will not serve Christians to continue to turn a blind eye to the reams of verses from the Bible which encourage zero tolerance and murder and execution for the so-called opposition, i.e. God’s ‘not-chosen’ ones

What are you talking about? Let me guess. The holy wars? If you know anything about them, then you know they were not started by "Christians" but by controlling individuals who wanted more power. It had nothing to do with Christ. Christ was the "excuse" but greed was the reason.*

That shoulda been the first clue they weren't Christians, when they started slaughtering non believers.

Again, the closer a follower of Christ gets to Him, the less violent they will become. Show me one instance where Christ killed or wanted someone killed. JUST ONE.

Now what did Mohamed do when coming down from the Mt after his "vision?" Slaughtered a caravan of Jews. And what does He advocate in the Koran for those unwilling to convert. DEATH.

Night and Day.

*In the brutal era of wars that tore Europe apart in the closing days of the first millennium AD, no period was more confusing, or more tragic, than the nearly two hundred years Europe spent locked in bitter fighting in the Middle East. This era, known as the Age of Crusades, would lead to some of the most atrocious acts and miserable failures ever made in the name of religion. But what was the point of these ceaseless wars, then, and how did they change the course of history?

The story of the Crusades actually begins centuries before the First Crusade was launched in AD 1096. When the center of the Roman Empire shifted East, to Constantinople, it began to grow a new culture which would become known as Byzantium. However, the Church had begun to develop with Rome as its centre, and the churches of the East turned to Constantinople rather than the developing Papacy in Rome. The first Popes were warlike and power-hungry, however, and they wanted all of the Christian world under their control. Then, during the latter half of the first millennium AD, the teachings of Islam began to spread throughout North Africa and Asia Minor at an alarming pace. The Popes of Rome, fearful that this new religion would displace them from their still-tenuous position, needed a way to suppress this new, peaceful religion coming out of the East.

Then, the final piece of the puzzle came into focus under the Western concept of primogeniture. The younger sons of European nobility, with no hope of ever ruling their family lands, became unruly as they sought to establish themselves, and began slaughtering each other. Rome, anxious to get these disruptive young nobles out of Europe, saw their chance to solve three problems at once. In AD 1096, Rome began preaching a Holy Crusade to free the Holy City of Jerusalem from the clutches of heretics and infidels. Rome preyed on the greed and pride of Europe’s young knights with promises of indulgences in exchange for service, the wealth of gold and lands available in the East, and honour and glory to all those who took up the holy cause.

Read more here: http://vt.essortment.com/crusadesholywa_rhvy.htm

it will not serve Christians to continue to turn a blind eye to the reams of verses from the Bible which encourage zero tolerance and murder and execution for the so-called opposition, i.e. God’s ‘not-chosen’ ones

What are you talking about? Let me guess. The holy wars?

I was referring to events described in the Bible. It’s teaming with cruelty and violence, verses like Exodus 32:27-29; Deuteronomy 3.3-6; Judges 1.3-6, to name but three.

Now what did Mohamed do when coming down from the Mt after his "vision?" Slaughtered a caravan of Jews. And what does He advocate in the Koran for those unwilling to convert. DEATH.

There is a website that lists all verses in the Bible that describe God encouraging violence and death. It also lists all such verses from the Qu’ran. The author concludes, “The Quran pales in comparison”

WWW Link

I agree with Jennifer’s point, from another thread, that the God described in these verses simply doesn’t exist. How can such verses be an accurate representation of “the Truth”? Is the Bible inerrant and infallible? Ask your heart of hearts, and the answer will be found, fot that’s where the Holy Spirit will come to abide.

the closer a follower of Christ gets to Him, the less violent they will become. Show me one instance where Christ killed or wanted someone killed. JUST ONE.

I agree with you Tova. Jesus was more aligned with love, forgiveness and harmony.
So how can God change personality so dramatically? I believe the answer lies in the fact that the hand that wrote the Bible was man’s. Mankind’s insights have clearly evolved and matured toward principles of love, goodness and harmony.

For a bit of light reading, consider the following verses and compare them those tyrannical OT verses:

“You have learned that they were told, “Love your neighbor, hate your enemy.” But what I tell you is this: Love your enemies and pray for your persecutors; only so can you be children of your heavenly Father, who makes his sun shine on good and bad alike, and sends the rain on the honest and the dishonest. If you love only those who love you, what reward can you expect? Surely the tax-gatherers do as much as that. And if you greet only your brothers, what is there extraordinary about that? Even the heathen do as much. There must be no limit to your goodness, as your heavenly Father’s goodness knows no bounds.”
- Matthew 5:43-48

"Love your enemies; do good to those who hate you; bless those who curse you; pray for those who treat you spitefully. When a man hits you on the cheek, offer him the other cheek too; when a man takes your coat, let him have your shirt as well. Give to everyone who asks you; when a man takes what is yours, do not demand it back. Treat others as you would like them to treat you. If you love only those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners love those who love them. Again, if you do good only to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do as much. And if you lend only where you expect to be repaid, what credit is that to you? Even sinners lend to each other to be repaid in full. But you must love your enemies and do good; and lend without expecting any return; and you will have a rich reward: you will be sons of the Most High, because he himself is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be compassionate as your Father is compassionate."
- Luke 6:27-36

"You have learned that they were told, “Love your neighbor, hate your enemy.” But what I tell you is this: Love your enemies and pray for your persecutors; only so can you be children of your heavenly Father, who makes his sun shine on good and bad alike, and sends the rain on the honest and the dishonest. If you love only those who love you, what reward can you expect? Surely the tax-gatherers do as much as that. And if you greet only your brothers, what is there extraordinary about that? Even the heathen do as much. There must be no limit to your goodness, as your heavenly Father’s goodness knows no bounds."
- Matthew 5:43-48

For a bit of light reading, consider the following verses and compare them those tyrannical OT verses:

Hey Andy, I think we should start calling you Dr. Love. You love to talk about the love of God and I think that's a great thing. Love conquers all after all. But you forget, there is also some, shall we say, tyrannical NT verses as well. For your consideration,

"And out of His mouth (Christ) goes a sharp sword that with it he should smite the nations; and He shall rule them with a rod of iron (same as Ps 2)and He treads the winepress (figure of judgment) of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." Rev 19:15[/B]

[B]"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie. That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" 2 Thess 2:5

I would love to see some backup from Dharmagrl on the extremist Christian abortion bombers. I believe for the most part they are making a political statement, not a religous one. There is not one Christian I know of that would approve of such a thing. Look what happened to the Amish this past week. They are great examples of extreme Christian living in my book and there's no way you'd find them bombing a clinic. So exactly how many do we have here?

Hey Andy, I think we should start calling you Dr. Love

Surely that’s not a bad thing?

But you forget, there is also some, shall we say, tyrannical NT verses as well. For your consideration, "And out of His mouth (Christ) goes a sharp sword that with it he should smite the nations; and He shall rule them with a rod of iron (same as Ps 2)and He treads the winepress (figure of judgment) of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." Rev 19:15[/B] [B]"And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie. That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness" 2 Thess 2:5

First we have Christians complaining that other religions encourage too much violence and cruelty, now we have Christians competing and boasting that their own Holy Book encourages violence and cruelty too.

Even though we might be able to find a couple of tyrannical verses in the NT, my point was that it’s still a world away from the monstrous behaviour of the God of the OT. Jesus' words in particular, from those verses quoted above, completely contradicts the OT God's attitudes

Another problem, comparison-wise, is that while Islamic schools teach their kids about the horrors and barbarism perpetrated against Islam during the Crusades, they fail to teach about the horrors and barbarism perpetrated against others by Islam AT THE SAME TIME.

The mindset seems to be that Christianity used to be really bad, and Islam was this really elevated thing that didn't bother anyone, but the roles have reversed. Not so. Islamic conquest of the Mediterranean was ruthless, all the way to Spain. To the East they had even less respect for Hindu and Buddhist cultures, who weren't people "of the book".

So what we really have is two cultures, both born in barbarism, but one who continued evolving and reforming and one who remains locked somewhere around the 15th century. The Protestant Reformation didn't have its parallel in Islam. They had their early division, like the early East/West Christian division, but nothing in the way of reform later.

So who is being unrealistic? We keep getting beaten over the head with the Crusades, but the Muslims of the time were out committing the same acts of genocide. Who deserves more credit, the religion that grew out of Inquisition mentality, or the one that is holding on to it tooth and toenail?

Modern violence in Christianity is the aberration. Peace in Islam is the aberration. MOst of the people who end up bombing abortion clinics we find weren't all that "Christian" in behavior and morals anyway. They usually end up using Christianity as an excuse.

Maybe it is the same for Islam. If so, though, a lot more people are using it as an excuse.

MOst of the people who end up bombing abortion clinics we find weren't all that "Christian" in behavior and morals anyway. They usually end up using Christianity as an excuse. Maybe it is the same for Islam. If so, though, a lot more people are using it as an excuse.

Personally I believe this to be the case. My fault with the majority of mainstream Muslims is their failure to speak out publicy to both decry these perversions of their religion and to distinguish themselves from the perpetrators.

My fault with the majority of mainstream Muslims is their failure to speak out publicy to both decry these perversions of their religion and to distinguish themselves from the perpetrators.

That's really annoying, you know. I've pointed out to you on multiple occasions times where large Muslim organisations - including the two biggest in the world - have spoken out in English against terrorists and religious extremists and yet you persist in this blatant falsehood. Just because you don't read the press release or see it on your TV doesn't mean it's not happening.

Most of the religious condemnations are happening in Arabic, Malay and French; if you can read those, I'm sure you'll have more luck in your attempts to avoid looking ignorant.

They had their early division, like the early East/West Christian division, but nothing in the way of reform later.

Actually they had more or less constant divisions based on territory. Islam was like Christianity in that respect. Every territory they conquered ended up with its own special breed of Islam, one that tended to incorporate whatever the social mores of the location were at the time. You are right though that reform has been long-coming. Even today probably only half to three quarters of Muslims are even aware that there are other ways of being Muslim than what they do in their own area.

Another problem, comparison-wise, is that while Islamic schools teach their kids about the horrors and barbarism perpetrated against Islam during the Crusades, they fail to teach about the horrors and barbarism perpetrated against others by Islam AT THE SAME TIME.

Yeah. It's a problem that's very expensive to fix. In most cases it's not the teachers' faults either. They have often only been trained in Islamic schools. No one has ever even told them about Islam's dirty historical secrets. The general access to news sources is fairly appalling throughout the 3rd and dictatorial world too, which doesn't help much either. Programs like the US' (in Pakistan and elsewhere) and Australia's (in Indonesia and the Pacific) are probably the best hope here. Teachers from outside are sent to religious schools and proceed to teach general subjects and train the teachers. They have the added bonus of being a friendly (generally white) foreign face who doesn't want to shoot or bomb them.

I've pointed out to you on multiple occasions times where large Muslim organisations

Microcosm, vs. Macrocosm. A minority does not make a majority, until they take the air from the voice of the macro. Right now, your friends are whispers. They best get together and make it a shout. Do not blame us for not hearing them. A whisper is a whisper until it is shouted.

I've pointed out to you on multiple occasions times where large Muslim organisations - including the two biggest in the world - have spoken out in English against terrorists and religious extremists and yet you persist in this blatant falsehood. Just because you don't read the press release or see it on your TV doesn't mean it's not happening. Most of the religious condemnations are happening in Arabic, Malay and French; if you can read those, I'm sure you'll have more luck in your attempts to avoid looking ignorant.

Despite your rudeness I'll respond to your comments. A couple of organizations putting out press releases does not a majority make. I clearly stated that I have a problem with the fact that the majority are not speaking out. Look up what the word majority means and it may help you in your attempts to not look ignorant.

And you could stand to learn how to express yourself in a more civil fashion.

Microcosm, vs. Macrocosm. A minority does not make a majority, until they take the air from the voice of the macro. Right now, your friends are whispers. They best get together and make it a shout. Do not blame us for not hearing them. A whisper is a whisper until it is shouted.

I'm talking about a majority. The major Muslim organisations in every Muslim country have all condemned terrorist attacks on civilians if not armed foreigners. There hasn't been a petition circulated world-wide so far as I'm aware so the smaller congregations aren't in on it, but I think it's not a dangerous thing to say that when the largest churches in the world condemn something it's a pretty widespread condemnation. It would be akin to statements from the Catholic Church, the Anglicans, the Baptists, the Mormons and the Orthodox Churches all condemning something.

Obviously that's not enough for either of you though, so I suppose there's no point arguing.

And you could stand to learn how to express yourself in a more civil fashion.

I know you've publically declared the turning over of a new leaf but don't get all self-righteous on me. I think I've got a right to be annoyed when you don't even acknowledge the efforts of an enormous minority (if you insist on believing it's a minority) before you slam an entire faith. It's particularly vexing when I've told you specifically about it on a number of occasions.

Cacto; you have a great talent for totally missing the point. I am not referring to a few church leaders making press statements. They are just a handful of people out of literally millions. When I say majority, I mean majority. The people you are trying to defend are very quick to make public demonstrations over an offending cartoon and yet remain markedly quiet when some extremist blows himself up in a crowded shopping plaza.

As for your self-righteous remark, all I can say is that you obviously don't even know the meaning of the word. Is it that hard to express yourself in a civil manner, or do you fear your opinion can't stand on it's own without insults or rude comments?

The people you are trying to defend are very quick to make public demonstrations over an offending cartoon and yet remain markedly quiet when some extremist blows himself up in a crowded shopping plaza.

Ah, now I see what you're talking about. Have you ever studied psychology or sociology? I think you'd find your answers there. Most people - and that's people in general, not just Muslims - aren't going to skip a day's paycheck to go and protest over something that they perceive has nothing to do with them. They leave that kind of thing to their leaders - social, political, religious etc.

Logistically it'd also be pretty difficult to come out in protest of every little terrorist act perpetrated in the name of Islam. You'd never get anything done and you'd probably end up starving to death in a gutter because you've spent all day every day protesting rather than working or getting food.

Yet the West doesn't 'insult' Islam very often. The rarity of it makes it a more significant event. Compounded with the general feeling of victimisation which is common in 3rd world and former colonial states subjected to Dependency Theory and you get a critical mass of public opinion out of all proportion to the significance of the event.

Is that explanation of any help or will you need to see the research papers that establish the existence of these phenomena?

As for your self-righteous remark, all I can say is that you obviously don't even know the meaning of the word.

I hold no illusions about my dismal command of the English language, so I'd thank you for clarifying the word's meaning in your eyes.

Is it that hard to express yourself in a civil manner, or do you fear your opinion can't stand on it's own without insults or rude comments?

Naturally your public change of face has been an education for us all. But let's face it - you are being very polite and self-consciously righteous these days - smiting obnoxious behaviour and standing above it all in a charmingly dramatic way. It's very much a change of attitude from your old scrum days where you'd be third in any conflict with an insult or smear.

Like so many unfortunates in this world I find it very difficult to reconcile the old with the new without casting aspersions on the intent of the change. I shall endeavour to be less snide in future and follow you in your glorious revolution of character.

Yes, I have studied psychology and sociology. Your statements simply do not fly. People alays react to those thing they feel strongly about. Someone committing murder in the name of a religion that they feel so strongly about that they would protest in the streets over a cartoon would also inspire riots or at least strong protests.

As for your other, more personal comments, anyone who has read me here on a regular basis would know that the post to which you keep referring had to do with a single person with whom I was out of line. It did not indicate some "glorious revolution of character" as you chose to snidely put it. And as I will not participate in your little snide insult fest I suppose we are finished here. I will gladly discuss viewpoints with you when you grow up.

the majority are not speaking out

They best get together and make it a shout. Do not blame us for not hearing them. A whisper is a whisper until it is shouted

By definition, good natured, normal Muslims, who form the majority, would not jump up and down and shout about how good natured and normal they are. Humility is a whisper from a worldly point of view, but is loud from Heaven’s point of view.

Just because the Islamic minority are louder than any other religion’s minority, doesn’t mean the majority are the same. So why is the Islamic minority louder than other religions’ minority? Cacto hit the nail on the head.

Compounded with the general feeling of victimisation

This is basic psychology. If you put a group of people in a place where they are generally considered ‘different’, (e.g. different skin colour, or different religious beliefs), this group will have a tendency to be perceived as “lesser” by the so-called normal folk. Throughout this group’s history, a minority of ‘normal folk’, who don’t know any better, will shout about the other group being ‘lesser’, ‘wrong’, or ‘worse’ than their selves, which would understandably aggravate the other group, even causing them to feel like victims. Naturally, a minority of the other group will react.

Jesus taught us to love our enemies; do good to those who ill treat us. It takes a lot of spiritual wealth and understanding to love our so-called enemies. But it is the worthy and stronger thing to do. If a victimised group doesn’t change their negative behaviour, then we should rise above their negativities, see beyond their weaknesses, exercise our own strengths, and treat them with compassion, understanding and humility. They cannot affect our own strength and inner peace if we don't let them.

Let us start seeing our Muslim brothers and sisters through the lens of love. They will then naturally begin to relax, lighten up, feel accepted, and will in turn change their attitudes and behaviour. That is the basic principle. Due to the natural laws of human growth and spiritual evolution, over a period of centuries things will begin to change. Love is the answer. If we don't have it in us to do this, then we have room for spiritual growth.