[Sinfest] Appalachia II
(sinfest.xyz)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (59)
sorted by:
So making religious excuses for your despicable actions makes those actions better? When I pillage a village because I admit it is because I want to rob them of their wealth it is bad but when I pillage a village and rob them of their wealth and excuse it away by saying they're dirty heathens it is better? That would make ISIS the most moral people on Earth.
They always had justification. Acquiring wealth and valuable farmland. And as the Christian clergy was so moral that they hoarded immense wealth they were the prime target for Norse raiders.
Yes because it shows that you need an excuse to do it instead of it being so normalized that you don't have an ounce of hesitation to even question doing it in first place.
Like, you see how a random person needed God to justify it before he went and started committing evil to be different from someone who just did it on his own, right. It doesn't make either good, it just makes one worse than the other.
For the people we're talking about violence is so normalized that they don't question their actions in the slightest. I'm not sure if you are aware how normal extreme violence was during that time.
Yes. One is honest, the other is hypocritical. Because in the end they both did it for the same exact reasons. Be it greed, rage or simply bowing down to authority.
And that's where we seem to be of very different opinions. I take honest evil over hypocritical and deceitful evil any day of the week.
On the one side you had the Norse who pillaged and conquered themselves for their own greedy gains. On the other side you have an organised religion who pillaged and conquered to live in disgusting luxury but manipulated others into doing it for them while shrouding themselves in moral superiority.
The Church spilled more European blood than probably any other group. And don't deceive yourself into thinking that they ever did it for noble reasons.
88% and 95% are basically guaranteed when you roll it, but 95% is still a bigger number and you'd probably pick those two if the option was presented. Which means that difference clearly means something
Alternatively, one is naturally evil and the other is tempted to be.
You seem to be really mad at the Church itself, and don't realize that its not comparable to the Viking rank and fodder's willingness to commit evil on their own.
Unless the Vikings were doing it for their Gods in which case the Christians were still the lesser evil because the Christian God is pretty clear in not doing that stuff that the corrupt Church was pushing, whereas the Viking ones tell them to straight up do most of it.
Sure. A more violent society that is capable of defending themselves is preferable to a society that slaves away for a corrupt clergy class while getting pillaged.
The Christian God is pretty clear in not doing that stuff? So basically only the Amish, Mennonites, Jehovas Witness and other pacifist variations of Christianity are real Christians? The Church despite being the very foundation of Christianity aren't real Christians? The first testament isn't real Christianity?
Let's not pretend that Christianity hasn't been extremely violent for most of its existence. Christianity, Islam and Judaism are all the same. Just tailored to different people.
You don't know anything about ISIS, then. They've never run apologetics for what they do.
We're not talking about "apologetics" we're talking about justification.
'Apologetics' is 'justification. It's a huge branch of Catholic theology.
Then his comment makes even less sense. Considering that ISIS quite openly justifies their actions with the Quran.