Go see a Pentecostal or eastern orthodox mass, if you want to see some funky shit done with language!
Yids are pretty entertaining too, especially after puffing on a reepha! check out the wailing wall, tell me these cunts are any better!
All talk, no fire-power!
Or maybe, he likes to have a fluffy dog living inside the house, hope it's a miniature poodle, as they don't shed some much hair and it's easier to get some flea control happening.
Last edited:
I interpret Jesus as being a character of peace, love, and forgiveness. However, most of the more rudimentary beliefs I see coming from Christianity are from the Old Testament, which shares an Abrahamic tradition with the Qur'an.
Hell! I believe in Jayzuess, it's just Christianity which I don't believe in!
I don't buy into an apocalyptic conclusion, life need not be founded on horror stories.
"Who you think your jivin' with your cosmic debris!"
Magic mushrooms will fuck the smartest man's head up
-Baked lamb with erb' lemon juice and magic mushrooms is a very old christian special on the menu.
I would say anger management on an individual basis to be a big part of any real way forward.
Negativity is a no-no, it's "soul destroying" stuff! and makes any man become animalistical cruel to his fellows(words used, like "counterparts" are a good example of negatively geared mentality- narcissism). In the future, they will look back on this day and age and shudder to think what was in some peoples heads.
True enough, the authors of the New Testament, or some of them, were bigger on peace and love. Once Christians started realizing that the society around them was changing, it became common practice to start disavowing the Old Testament as superceded by the New, except the parts of the Old that they still believe in, like the creation story.
The New isn't bereft of violent teachings, however. And it isn't only Revelations. Matthew 10 is Jesus talking to his disciples about spreading the word, and making it clear that he expects and desires that doing so will spread slaughter of non-believers by believers. That is, if you interpret it literally rather than falling back on metaphor.
21: And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.
34: Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35: For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
There you have it - Jesus has come to bring not peace, but the sword.
Then again, there are teachings against violence as well, and they tend to outnumber the violent teachings, at least until Revelations. Like any scripture, it's a smorgasbord for either pacifists or warmongers to pick and choose.
- wolf
fallout man
Golden Member
- Nov 20, 2007
- 1,787
- 0
- 0
The OP is basing the title of this thread on his own biased opinion, and a lone quote of a self-admittedly deceitful individual. While I don't necessarily disagree with what JediYoda is trying to get across, I don't think that the thread title is "pure of heart."
Not only is the thread title misleading, it is also inflammatory.
:whiste:
21 - he is warning his followers that they may get violence on them for following them
34 - here is something that one can debate. Matthew uses the word "sword" but the other books use the word "division" which anyone really paying attention knows the use of the word sword implies division from the status quo.
Sure take, Matthew literally, but then what? What do you do with the "sword"? Anyone wondering will read the context around it, and it is VERY hard pressed to interpret it as go killing people.
There are maybe a couple of these "types" of statements spoken by Jesus (none ever explicit), and none can ever be interpreted as suggesting violence when you read the context around it. OTOH the Koran explicitly urges violence on non-believers.
Christianity is a conversionist religion in essence, the prodigal son and all that stuff.
Lincoln used this psychology tool very powerfully indeed. Wolf point is so true, Christianity is a double edge sword, with a bottle opener on it's hilt.
Its is also used now by fund management firms to lure in prospective "kills". Financial rebirth thru "wise" investment.
Lincoln used this psychology tool very powerfully indeed. Wolf point is so true, Christianity is a double edge sword, with a bottle opener on it's hilt.
Its is also used now by fund management firms to lure in prospective "kills". Financial rebirth thru "wise" investment.
Last edited:
The sword is a metaphor for the word "truth"? Not rebellious uprising against the Romans at that time?
Same can be done with any book, reading between the lines often get very imaginative or tangential.
It's probably why I read mostly technical documents, even for fun!
- Jul 13, 2005
- 33,981
- 3,318
- 126
The OP is basing the title of this thread on his own biased opinion, and a lone quote of a self-admittedly deceitful individual. While I don't necessarily disagree with what JediYoda is trying to get across, I don't think that the thread title is "pure of heart."
Not only is the thread title misleading, it is also inflammatory.
:whiste:
Unlike the idiot you are.......I don`t take from other threads and purposely mis-quote others.
My thread title is not mis-leading at all.
It is taken word for word out of the article.
I don`t need to make things up or mislead people like you do to get a point accross.
Read the damn article before making yourself look like a fool!!
Context is why I put in 35 along with 34. However, I have no interest in disputing your interpretation because my point is made. Sure, you can interpret whatever you want as literal or as metaphorical. Which is exactly why people of religion will behave very differently from one cultural/political/economic/historic context to the next. You can justify whatever you like by reading scriptures. There is a debate in Islam about the Qu'Ran. The majority of Muslims emphasize the peaceful passages and say the violent ones are taken out of context, refer to more limited cases than general cases, or have metaphorical meaning. I have no horse in any of these disputes, except to note that the peaceful side will win out when the broader culture inclines itself toward peace, and vice versa.
- wolf
fallout man
Golden Member
- Nov 20, 2007
- 1,787
- 0
- 0
You're not getting your 72 virgins by loving your neighbors. Sacrifices have to be made, blood needs to flow.
ericlp
Diamond Member
- Dec 24, 2000
- 6,133
- 219
- 106
When you quote parts of the Bible without proper context, it sounds violent, no? When you quote the Quran without proper context, it would also sound violent. It is obviously clear that context is key. If you quote passages from the Quran you think are violent, just as you defended the bible, a Muslim can defend that verse, because he/she could understand its context. I don't think either books are violent, just as Wolf said, they are interpreted as such due to other factors.
peonyu
Platinum Member
- Mar 12, 2003
- 2,038
- 23
- 81
You state that as though it is fact. Where are your numbers showing Christians have killed more than Muslims have ? I highly doubt that is true. Christians have of course killed plenty...but if you read up on the countless Jihads that Muslims have waged since its founding, it makes the Crusades look like a speck of dust. Probably the highest number of people killed solely in the name of conversion/religion [disease does not count as a 'religion' killing people] was in Northern India/Pakistan when Jihad reached there, the numbers are easily in the millions and im talking about 1400 AD populations. Its no surprise that Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan are nearly 100% muslim today when they were killing anyone who wouldnt convert from Hinduism/Buddhism to thier faith.
Also thats not counting the killings of subjugated Christians when Muslims conquered Egypt, Iraq, Byzantines, Syria, N.Africa, Spain and on and on.
You state that as though it is fact. Where are your sources showing Muslims have killed more than Christians have. It's also no surprise that Malaysia and Indonesia are nearly 100% muslim because of the countless Jihads Muslims waged there when they were killing anyone who wouldn't convert to their faith.
SlickSnake
Diamond Member
- May 29, 2007
- 5,237
- 2
- 0
We can debate endlessly and pointlessly the differences and similarities between the Christians and the Islamics and which is more violent and hateful or peaceful. This eternal debate will invariably take this thread further off topic, since the point of the topic seems to be a son of a Hamas leader saying it's a religion of violence, not peace.
But in light of recent history and events, it is clearly obvious what the biggest difference between them is that we need to concern ourselves with in the present at least for the purposes of this topic.
Fundamentalist Islamics will WILLINGLY kill any innocent and non waring "heathens" in their imaginary Holy wars and still get a free pass into Heaven, where as a Christian Holy war suicider who willingly kills innocent non violent people DO NOT get a free pass to Heaven. MURDERING INNOCENT PEOPLE FOR A RELIGION OR GOD IS NOT A HOLY WAR, IT'S COLD BLOODED HATEFUL MURDER. And NOBODY who is sane and in their right mind can dispute that. Which points to the obvious fact that people who do these things are not sane, and cannot be reasoned with. You don't even bother to try to reason with the rabid mad dog who is trying to kill you, you simply have to kill it. The mad dog gives you no choice in the matter. It's either you or it.
And since we are veering OFF TOPIC anyhow, the most disturbing fact to me overall about "organized religion", is the fact that otherwise apparently sane people are staking their very lives and well being on an invisible God or Gods and a Heaven or Hell they can't even verify exists until they die.
So all this religious fervor and hysteria is based on jumbled together ancient writings that are loosely borrowed from other religions and that frequently contradict each other and play fast and loose with the obvious facts when convenient, such as various ridiculous creationism myths. These frequent and unbelievable discrepancies clearly points out the uneducated and juvenile mentalities of the writers, and not their great Holy insights, and pretty much seals the deal that these are almost completely works of hopeful religious fantasy, and not facts.
And while it's true some historical facts are evident in these various religious writings, in order to make any fiction or myth plausible, and especially if you are selling an alternate lifestyle choice, some degree of historical facts would have to be evident to make the myth somewhat believable in the first place. Otherwise, you would have no religious converts.
Yet another obvious hook used to sell the ancient religious myths, is the conflicting fact the Gods only love us if we do exactly as the religion commands us to, otherwise the Gods will hate us and send us to Hell.
So what's the point in God giving mankind a thinking brain and freewill, then expecting us to stop all rational thinking and act like identical religious zombies based on deaf, dumb and blind faith just to get to Heaven? In that sense, we then become nothing more than brainwashed religious automatons who stop thinking rationally for ourselves, and then expect and demand Holy intervention in every minute facet of our lives.
Somehow, praying the traffic jam lightens up during rush hour or we will get that cash bonus from the boss seems a little irrational and far fetched to be expecting the Gods to steer all our minor choices and destines. The freewill to choose what we want to do with our lives is ours, and remains ours, and there is nothing wrong with that. But we lose a lot of our rational humanity and our grounded purpose for being by expecting divine intervention or guidance over every petty thing. God would not be impressed by that hysterical level of religious fervor, he would be disgusted by it.
Which brings me full circle back to the original point of this topic.
Thanks for reading.
But in light of recent history and events, it is clearly obvious what the biggest difference between them is that we need to concern ourselves with in the present at least for the purposes of this topic.
Fundamentalist Islamics will WILLINGLY kill any innocent and non waring "heathens" in their imaginary Holy wars and still get a free pass into Heaven, where as a Christian Holy war suicider who willingly kills innocent non violent people DO NOT get a free pass to Heaven. MURDERING INNOCENT PEOPLE FOR A RELIGION OR GOD IS NOT A HOLY WAR, IT'S COLD BLOODED HATEFUL MURDER. And NOBODY who is sane and in their right mind can dispute that. Which points to the obvious fact that people who do these things are not sane, and cannot be reasoned with. You don't even bother to try to reason with the rabid mad dog who is trying to kill you, you simply have to kill it. The mad dog gives you no choice in the matter. It's either you or it.
And since we are veering OFF TOPIC anyhow, the most disturbing fact to me overall about "organized religion", is the fact that otherwise apparently sane people are staking their very lives and well being on an invisible God or Gods and a Heaven or Hell they can't even verify exists until they die.
So all this religious fervor and hysteria is based on jumbled together ancient writings that are loosely borrowed from other religions and that frequently contradict each other and play fast and loose with the obvious facts when convenient, such as various ridiculous creationism myths. These frequent and unbelievable discrepancies clearly points out the uneducated and juvenile mentalities of the writers, and not their great Holy insights, and pretty much seals the deal that these are almost completely works of hopeful religious fantasy, and not facts.
And while it's true some historical facts are evident in these various religious writings, in order to make any fiction or myth plausible, and especially if you are selling an alternate lifestyle choice, some degree of historical facts would have to be evident to make the myth somewhat believable in the first place. Otherwise, you would have no religious converts.
Yet another obvious hook used to sell the ancient religious myths, is the conflicting fact the Gods only love us if we do exactly as the religion commands us to, otherwise the Gods will hate us and send us to Hell.
So what's the point in God giving mankind a thinking brain and freewill, then expecting us to stop all rational thinking and act like identical religious zombies based on deaf, dumb and blind faith just to get to Heaven? In that sense, we then become nothing more than brainwashed religious automatons who stop thinking rationally for ourselves, and then expect and demand Holy intervention in every minute facet of our lives.
Somehow, praying the traffic jam lightens up during rush hour or we will get that cash bonus from the boss seems a little irrational and far fetched to be expecting the Gods to steer all our minor choices and destines. The freewill to choose what we want to do with our lives is ours, and remains ours, and there is nothing wrong with that. But we lose a lot of our rational humanity and our grounded purpose for being by expecting divine intervention or guidance over every petty thing. God would not be impressed by that hysterical level of religious fervor, he would be disgusted by it.
Which brings me full circle back to the original point of this topic.
Thanks for reading.
Last edited:
Even if Christianity *IS* a "religion of peace", there are plenty of non-peaceful Christians out there. The fact that Jesus was a nice guy doesn't mean you're not an asshole. And it works the other way too, which is why I'd rather judge individuals based on their actions instead of their professed faith.
It's not that I have a particular opinion on whether Islam is a "religion of peace" or not so much as I think it's an irrelevant question. A guy trying to blow up a plane is a guy trying to blow up a plane...I think that says more about him than whether he's a Muslim or a Methodist. And if instead of blowing up the plane, my fellow passenger just wants to sit there and read GQ magazine, I really don't see why it matters if he prays to Allah or Zeus.
It seems to me that people obsessed with generalizing the religious side of this are less interested in fighting terrorism than in waging Holy War. And while I'm sure that goes over real well at the local Klan meeting, I don't think it's particularly helpful.
It's not that I have a particular opinion on whether Islam is a "religion of peace" or not so much as I think it's an irrelevant question. A guy trying to blow up a plane is a guy trying to blow up a plane...I think that says more about him than whether he's a Muslim or a Methodist. And if instead of blowing up the plane, my fellow passenger just wants to sit there and read GQ magazine, I really don't see why it matters if he prays to Allah or Zeus.
It seems to me that people obsessed with generalizing the religious side of this are less interested in fighting terrorism than in waging Holy War. And while I'm sure that goes over real well at the local Klan meeting, I don't think it's particularly helpful.
Christianity had an enlightenment, unlike Islam.
Christians are not oppressing religious or ethnic minorities. Name me one Christian state (none exist BTW) that oppress and cleanse ethnic, sexual, and religious minorities.
Hundreds of millions of Christians are not allowed to practice in Islamic countries. Converting out of Islam is a capital offense in many states, and can also lead to economic handicaps and even family disownment.
Christians are oppressed in Sudan, Egypt, Gaza, Somalia, Pakistan (majorly), Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran.
Of course, this isn't unique to Islam. Leftist states such as China, Vietnam, North Korea, etc...all oppress Christians (sometimes to even more ruthless extent.)
Christianity *is* a religious of peace in the sense that people do not open the bible and find evidence to support suicide bombings. Muslims convert to Christianity because it is a progressive religious in comparison.
Christianity is the fattest growing religion in the Muslim world and rulers are very concerned about this. Much easier to control a mono-culture than a diverse populous.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter