then someone had to have interpreted it in that way to start with, right?Kmarion wrote:
I maintain that the real problem is derived from another person, or group of persons telling you how to interpret the message.
Yes, most likely a person seeking power. This is not to say that the majority would find this to be the case otherwise. If it weren't for congregation the degree of misinterpretation would not be nearly as bad. It is when someone takes part of something, usually out of historical context, and tries to commit a larger population to follow their own misguidings that we have a problem.Krappyappy wrote:
then someone had to have interpreted it in that way to start with, right?Kmarion wrote:
I maintain that the real problem is derived from another person, or group of persons telling you how to interpret the message.
is it such a stretch to extrapolate that the same would happen sans organized religion?
the magnitude of the problem might be smaller, but that's not the point here.
Okay there CamPoATG wrote:
Greed and money have killed more and caused more wars than religion.
It's a fact because I say so.
we are really quibbling over minutia. i say that judeo-christian religions, as they exist in the the world today and in the past, are all religions of violence.Kmarion wrote:
Yes, most likely a person seeking power. This is not to say that the majority would find this to be the case otherwise. If it weren't for congregation the degree of misinterpretation would not be nearly as bad. It is when someone takes part of something, usually out of historical context, and tries to commit a larger population to follow their own misguidings that we have a problem.
The magnitude of the problem IS important.
Last edited by Krappyappy (2009-08-09 19:28:54)
well when someone says 'islam is a religion of violence' i take it to refer to the religion as an ideological entity, which would include everything associated with it past and present.ATG wrote:
Again Champ, we are talking about current events, or past grievances?
If it is the past, all we can do is say " sorry 'bout that, " and move forward.
It's odd; for me, I am becoming at the same time open to The Word, and more and more despising of religion and the ills it has brought to the world.
modern christians still worship this. christianity doesn't get a free pass just because the deaths it caused happen to lie in the past. it's still causing plenty of death and destruction today.ezekial 35:4 wrote:
I will lay thy cities waste, and thou shalt be desolate, and thou shalt know that I am the LORD.
The reason for understanding the degree is important.. especially if you are doing a comparison between Islam and Christianity. You have also chosen to ignore the countless christian organizations working to improve the lives of millions in this world. Christianity is not the same as it was in the past. That is a ridiculous assertion. Islam is currently getting more attention because of the relatively recent (large scale attacks) done in Madrid, London, and NY.Krappyappy wrote:
we are really quibbling over minutia. i say that judeo-christian religions, as they exist in the the world today and in the past, are all religions of violence.Kmarion wrote:
Yes, most likely a person seeking power. This is not to say that the majority would find this to be the case otherwise. If it weren't for congregation the degree of misinterpretation would not be nearly as bad. It is when someone takes part of something, usually out of historical context, and tries to commit a larger population to follow their own misguidings that we have a problem.
The magnitude of the problem IS important.
you seem to agree with that assessment.
this debate on how organized worship catalyzes the violence inherent in religion is a digression which, though interesting, is not the point of this thread.
i just wanted to highlight the ignorance in proclaiming islam a religion of violence while conveniently leaving out the other two.
Bah, Christians are not laying waste to cities atm, or cutting the heads off Muslims.Krappyappy wrote:
well when someone says 'islam is a religion of violence' i take it to refer to the religion as an ideological entity, which would include everything associated with it past and present.ATG wrote:
Again Champ, we are talking about current events, or past grievances?
If it is the past, all we can do is say " sorry 'bout that, " and move forward.
It's odd; for me, I am becoming at the same time open to The Word, and more and more despising of religion and the ills it has brought to the world.
again i quote scripturemodern christians still worship this. christianity doesn't get a free pass just because the deaths it caused happen to lie in the past. it's still causing plenty of death and destruction today.ezekial 35:4 wrote:
I will lay thy cities waste, and thou shalt be desolate, and thou shalt know that I am the LORD.
"So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; forKrappyappy wrote:
well when someone says 'islam is a religion of violence' i take it to refer to the religion as an ideological entity, which would include everything associated with it past and present.ATG wrote:
Again Champ, we are talking about current events, or past grievances?
If it is the past, all we can do is say " sorry 'bout that, " and move forward.
It's odd; for me, I am becoming at the same time open to The Word, and more and more despising of religion and the ills it has brought to the world.
again i quote scripturemodern christians still worship this. christianity doesn't get a free pass just because the deaths it caused happen to lie in the past. it's still causing plenty of death and destruction today.ezekial 35:4 wrote:
I will lay thy cities waste, and thou shalt be desolate, and thou shalt know that I am the LORD.
ATG wrote:
Bah, Christians are not laying waste to cities atm, or cutting the heads off Muslims.
fine.Kmarion wrote:
No, the vast majority of modern Christian worship the new testament. You're quoting the old. Maybe look at the whole book? .. like the most recent stuff?
i think what you mean by 'interpretation' is 'willfully ignore.' i don't deny that many christians don't lead violent lives. but they are also not adhering to the word of god.bible wrote:
I say to you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. As for my enemies who do not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence" (Luke 19:26-27).
"Do not think that I have come to send peace on Earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34-35).
I agree.Krappyappy wrote:
i don't deny that many christians don't lead violent lives. but they are also not adhering to the word of god.
many muslims do the same.
Get back with us when you use the teachings of CHRIST to show how violent CHRISTians are. Christ's teachings and actions are not in line with the violent acts committed in his name. Unfortunately, Mohammed's teachings and actions are very much in line with those acts committed in the name of Islam. Now you know the difference.Krappyappy wrote:
we get a lot of posts in here as to how islam is a religion of violence, which is true to some extent.
however all three of the judeo-christian religions are rooted in violence, and it's amusing to see the willful omission and therefore underlying implications espoused by certain elements in these forums.and so on and so forth.the bible wrote:
When my angel goes in front of you, and brings you to the Amorites ... you shall not bow down to their gods ... but utterly demolish them and break their pillars in pieces.... Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you have increased and possess the land (Ex 23:23-33).
But as for the towns of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, you must not let anything that breathes remain alive. You shall annihilate them - the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites ... - just as the Lord your God has commanded (Deut 20:16-17)
They did battle against Midian, as the Lord had commanded Moses, and killed every male (Num 31:7)
when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thess 1:7-8)
[Christ will destroy] every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25)
judeo-christian religions are poison, islam is not an exception so much as the norm.
get back with me when you've read the thread.lowing wrote:
...
Get back with us when you use the teachings of CHRIST to show how violent CHRISTians are. Christ's teachings and actions are not in line with the violent acts committed in his name. Unfortunately, Mohammed's teachings and actions are very much in line with those acts committed in the name of Islam. Now you know the difference.
I am not responding to the thread, I am responding to your post. Kinda why I quoted it. So feel freee to deny or debunk my response to your OPKrappyappy wrote:
get back with me when you've read the thread.lowing wrote:
...
Get back with us when you use the teachings of CHRIST to show how violent CHRISTians are. Christ's teachings and actions are not in line with the violent acts committed in his name. Unfortunately, Mohammed's teachings and actions are very much in line with those acts committed in the name of Islam. Now you know the difference.
I did not say they weren't. In fact I thought I acknowledged it, but His teachings were not of violence and intolerance and thus can not be held accountable for the warped actions they were twisted into justifying.Krappyappy wrote:
i have shown throughout this thread how christ's teachings have been used to commit acts of violence. you are special, but not special enough to warrant repeating myself.
ignorant lowing is ignorant.lowing wrote:
but His teachings were not of violence and intolerance
plenty more where those came from. don't pretend that christianity is all lovey dovey turn the other cheek. there is no 'twisting' necessary, only a literal interpretation.Krappyappy wrote:
the bible wrote:
when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thess 1:7-8)
[Christ will destroy] every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25)
I say to you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. As for my enemies who do not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence" (Luke 19:26-27).
"Do not think that I have come to send peace on Earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34-35)
Corinthians and Thessalonians are not the teachings of Christ, but the teachings of Paul.Krappyappy wrote:
ignorant lowing is ignorant.lowing wrote:
but His teachings were not of violence and intolerance
and reading-handicapped.plenty more where those came from. don't pretend that christianity is all lovey dovey turn the other cheek. there is no 'twisting' necessary, only a literal interpretation.Krappyappy wrote:
the bible wrote:
when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. (2 Thess 1:7-8)
[Christ will destroy] every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Cor 15:25)
I say to you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. As for my enemies who do not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence" (Luke 19:26-27).
"Do not think that I have come to send peace on Earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword." (Matthew 10:34-35)
I think he meant that the religion of the Empires were Christian?Kmarion wrote:
Really? .. and this is all the cause of Christianity? Queen Isabella's pigs killed more natives than the cross did.Krappyappy wrote:
the colonization of both americas is an astronomical 100+ million, depending on how you add up the figures.[/url]
I can tell you that it is a well known fact that Queen Isabella (and other leaders) sponsored the colonization of the Americas on the promise of new found wealth and power.SEREVENT wrote:
I think he meant that the religion of the Empires were Christian?Kmarion wrote:
Really? .. and this is all the cause of Christianity? Queen Isabella's pigs killed more natives than the cross did.Krappyappy wrote:
the colonization of both americas is an astronomical 100+ million, depending on how you add up the figures.[/url]