slothrop Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Christians don't jump up and down and cry "Its a war against Christians!!" 774539[/snapback] Here is this . . . and this . . . . and this . . . and this . . . and then there is this gem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Don't throw the "Christianity is based solely on the word of Jesus" crap out there, because if that were the case, evangelists wouldn't be running around condemning homosexuals (please find for me where Jesus said anything about them), and they'd find it a hell of a lot harder to rationalize a lot of their behavior. The fact is that the big three monotheistic religions draw a lot from the same well. There have been societal advancements in the west that have changed our outlook more than most realize. But if you want to follow the Bible word-for-word, you are going to be living a life that is no less backwards to our understanding than that which you consider the Muslim world to live. That's the truth. All religions have a history of violence, because there has always been violence. It's up to each one of us to determine whose (if any) teachings within one can lean on. The predicament we find ourselves in now is not due to there being any more violence than there has ever been, but rather the greater capabilities of destruction via violence coupled with technology. Quit it with the "religion of peace" crap. If you follow any religion, look in the mirror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 False. 774813[/snapback] Maybe true. I'd thought he was drafted in to the Waffen SS; turns out that although I can confirm he was a flakhilfer, the most I can find after that is that he was "in the infantry". Which is ambiguous. Your point is taken, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Don't throw the "Christianity is based solely on the word of Jesus" crap out there, because if that were the case, evangelists wouldn't be running around condemning homosexuals (please find for me where Jesus said anything about them), and they'd find it a hell of a lot harder to rationalize a lot of their behavior. The fact is that the big three monotheistic religions draw a lot from the same well. There have been societal advancements in the west that have changed our outlook more than most realize. But if you want to follow the Bible word-for-word, you are going to be living a life that is no less backwards to our understanding than that which you consider the Muslim world to live. That's the truth. All religions have a history of violence, because there has always been violence. It's up to each one of us to determine whose (if any) teachings within one can lean on. The predicament we find ourselves in now is not due to there being any more violence than there has ever been, but rather the greater capabilities of destruction via violence coupled with technology. Quit it with the "religion of peace" crap. If you follow any religion, look in the mirror. 774848[/snapback] Ok, I had to counter the fallacy in your first statement before proceeding any further. By your logic, since Jesus said nothing about automobiles and computers, wacko evangelicals would be able to rationalize a ban on driving and computing due to the lack of comment on either subject by Christ? Just because someone calls themselves Christian, doesn't make it so. The whole point of Christ's teachings were peace, acceptance, and tolerance. Someone misinterpreting his work doesn't nullify the work, it just makes the person a retard. Secondly, Christ basically said to ignore the old testament stuff, so there goes the argument associating Christianity with the slavery, sacrifice, and violence found in the old testement. Lasty, Islam IS a violent religion. Forget what the books (Hadith and Quran) say, even though they advocate subrogation and violence against non-believers, and look at the life of Mohammed the doucheba.... I mean "Phrophet". The guy MURDERED people. He killed many. Sure he started out peaceful, mostly because he had no power or authority. But once he had those, look out. A violent Christian is a bit of an oxymoron. They are mutually exclusive. If you are one, you are not the other. Plain and simple. Islam on the other hand encourages violence. Both through the scripture and through the example of the creator of said religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Ok, I had to counter the fallacy in your first statement before proceeding any further. By your logic, since Jesus said nothing about automobiles and computers, wacko evangelicals would be able to rationalize a ban on driving and computing due to the lack of comment on either subject by Christ? Just because someone calls themselves Christian, doesn't make it so. The whole point of Christ's teachings were peace, acceptance, and tolerance. Someone misinterpreting his work doesn't nullify the work, it just makes the person a retard. Secondly, Christ basically said to ignore the old testament stuff, so there goes the argument associating Christianity with the slavery, sacrifice, and violence found in the old testement. 774875[/snapback] The first argument was not mine. It was somebody else's. I was pointing out that it made no sense. They were saying "Christ didn't make these statements, so they're in effect not part of the religion." I'm a Unitarian from the Christian perspective, which means I have my own problems. I believe I interpret Christ's teachings in the same way you do. But I think a lot of people would have quarrel with the notion that Christ said to ignore the OT. These are the people who claim that every word is the word of God -- even the baffling, dated, contradictory statements. I don't think these people are retards, though I certainly think they're wrong. However, they're part of the religion even if they have a different grasp of the theology. And part of that religious belief is a belief in a time for violence. It's plastered all over the OT. I interpret the Bible in the same way I do the Koran. There are things that are just meant for their times and don't apply today. There is wisdom that holds true today. If you believe it's the word of man interpreting God, to accept either as a text that doesn't move and bend with the wisdom we've accumulated throughout the ages is a big mistake. I suppose we'll agree to disagree on our interpretations of Islam. I live near a mosque and know many peaceful followers. I think theirs is a religion of devotion, and, yes, unironically stated, one of peace. What is passing for Islam in the media and in the schools of radicalism is a distortion being used for political gain and power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 As we if needed any more proof that religion (not God, not humanitarian values, but organizated religions orchestrated and run by men) is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 As we if needed any more proof that religion (not God, not humanitarian values, but organizated religions orchestrated and run by men) is stupid. 774930[/snapback] Besides the "organizated" part, I think you're pretty right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 The first argument was not mine. It was somebody else's. I was pointing out that it made no sense. They were saying "Christ didn't make these statements, so they're in effect not part of the religion." My bad... hand't followed the thread carefully enough. I suppose we'll agree to disagree on our interpretations of Islam. I live near a mosque and know many peaceful followers. I think theirs is a religion of devotion, and, yes, unironically stated, one of peace. What is passing for Islam in the media and in the schools of radicalism is a distortion being used for political gain and power. 774895[/snapback] I too know many peaceful muslims. My family doctor is whom I trust implicitly. The non-extreme, peaceful followers are certainly the rule, not the exception. That being said, I think they don't represent the true meaning of Islam, much in the many many people think Catholics don't fully represent the teaching of Christianity. The "peaceful" snippets of the islamic holy texts aren't enough to counter the explicit calls for violence, especially when taken into consideration with the violent history of mohammed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickW Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Don't throw the "Christianity is based solely on the word of Jesus" crap out there, because if that were the case, evangelists wouldn't be running around condemning homosexuals (please find for me where Jesus said anything about them), and they'd find it a hell of a lot harder to rationalize a lot of their behavior. The fact is that the big three monotheistic religions draw a lot from the same well. There have been societal advancements in the west that have changed our outlook more than most realize. But if you want to follow the Bible word-for-word, you are going to be living a life that is no less backwards to our understanding than that which you consider the Muslim world to live. That's the truth. All religions have a history of violence, because there has always been violence. It's up to each one of us to determine whose (if any) teachings within one can lean on. The predicament we find ourselves in now is not due to there being any more violence than there has ever been, but rather the greater capabilities of destruction via violence coupled with technology. Quit it with the "religion of peace" crap. If you follow any religion, look in the mirror. 774848[/snapback] Yeah, that about sums it up. E'nuf said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Anyone catch the Mind of Mencia Religous Royal Rumble? They couldn't show Mohammed so the other Gods/Prophets started to get beat up by an invisible guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Secondly, Christ basically said to ignore the old testament stuff, so there goes the argument associating Christianity with the slavery, sacrifice, and violence found in the old testement. 774875[/snapback] Even though I consider myself an agnostic (believes that in between the lines all religions basically say the same thing), even I know that statement is patently false. Christ said he came to confirm the Old Testament, and recited it repeatedly. http://billarnold.typepad.com/poet_in_moti..._and_the_o.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Here is the true context of the entire RATIONAL, theological discussion: Read it ALL, or don't comment! P.S. What doesn't piss of muslims anyway? Cartoons, beauty contests, soccer tournaments, theological discussions? Hmmm... 774541[/snapback] I like that the Pope can give a thorough speech on why the concept of a "Holy War" is wrong and the response from thousands of muslims around the world is that the Pope needs to be killed. Yeah, but all religions are the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Christ said he came to confirm the Old Testament, and recited it repeatedly.http://billarnold.typepad.com/poet_in_moti..._and_the_o.html 775016[/snapback] SEeing how Jesus was JEwish it seems to make sense that he would like the Old Testament. So Yall, half the Bible is a crock of Sh*t? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 As we if needed any more proof that religion (not God, not humanitarian values, but organizated religions orchestrated and run by men) is stupid. 774930[/snapback] You're painting with a broad brush. Organized religions have a positive effect on many people's lives. Unfortunately, there will always be failures because not everyone in the world is good and/or smart. It's always going to be like this. There will always be good and bad effects based on the quality of the people running and practicing different religions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 You're painting with a broad brush. Organized religions have a positive effect on many people's lives. Unfortunately, there will always be failures because not everyone in the world is good and/or smart. It's always going to be like this. There will always be good and bad effects based on the quality of the people running and practicing different religions. 775032[/snapback] In which case, is it the religion -- or the people running it -- that is the problem / source of benefit? Also consider substituting the word "government" for "religion" as what they really are, both of them, are organizations of people deciding what's right for the group and/or a bunch of others -- well meaning though they may or may not be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 In which case, is it the religion -- or the people running it -- that is the problem / source of benefit? Also consider substituting the word "government" for "religion" as what they really are, both of them, are organizations of people deciding what's right for the group and/or a bunch of others -- well meaning though they may or may not be. 775047[/snapback] At a simple level yeah. But there are no Democratic religions that I'm aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 At a simple level yeah. But there are no Democratic religions that I'm aware of. 775065[/snapback] Unitarian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Unitarian? 775068[/snapback] Aren't they more of a large, elite group of rulers? They may listen to the people, but they aren't elected by the people, afaik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 I like that the Pope can give a thorough speech on why the concept of a "Holy War" is wrong and the response from thousands of muslims around the world is that the Pope needs to be killed. Yeah, but all religions are the same. 775027[/snapback] Precisely! They were having a rational, theological discussion and islam, true to form and right on cue, reacts violently and irrationally. How totally ignorant can they be that they cannot grasp that they are PROVING THE POINT OF THE QUOTE IN QUESTION? Again, what does not piss them off? Cartoons, books, beauty pageants, dogs, soccer tournaments, parties, nightclubs, infidels breathing... what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 I like that the Pope can give a thorough speech on why the concept of a "Holy War" is wrong and the response from thousands of muslims around the world is that the Pope needs to be killed. Yeah, but all religions are the same. 775027[/snapback] To play Devil's advocate on solely this example, Osama Bin Laden could give a speech on how the concept of a "Holy War" is a moral and reasonable thing to do, and Christians around the world would call for him to be killed. While I get what you're saying, I'm not sure that its a great example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts