Fanatical Wrote:A war on Islam? While radical Muslims have been doing a good deal of damage it is unfair to group all of Islam into one category. Perhaps a war on the corruption of Islam. Christians if anyone should be able to understand how a faith can be corrupted by individuals for personal gains. Islam could really use an Enlightenment.

But like I said, these "peaceful" Muslims are a deviation from the true purpose of their faith. THEY are the corruption of the faith. I have no problem if Muslim people want to believe that those who do not convert should be killed. Just they better realize that they will face opposition here in America (to name one, me) if they continue their war here.

eaglewing505 Wrote:Personally, I think every Christian needs to sit down and study the Bible. Then come to your own conclusions for yourself rather than let someone tell you what to think. Then you can discuss with others about your views.

This was the first thing I wanted to address. I realize that this is slightly off topic, but have personally been sorting through this myself.

While individual studying of the Bible is important, to believe that by yourself you can reach the right conclusions is dangerous (for your spiritual health). There is a reason why it is so hard to become a leader in the Church and why there is Church doctrine. Its from people who have devoted long durations of study to the Bible and study under religious scholars. When individuals draw their own conclusions, that is when the religion has been "perverted", in the only word that came to mind.

In probably more clear terms, that is why I believe in more strict and narrow interpretations, where there is much less chance of deviating from the Truth.

My main points in response to a variety of post I don't want to respond to individually due to having to reformat a ton of posts.

My first response was because of this statement:

Quote:And before we drag Christianity into this, I get frustrated whenever I see a church like the United Church of Christ that accept a liberal view of God's laws.

Here we have T saying that he doesn't want to drag Christianity into, but then he goes and rips the UCC up. Sorry, but I find that ludicrous. Forget about Islam, he hates different interpretation than his own. That's fine. I don't have a problem with hating people or ideas, but I find it sad that you can't live comfortably with people believeing something different than you.

Second, let's not just kill the wackos that run extreme fundamental Islam. Lets kill each and every 1.4 Billion adherents to Islam. That's what I hear you advocating. You may not be saying it in as many words, but I don't see how you can't be if you claim that this is a "war on Islam" and you wish the moderates would be extremists, too. So I guess that you can kill them without feeling so bad?

That's all well and good in theory, but frankly I don't want to be sending my children off to a war of extermination. I don't have children yet, but if we're engaged in a war against all of Islam, that's where my kids'll be. Pending that we're not all dead.

I'm not so optimistic that I think we can avoid war for all time. I think there will always be wars, and they will be neccessary. But you won't find me advocating World War 3.

On the subject of tolerance.

Quote:Christians hate the sin and love the sinner. Muslims hate the sinner and want to kill him. Not what I call tolerance.

So the Christian should kill the Muslim/sinner? Is that tolerance? Do you understand the cognitive dissonance that I'm sensing here?

I believe in the freedom of religion worldwide. Is that the case? Clearly not. But I would find it very difficult to support any war that is based on wiping out any religion.

As for:

Quote:

Quote:The mischaracterization of broad groups of people here is laughable.

Like Christians?

Yeah, like Christians. And Muslims.

T-Monay820 Wrote:

eaglewing505 Wrote:Personally, I think every Christian needs to sit down and study the Bible. Then come to your own conclusions for yourself rather than let someone tell you what to think. Then you can discuss with others about your views.

This was the first thing I wanted to address. I realize that this is slightly off topic, but have personally been sorting through this myself.

While individual studying of the Bible is important, to believe that by yourself you can reach the right conclusions is dangerous (for your spiritual health). There is a reason why it is so hard to become a leader in the Church and why there is Church doctrine. Its from people who have devoted long durations of study to the Bible and study under religious scholars. When individuals draw their own conclusions, that is when the religion has been "perverted", in the only word that came to mind.

In probably more clear terms, that is why I believe in more strict and narrow interpretations, where there is much less chance of deviating from the Truth.

I should have said discuss it with your church's leaders or a Bible scholar rather than others. That's what I was trying to say.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:

Quote:Christians hate the sin and love the sinner. Muslims hate the sinner and want to kill him. Not what I call tolerance.

So the Christian should kill the Muslim/sinner? Is that tolerance? Do you understand the cognitive dissonance that I'm sensing here?

BR can you explain how you get Christians should kill Muslims based on the statement of hate the sin, love the sinner?

Hating the sin means not accepting it as ok, not acknowledging it as acceptable. But it doesn't bring with it an action based on that decision. The action is love the sinner, which to me kind of eliminates the possibility of killing them.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:On the subject of tolerance.

Quote:Christians hate the sin and love the sinner. Muslims hate the sinner and want to kill him. Not what I call tolerance.

So the Christian should kill the Muslim/sinner? Is that tolerance? Do you understand the cognitive dissonance that I'm sensing here?

I believe in the freedom of religion worldwide. Is that the case? Clearly not. But I would find it very difficult to support any war that is based on wiping out any religion.

I see you have missed the point. Probably my fault. I will try again.

Tolerance, especially of other religions, is essentially a Western value, not a Muslim value. If you think that by extending tolerance we shall receive tolerance back, I think you are mistaken. It is a delusion that they will leave us be if only we leave them be.

As for tolerance in other ways, I heard today that a political cartoon published in an Arab newspaper showed a pregnant Condi Rice with a monkey inside. yeah, these people are tolerant.

When dealing wwith two different cultures, it would be wise not to assume the other side has the same values as you and will react to you as you would to them.

One difference is the hate the sinner, etc., statement I made. i don't see where you make the leap to kill them - that is a Muslim view, and I am not a Muslim. I THINK, repeat, THINK, you are an idealist whose ideals are based on a Western culture. I don't think the idealist in the Muslim culture dreams of peaceful coexistence - he dreams of a world under Allah's law. He doesn't want "freedom of religion world wide", as you do. Freedom of religion is against his religion.

Just saw the broadcasts of the crowd in baghdad chanting "Death to Israel" and "Death to America". Couldn't find the telecasts of crowds anywhere chanting "Death to Beirut" or "Death to Muslims". Maybe one side IS more tolerant than the other. Maybe that is because of cutural differences. Or religious ones.

As long as people try to characterize the side NOT chanting "Death to____" (fill in the blank) as intolerant, they will continue to lack credibility. Kind of like saying the Jews were intolerant of Hitler. America, England, and Poland tolerated hitler, until war was brought to them. As I said in my earlier post, there coses a time when tolerance is just fooling yourself, and that time comes when the other side doesn't return your tolerance.

Not attempting to justify anything here, but let's take the Star Wars "point of view" theory into account here.

From their point of view:

1. A muslim country is beng invaded by Isreal.
2. Even though they say they doing a defensive strike again a specific group, the continue to drive deeper into the country and kill more innocents.
3. While the rest of the world is asking Isreal to have cease fire, the one country that could actually get a cease fire done is the US and they are not doing anything to aid the muslim country being attacked.

Even if you do not agree with that point of view, you should be able to understand people who might have that point of view.

Quote:Tolerance, especially of other religions, is essentially a Western value, not a Muslim value. If you think that by extending tolerance we shall receive tolerance back, I think you are mistaken. It is a delusion that they will leave us be if only we leave them be.

I'm not denying that. Because I give tolerance, I don't expect it back. And I generally do not get it back. But I still do try to be tolerant. Not because of what I will get out of it, but because I believe it is right.

Quote:I THINK, repeat, THINK, you are an idealist whose ideals are based on a Western culture.

That's probably true. I realize a lot of my ideas are impractical. But I take the stance that if I set high ideals, then even if we fall short, we're not in that bad of a situation.

Quote:BR can you explain how you get Christians should kill Muslims based on the statement of hate the sin, love the sinner?

Maybe it is just me, but when I hear phrases like "War on Islam." I get images in my mind of Christians killing Muslims. Muslims who are viewed as sinners.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:

Quote:BR can you explain how you get Christians should kill Muslims based on the statement of hate the sin, love the sinner?

Maybe it is just me, but when I hear phrases like "War on Islam." I get images in my mind of Christians killing Muslims. Muslims who are viewed as sinners.

I think it's a significant stretch to read

Quote:Christians hate the sin and love the sinner. Muslims hate the sinner and want to kill him. Not what I call tolerance.

and end up at War on Islam.

I was dealing with your response to that, not a broader subject but it sounds like you meant it in conjunction with a broader point. I just got confused given how you structured your statement.

Sorry, I thought that you were defending the War on Islam position that T-Monay was making.

Bourgeois_Rage Wrote:Sorry, I thought that you were defending the War on Islam position that T-Monay was making.

No, just asking about that one statement.

Glad we got that cleared up. I'd hate to lose any of those warm fuzzies we built up in our last conversation. lmfao