So how long will Ben last this time?

[Kidlicious]

But it's the accepted doctrine of the church that launched the Crusades... so they were sanctioned and ordered by God.

I said The BIBLE does not give them that authority.

[C0ckney]

That's because jihad is Muslims attacking non-Muslims you ****! I'm sorry if the definition of words is 'inconsisent' with your retarded leftist narrative.

you seem to have avoided actually addressing the point. what a surprise.

I did back them up. You haven't done anything to dispute my claims.

no, you didn't. please stop lying.

i see you have conceded the points. thanks for playing.

[kentonio]

You're ignoring two facts...

1) Those verses were severely twisted. They don't, in anyway, mean that.
2) The Christians had been attacked for 400 years before that and were taking a serious ass beating.

Neither of which actually matter. The point is that both the bible and the koran have been used for most of their existences as an excuse or pretext for war. You can try and make up some fluff about how the koran is evil and the bible isn't, but everyone here is familiar with the OT so its not like we don't know some of the nasty **** that's in there.

[C0ckney]

You can try and make up some fluff about how the koran is evil and the bible isn't, but everyone here is familiar with the OT so its not like we don't know some of the nasty **** that's in there.

everyone except kid, you mean.

[Kidlicious]

Neither of which actually matter. The point is that both the bible and the koran have been used for most of their existences as an excuse or pretext for war. You can try and make up some fluff about how the koran is evil and the bible isn't, but everyone here is familiar with the OT so its not like we don't know some of the nasty **** that's in there.

You have not demonstrated that you are familiar with either the Bible or the Koran. Everyone who understands the Bible sees what a ignorant blow hard you are, but you just don't care.

[C0ckney]

You have not demonstrated that you are familiar with either the Bible or the Koran. Everyone who understands the Bible sees what a ignorant blow hard you are, but you just don't care.

i think my irony meter just exploded.

[Proteus_MST]

But it's the accepted doctrine of the church that launched the Crusades... so they were sanctioned and ordered by God.

Exactly this ... theory doesn´t matter all too much, but rather the actual practice of faith ..
for example the islam doesn´t actually tell women to wear a full body covering ...
nevertheless it is/was practiced in many countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan and is enforced by religious guards.

The Quran also doesn´t forbid women to drive cars ... but again this is enforced by religious guards.
So this is religious reality for people living in those countries.

Similarly for the christians in europe it was religious reality that the pope was the representative of god on earth ...
similar to Moses in the old testament ... and therefore, who else than him (aside from god himself) would have the authority to star a religous war
(and, as I mentioned, god in the old testament never was shy of ordering the israelites to have other tribes killed)

Similarly it was religious reality for people of this time that Satan exists and that he corrupts women (and sometimes men) into becoming witches ... and that, if you burn them on a pyre, this is actually a nice thing to do to them, as it drives out Satan of their body and therefore the soul of the poor witch goes to heacven instead of the eternal fires of hell)

[Kidlicious]

Exactly this ... theory doesn´t matter all too much, but rather the actual practice of faith ..

No. Actual practice doesn't count, because Christians do not always follow the Bible. So you can blame Christians, but you can not blame the Bible or God.

for example the islam doesn´t actually tell women to wear a full body covering ...
nevertheless it is/was practiced in many countries like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan and is enforced by religious guards.

The Quran also doesn´t forbid women to drive cars ... but again this is enforced by religious guards.
So this is religious reality for people living in those countries.

But the Koran does say that women have to submit to men, and if they do not, for their husbands to beat them. So how are men sinning against the Koran by not letting women drive cars?

Similarly for the christians in europe it was religious reality that the pope was the representative of god on earth ...
similar to Moses in the old testament ... and therefore, who else than him (aside from god himself) would have the authority to star a religous war
(and, as I mentioned, god in the old testament never was shy of ordering the israelites to have other tribes killed)

Similarly it was religious reality for people of this time that Satan exists and that he corrupts women (and sometimes men) into becoming witches ... and that, if you burn them on a pyre, this is actually a nice thing to do to them, as it drives out Satan of their body and therefore the soul of the poor witch goes to heacven instead of the eternal fires of hell)

But God does not give Christians any authority to do those things, not in the Bible. He gave the ancients that authority. There's a difference between twisting the Bible and what the Bible actually means.

[ricketyclik]

[Kidlicious]

You need a better meme. Seriously, that's all you got?

[Lorizael]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]178132[/ATTACH]

Alright, then who should we hate?

[Proteus_MST]

No. Actual practice doesn't count, because Christians do not always follow the Bible. So you can blame Christians, but you can not blame the Bible or God.

I can blame the bible, because it contains passages thast can be misused for many bad things (like persecuting infidels, suppressing women, slavery and much more)

But the Koran does say that women have to submit to men, and if they do not, for their husbands to beat them. So how are men sinning against the Koran by not letting women drive cars?

But it isn´t usually their husbands who disallow them from driving ... and it also isn´t their husbands who beat them up if they dare to drive a car ... instead it are totally strangers that were employed by the saudi arabian state. So, if I were a muslim living in Saudi Arabia and would allow my wife to drive, this wouldn´t matter all too much because the religious guards would nevertheless (and against my wishes) beat her up if they caught her driving a car).
So, banishing all women from driving, regardless of what their husband says, seems to be against the Quran

But God does not give Christians any authority to do those things, not in the Bible. He gave the ancients that authority.

Where does it explicitely say that in the bible, that after Jesus coming the old law isn´t valid anymore and that the things written in the old testament (like god ordering the destruction of cities and/or putting an enormous amoutn of authority in his representatives) will cease to be applicable after Jesus coming?

Jesus himself said, according to the bible:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Matthew 5:17

So, according to this, everything written in the old testament is still valid, even after Jesus coming.
Therefore there is no reason not to assume that god would use his own representatives (i.e. the popes) in order to sdtart wars against infidels.

And therefore there is also no reason to believe that disobeying/speaking against the representatives of god would be seen less lightly by god than it was the case in the old testament.
And what may happen if you speak against a representative of god is displayed in a lengthy account in
where the israelites dared to speak against Moses and Aaron ... resulting in god himself killing thousands of israelites

There's a difference between twisting the Bible and what the Bible actually means.

Why do you think that your interpretation of the bible is the right one and other interpretations are wrong ones?

[kentonio]

No. Actual practice doesn't count, because Christians do not always follow the Bible. So you can blame Christians, but you can not blame the Bible or God.

Ah! No True Christian!

[Kidlicious]

I can blame the bible, because it contains passages thast can be misused for many bad things (like persecuting infidels, suppressing women, slavery and much more)

So you honestly blame the Bible for having verses that can be misused? That's pretty extreme. I don't share your sentiment, and I don't expect anyone else to either.

But it isn´t usually their husbands who disallow them from driving ... and it also isn´t their husbands who beat them up if they dare to drive a car ... instead it are totally strangers that were employed by the saudi arabian state. So, if I were a muslim living in Saudi Arabia and would allow my wife to drive, this wouldn´t matter all too much because the religious guards would nevertheless (and against my wishes) beat her up if they caught her driving a car).
So, banishing all women from driving, regardless of what their husband says, seems to be against the Quran

The Koran does not give husbands that authority either. The Koran clearly gives Muslim rulers authority to enforce the Koran by the sword. It does not give anyone the right to disobey Muslim rulers. Just as wives must submit to their husbands, husbands must submit to the religious/political authorities. So long as it is not against the Koran to make it illegal to deny women rights no subjects of Muslim rulers can justify exercising freedoms that the Koran does not allow them.

Where does it explicitely say that in the bible, that after Jesus coming the old law isn´t valid anymore and that the things written in the old testament (like god ordering the destruction of cities and/or putting an enormous amoutn of authority in his representatives) will cease to be applicable after Jesus coming?

The Law doesn't command anyone to a Holy War. God commanded the Israelites to take the promise land. That's it.

Paul was at first a Pharisee. He persecuted the Christian Church, and tried to destroy it. That's one reason why he was chosen to be an Apostle, not because he taught to persecute non-believers, but because he called that sin (obeying the flesh, not the spirit).

Jesus told the disciples not to use violence to spread the Word in Matt 26: 52-54. That said, it remains a controversial issue whether or not just war is justified, IMO. Most people believe that it is, but it's not the same thing as Holy War.

Jesus himself said, according to the bible:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." Matthew 5:17

Again, It is not lawful to fight a holy war.

So, according to this, everything written in the old testament is still valid, even after Jesus coming.
Therefore there is no reason not to assume that god would use his own representatives (i.e. the popes) in order to sdtart wars against infidels.

There absolutely is. Jesus said not to use violence to spread the Word in Matt 26: 52-54

And what may happen if you speak against a representative of god is displayed in a lengthy account in
where the israelites dared to speak against Moses and Aaron ... resulting in god himself killing thousands of israelites

Moses gave the Law to the Israelites. That's something completely different. The Bible doesn't even give Popes authority to add to or take away from the Bible.

Why do you think that your interpretation of the bible is the right one and other interpretations are wrong ones?

It makes much more sense.

[Bereta_Eder]

That's so funny.
A bunch of nonsense written in some books and some idiots talking about them like they actually influence anything