when an FBI memo regarding “Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology” showed up, Christopher Wray expressed what seemed to be the appropriate level of shock, alo...

hotair.com

Back when an FBI memo regarding "Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology" showed up, Christopher Wray expressed what seemed to be the appropriate level of shock, along with promises to do better. At the time, he told the House Judiciary Committee that he was "aghast," and that "we do not conduct investigations based on religious affiliation or practices, full stop."

That sounded pretty good, right? Maybe it was just one rogue office in Richmond where that was going on. A bit of retraining and updates to the Bureau's standard practices might just get us back on track. It sounded like a plan. Of course, now Wray is going to need to explain how it was that the FBI recruited an "undercover employee" to develop "sources" among the clergy and leadership of the Catholic Church. We learned this from Jim Jordan this week and a subpoena was quickly issued to Wray to compel his "full cooperation." (National Review)

As part of its effort to identify extremists in the Catholic Church, the FBI recruited at least one "undercover employee" to "develop sources among the clergy and church leadership," Representative Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) revealed Monday.
Jordan, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, issued a subpoena demanding FBI director Christopher Wray testify and provide more information to Congress about the federal agency's intelligence-gathering initiative targeting Catholic Americans.
"This shocking information reinforces our need for all responsive documents, and the Committee is issuing a subpoena to you to compel your full cooperation," Jordan claimed in the letter.

One rogue director at a field office might be understandable. But two? Well, I suppose… maybe? Still, this is looking more like a feature than a bug at this point.

To be clear, if the FBI receives specific, credible information that a church (of any type) is being used by members to plan or commit crimes, then by all means they should be able to investigate. That would apply to Catholic or Protestant churches, synagogues, or mosques.

But that's not what the FBI has been up to by the sound of all of this. It seems as if a rationale is being put forward saying that congregants at a particular set of churches are "more likely" to be brewing extremist plots based on the religion they practice. Based on that alone, the Bureau would start fishing around to see if they could come up with a crime to charge.

This is simply inexcusable but it's also very reminiscent of how liberal prosecutors have been handling the affairs of the Trump family and business empire. 'Show us the family or business and we'll find you a crime if we dig around long enough.' This is more blatant banana republic insanity. To see it happening in America in the modern era is beyond alarming.

The choice of targets also raises additional questions. I'm old enough to remember when any suggestion of investigating activities at mosques that appeared to be funneling money to ISIS was decried as being racist, xenophobic, and every other label in the book. You weren't supposed to make generalizations about Muslims or any other group (which is obviously true). But it would appear that at some point the script was flipped. "Radical" Catholics who preferred to attend traditional masses held in Latin are fair game. And just for the record, I say this as a Protestant.


The housecleaning at the FBI can't start soon enough. We're still getting some whistleblowers coming forward from inside the Bureau, so the agency should remain salvageable, or at least I hope so. But the current situation is simply unacceptable.

Everyone is focused on them targeting traditionalists but what they are likely doing as well is curating and grooming leftists within organizations like the Catholic Church. Collecting info on people who should be purged and who should be assisted in moving up the ranks, essentially like agents of influence. They want all major institutions to be run by leftists, so they won't question the major policies impacting the congregation. Such as inflation, mass migration, and racial and gender identity politics.

This is why it's not enough to be neutral. Lots of people think they go to a "good church" because they don't talk about politics. But they should be explicitly anti-leftist in order to support and prepare them for the issues they are dealing with. If you go to a church that isn't addressing this it's time to have a talk with them or find a new church

 

[ATP]

The FBI can't imagine where all of this anti-Catholic bias is coming from

The FBI can't imagine where all of this anti-Catholic bias is coming from

Back when an FBI memo regarding “Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology” showed up, Christopher Wray expressed what seemed to be the appropriate level of shock, alo...

hotair.com

Everyone is focused on them targeting traditionalists but what they are likely doing as well is curating and grooming leftists within organizations like the Catholic Church. Collecting info on people who should be purged and who should be assisted in moving up the ranks, essentially like agents of influence. They want all major institutions to be run by leftists, so they won't question the major policies impacting the congregation. Such as inflation, mass migration, and racial and gender identity politics.

This is why it's not enough to be neutral. Lots of people think they go to a "good church" because they don't talk about politics. But they should be explicitly anti-leftist in order to support and prepare them for the issues they are dealing with. If you go to a church that isn't addressing this it's time to have a talk with them or find a new church

Just so.
Soviets send their agents to american catholics seminaries before WW2.
Now soviet union is lead from Washington,that is all.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

The FBI can't imagine where all of this anti-Catholic bias is coming from

The FBI can't imagine where all of this anti-Catholic bias is coming from

Back when an FBI memo regarding “Violent Extremists in Radical-Traditionalist Catholic Ideology” showed up, Christopher Wray expressed what seemed to be the appropriate level of shock, alo...

hotair.com

Everyone is focused on them targeting traditionalists but what they are likely doing as well is curating and grooming leftists within organizations like the Catholic Church. Collecting info on people who should be purged and who should be assisted in moving up the ranks, essentially like agents of influence. They want all major institutions to be run by leftists, so they won't question the major policies impacting the congregation. Such as inflation, mass migration, and racial and gender identity politics.

This is why it's not enough to be neutral. Lots of people think they go to a "good church" because they don't talk about politics. But they should be explicitly anti-leftist in order to support and prepare them for the issues they are dealing with. If you go to a church that isn't addressing this it's time to have a talk with them or find a new church

I've been arguing this. The issue is that (at least in American Conservative churches) sex is something shameful that should only exist for childbirth and even then it should be not spoken of except in shadows (We freak out over puberty for crying out loud) my parents went as far as to say (paraphrased mind you) that nature will take over and kids will learn this stuff on their own. this was in spite of the fact that when puberty started affecting me they started talking about this stuff on their own terms at their own pace because they knew that if they didn't talk about it to me...other potentially bad influences will.

So frankly I fear that we will see conservatives in America hide and cover their eyes and ears to all the things going on around them and then wonder why no one below the age of 30 steps foot inside a church anymore and why all these kids are getting these satanic ideas.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

I've been arguing this. The issue is that (at least in American Conservative churches) sex is something shameful that should only exist for childbirth and even then it should be not spoken of except in shadows (We freak out over puberty for crying out loud) my parents went as far as to say (paraphrased mind you) that nature will take over and kids will learn this stuff on their own. this was in spite of the fact that when puberty started affecting me they started talking about this stuff on their own terms at their own pace because they knew that if they didn't talk about it to me...other potentially bad influences will.

So frankly I fear that we will see conservatives in America hide and cover their eyes and ears to all the things going on around them and then wonder why no one below the age of 30 steps foot inside a church anymore and why all these kids are getting these satanic ideas.

I will say that in my family and my church we have a fair number of youth, teenagers, and college students.

I don't buy that the church is losing wholesale to culture. I've seen a lot of young adults coming to find something that's solid in the Church. They are desperate for it.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

I will say that in my family and my church we have a fair number of youth, teenagers, and college students.

I don't buy that the church is losing wholesale to culture. I've seen a lot of young adults coming to find something that's solid in the Church. They are desperate for it.

Been the opposite case in my neighborhood.

 

[Bacle]

I think Deism is likely to be on the rise, but organized religion...is still just another bureaucracy that takes itself to seriously.

The divine cannot be confined to any one faith or creed, nor can morality.

Christianity needs teeth, it needs to be unashamed of what it is and straightforward on what it represents.

Frankly, Christianity has done some pretty shameful things in the name of 'convert or die' operations, it's just that's always excused as an 'act outside the church', even with official church approval being a known historical fact.

Christianity is not any more righteous than Islam is in it's conquests of other groups in the name of 'convert or die', it just has better PR about them.

 

[S'task]

If your country had a major presence of a national church of a foreign country which yours is at war with, and it did such things, what would you propose be done about this institution?

You do realize that of ALL THE COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD the US is actually the MOST QUALIFIED to comment on this?

The answer is quite simple: you tell them to break off their relationship with state church of your enemy, allowing them to reorganize as their own thing with their own governing body clearly separate from the foreign one and keep their property. Then, maybe in a hundred years or so you you allow them to associate with the old foreign church but still maintain their general separation.

Ideally, they'll do this voluntarily, as so not to place parishioners in a situation where they have to face divided loyalties.

 

[Marduk]

You do realize that of ALL THE COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD the US is actually the MOST QUALIFIED to comment on this?

The answer is quite simple: you tell them to break off their relationship with state church of your enemy, allowing them to reorganize as their own thing with their own governing body clearly separate from the foreign one and keep their property. Then, maybe in a hundred years or so you you allow them to associate with the old foreign church but still maintain their general separation.

Ideally, they'll do this voluntarily, as so not to place parishioners in a situation where they have to face divided loyalties.

Yeah, it was a pretty similar situation.
From what we are hearing, doing it voluntarily is not an option when it comes to those who didn't do it already, and also there are some differences between how Orthodox and Protestant hierarchies work.

Ukraine has its own Orthodox church since a long time, who went fully independent after the fall of relations with Russia and in turn problems with Russia based based and controlled patriarchate. The fact that it got an ok from Constantinople to do so has caused a schism between Constantinople and Moscow.

And the American situation apparently had its own controversy over church land ownership:

By the end of the Revolution, the Anglican Church was disestablished in all states where it had previously been a privileged religion. Thomas Buckley examines the debates in the Virginia legislature and local governments that culminated in the repeal of laws granting government property to the Episcopal Church (during the war Anglicans began using the terms "Episcopal" and "Episcopalian" to identify themselves). The Baptists took the lead in disestablishment, with support from Thomas Jefferson and, especially, James Madison. Virginia was the only state to seize property belonging to the established Episcopal Church. The fight over the sale of the glebes, or church lands, demonstrated the strength of certain Protestant groups in the political arena when united for a course of action.[11]

And speaking of, here's another example of how hard the Moscow patriarchate is going into the war:

 

[King Arts]

I think Deism is likely to be on the rise, but organized religion...is still just another bureaucracy that takes itself to seriously.

The divine cannot be confined to any one faith or creed, nor can morality.

But this makes no sense. Religions have vastly different moralities and I could give an example. Either one is right or one is wrong.

 

[Cherico]

But this makes no sense. Religions have vastly different moralities and I could give an example. Either one is right or one is wrong.

I think time has shown that religion has its place in society.

Take New England, it was started and remained for generations a theocratic ethnostate. It was hoped that a decline of religion would make the people of the region stop being control freak kill joys who seem to be offended by the idea of some one actually enjoying themselve.

Instead what happened was the creation of Social justice and we learned the hard way that religion wasn't what caused to region to be so smug and controlling it was the only thing acting as a restraining bolt on their utopian delusions.

 

[King Arts]

I think time has shown that religion has its place in society.

Take New England, it was started and remained for generations a theocratic ethnostate. It was hoped that a decline of religion would make the people of the region stop being control freak kill joys who seem to be offended by the idea of some one actually enjoying themselve.

Instead what happened was the creation of Social justice and we learned the hard way that religion wasn't what caused to region to be so smug and controlling it was the only thing acting as a restraining bolt on their utopian delusions.

I was not making some bigger point when I said that to Bacle, I was just being an autist about his specific comment

"The divine cannot be confined to any one faith or creed, nor can morality."

I am saying this sentence does not make sense. Let's take Islam for example

Under Islam the most moral man for all times and all places married a 9 year old girl. Under Islamic morality marrying 9 year olds is not morally wrong, our morality says otherwise. Obviously only one can be correct. If Islam is true and Muhammed was a real prophet then they are correct, if however we are right and he was not a real prophet then they are wrong.

 

[Cherico]

I was not making some bigger point when I said that to Bacle, I was just being an autist about his specific comment

"The divine cannot be confined to any one faith or creed, nor can morality."

I am saying this sentence does not make sense. Let's take Islam for example

Under Islam the most moral man for all times and all places married a 9 year old girl. Under Islamic morality marrying 9 year olds is not morally wrong, our morality says otherwise. Obviously only one can be correct. If Islam is true and Muhammed was a real prophet then they are correct, if however we are right and he was not a real prophet then they are wrong.

Not insulting you or saying your all in the wrong.

But recent history has shown that assholes are going to asshole religon or not and in fact religion acts a restraining bolt keeping certain people from going full tilt crazy.

 

[King Arts]

Not insulting you or saying your all in the wrong.

But recent history has shown that assholes are going to asshole religon or not and in fact religion acts a restraining bolt keeping certain people from going full tilt crazy.

Oh this I agree with. The puritans were just as insufferable assholes as their modern day New England types. The Virginians at least were pretty chill they were just here to make money and get a better life.

I don't know if there is some pathological English gene that makes them insufferable assholes who have to moralize everywhere and have to act holier than thou.

 

[Syzygy]

Frankly, Christianity has done some pretty shameful things in the name of 'convert or die' operations, it's just that's always excused as an 'act outside the church', even with official church approval being a known historical fact.

Christianity is not any more righteous than Islam is in it's conquests of other groups in the name of 'convert or die', it just has better PR about them.

I won't deny Christianity as a whole has done terrible things. Those wrongdoings should be acknowledged. However, I would like for people to hold it, and the Catholic church as an institution specifically, accountable for transgressions it actually committed. Pop-cult history like Christianity holding back progress (it was the major contributor in preserving knowledge into the Renaissance, many scientific theories were developed by monks and priests in search of God, and the advent of modern education came about thanks to the theocratic organization of the Catholic church serving as foundation for universities), the inquisition and witch trials (most hunts were formed at the local level - except for the HRE, which had a hilarious number of very lethal witch hunts - and the inquisitions were more interested in policing christians, whose cases they scrutinized to prevent abuse of their own parishes, to the point where the Spanish Inquisition went out of its way to explicitly dismiss any evidence produced through torture), and religious wars (I have fucking had it with people citing the Crusades as proof of evil christians out to destroy poor, oppressed minorities; the only crusade I would argue was even remotely unjustified was the northern crusades, which highlights the irony of most aggression being directed at Europeans) makes it nearly impossible to engage in good faith without being forced to grovel for uncommitted sins. I am so incredibly tired of people deciding that not only is religion bad, but Christianity in particular is the epitome of evil organized religion.

And don't you fucking dare degrade Christianity to the same level as Islam. The disingenuous bastards that paint them as two sides of the same coin would do well to remember which they lived under for the majority of their life and really consider how alike the two are. Remind me just how far the Christian "empire" spread by right of conquest? Bear in mind, I will laugh at you if the Roman empire's collapse is put forth as an example christian conquest. Let's not forget where Christianity originated and further consider it hardly exists in the land it came from thanks in no small part to the Islamic conquest. Islam certainly wasn't content with staying in the middle east. It spread, by the point of a sword, from India to Spain in little more than a century. Islam wasn't just meandering about the periphery of various kingdoms in the pre-modern world, it was knocking hard enough to bring down the door. It was a stones throw away from both seats of christian power (Rome, Constantinople) and dominated Spain for seven hundred years. All the while it actively encouraged piracy through its domination of the Mediterranean to ensure non-Muslim slaves (from Europe and Africa alike, the latter of which was so far beyond brutal it makes the Atlantic slave trade look like a school field trip) continued flowing into the Islamic empires for nearly a millennium. People tend to forget the Crusades were reactionary, lasted two hundred years, and at most accomplished a greater unification of Europe, if that. And that's barely scratching the surface of Islam's geopolitical scope without diving into the Quran or, heaven help you, the hadiths. I will write as many essays online as I must, if not to convince you then to point out the continual tide of slop shoveled into the trough that is our modern educational system the average joe regurgitates as fact.

 

[Bacle]

I won't deny Christianity as a whole has done terrible things. Those wrongdoings should be acknowledged. However, I would like for people to hold it, and the Catholic church as an institution specifically, accountable for transgressions it actually committed. Pop-cult history like Christianity holding back progress (it was the major contributor in preserving knowledge into the Renaissance, many scientific theories were developed by monks and priests in search of God, and the advent of modern education came about thanks to the theocratic organization of the Catholic church serving as foundation for universities), the inquisition and witch trials (most hunts were formed at the local level - except for the HRE, which had a hilarious number of very lethal witch hunts - and the inquisitions were more interested in policing christians, whose cases they scrutinized to prevent abuse of their own parishes, to the point where the Spanish Inquisition went out of its way to explicitly dismiss any evidence produced through torture), and religious wars (I have fucking had it with people citing the Crusades as proof of evil christians out to destroy poor, oppressed minorities; the only crusade I would argue was even remotely unjustified was the northern crusades, which highlights the irony of most aggression being directed at Europeans) makes it nearly impossible to engage in good faith without being forced to grovel for uncommitted sins. I am so incredibly tired of people deciding that not only is religion bad, but Christianity in particular is the epitome of evil organized religion.

And don't you fucking dare degrade Christianity to the same level as Islam. The disingenuous bastards that paint them as two sides of the same coin would do well to remember which they lived under for the majority of their life and really consider how alike the two are. Remind me just how far the Christian "empire" spread by right of conquest? Bear in mind, I will laugh at you if the Roman empire's collapse is put forth as an example christian conquest. Let's not forget where Christianity originated and further consider it hardly exists in the land it came from thanks in no small part to the Islamic conquest. Islam certainly wasn't content with staying in the middle east. It spread, by the point of a sword, from India to Spain in little more than a century. Islam wasn't just meandering about the periphery of various kingdoms in the pre-modern world, it was knocking hard enough to bring down the door. It was a stones throw away from both seats of christian power (Rome, Constantinople) and dominated Spain for seven hundred years. All the while it actively encouraged piracy through its domination of the Mediterranean to ensure non-Muslim slaves (from Europe and Africa alike, the latter of which was so far beyond brutal it makes the Atlantic slave trade look like a school field trip) continued flowing into the Islamic empires for nearly a millennium. People tend to forget the Crusades were reactionary, lasted two hundred years, and at most accomplished a greater unification of Europe, if that. And that's barely scratching the surface of Islam's geopolitical scope without diving into the Quran or, heaven help you, the hadiths. I will write as many essays online as I must, if not to convince you then to point out the continual tide of slop shoveled into the trough that is our modern educational system the average joe regurgitates as fact.

I see the actions against Native Americans, Norse, and other 'pagan/heathen' groups in the New World and other places under guise of 'converting them' doesn't really seem to actually factor into your thinking on why people have problems with Christianity.

What Christianity did in the New World is why I say it is no more righteous than Islam when it comes to 'convert or die' actions.