Pope angers muslims

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
Actions of God versus actions of man. You have a lot of verses, but little understanding.

Jon Miller

I think Molly's point, Jon, is that Cyber's throwing stones from a glass house.

He's asserting that Christianity is, at its "core" a religion of peace and that Islam is violent at its "core." How you define core, and how much you care about events in the past, of course, may alter your opinion rather drastically.

Damnit. Now I've gotten involved.

-Arrian

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by CyberShy

Stick to what I actually say, not what you think I do or say.

It's kewl that you say that, after I replied to a post in which you putted like 100 things into my mouth

I did nothing of the sort.

He most probably used it for the animals on the temple square.

That's a very interesting 'interpretation' of the passage.

Let's see it broken down into easy to read, manageable parts:

14 and found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:

So Jesus went to Jerusalem, went to the temple of the Jews, and there he found two sets of people:

those that sold oxen and sheep and doves

and

the changers of money sitting:

And what happened ?

Did he say 'By the way, do you think this might just be cheapening a house of god, perhaps you'd like to sit somewhere else, let's have a discussion about this ?'

This is what he does:

15 and when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;

He improvises a weapon, a scourge:

a whip used to inflict punishment

and drives them (who are ?):

those that sold oxen and sheep

and overturns the tables of the:

changers of money

and:

poured out the changers' money

Nice guy. For some reason dove sellers get off more lightly:

16 and said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house a house of merchandise.

I think that's pretty clear.

He was pretty angry indeed but as far as I can see did he not harm any human being.

Really ?

he [...] made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple

So he makes a whip but just uses loud words to drive them out ?

I don't think so.

It's really funny that you base your entire argumentation on this small small small small thing, Jesus drove some people from the temple square.

Isn't he your god ? Didn't he expressly say this:

5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

So: do as I say, not do as I do.

You're a muslim by any change? You do sound like one.

Gosh, what a sense of humour you do have.

You're really good at making comparisions!

You're rather apt at ignoring them.

Actions of God versus actions of man. You have a lot of verses, but little understanding.

Pompous nonsense.

Matthew 7
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

[Jon Miller]

Don't be an idiot. Based upon the number of people who have commented, and the number of people who have commented that you seem to have a thing against christianity in particular, an hypothesis that you do so is reasonable. It's scientific. Yes, you seem (as in, this is my theory) to most observers to be biased against Christianity (my theory here). And there is evidence, which is the number of people who have commented that you seem to be against Christianity.

You post on these topics, purposely trying to get people's ire, and generally behaving like a jerk. Which you don't in other conversation. In Christianity threads you are worse then Asher is in Apple threads or Circumcision threads.

Now if you dont' see your self as such, then maybe you should ask yourself why others see you this way.

It isn't even a religion thing, as you primarly post in Christianity threads. Almost every post has some little nitpick negative thing, additionally, never a positive.

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Arrian


I think Molly's point, Jon, is that Cyber's throwing stones from a glass house.

He's asserting that Christianity is, at its "core" a religion of peace and that Islam is violent at its "core." How you define core, and how much you care about events in the past, of course, may alter your opinion rather drastically.

Damnit. Now I've gotten involved.

-Arrian

Err, no he isn't. Cybershy is saying, look at how Jesus lived. There is no argument from him about violence being in the Bible. Or that violence has been done by Christianity. But the violence that molly bloom picked at, wasn't done by Jesus, who is suppose to be our example, but by God.

You look at all the Christian groups that are highly, or entirely, passivistic. All are citing Jesus' life.

Now you could argue that the history of the Christian church since Christ is more important then His life. But I think you would not get majority agreement on that.

I am not going to say Christianity is a religion of peace while Islam is a religion of war. But you can't deny that their founders were very different.. that their begginings were very different.

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

Just in case you forgot: (from Dictionary.com)

"seem  /sim/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[seem] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object)
1. to appear to be, feel, do, etc.: She seems better this morning.
2. to appear to one's own senses, mind, observation, judgment, etc.: It seems to me that someone is calling.
3. to appear to exist: There seems no need to go now.
4. to appear to be true, probable, or evident: It seems likely to rain.
5. to give the outward appearance of being or to pretend to be: He only seems friendly because he wants you to like him."

JM

[Arrian]

[SIZE=1] ...Therefor the only conclusion is that Islam is violent at it's core and christianity is not.

...

Of course there are millions of muslims who are good people who can't be blamed for the wrongs of Islam but I think it's too political correct to claim that Islam is a religion of peace for it is not. It's not in it's core. And eventhough many muslims are good people their religion is not. And that's totally different with christianity where indeed many of it's followers are very wrong, the faith in itself is not.
...

Jon, I didn't make up the "core" thing. It's straight from Cyber's post.

It certainly seems that Cyber is saying that Christianity is, at its core, peaceful whereas Islam is, at its core, violent. Refer to your definition above if that is unclear.

-Arrian

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
Don't be an idiot.

A very Christian attitude .

Based upon the number of people who have commented, and the number of people who have commented that you seem to have a thing against christianity in particular, .

Who, you and Cybershy ?!?

an hypothesis that you do so is reasonable. It's scientific.

It's nothing of the sort! You're simply justifying your own prejudice now.

Who are these 'most observers' ? What are their names and where are their remarks or observations ?


You know, those 'scientific' things called observable phenomena and facts.

Yes, you seem (as in, this is my theory) to most observers to be biased against Christianity (my theory here). And there is evidence, which is the number of people who have commented that you seem to be against Christianity.

Again, who are these 'most observers' and where are their observations....

Otherwise, this is just wishful thinking on your part.

And there is evidence, which is the number of people who have commented that you seem to be against Christianity.

What is the number of these people, and why are their observations valid ?

This isn't science it's just nonsense.

You post on these topics, purposely trying to get people's ire,

So now you're a mind reader as well as a purveyor of bad science and sloppy logic ?

and generally behaving like a jerk.

Getting that Christian love from you now all right.

In Christianity threads you are worse then Asher is in Apple threads or Circumcision threads.

You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how erroneous.

Now if you dont' see your self as such, then maybe you should ask yourself why others see you this way.

Go see an oculist:

41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Rather apt I thought.

It isn't even a religion thing, as you primarly post in Christianity threads.

Prove it, O great one who claims he speaks for most observers....

But the violence that molly bloom picked at, wasn't done by Jesus, who is suppose to be our example, but by God.

Not true.

The violent scourging in the temple features the one and only scourgemeister himself, Jesus Christ.

There is no argument from him about violence being in the Bible.

Memory lapse, was it ?

Everybody agrees that the New Testament forbids christians to use violence and tells them to obey the governament of the land they're in. To turn the other cheek. It even tells christians that they should respect differences of opinion.

That's what Cybershy wrote.

Everybody agrees that Jesus was a peacefull man.

Except of course the moneylenders, the temple sellers of sheep and oxen and anyone presumably who wouldn't receive the followers of Jesus, but they'll have to wait for judgment day to see how much their difference of opinion was respected by the peaceful Jesus.

[SlowwHand]

Both religions are peaceful in their teachings. I would assume most religions are peaceful. It's only idiots who bend the teaching to a perverse goal who aren't peaceful.

[Arrian]

As for the division between Christ's example and the actions of Christians... no argument from me there. Christ, whether you believe he was the son of God or not, concentrated mostly on healing and love and peace (notwithstanding a flash of anger at the Temple).

Frankly I have not read any Muslim holy texts, but I do get the sense that the Prophet was perhaps a tad warlike.

Then again, so was the God of the Old Testament/Torah.

Anyway, as someone who doesn't believe in the God(s) of the various religions, to me what matters are the actions of humans, and in that, unfortunately, neither side of this argument has acquitted itself very well.

-Arrian

[SlowwHand]

No. If you read any of the Koran, it's very specific on killing. It's not to be done.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Arrian


Frankly I have not read any Muslim holy texts, but I do get the sense that the Prophet was perhaps a tad warlike.

The difference being that Muhammad stands in relation to his people and Muslims much as an Old Testament prophet did to the Jews- and there's lots of bloodshed and violence in the Old Testament.


Of course, Muhammad and his followers had seen plenty of violence between rival Christian sects, Christians and pagans and Christians and Jews, and between differing bands of pagans.

[Robert]

The New Testament doesn't have any passages relating to violent acts, or the justification for violent acts ?


The Book of Revelation

1. this is a vision, not something that's actually happening
2. like Jon already said, these are acts of God, not acts of man. Nowhere christians are being told in the NT to use violence. Which is different then the Quran which tells people to use violence.

Why should Muslims have to apologize for the actions of other Muslims ? Do you apologize for what other Dutch people do ?

In fact, yes I do.
Perhaps not because I feel guilty for it but because I do feel sorry for wrong things being done in name of Holland or christianity. I wish I could change it.
Saying that you're sorry is more then pleading to be guilty for it as well.

Yes, I'm familiar with your opinions on the Catholic Church....

There wasn't a protestant church in those days so I feel like the CC was my church in the middle ages. I'll never hide behind the fact that it's technically not the church I belong to. In fact I feel connected to all christians of all places and times, no matter what their denomination is and no matter what differences of ideas we have. And if christians do wrong in name of christianity (like North Ireland ie.) then I do feel really ashamed and sorry for that.

...christian wrongs can't be compared to muslim wrongs.

No, christian wrongs are as wrong as muslim wrongs.
I thought I made that clear.

Yes, both are wrong, no you can't compare them. Is it that difficult to understand?
Of course I mean with 'comparing' that you can 'compare both faiths because of these wrongs'.
Because the wrongs of the muslims (violence) are done b/c they did what muhammed did and told them to.
The violence committed by christians is done by those who for some reason did NOT understand right what Jesus told them to do and did NOT follow Jesus' example.

I'll make it easy for you.
There are two fathers.
Girlfriend A tells her friend that he should not kill her ex
Girlfriend B tells her friend that he should kill her ex

Both friends do kill the exes of their girlfriends though.
Now Girlfriend B is to blame and guilty as well, girlfriend A is not guilty neither is she to blame.
That's the thing with christianity/muslims, Jesus told his followers to not use violence and he never used violence himself. Muhammed told his followers to use violence and used violence himself.
Christians who use violence do that despite of what Jesus told/did, muslims who use violence do that b/c of what Muhammed told them/did.

I wonder why I have to explain it, while typing it.
It's really that simple that a child could understand it.

Muslims assert that Islam is a religion of peace.

Christians assert that Christianity is a religion of peace

I wouldn't say that christianity is a religion of peace. Peace is not our main teaching. Our main teaching is that we are saved through Jesus Christ. Of course we do think that whatever happens, we should remain peacefull ourselves. We're not a ghandi-religion though.

Cybershy (a Christian) would have us believe that he knows the real truth and meaning of Christianity, that it is indeed a religion of peace, and that Islam is not a religion of peace.

I don't claim to know the whole truth of christianity and that my opinion on Christianity is the perfect opinion. I think though that about everybody in the world except Molly Bloom agrees with me that neither the New Testament nor Jesus Christ preach or commit violence and that all violence done by christians has been done despite of what Jesus said or did.

I think everybody in this world except Molly Bloom also agrees with me that Muhammed was a warmonger. We may disagree about the question if the Quran tells it's followers to use violence but I think that everybody agrees that there are some VERY questionable passages in the Quran and that the book is at least easily to be misunderstood by it's followers.

Conclusion, it's not my opinion on christianity that says this, it's just the major opinion. What I do is making some straight conclusions from this. Most (PC) people just don't dare to say that Muhammed was a warlord and a bad example for all muslims to come. They agree that Muhammed has started some wars though.

Well I'm sure I could find a devout Muslim who would say the same as you, but in reverse, and feel that they had just as much justification

well, that's what I already said, that there are many muslims who are peacefull indeed. They will agree with me though that Muhammed used force to establish the Islam, which is a simple pure fact. Like it is a fact that he married an 8 year old girl and 'consumed' her when she was 9. Muhammed was a very nice man though! Wasn't he, Molly Bloom?

Muslims, you say, and the Qu'ran and Muhammad are intolerant of differing opinions. What does Jesus say about those who don't want Christianity preached in their towns ?

He says that you should just leave them behind and not bother to continue to try to conver them. (as you quoted)
That's pretty different then saying that the heathens should be converted or killed by the sword, as Muhammed did. Isn't it?

I think most of us recall what supposedly happened to Sodom and Gomorrah, don't we ? That doesn't seem to me to be 'tolerance' of differing opinions.

Act of God.
And if you don't believe in God it's even an act of nature.
Abraham and Lot didn't do anything to destroy Sadom and Gomorrah. Abraham even tried to convince God to not destroy the city.

not to mention that you're quoting the Old Testament. The New Testament has changed some things, like I pointed out already.

It is ? Could you show us that formula in the Qu'ran or the Hadith?

Slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out ... If they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.--2:191

Fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah--2:193

Give us victory over the disbelieving folk.--3:147

Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah; and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil.--4:76

Choose not friends from them [unbelievers]. ... Take them and kill them wherever ye find them.--4:89

Take them [unbelivers] and kill them wherever ye find them. Against such We have given you clear warrant.--4:91

As for the thief, both male and female, cut off their hands. ... An exemplary punishment from Allah.--5:38

The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation.--5:45

How many a township have We destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them.--7:4

Slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush.--9:5

O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites! Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end.--9:73

O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you--9:123

There's much more but I got bored.
And notice, this is all man who's asked to commit the violence. And notice that there are political statements (what to do with thieves)
That's clearly different then the NT that leaves politics to the administration. (Obey the emperor, live according to the rules of your land, etc.)

Arrian

I think Molly's point, Jon, is that Cyber's throwing stones from a glass house.

He's asserting that Christianity is, at its "core" a religion of peace and that Islam is violent at its "core." How you define core, and how much you care about events in the past, of course, may alter your opinion rather drastically.

I define the 'core' of the faith it's foudner and the holy book they base themselves on.
Do you think that's a good 'core'?

Back to molly bloom

CyberShy: It's kewl that you say that, after I replied to a post in which you putted like 100 things into my mouth

Molly Bloom: I did nothing of the sort.

This is what you putted into my mouth:

Ah, because Christian wrongs aren't as wrong as Muslim wrongs?

So he makes a whip but just uses loud words to drive them out?

He makes a whip to drive those who have animals out of the temple square. He doesn't use the whip for the money table owners or the pigeon sellers. It's clear that he uses the whip to drive the animals out. That's where whips are used primary.

Isn't he your god ? Didn't he expressly say this:

He isn't condeming these people to hell, neither does he kill them. He just drives them from his own square. And I agree that he didn't do it in the modern-western-talk about it first-way.

Gosh, what a sense of humour you do have.

At least I have some

[Arrian]

Hey, that's what Islam needs! A New Testament! Maybe the Pope should suggest that.

As for Muhammad, I'm thinking we're talking about the chief of a bunch of desert nomads, yes? Violence, austerity... yeah, makes sense.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Cyber,

1. It's "put words in my mouth" not "putted."

2. Founder + holy text is a pretty good definition of core, yes. But what about various Popes? Do their actions count as part of the core of Christianity, or not? I could see that one going either way, at least w/regard to Catholicism. I'm sure there are similar distinctions to be made in Islam as well.

3. I for one am not going to argue that at this point in time Christianity is not, by and large, more peaceful than Islam. But I take a longer view. It was not always this way, and I hope that Islam will mature like Christianity has (or even more so, hopefully). I'm sure there is enough peaceful loving stuff in the "core" of Islam to suffice as a basis for such a maturation.

-Arrian

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by molly bloom
A very Christian attitude .

You are being one. You are definitely being foolish here.

Who, you and Cybershy ?!?

In this thread. Other people have mentioned it in numerous other threads. Considering the number of people who have commented on your religion posts.. it is highly correlated.

It's nothing of the sort! You're simply justifying your own prejudice now.
Who are these 'most observers' ? What are their names and where are their remarks or observations ?

In the loose definition of scientific. Which is hypthosis with supporting evidence. I gave supporting evidence. I have seen no evidence to the contrary, I formed an hypothesis. You said I was lying.. which was unreasonable.

A large portion of your posts (on Christianity) in this thread are the same. You have a bone to pick, and won't let facts, logic, or reason get in your way.

You know, those 'scientific' things called observable phenomena and facts.

There is some evidence. And I used seem, which is a little bit loser then saying is (which I would have if there had been more supporting evidence).

Again, who are these 'most observers' and where are their observations....

Otherwise, this is just wishful thinking on your part.

I, Cybershy, Ben Kenobi (in the past), and others have all stated similiar observations. You are the one who is not seeing.

What is the number of these people, and why are their observations valid ?

This isn't science it's just nonsense.

I said most people. Which makes it a soft science. And I have posted supporting evidence. You have not, you have just repeated yourself ad naseum, with no backing arguments.

So now you're a mind reader as well as a purveyor of bad science and sloppy logic ?

Getting that Christian love from you now all right.

And now you are disparaging my character. Which is what you aim to do whenever you can frustrate a Chrstian in one of these threads. Then you hop about, crowing your triumph in your post.

Well, I don't feel upset at you at all. I merely am trying to aid you, in seeing what you observed to be, what you seem to be. That is often what you are.

You're entitled to your opinion, no matter how erroneous.

True. But you might want to ask yourself.. how many Christians have I talked to about Christianity who have found me to show an unbiased and neutral view of Chrstianity in the course of the conversation?

Go see an oculist:



Rather apt I thought.

Yeah, that is why I am pointing out your spec. Now, do be so kind to point out my beam? You haven't pointed out anything in this post..

Prove it, O great one who claims he speaks for most observers....
Not true.
The violent scourging in the temple features the one and only scourgemeister himself, Jesus Christ.

And it says that he scourged them where?

Memory lapse, was it ?

And where has your reading comperhension gone? I explicitly posted that Christians are to take Christ as their example. As such, Christians shouldn't use violence to fix their problems.

That's what Cybershy wrote.
Except of course the moneylenders, the temple sellers of sheep and oxen and anyone presumably who wouldn't receive the followers of Jesus, but they'll have to wait for judgment day to see how much their difference of opinion was respected by the peaceful Jesus.

Whoever said that God will respect differences of opinion.
We aren't God, we are to be humble, meek, and patient.

God is merciful, but also just. As such, the wicked will get their just deserts (and since I know you will now post something about hell fire and eternal punishment.. no, I don't beleive in that, it is just a misunderstanding of the parable of Lazarus).

Jon Miller