Who Was Worse?

Arguably, three of the most notorious charlatans of all time were Jim Jones, Adolf Hitler and (the alleged) Jesus Christ.

Although Hitler did not lead a religious cult he was known to be devoutly Catholic and clearly let it be known that he had a mandate from God to carry out the elimination of Jews. He was also fully backed and financed by the Catholic Church.

But let's take a look at the facts:

Adolf Hitler was a distinguished soldier, fine dresser, a vegetarian a non smoker and drank very little. He was known to have been responsible for the killing of 6 million Jews during the holocaust.

Jim Jones was a charismatic, rapist who was responsible for the murder of over 900 of his followers.

(the alleged, by some) Jesus Christ was a low-paid hippie-like carpenter's laborer who, like Jones conned his followers into believing that he was the son of God. He was responsible for the persecution and murder of more than over 8 million of his deluded followers.

You be the judge. Who was the worst of the worst?

Yet if people actually followed the teachings of Jesus, we would have a saner society.

Why attribute the violence of those who deviate from Christ's teachings as being the fault of Christ?

Christ Himself says,

"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Christ "allegedly" stated such.

You have no proof that Christ uttered those words nor, existed for that matter.

Jim Jones said: "If we can't live in peace, then let's die in peace."

In each case, the words were uttered by a charismatic, manipulative cult leader.

And in each case, the words are some of the most gut-wrenching, morbid disturbing nonsense ever to have been uttered.

Except that in Jones's case, the words were no more than woeful speculation.

The words from Christ were no less than morbid, fear-mongering lies.

The Incarnate Truth does not lie.

Rather, to deny The Incarnate Truth is to say that not even a type or shadow of The Truth is present in creation.

If you truly knew who Christ is, you would have no doubt. Being that The Truth is revealed to us, we are not speaking of things that we ourselves are not witnesses to.

I can see plain as day that God is everywhere present and fills all things. How could I deny my Lord and my God? The Incarnate Truth is revealed in the things that are made, for the things that are made are unified to His flesh. The Spirit of Truth clearly gives life to creation.

The Supreme Being is God. If you say there is no supreme being, you are denying that there is even reality.

The world has already judged. Jesus has been worshipped and revered all over the world for 2,000+ years. Have you not heard?

I've travelled the world, and lived in more than 12 countries. Most people do not know who Jones or Hitler was. But they all know Jesus.

No one but deluded western idiots count Jesus as among the worst. The world counts Him as the best. His name has become synonymous with virtue and kindness.

There are houses of worship to Him on every continent on Earth, and countless works of art dedicated to him, and millions who have braved death rather than deny Him. Your question immediately paints you as  clueless dolt.

But we both know you didn't care about an answer. All you wanted was to make the insult. Like a moron spray painting an insult on a church wall, only the insult matters to you.

But like the spray painting idiots, you're always flummoxed as to why everyone see you as a clueless dolt.

Did your grafitti soothe the bitterness in your soul? Did you get emotional release? No. As your obsession to keep posting nonsense like this will force you to keep embarrassing yourself.

Do another "whose worse of the worse" about the Black Widow, Jezabel, and Mother Theresa, that should be interesting. Lol.

I totally agree with your choice of Jesus being the least bad of the three.

Even though he was responsible for many more deaths than the other two put together he has certainly gained much popularity since his whole image was created approximately 700 years ago.

And we should not disregard the fact that there is one fundamental difference between Christ and the other two charlatans.

The other two actually existed.

You have once again failed to address the topic.

Preaching gratuitous, promotional hallucinogenic untruths is hardly becoming of intelligent discussion, is it? 

So one of your options is fake, and that fake option is the one you chose? Lol.

Are you trying to make people take you less seriously?

If you made no such choice then would you like to contribute to the topic and say who you think is the worst?

If I didn't why did you lie?

I did. You must have missed it with your obtuse glasses on. Here, I'll post it again just for you Pedro.

Did that get past your obtuse glasses?

Your uncharitable attitude is not conducive to intelligent conversation. Rather, it stops conversation all together.

That is what nihilism does, it is the doctrine of negation. 

I have never indicated that I am posting here for charitable reasons, nor to win a popularity contest for that matter.

What I do is expose the reality of religion through sound reasoning and facts.

That is certainly your pretense, but being that your heart is not pure regarding this matter, you do not see clearly.

Charity is work that purifies the heart and acts as a bond of peace.

Charity is like giving and helping people out hey? 

Is That what you mean moe moe.  

If what I said was a pretense would you mind expanding on that and explain exactly what you are talking about?

The pretense is that you expose the reality of religion.

The thing is, you have not been educated by the church, so you don't really understand what we believe.

Orthodox Christianity is fundamentally Truth worship. That being the case, when the faith is put into observance and practice, it naturally makes a more rational and loving person.

We don't want problems with anybody, we just want to practice our faith in peace. There are still a lot of common work we can do, like taking care of orphans and widows, feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, etc. 

I can understand that however the problem is that religion does have a problem....

....a problem with society in that religious institutions pray on the naive, weak and gullible to promote an ugly agenda of absolute lies and fear.

It is only in recent times that Christian Church has tried to put across an image of being compassionate and charitable.

By and large most people can see through such corny hypocricy.

For example, Mother Theresa was placed on a pedestal by Catholic and other denominational Churches as a selfless worker who helped thousands of poor children.

In reality it has been revealed that she was in fact a self-serving hard, sour bitch who used hardly any of the massive donations given to her to feed and clothe the poor. More than 80% of donations were spent on erecting "schools and Churches" to lure innocent children into the Christian faith.

Again, you are surmising (and wrong) about my background.

About as wrong and surmising as religion is.

There is no such thing as worshiping truth.

And there is certainly nothing at all truthful about religion.

Let the facts speak for themselves.

I have presented arguments that have been fully backed by reason and sound evidence and so far, none of that evidence has been overturned.

Religion has proven itself to be no more than a means for those who are deceitful and evil to manipulate those who are weak for their on self-serving devious ends.

Religion has always been criticised in a bad light and religious followers will always be seen for what they are: radical outcasts and misfits from normal, law-abiding, decent society.

You don't understand our faith, so you can't be talking from a position of knowledge.

The caricature of my faith you present does not match the reality I witness.

I understand your faith completely and it is repulsive.

It is those who are naive, gullible, weak and vulnerable who made to understand what they want to hear.

Is racism repulsive Sal? Mopac doesn't even know you and he has correctly ascertained that your act is pretense.

So you find his faith repulsive. Is racism repulsive Sal? Does your moral indignation cover virulent racism? Or is it only faith that you find repulsive?

See Sal. You aren't anonymous here, some people here know you.

I don't believe you, and I doubt you could prove your assertion that you understand my faith.