SPQR
I agree, in recent years most terrorist violence has been perpetrated in the name of Islam. When I was a child growing up in the UK most terrorist violence was committed by Irish Catholics. It doesn’t mean the Irish are congenital criminals or Catholicism is a religion of violence.

LEGO/luciferase
Yes, Christians follow the teaching of Jesus, but as I pointed out , not all Jesus’ sayings were pacifist. Christians accept both Old and New Testaments as scripture – the church rejected as heresy Marcion’s hypothesis that Christians should reject the Old Testament long ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism

Much in the OT appears to endorse violence. The Church, and Christian cultures, have historically used these texts to justify violence against other Christian denominations and other religions. This doesn’t make Christianity a religion of violence, or mean that Jesus’ message is one of violence. These self-serving corruptions are a perversion of the Bible’s message.

This book explores the issue quite well:

http://www.amazon.com/Laying-Down-Sword-Ignore-Violent-ebook/dp/B005C6HH9E/ref=sr_1_18?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1421113473&sr=1-18&keywords=violence+bible

Equally, most of Jesus' “peaceful” teaching is thoroughly grounded in the OT (“love you neighbour as yourselves” is from Leviticus 19:18, for example).

There are clear parallels with the corruption of Islam by violent fundamentalists. Knowing the history of scripturally based rationalisations for Christian violence is helpful because it can help to understand how the same process happens in Islam.

I think it was CS Lewis who said that evil is not the absence of good, or the opposite of good, but the corruption of good. The things that we most value and find most inspiring are the things we are most likely to go to extremes to promote and defend. In their own minds, the Parisian murderers were courageous idealists. So were the Nazis, the Stalinists, Mao’s cultural revolutionaries, the crusaders and the inquisition. We need to understand how passionate idealism mutates into violent fundamentalism, in all its variations.

Jay
You may be right that violence has recently diminished in Christian countries and increased in Muslim countries. But give that both religions have been around for many centuries, it’s unlikely that Islam and Christianity are the sole causes

Steele,
Hitler most certainly was not a Christian and like all shrewd politicians he had one persona for the public and another for the party's inner circle.
The NS intended to roll all the Christian confessions into one church which would gradually be absorbed into the National Socialist state.
The Leaders weren't stupid, they realised the necessity of getting the churches on side as a first step then they could implement the gradual phasing out of traditional Christianity via a program they called "Positive Christianity".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity
The senior NS definitely planned to de Christianise the German people and they were supported by Hitler, their plans didn't come to fruition but that's another story.
Steele you do understand that Hitler's public appearances and speeches were all staged and highly rehearsed pieces of theatre?
Read Goebbels' diaries, he talks about how Hitler had perfected his act, his perfect balance of physical movement and vocal techniques, what he said in his performances and what he believed are two different things.
Hindsight is 20/20, we now have a small number of more or less reliable testimonials to Hitler's character and private,personal opinions, sure he appears to contradict himself when you compare his private and public comments but when he was in power all the world saw was his propaganda, very few people knew him on a personal basis or spent any length of time in his company.

Rhian says:
<<I agree, in recent years most terrorist violence has been perpetrated in the name of Islam.>>

No Rhian:
most terrorism has been perpetuated in the cause of Islam for centuries it has only come to the west in recent years.

Suggest you read references like Confessions of a Mullah Warrior by Masood Farivar. He recounts how they hunted and raped local infidels for sport decades ago--when no one in the west knew or cared.

This article is unfortunately highly typical of one particular style of "Christian". And no less depressing, for all its tendentious familiarity.

Why is it, I often wonder to myself, that some people think that it is their Christian duty to stir up hatred towards other religions, as this article does. Is it a hangover from the Crusades? Is it just a revival of the ducking-stool style of Christianity, where a person is adjudged evil by their inability to avoid being so defined? Or are we merely seeing the sad, shrill effluvium of a permanently closed and stunted mind?

They won't go away, of course. Because they are so convinced that they are "right", that it is somehow their bounden duty to constantly bombard the rest of us with their vituperative, spittle-drenched bigotry.

It is also, somehow, easy for them to forget the actions of, say, Anders Brevik, who - relatively recently - perpetrated the mindless massacre of 77 innocents in the name of a very similar strain of Christian-based Islamophobia.

[Waits for a string of the usual excuses...]

It's almost a certainty that the vast majority of Islamic refugees, especially the women, are fleeing Islam for a better life they hope to find in a Western secular democracy. Why else would they pass through many Islamic countries, to finally risk their lives, and the lives of their loved ones, on the very hazardous sea crossing to Australia, or Europe?
We then fail them, miserably!
In Europe especially they are expected to live in their own communities, where criticism of Islam or their prophet can quickly lead to death. How can we even know if the silent majority of our Muslim immigrants wish to leave the religion (of peace?) when it is obviously so dangerous for them to even hint at such an idea? How can we possibly know if a Muslim woman is completely covered by her own choice, or from fear of the wider Islamic community?
I think we could at least try a little harder to help those who wish to escape the restrictions that the more violent of their fellows keep them under.
Firstly, we should ban any mode of dress that covers the face, anywhere in public. We know that the majority of Muslim women would prefer the freedom that western women have, as we have seen how they react in places like Iran, when the religious regime relaxes it's grip.
Secondly, we should ban religious schools - all religious schools - as they only lead to divisions in the community. Strictly enforce de-segregation, even if it means bussing kids out of their home community to more distant schools. Let the kids learn any religious garbage on the Sabbath, if their parents so desire, but not on our dollar, in our schools. Yes, this will be costly, but balance that cost against the cost of terrorism. How much have the 400,000 extra police and soldiers cost France, after the last tterrorist attack.
Thirdly, bring back complete freedom of speech. Encourage it! Make it illegal to prosecute someone for voicing an opinion, except perhaps for inciting violence. And protect those who do speak out!

Suse.

"Runner, I would imagine that if Hitler was heard to call himself a Christian then that is what he was, whether you like it or not"

Does that mean that if Hitler was heard to call himself a midwife, then he was a midwife?

I'll try calling myself a 25 year old.