[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
the Inquisition, or the actions in Latin America of certain pious Spanish explorers (actions which were fully endorsed by the Catholic church)[/quote]
Oh do tell. Enlighten me.
Well, when the majority of those doing the critiquing are Christians, then yes. When the complaints come against a religion that has a tiny presence and tiny impact in the Western world (and so are quite unprovoked), then yes. I am not calling anyone on here a full-on bigot, but many of these posts do smack of intolerance as well as a naivete that would perhaps be charming in other circumstances.
“They all did their best–to kill being the chiefest ambition of the human race and the earliest incident in its history-- but only the Christian civilization has scored a triumph to be proud of. Two or three centuries from now it will be recognized that all the competent killers are Christians; then the pagan world will go to school to the Christian–not to acquire his religion, but his guns.”
-Mark Twain
[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
the Inquisition, or the actions in Latin America of certain pious Spanish explorers (actions which were fully endorsed by the Catholic church)[/quote]
Oh do tell. Enlighten me. [/quote]
I’m not going to spoon-feed you history. You learn more when you do your own reading anyway. A good place to start would be Bartolome de las Casas’ History of the Indies.
As a christian who lived in the middle east for several years, I can tell you that I see far more intolerance in America than I ever did abroad.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
the Inquisition, or the actions in Latin America of certain pious Spanish explorers (actions which were fully endorsed by the Catholic church)[/quote]
Oh do tell. Enlighten me. [/quote]
I’m not going to spoon-feed you history. You learn more when you do your own reading anyway. A good place to start would be Bartolome de las Casas’ History of the Indies.[/quote]
I am a history major, and have done more reading on the subject that you ever will.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
the Inquisition, or the actions in Latin America of certain pious Spanish explorers (actions which were fully endorsed by the Catholic church)[/quote]
Oh do tell. Enlighten me. [/quote]
I’m not going to spoon-feed you history. You learn more when you do your own reading anyway. A good place to start would be Bartolome de las Casas’ History of the Indies.[/quote]
And I have read what you suggest, this year in fact. Most scholars agree it is over blown, over exaggerated, and was simply a political tool. I am not saying shit was not happening, but to go as far as his book did? It simply didnt happen.
Then why are you asking me to “enlighten you?” Shouldn’t you already know?
[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]DixiesFinest wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
the Inquisition, or the actions in Latin America of certain pious Spanish explorers (actions which were fully endorsed by the Catholic church)[/quote]
Oh do tell. Enlighten me. [/quote]
I’m not going to spoon-feed you history. You learn more when you do your own reading anyway. A good place to start would be Bartolome de las Casas’ History of the Indies.[/quote]
And I have read what you suggest, this year in fact. Most scholars agree it is over blown, over exaggerated, and was simply a political tool. I am not saying shit was not happening, but to go as far as his book did? It simply didnt happen. [/quote]
Of course it’s exaggerated. But did these things happen? Yes they did. Even taking these events off the table, there’s plenty of violent Christian history left. The numbers are irrelevant. Unless you want to start a bodycount for each religion, and declare as superior the one which has the smaller total. But then that would be stupid. Though perhaps it would satisfy you for your religion to be “somewhat less murderous” than another.
all people are guilty when using “In the Name of Insert_ said_ religion_ here”. As we all know it is an agenda by that person not usually the foundation of that religions beliefs.
However, in the case of Islamic terrorism, there are a large number of passages in the source books of that religion showing that killing for Islam is something that the founder of the religion often did and most certainly approved of.
There is no other terrorism or other large scale killing going on in the world as a religious duty or achievement, as the Islamic terrorists see their killings as being. There is some terrorism for political reasons, some killings for political reasons, and many killings for other reasons: but only Islam provides religious motivation for killings that today are in fact occurring in quite large quantity.
Now, if some leftist wants to go back thousands of years in the history of Israel to try to justify the Muslim terrorism of today, yes the Jews killed polytheists in Canaan. A person not having his head up his ass will recognize however that the Jewish religion has moved on from that in the meantime, with not a single authority in the last couple of thousand years arguing that killing non-Jews for their disbelief is called for by their Scripture but rather all condemn it as murder and as something that would be a horrible sin, while on the other hand one would be hard-pressed to find a single Muslim authority arguing that killing “infidels” for the sake of Islam is unacceptable and not tough at all to find those that in fact preach armed jihad and support terrorism and teach that there is the highest reward in their afterlife for those who do this. Hence your organizations such as Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas.
That is the difference.
“If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant, and hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; and it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel: then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.”
Deuteronomy 17:2-5 (bold text mine)
Bill, the vast majority of Muslims find Islamic terrorism reprehensible. It’s NOT difficult to find Muslims who argue against killing non-Muslims, contrary to your assertions.
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
[quote]jglickfield wrote:
[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
The intolerance in this forum is quite disheartening. It’s also confusing to me how many Christians suddenly forget all about the entire Old Testament when criticizing Islam.[/quote]
Which parts of the old testament would these be? The parts about corporal punishment?[/quote]
Nope, all those parts where God commands his followers to slaughter (in many cases) innocent people, or does so himself.
I like this one. Had God’s people actually done what they were told to do we all would not be having this conversation about Islam vs Christianity. Islam would never had been invented because those people would not be here. I am not saying it would be better or worse, because I believe that God had a plan and he knew his people would mess up and not follow his orders.
There has always been a rift between Hebrews and Arabs, Islam came later, and there always will be until the end of time. How would you feel if your father threw you out of the house and loved another woman’s son over you?
sssss