[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
<<< am I a “real” christian? I’m still curious.
In short, no.[/quote]
Oh my! Oh my! I’m so surprised Trib! Almost as surprised as I was to see PWI posters advocating mass deportations based upon…wait for it… religion!
But my goodness trib, don’t be short. It’s your “thinking” that makes PWI so much fun to read. Please elaborate. I’d love to hear (more) about how I’m not Christian enough for you!
Nah, not up to it at the moment and it’d be lost on you anyway.
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
<<< am I a “real” christian? I’m still curious.
In short, no.
Oh my! Oh my! I’m so surprised Trib! Almost as surprised as I was to see PWI posters advocating mass deportations based upon…wait for it… religion!
But my goodness trib, don’t be short. It’s your “thinking” that makes PWI so much fun to read. Please elaborate. I’d love to hear (more) about how I’m not Christian enough for you!
[/quote]
Only one poster is advocating mass deportations based on religion. I support mass deportations based on residency status…I.E. you illegal, get the fuck out.
[quote]pat wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
<<< am I a “real” christian? I’m still curious.
In short, no.
Oh my! Oh my! I’m so surprised Trib! Almost as surprised as I was to see PWI posters advocating mass deportations based upon…wait for it… religion!
But my goodness trib, don’t be short. It’s your “thinking” that makes PWI so much fun to read. Please elaborate. I’d love to hear (more) about how I’m not Christian enough for you!
Only one poster is advocating mass deportations based on religion. I support mass deportations based on residency status…I.E. you illegal, get the fuck out.[/quote]
Thats the only way to save this country. Sadly the latino block, aka people against law and order, have too much power.
Christ…25% of Americans think its okay for an Army officer to have secert ties with AQZ…
Please.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Pat Robertson said some interesting things this week along this line.[/quote]
Hahahahahaha!!!11
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE![/quote]
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.
[quote]Amiright wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.[/quote]
So… you first say that Christianity is NO DIFFERENT, then you describe a huge DIFFERENCE. Yet you forgot to mention that while Islam has not evolved from the violent shit that is in their Koran, Christianity hasn’t got any extremists.
Imagine a Christian (supposedly a soldier) at an Egyptian army HQ screaming “Jesus is greater!” and killing Egyptians. Imagine the response.
Here, all we get are people who apologize for the jihadists.
[quote]Amiright wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.[/quote]
Do we really need to go through the pissing contest of which belief system has produced the most evil in history? We’ve done it like a million times. Atheists always win the atrocities against their fellow man contest, hands fucking down.
Based on your statement above, you have not given this the slightest bit of thought.
[quote]archiewhittaker wrote:
Amiright wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.
So… you first say that Christianity is NO DIFFERENT, then you describe a huge DIFFERENCE. Yet you forgot to mention that while Islam has not evolved from the violent shit that is in their Koran, Christianity hasn’t got any extremists.
Imagine a Christian (supposedly a soldier) at an Egyptian army HQ screaming “Jesus is greater!” and killing Egyptians. Imagine the response.
Here, all we get are people who apologize for the jihadists.
[/quote]
The GLARING difference is the fact that Christianity has modernized and evolved, whereas Islam is firmly stuck in the 15th century. The muslim apologists love to say “Christianity has extremists too”. There may be a VERY few acts of violence committed by “Christian Extremists”, but they pale in comparison to thousands of deaths perpetrated each year in the name of Islam.
The apologists (willing Dhimmis) also love to cite the Inquisition and the Crusades. Ummm, the Inqusition was HUNDREDS of years ago, and nothing like that has happened since. Ie, mainstream Christianity has modernized and rid itself of violent ideologues (barring wacko cults and sub-sects).
Regarding the Crusades, few people remember that the Arabs, under the Isamic world-conquering doctrine, began a huge and violent expansion into Europe in 620 AD (long before the Crusades) eventually conquering as far as Spain. The Crusades were the tail-end of the European drive to expel the invaders, take back the Christian holy-lands, and probably attempt to conquer those who had first invaded their lands. Interestingly, the Islamic hatred of the “Crusaders” is a modern creation of Muslim fundamentalists, not a long-standing issue as the apologists would have you believe:
http://www.nps.edu/Academics/centers/ccc/publications/OnlineJournal/2007/Mar/chamberlinMar07.html
[quote]pat wrote:
Amiright wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.
Do we really need to go through the pissing contest of which belief system has produced the most evil in history? We’ve done it like a million times. Atheists always win the atrocities against their fellow man contest, hands fucking down.
Based on your statement above, you have not given this the slightest bit of thought.[/quote]
You’re obsessed.Do you see the word atheist anywhere in the above post?
[quote]Amiright wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.[/quote]
Actually, the Islamic world has modernized significantly. Prior to the discovery of black gold in Islamic lands, they were all jockeying around on camels, eating dates, drinking goat’s milk and living in tents. At least that’s how it was in Saudi Arabia.
Prior to that, the Ottomans ruled the Islamic world until Ataturk abolished teh Caliphate. He modernized Turkey by suppressing Islam in his country as much as possible and having the government write the Friday sermons. Secularism is now dying in Turkey and it has again reverted to Islam. Ataturks “reforms,” however, didn’t preven the Armenian genocide with the co-operation of the Kurds.
Under Ottoman rule (which ended roughly at the turn of the 20th century), the Islamic world maintained a booming slave trade in whites and blacks. It forced Greeks, Jews, and Southern Europeans to live under dhimma and eventually ethnically cleansed Anatolia of all Greeks, Jews, and Armenians, despite them being there for at least several thousand years prior to the Turk’s arrival.
We could get into the Ummayyads, Abbasids, Fatamids, Mughals etc, but the story remains the same. The parenthetical “golden age” of Islam ended 800 years ago once the supply of dhimmis dried up.
In short, you have no historical basis for this claim.
As for your assertion about Christianity, only the most foolish of the fools are making this claim at this point - the real hardcore idiots.
Could someone please name for me the Christian denomination that advocates violence as doctrine?
Especially since the protestant reformation of Luther and Calvin, which was actually a revival of the essential belief system of the first 3 centuries, there has not been one mainstream orthodox group that believes in violent conquest as any part of their theology.
In other words those who claim Christianity yet engage in anything like jihad are doing so in direct violation of what they say is their religion. It may be their religion, but it ain’t Christianity.
On the other hand those who claim Islam and Muhammad as their own yet refuse to practice jihad are doing so in direct violation of what they say is their religion. It may be their religion, but it ain’t Islam.
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
pat wrote:
Amiright wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
hmmm . . . no way this was an act of terrorism and Islam is a religion of peace . . .wasn’t this where I left off on these threads?
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Christianity is no different… there are extremists everywhere. The only difference in today’s world is that the “islamic” world is suppressed by other nations and not allowed to modernize. Therefore still run under religious rule. Oil runs this world… the middle east has most of the oil… suppress the middle east and you gain control.
Do we really need to go through the pissing contest of which belief system has produced the most evil in history? We’ve done it like a million times. Atheists always win the atrocities against their fellow man contest, hands fucking down.
Based on your statement above, you have not given this the slightest bit of thought.
You’re obsessed.Do you see the word atheist anywhere in the above post?[/quote]
Perhaps…No. But islam and Christianity are different. Second, the number of radicalized muslims greatly out weighs the number fundementalized Christians…You’re going to have kooks everywhere, but numbers matter.
The amount of muslims who think killing with impunity, abuse of woman, etc. is a clear indication that something is wrong internally on a wide scale. It is internationally wide spread. You can’t say just because some others done wrong to that there is no problem.
Nope there’s no problem…After all there have been bad Christians too…
[quote]pat wrote:
Nope there’s no problem…After all there have been bad Christians too…
[/quote]
At there very least, those guys need to be put on the very next flight back to Pakistan, citizens or not. They’re clearly traitors.
I don’t understand why the rest of us should be expected to tolerate this sort of nonsense.
What’s becoming more and more obvious each passing day is that the most serious Muslims are also the biggest losers in a particular society. So were Muhammad’s followers. His rag-tag band consisted of just himself and a few of his relatives until he took over Mecca militarily. Prior to that, everyone rejected him and wrote him off as a loser.
These fat, unbathed savages think they can dictate to the rest of us how to live, and that’s the real injustice. And our government and the UK’s government will continue to enable them.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Could someone please name for me the Christian denomination that advocates violence as doctrine?[/quote]
What about the versus that sanction slavery, rape and subduing to your will?
How was ‘manifest destiny’ justified? Don’t you think the tribes would’ve had a different outlook on this matter?
These are questions, not declarations.
[quote]pat wrote:
Nope there’s no problem…After all there have been bad Christians too…
[/quote]
This video is pretty clear evidence of the lack of violent Christian extremists. Those guys are clearly the mortal enemy of Christians, but nobody has shot them or blown them up. If there were a bunch of “Christian extremists”, don’t you think these guys would be their #1 targets?
[quote]spurlock wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Could someone please name for me the Christian denomination that advocates violence as doctrine?
What about the versus that sanction slavery, rape and subduing to your will?
Especially since the protestant reformation of Luther and Calvin, which was actually a revival of the essential belief system of the first 3 centuries, there has not been one mainstream orthodox group that believes in violent conquest as any part of their theology.
How was ‘manifest destiny’ justified? Don’t you think the tribes would’ve had a different outlook on this matter?
These are questions, not declarations.[/quote]
I’m pretty sure John L. O’Sullivan wasn’t a minister. His arguments were based on a “nonsectarian Providence” with pinched New Testament verses taken out of context.
The issue in dealing with religious texts is always one of context, both historical and within the text itself.
The biggest religious faultline by far during the period of “manifest destiny” in north America was that between Protestants and Catholics. During the Reformation, Catholics offed Protestants in large numbers. We weren’t over it by the mid 1800s. We likewise saw popery and Catholicism to be anti-democratic forces.
Naturally, Protestant clergy couldn’t resist the urge to comment on Catholics coming here, or the need to convert the Indians. These fed into manifest destiny and were also co-opted by the government. But, money talks the loudest, and there was a lot of money to be made out West.
With regards to the Old Testament passages you alluded to, there is thing called the “New Testament” in Christianity which is seen as the fulfillment of the Old, therefore we interpret these stories in light of the New Testament.
Still, there is no doctrine of “warfare for the spread of religion” in Christianity.