Bible twice as violent as the Koran.

[Ben Kenobi]

Islam is more believable as a successor to Judaism

Insofar as both are violent and Christianity is peaceful?

[Ben Kenobi]

He said sinners should get NO punishment if they believe in him.

And if they repent.

[kentonio]

kentonio's reasoning is that people are violent anyway so it's no big deal that Mohammed told people that Allah told him to tell people to murder.

I just think its a bit rich whining about how violent a 7th century warlord was, considering the 7th century was mostly comprised of people trying to kill each other in whatever bloody and brutal ways they could think of. I also find it rather ironic that a faith that STILL uses the old testament as a part of their holy book has the bare faced cheek to call another faith violent.

Just for one final piece of dropping hypocrisy, the very people most likely to whine about violent muslims are the same people who claim to be christians yet completely ignore or misrepresent the pacifistic teachings of the New Testament and insist that its ok to fight wars and blow up civilians. But no, tell me again how 'turn the other cheek' actually means 'fight brutal attritional wars against our enemies, in between assassinating them with drone strikes'.

Also it's OK that he was a baby raper.

You really never did get your little simple head around that discussion did you. The point is not that it was 'ok', the point was that it wasn't anything unusual in that time period. If we're going to hold historical figures accountable to the moral standards of today then basically every historical figure from more than 200 years ago was a ****ing monster who would have been largely despised by everyone today for one reason or another.

[kentonio]

Insofar as both are violent and Christianity is peaceful?

Tell that to the 6m Jews your fellow Christians put into camps and slaughtered.

[Jon Miller]

The Nazis would sometimes claim to be Christian and sometimes not. A sure sign that anything they claimed to be doing for 'Christian' reasons was claimed falsely.

There are much much better examples of crimes by Christians against Jews, and I think the Pope has even appologized about them.

JM

[Jon Miller]

This thread refers to something that non-Christians (and some lite Christians, including Trump) just do not seem to understand.

(Christian view)
We are all sinners. We all deserve death (and worse). We are all breaking the law. All of the time.

The good news is that we are forgiven, that Christ saved us.
(\Christian view)

If you don't get that, you don't get Christianity. This is important all over the place. To Christians, it is worse to say 'I am not a sinner, this is not a sin' and sin little then it is to say 'I am a sinner, this is a sin' and sin a lot. This is why someone like Trump is in a worse state than a murderer and felon/etc.

JM
(Not to say that Christians aren't often hypocrites.)

[Kidlicious]

I just think its a bit rich whining about how violent a 7th century warlord was, considering the 7th century was mostly comprised of people trying to kill each other in whatever bloody and brutal ways they could think of.

That's because you are fine with violence as long as it's muslims or POCs committing that violence. Does anyone here ever excuse violence by Christians by saying that everyone is violent anyway? No because we all have at least a small amount of decency.

But your claim that pre-Islamic Arabia was particularly violent is BS. It was a typical tribal system. There was some violence but nothing like the violence committed who believe and teach that Allah commands violence in his name.

I also find it rather ironic that a faith that STILL uses the old testament as a part of their holy book has the bare faced cheek to call another faith violent.

That's because you don't understand the very basics of Christianity, which is incredible because you talk about it so much.

Just for one final piece of dropping hypocrisy, the very people most likely to whine about violent muslims are the same people who claim to be christians yet completely ignore or misrepresent the pacifistic teachings of the New Testament and insist that its ok to fight wars and blow up civilians. But no, tell me again how 'turn the other cheek' actually means 'fight brutal attritional wars against our enemies, in between assassinating them with drone strikes'.

So you are shocked when people support defending peaceful democratic societies which allow freedom of religion from those who want to impose Sharia Law on the entire planet.

You really never did get your little simple head around that discussion did you. The point is not that it was 'ok', the point was that it wasn't anything unusual in that time period. If we're going to hold historical figures accountable to the moral standards of today then basically every historical figure from more than 200 years ago was a ****ing monster who would have been largely despised by everyone today for one reason or another.

You're being incredibly dishonest. Pointing out that he was a baby raper is an actual good point. Why should anyone in this generation follow a baby raper just because he lived in a generation that approved of that?

[kentonio]

The Nazis would sometimes claim to be Christian and sometimes not. A sure sign that anything they claimed to be doing for 'Christian' reasons was claimed falsely.

There are much much better examples of crimes by Christians against Jews, and I think the Pope has even appologized about them.

JM

Nice try. The mistake you and your fellow christian apologists make when you try and push off the blame for nazi actions onto a seperate non-christian 'Nazi' group however is that the religious makeup of Germany in 1933 was as follows..

67% Protestant
33% Catholic
<1% Jewish

Now I'm fairly sure that the Jews weren't the ones driving on the vision of National Socialism, so just remind who else exactly was responsible? The holocaust wasn't carried out by 12 men in black uniforms, it was carried out by hundreds of thousands of German soldiers and officials all over Europe who herded Jews into trains, slaughtered them in the streets or carried out the barbarities in the camps. It was a Christian crime based on centuries of religious hate, and trying to just deny any responsibility for that is sickening. The only argument you guys have seems to be "Well we didn't want them annihilated, just marginalized and despised!".

[kentonio]

That's because you are fine with violence as long as it's muslims or POCs committing that violence. Does anyone here ever excuse violence by Christians by saying that everyone is violent anyway? No because we all have at least a small amount of decency.

You excuse violence by Christians constantly, whether its the US bombing hospitals or little kids, white police officers shooting unarmed black people or whatever, don't try and claim you have a shred of compassion in you.

But your claim that pre-Islamic Arabia was particularly violent is BS. It was a typical tribal system. There was some violence but nothing like the violence committed who believe and teach that Allah commands violence in his name.

Typical tribal systems back then WERE incredibly violent you dumb ****, all Mohammed did was successfully band together a load of people and wage a highly successful war of expansion. Like other successful generals and leaders have done throughout the world countless times. The only reason we still even remember he exists outside the history-nerd circle is because he made up a religion which took off, like Jesus and Joseph Smith and others also managed to pull off.

You're being incredibly dishonest. Pointing out that he was a baby raper is an actual good point. Why should anyone in this generation follow a baby raper just because he lived in a generation that approved of that?

Why should anyone follow the teachings of biblical figures who did horrific things? I completely agree, let's do away with the whole thing, and just make moral rules for society that are based on modern morality.

[Kidlicious]

You excuse violence by Christians constantly, whether its the US bombing hospitals or little kids, white police officers shooting unarmed black people or whatever, don't try and claim you have a shred of compassion in you.

You damn liar. I have never excused either of those things.

Typical tribal systems back then WERE incredibly violent you dumb ****, all Mohammed did was successfully band together a load of people and wage a highly successful war of expansion. Like other successful generals and leaders have done throughout the world countless times. The only reason we still even remember he exists outside the history-nerd circle is because he made up a religion which took off, like Jesus and Joseph Smith and others also managed to pull off.

Another statement that shows that you don't know anything about history. You might as well say that Hitler "just fought a war of expansion" you dip****.

Why should anyone follow the teachings of biblical figures who did horrific things? I completely agree, let's do away with the whole thing, and just make moral rules for society that are based on modern morality.

Because you are an immoral liar who apologizes for child rapers and murderers.

[Proteus_MST]

Insofar as both are violent and Christianity is peaceful?

Christianity more peaceful?
Nope (a peaceful christianity is a more recent development from the 20th century onwards ... before that they (as an organized church) were as eager in persecuting "unbelievers" as other religions .... often even more so)

Jesus more peaceful (according to his depiction in the bible (in comparison to the vengeful, jealous and warlike god he represents))
Clearly yes

[kentonio]

You damn liar. I have never excused either of those things.

Unfortunately the search function seems unable to find threads older than a few weeks at present, but you've sided with the police in unarmed shooting cases on numerous occasions. I'm fairly sure you've thrown the term 'thugs' around too, but without being able to check I don't want to make that accusation.

Another statement that shows that you don't know anything about history. You might as well say that Hitler "just fought a war of expansion" you dip****.

Hitler did fight a war of expansion. That was his primary objective, as anyone who has actually studied the period would know perfectly well. Where you're going wrong is somehow thinking that saying that is some kind of moral excuse for his actions, it isn't. The sole act of fighting a war of expansion is one of the most morally repellant actions a person can take. It's a willingness to destroy the lives of innocent people simply to steal their stuff. The holocaust at its core was basically that exact same thing when you strip away the religious coverings. The nazis stole vast qualities of money and possessions from the Jewish people, used them as slave labour and used them as an excuse to carry out their expansionistic goals before slaughtering them.

What is actually morally repellant is thinking that putting the discussion in those terms is some kind of lessening of their crimes. It isn't, its a way of showing just how base and crude their actions really were. There was no deep idealistic false morality in there, it was greed pure and simple.

Because you are an immoral liar who apologizes for child rapers and murderers.

Please explain why you follow a religion that set the low age for approving marriages at 12 years old. Or are you no longer a Christian?

[Kidlicious]

Unfortunately the search function seems unable to find threads older than a few weeks at present, but you've sided with the police in unarmed shooting cases on numerous occasions. I'm fairly sure you've thrown the term 'thugs' around too, but without being able to check I don't want to make that accusation.

They police officer was found innocent and that thug was a thug. There is video evidence of him stealing from a convenience store and shoving the owner.

Hitler did fight a war of expansion. That was his primary objective, as anyone who has actually studied the period would know perfectly well. Where you're going wrong is somehow thinking that saying that is some kind of moral excuse for his actions, it isn't. The sole act of fighting a war of expansion is one of the most morally repellant actions a person can take. It's a willingness to destroy the lives of innocent people simply to steal their stuff. The holocaust at its core was basically that exact same thing when you strip away the religious coverings. The nazis stole vast qualities of money and possessions from the Jewish people, used them as slave labour and used them as an excuse to carry out their expansionistic goals before slaughtering them.

What the actual ****? I'm not defending the Holocaust you dishonest turd!

Please explain why you follow a religion that set the low age for approving marriages at 12 years old. Or are you no longer a Christian?

I'm a Methodist. You know that. I've repeated that everytime I talk to you about religion. You keep trying the same crap that doesn't work.

[kentonio]

They police officer was found innocent and that thug was a thug. There is video evidence of him stealing from a convenience store and shoving the owner.

Which one of the dozens of incidents are you talking about?

What the actual ****? I'm not defending the Holocaust you dishonest turd!

I didn't say you were. Once again you're jumping to conclusions instead of reading what I actually wrote.

I'm a Methodist. You know that. I've repeated that everytime I talk to you about religion. You keep trying the same crap that doesn't work.

You're a Christian. Your specific religion is a branch of one that has existed for 2 thousand years and still uses the same documentation. The branch occured long after those church rules were in place. Do you just disavow everything about Christianity before the Methodist church was founded?

[Elok]

It's deeply dubious to say that the Holocaust was primarily religious, given that most of the Nazi upper hierarchy was skeptical of conventional religion at best and there's evidence to suggest Hitler planned to purge the churches once he was done with everybody else. While antisemitism originated in Christian Europe, by Hitler's time it had been fundamentally transformed from a primarily religious objection (they killed Christ and continued to reject Him) to a racial "scientific" one (they were genetically predestinate thieves and parasites undermining the master race). There was at least as much, if not more, bad readings of science and bad readings of Nietzsche in Nazism as there were bad readings of Christianity.

Because the Nazi Gleichschaltung policy of forced coordination encountered such forceful opposition from the churches, Hitler decided to postpone the struggle until after the war.^[60] During the War, Rosenberg, the party's official ideologist outlined the future envisioned for religion in Germany, with a thirty-point program for the future of the German churches. Among its articles: (1) the National Reich Church of Germany was to claim exclusive control over all churches in the Reich; (5) foreign faiths imported to Germany in 800 AD were to be exterminated; (7) priests/pastors were to be replaced with National Reich Orators; (13) publication of the Bible was to cease; (14) Mein Kampf was to be considered the foremost source of ethics; (18) crucifixes, Bibles and saints to be removed from altars; (19) Mein Kampf was to be placed on altars "to the German nation and therefore to God the most sacred book"; (30) the Christian Cross to be removed from all churches and replaced with the swastika.^[48]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchenkampf