Obama Just Compared Christianity With Islam…At National Prayer Breakfast

[deaddogseye]

Whatever you think of his statement -- and its incredibly stupid - the White House from time to time laments the intensity of the opposition to Obama and sees it as personal / hatred / etc.

Well when you say stuff like this, that's what is going to happen. His real problem is that he just isn't a very smart person.

 

[Geaux4it]

Calling 1 billion Christians equal to terrorists BASED on actions over 1,000 years old?
People like you are really proving the Gruber statement "Stupidity of American Voter" here!

Quote him saying that.

First tell us what the definition of is...is....

-Geaux

We'll count that as one who can't quote him saying any such thing.

We're smarter than you I suppose as we can get the message within the context delivered.

Lets have a brief vocabulary lesson... Shall we?

Inferred- 1. To conclude from evidence or by reasoning:

Your lack of common sense reasoning has your dishonesty on full display... But for you, I'll just chock it up to lack of education in being able to come about a logical conclusion in the face of overwhelming evidence.

-Geaux

 

[elektra]

Yes, Mister President, except...

1. the Crusades happened the better part of a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

2. the Inquisition happened half a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

3. when Christians did those things so many centuries ago, they did so in direct violation of the teachings of their Founder, whereas when the Muslims do this today, they do it in obedience to the teachings of their Founder.

Apples and oranges, Mister President.

Oh, and, by the way... are you not supposed to be one of us? So why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Sure, you can find quotes of beheading in the bible, you just can't find any examples of Christians beheading people in the name of Christianity for the last 2015 years.

Did you somehow miss the Crusades?

No, did you somehow miss that I responded to, "beheadings", not war.

They killed people with swords, happily trowing infants into the air and slicing them to pieces, as well as bashing their heads in with rocks. Do you really think they didn't behead people?

And you will be referencing which book or will you simply dictate that you are right, of course you may simply draw a card from the deck of google, so.......

 

[Kondor3]

..."...And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."...

Yes, Mister President, except...

1. the Crusades happened the better part of a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

2. the Inquisition happened half a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

3. when Christians did those things so many centuries ago, they did so in direct violation of the teachings of their Founder, whereas when the Muslims do this today, they do it in obedience to the teachings of their Founder.

Apples and oranges, Mister President.

Oh, and, by the way... are you not supposed to be one of us? So why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Yes, yes, yes...

Apologists for Radical Islam, and Uber-Liberals - committed to religious egalitarianism despite the savage nature of the alien belief system - always drag-out the violence inherent in the Old Testament, to try and equate Islamic dogma and philosophy with Christian dogma and philosophy...

Here's the problem with that...

The New Testament overrides and supercedes the Old...

Any teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override and supercede conflicting teachings in the Old Testament...

If the Prophet DumAzzkiel from ancient times says that it's OK to spit your enemy's babies on barbeque skewers and eat them with fava beans and a nice chianti...

And if Jesus of Nazareth says that you should "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor", then...

Your enemy's babies are safe, after all, because the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override those of the Old Testament...

Now, mind you, over the centuries, a very great and repeated slaughter has been perpetrated by Christians, in various parts of the domains of Old Christendom...

But, here's the thing...

When Christians slaughtered in the name of God, they did so in obedience-to or in agreement-with Christian clerics and/or Christian royalty who were covering their asses with such concepts as "Just War" and "Defense of the Faith"...

And those concepts - and the actions and great slaughters committed under the aegis of those concepts - were in direct violation of the basic teachings of Jesus of Nazareth - namely: "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor".

In effect, churchmen and temporal rulers had devised Juicy Rationalizations to circumvent the unmistakable prohibitions against violence and the unmistakable enjoinders to love, for which Jesus of Nazareth is famed and respected and even worshiped, and which he served-up without caveats or conditions or exceptions during his ministry.

Jesus of Nazareth did not say "Turn the other cheek, unless the other guy is making war on you" nor did he say "Love thy neighbor, unless he is making war on you" nor did he say "Suffer the little children to come unto me, unless they belong to a different tribe or race or religion" - rather, his injunctions are perceived as universal and unconditional.

The great violence committed by Christianity in centuries long-past was the result of mortal and fallible men, misleading others away from those Core Teachings of Jesus.

The Old Testament is there as historical backdrop and as continuity with the monotheistic heritage of Jesus and as metaphorical Morality Play and as a collection of lessons in what to do and what not to do, and as a catch-all bucket for anything not covered by the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the superceding New Testament.

If the subject matter is explicitly or (reasonably) implicitly covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the New Testament supercede and control.

If the subject matter is not covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the Old Testament control.

The Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth prohibit violence and warfare of any kind, under any circumstances.

Leaving the warfare and head-taking and baby-skewering of the Old Testament as historical narrative and backdrop, rather than as permission for others to do the same.

Islam, on the other hand, is absolutely saturated with Permissions to Wage War and to commit Violence Against Unbelievers - supposedly, the Word of God himself, as revealed to Muhammed.

Clearly, the Islamic vision of the godhead is a bloodier and more violent vision than that offered to Mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.

Equally clearly, the Founder of Islam was a being of far commoner clay and far more violent than the Founder of Christianity.

It is failure to make and understand and apply these differences, which allows faux equivalencies between Islam and Christianity.

But... amongst those who perceive and understand these differences... the far more savage and brutal nature of the Core Teachings of Islam come into a clear focus.

Obumble - the Failed Messiah - is a high-profile purveyor of the falsehood inherent in such faux equivalencies.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Calling 1 billion Christians equal to terrorists BASED on actions over 1,000 years old?
People like you are really proving the Gruber statement "Stupidity of American Voter" here!

Quote him saying that.

First tell us what the definition of is...is....

-Geaux

We'll count that as one who can't quote him saying any such thing.

We're smarter than you I suppose as we can get the message within the context delivered.

Lets have a brief vocabulary lesson... Shall we?

Inferred- 1. To conclude from evidence or by reasoning:

Your lack of common sense reasoning has your dishonesty on full display... But for you, I'll just chock it up to lack of education in being able to come about a logical conclusion in the face of overwhelming evidence.

-Geaux

Let me give you a vocabulary lesson.

Knowingly claiming something to be true when it is false is called LYING.

The mental patient poster LIED. Period.

 

[NYcarbineer]

..."...And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."...

Yes, Mister President, except...

1. the Crusades happened the better part of a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

2. the Inquisition happened half a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

3. when Christians did those things so many centuries ago, they did so in direct violation of the teachings of their Founder, whereas when the Muslims do this today, they do it in obedience to the teachings of their Founder.

Apples and oranges, Mister President.

Oh, and, by the way... are you not supposed to be one of us? So why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Yes, yes, yes...

Apologists for Radical Islam, and Uber-Liberals - committed to religious egalitarianism despite the savage nature of the alien belief system - always drag-out the violence inherent in the Old Testament, to try and equate Islamic dogma and philosophy with Christian dogma and philosophy...

Here's the problem with that...

The New Testament overrides and supercedes the Old...

Any teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override and supercede conflicting teachings in the Old Testament...

If the Prophet DumAzzKiel from ancient times says that it's OK to spit your enemy's babies on barbeque skewers and eat them with fava beans and a nice chianti...

And if Jesus of Nazareth says that you should "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor", then...

Your enemy's babies are safe, after all, because the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override those of the Old Testament...

Now, mind you, over the centuries, a very great and repeated slaughter has been perpetrated by Christians, in various parts of the domains of Old Christendom...

But, here's the thing...

When Christians slaughtered in the name of God, they did so in obedience-to or in agreement-with Christian clerics and/or Christian royalty who were covering their asses with such concepts as "Just War" and "Defense of the Faith"...

And those concepts - and the actions and great slaughters committed under the aegis of those concepts - were in direct violation of the basic teachings of Jesus of Nazareth - namely: "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor".

In effect, churchmen and temporal rulers had devised Juicy Rationalizations to circumvent the unmistakable prohibitions against violence and the unmistakable enjoinders to love, for which Jesus of Nazareth is famed and respected and even worshiped, and which he served-up without caveats or conditions or exceptions during his ministry.

Jesus of Nazareth did not say "Turn the other cheek, unless the other guy is making war on you" nor did he say "Love thy neighbor, unless he is making war on you" nor did he say "Suffer the little children to come unto me, unless they belong to a different tribe or race or religion" - rather, his injunctions are perceived as universal and unconditional.

The great violence committed by Christianity in centuries long-past was the result of mortal and fallible men, misleading others away from those Core Teachings of Jesus.

The Old Testament is there as historical backdrop and as continuity with the monotheistic heritage of Jesus and as metaphorical Morality Play and as a collection of lessons in what to do and what not to do, and as a catch-all bucket for anything not covered by the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the superceding New Testament.

If the subject matter is explicitly or (reasonably) implicitly covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the New Testament supercede and control.

If the subject matter is not covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the Old Testament control.

The Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth prohibit violence and warfare of any kind, under any circumstances.

Leaving the warfare and head-taking and baby-skewering of the Old Testament as historical narrative and backdrop, rather than as permission for others to do the same.

Islam, on the other hand, is absolutely saturated with Permissions to Wage War and to commit Violence Against Unbelievers - supposedly, the Word of God himself, as revealed to Muhammed.

Clearly, the Islamic vision of the godhead is a bloodier and more violent vision that that offered to Mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.

Equally clearly, the Founder of Islam was a being of far commoner clay and far more violent than the Founder of Christianity.

It is failure to make and understand and apply these differences, which allows faux equivalences between Islam and Christianity.

But... amongst those who perceive and understand these differences... the far more savage and brutal nature of the Core Teachings of Islam come into a clear focus.

Obumble - the Failed Messiah - is a high-profile purveyor of the falsehood inherent in such faux equivalencies.

It's irrelevant what's in the storybooks.

99% of Muslims manage to live peacefully.

99% of Christians manage to ignore the extreme pacifist admonitions of Christ and still call themselves Christians.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Sure, you can find quotes of beheading in the bible, you just can't find any examples of Christians beheading people in the name of Christianity for the last 2015 years.

Did you somehow miss the Crusades?

No, did you somehow miss that I responded to, "beheadings", not war.

They killed people with swords, happily trowing infants into the air and slicing them to pieces, as well as bashing their heads in with rocks. Do you really think they didn't behead people?

And you will be referencing which book or will you simply dictate that you are right, of course you may simply draw a card from the deck of google, so.......

Enjoy: Crimes of Christianity The Crusades

"Such was the carnage in the Mosque of Omar, that the mutilated carcasses were hurried by the torrents of blood into the court; dissevered arms and hands floated into the current that carried them into contact with bodies to which they had not belonged. Ten thousand people were murdered in this sanctuary. It was not only the lacerated and headless trunks which shocked the sight, but the figures of the victors themselves reeking with the blood of their slaughtered enemies. No place of refuge remained to the vanquished, so indiscriminately did the insatiable fanaticism of the conquerors disregard alike supplication and resistance. Some were slain, others were thrown from the tops of the churches and of the citadel." [192:1]"

You'll especially like the beheading and setting afire parts.

And maybe this:


"Michaud remarks that the contemporary Christian historians describe these frightful scenes with perfect equanimity. Even amid recitals of the most disgusting details they "never allow a single expression of horror or pity to escape them." [193:8] Nor did the clergy feel any more compunction than the laymen. There is a letter written by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, to the Pope, in which he says: "If you desire to know what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses." [193:9]"

 

[Geaux4it]

..."...And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."...

Yes, Mister President, except...

1. the Crusades happened the better part of a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

2. the Inquisition happened half a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

3. when Christians did those things so many centuries ago, they did so in direct violation of the teachings of their Founder, whereas when the Muslims do this today, they do it in obedience to the teachings of their Founder.

Apples and oranges, Mister President.

Oh, and, by the way... are you not supposed to be one of us? So why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Yes, yes, yes...

Apologists for Radical Islam, and Uber-Liberals - committed to religious egalitarianism despite the savage nature of the alien belief system - always drag-out the violence inherent in the Old Testament, to try and equate Islamic dogma and philosophy with Christian dogma and philosophy...

Here's the problem with that...

The New Testament overrides and supercedes the Old...

Any teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override and supercede conflicting teachings in the Old Testament...

If the Prophet DumAzzKiel from ancient times says that it's OK to spit your enemy's babies on barbeque skewers and eat them with fava beans and a nice chianti...

And if Jesus of Nazareth says that you should "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor", then...

Your enemy's babies are safe, after all, because the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override those of the Old Testament...

Now, mind you, over the centuries, a very great and repeated slaughter has been perpetrated by Christians, in various parts of the domains of Old Christendom...

But, here's the thing...

When Christians slaughtered in the name of God, they did so in obedience-to or in agreement-with Christian clerics and/or Christian royalty who were covering their asses with such concepts as "Just War" and "Defense of the Faith"...

And those concepts - and the actions and great slaughters committed under the aegis of those concepts - were in direct violation of the basic teachings of Jesus of Nazareth - namely: "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor".

In effect, churchmen and temporal rulers had devised Juicy Rationalizations to circumvent the unmistakable prohibitions against violence and the unmistakable enjoinders to love, for which Jesus of Nazareth is famed and respected and even worshiped, and which he served-up without caveats or conditions or exceptions during his ministry.

Jesus of Nazareth did not say "Turn the other cheek, unless the other guy is making war on you" nor did he say "Love thy neighbor, unless he is making war on you" nor did he say "Suffer the little children to come unto me, unless they belong to a different tribe or race or religion" - rather, his injunctions are perceived as universal and unconditional.

The great violence committed by Christianity in centuries long-past was the result of mortal and fallible men, misleading others away from those Core Teachings of Jesus.

The Old Testament is there as historical backdrop and as continuity with the monotheistic heritage of Jesus and as metaphorical Morality Play and as a collection of lessons in what to do and what not to do, and as a catch-all bucket for anything not covered by the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the superceding New Testament.

If the subject matter is explicitly or (reasonably) implicitly covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the New Testament supercede and control.

If the subject matter is not covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the Old Testament control.

The Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth prohibit violence and warfare of any kind, under any circumstances.

Leaving the warfare and head-taking and baby-skewering of the Old Testament as historical narrative and backdrop, rather than as permission for others to do the same.

Islam, on the other hand, is absolutely saturated with Permissions to Wage War and to commit Violence Against Unbelievers - supposedly, the Word of God himself, as revealed to Muhammed.

Clearly, the Islamic vision of the godhead is a bloodier and more violent vision that that offered to Mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.

Equally clearly, the Founder of Islam was a being of far commoner clay and far more violent than the Founder of Christianity.

It is failure to make and understand and apply these differences, which allows faux equivalences between Islam and Christianity.

But... amongst those who perceive and understand these differences... the far more savage and brutal nature of the Core Teachings of Islam come into a clear focus.

Obumble - the Failed Messiah - is a high-profile purveyor of the falsehood inherent in such faux equivalencies.

It's irrelevant what's in the storybooks.

99% of Muslims manage to live peacefully.

99% of Christians manage to ignore the extreme pacifist admonitions of Christ and still call themselves Christians.

And 99.9% of gun owners never commit a crime

-Geaux

 

[Kondor3]

..."...And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."...

Yes, Mister President, except...

1. the Crusades happened the better part of a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

2. the Inquisition happened half a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

3. when Christians did those things so many centuries ago, they did so in direct violation of the teachings of their Founder, whereas when the Muslims do this today, they do it in obedience to the teachings of their Founder.

Apples and oranges, Mister President.

Oh, and, by the way... are you not supposed to be one of us? So why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Yes, yes, yes...

Apologists for Radical Islam, and Uber-Liberals - committed to religious egalitarianism despite the savage nature of the alien belief system - always drag-out the violence inherent in the Old Testament, to try and equate Islamic dogma and philosophy with Christian dogma and philosophy...

Here's the problem with that...

The New Testament overrides and supercedes the Old...

Any teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override and supercede conflicting teachings in the Old Testament...

If the Prophet DumAzzKiel from ancient times says that it's OK to spit your enemy's babies on barbeque skewers and eat them with fava beans and a nice chianti...

And if Jesus of Nazareth says that you should "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor", then...

Your enemy's babies are safe, after all, because the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override those of the Old Testament...

Now, mind you, over the centuries, a very great and repeated slaughter has been perpetrated by Christians, in various parts of the domains of Old Christendom...

But, here's the thing...

When Christians slaughtered in the name of God, they did so in obedience-to or in agreement-with Christian clerics and/or Christian royalty who were covering their asses with such concepts as "Just War" and "Defense of the Faith"...

And those concepts - and the actions and great slaughters committed under the aegis of those concepts - were in direct violation of the basic teachings of Jesus of Nazareth - namely: "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor".

In effect, churchmen and temporal rulers had devised Juicy Rationalizations to circumvent the unmistakable prohibitions against violence and the unmistakable enjoinders to love, for which Jesus of Nazareth is famed and respected and even worshiped, and which he served-up without caveats or conditions or exceptions during his ministry.

Jesus of Nazareth did not say "Turn the other cheek, unless the other guy is making war on you" nor did he say "Love thy neighbor, unless he is making war on you" nor did he say "Suffer the little children to come unto me, unless they belong to a different tribe or race or religion" - rather, his injunctions are perceived as universal and unconditional.

The great violence committed by Christianity in centuries long-past was the result of mortal and fallible men, misleading others away from those Core Teachings of Jesus.

The Old Testament is there as historical backdrop and as continuity with the monotheistic heritage of Jesus and as metaphorical Morality Play and as a collection of lessons in what to do and what not to do, and as a catch-all bucket for anything not covered by the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the superceding New Testament.

If the subject matter is explicitly or (reasonably) implicitly covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the New Testament supercede and control.

If the subject matter is not covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the Old Testament control.

The Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth prohibit violence and warfare of any kind, under any circumstances.

Leaving the warfare and head-taking and baby-skewering of the Old Testament as historical narrative and backdrop, rather than as permission for others to do the same.

Islam, on the other hand, is absolutely saturated with Permissions to Wage War and to commit Violence Against Unbelievers - supposedly, the Word of God himself, as revealed to Muhammed.

Clearly, the Islamic vision of the godhead is a bloodier and more violent vision that that offered to Mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.

Equally clearly, the Founder of Islam was a being of far commoner clay and far more violent than the Founder of Christianity.

It is failure to make and understand and apply these differences, which allows faux equivalences between Islam and Christianity.

But... amongst those who perceive and understand these differences... the far more savage and brutal nature of the Core Teachings of Islam come into a clear focus.

Obumble - the Failed Messiah - is a high-profile purveyor of the falsehood inherent in such faux equivalencies.

It's irrelevant what's in the storybooks.

99% of Muslims manage to live peacefully.

99% of Christians manage to ignore the extreme pacifist admonitions of Christ and still call themselves Christians.

Yes, yes, yes...

Anything that runs contrary to your viewpoint is 'irrelevant'...

Horseshit...

And...

99% of Muslims manage to live peacefully, while 99% of Christians are belligerent in nature?

Double Horseshit...

Although, by that statement, you reveal whose side you're on...

And it's not ours...

Out-ed.

 

[Edgetho]

Here's why I (accurately) call dimocraps the scum of the earth -- They are

In the name of political expediency, in the name of defending one of their own (the Lying Cocksucker in Chief) they will not only denounce their own Faith, their own Country, their own People, their own Culture and the Heroes that protect them from those who would harm ALL of us (especially them).....

People, dimocraps are NOT good people with bad ideas. They are NOT misguided, mistaken or misremembering. dimocraps are NOT like us, they do NOT want what's best for all of us but in a different way, with a different approach

dimocraps are the scum of the earth.

Period.

You don't reason with this kind of insane scum, you destroy it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Here's why I (accurately) call dimocraps the scum of the earth -- They are

In the name of political expediency, in the name of defending one of their own (the Lying Cocksucker in Chief) they will not only denounce their own Faith, their own Country, their own People, their own Culture and the Heroes that protect them from those who would harm ALL of us (especially them).....

People, dimocraps are NOT good people with bad ideas. They are NOT misguided, mistaken or misremembering. dimocraps are NOT like us, they do NOT want what's best for all of us but in a different way, with a different approach

dimocraps are the scum of the earth.

Period.

You don't reason with this kind of insane scum, you destroy it.

And the ISIS for Jesus party speaks.

It's not the faith kiddos, it's the mentality, like that of Edge here, just itching to pick up his sword and slaughter in the name of Jesus.

 

[elektra]

Sure, you can find quotes of beheading in the bible, you just can't find any examples of Christians beheading people in the name of Christianity for the last 2015 years.

Did you somehow miss the Crusades?

No, did you somehow miss that I responded to, "beheadings", not war.

They killed people with swords, happily trowing infants into the air and slicing them to pieces, as well as bashing their heads in with rocks. Do you really think they didn't behead people?

And you will be referencing which book or will you simply dictate that you are right, of course you may simply draw a card from the deck of google, so.......

Enjoy: Crimes of Christianity The Crusades

"Such was the carnage in the Mosque of Omar, that the mutilated carcasses were hurried by the torrents of blood into the court; dissevered arms and hands floated into the current that carried them into contact with bodies to which they had not belonged. Ten thousand people were murdered in this sanctuary. It was not only the lacerated and headless trunks which shocked the sight, but the figures of the victors themselves reeking with the blood of their slaughtered enemies. No place of refuge remained to the vanquished, so indiscriminately did the insatiable fanaticism of the conquerors disregard alike supplication and resistance. Some were slain, others were thrown from the tops of the churches and of the citadel." [192:1]"

You'll especially like the beheading and setting afire parts.

And maybe this:


"Michaud remarks that the contemporary Christian historians describe these frightful scenes with perfect equanimity. Even amid recitals of the most disgusting details they "never allow a single expression of horror or pity to escape them." [193:8] Nor did the clergy feel any more compunction than the laymen. There is a letter written by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, to the Pope, in which he says: "If you desire to know what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses." [193:9]"

It says headless trunks not beheading, and again you are confusing war with beheading.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Did you somehow miss the Crusades?

No, did you somehow miss that I responded to, "beheadings", not war.

They killed people with swords, happily trowing infants into the air and slicing them to pieces, as well as bashing their heads in with rocks. Do you really think they didn't behead people?

And you will be referencing which book or will you simply dictate that you are right, of course you may simply draw a card from the deck of google, so.......

Enjoy: Crimes of Christianity The Crusades

"Such was the carnage in the Mosque of Omar, that the mutilated carcasses were hurried by the torrents of blood into the court; dissevered arms and hands floated into the current that carried them into contact with bodies to which they had not belonged. Ten thousand people were murdered in this sanctuary. It was not only the lacerated and headless trunks which shocked the sight, but the figures of the victors themselves reeking with the blood of their slaughtered enemies. No place of refuge remained to the vanquished, so indiscriminately did the insatiable fanaticism of the conquerors disregard alike supplication and resistance. Some were slain, others were thrown from the tops of the churches and of the citadel." [192:1]"

You'll especially like the beheading and setting afire parts.

And maybe this:


"Michaud remarks that the contemporary Christian historians describe these frightful scenes with perfect equanimity. Even amid recitals of the most disgusting details they "never allow a single expression of horror or pity to escape them." [193:8] Nor did the clergy feel any more compunction than the laymen. There is a letter written by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, to the Pope, in which he says: "If you desire to know what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses." [193:9]"

It says headless trunks not beheading, and again you are confusing war with beheading.

So, the Christians, who are not allowed to go to war, can chop off heads in war but Muslims beheading people is barbaric? Is that your position?

 

[NYcarbineer]

..."...And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ."...

Yes, Mister President, except...

1. the Crusades happened the better part of a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

2. the Inquisition happened half a thousand years ago, whereas Islam is doing this today, during our very lifetimes

3. when Christians did those things so many centuries ago, they did so in direct violation of the teachings of their Founder, whereas when the Muslims do this today, they do it in obedience to the teachings of their Founder.

Apples and oranges, Mister President.

Oh, and, by the way... are you not supposed to be one of us? So why are you giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

I could find you plenty of Bible Quotes that call for beheadings, guy. So saying that this is against the teachings of Jesus are kind of silly.

Judges 7:25
And they took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb ... and brought the heads of Oreb and Zeeb to Gideon....



1 Samuel 17:57
And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, ... [he] brought ... the head of the Philistine in his hand.


2 Samuel 4:7-8
And they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head ... brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David....


2 Samuel 20:22
And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab.


2 Kings 10:7-8
[T]hey took the king's sons, and slew seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent him them to Jezreel. And there came a messenger, and told him, saying, They have brought the heads of the king's sons. And he said, Lay ye them in two heaps at the entering in of the gate until the morning.

Yes, yes, yes...

Apologists for Radical Islam, and Uber-Liberals - committed to religious egalitarianism despite the savage nature of the alien belief system - always drag-out the violence inherent in the Old Testament, to try and equate Islamic dogma and philosophy with Christian dogma and philosophy...

Here's the problem with that...

The New Testament overrides and supercedes the Old...

Any teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override and supercede conflicting teachings in the Old Testament...

If the Prophet DumAzzKiel from ancient times says that it's OK to spit your enemy's babies on barbeque skewers and eat them with fava beans and a nice chianti...

And if Jesus of Nazareth says that you should "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor", then...

Your enemy's babies are safe, after all, because the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth override those of the Old Testament...

Now, mind you, over the centuries, a very great and repeated slaughter has been perpetrated by Christians, in various parts of the domains of Old Christendom...

But, here's the thing...

When Christians slaughtered in the name of God, they did so in obedience-to or in agreement-with Christian clerics and/or Christian royalty who were covering their asses with such concepts as "Just War" and "Defense of the Faith"...

And those concepts - and the actions and great slaughters committed under the aegis of those concepts - were in direct violation of the basic teachings of Jesus of Nazareth - namely: "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thy neighbor".

In effect, churchmen and temporal rulers had devised Juicy Rationalizations to circumvent the unmistakable prohibitions against violence and the unmistakable enjoinders to love, for which Jesus of Nazareth is famed and respected and even worshiped, and which he served-up without caveats or conditions or exceptions during his ministry.

Jesus of Nazareth did not say "Turn the other cheek, unless the other guy is making war on you" nor did he say "Love thy neighbor, unless he is making war on you" nor did he say "Suffer the little children to come unto me, unless they belong to a different tribe or race or religion" - rather, his injunctions are perceived as universal and unconditional.

The great violence committed by Christianity in centuries long-past was the result of mortal and fallible men, misleading others away from those Core Teachings of Jesus.

The Old Testament is there as historical backdrop and as continuity with the monotheistic heritage of Jesus and as metaphorical Morality Play and as a collection of lessons in what to do and what not to do, and as a catch-all bucket for anything not covered by the teachings of Jesus and the writings of the superceding New Testament.

If the subject matter is explicitly or (reasonably) implicitly covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the New Testament supercede and control.

If the subject matter is not covered in the New Testament, then the teachings of the Old Testament control.

The Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth prohibit violence and warfare of any kind, under any circumstances.

Leaving the warfare and head-taking and baby-skewering of the Old Testament as historical narrative and backdrop, rather than as permission for others to do the same.

Islam, on the other hand, is absolutely saturated with Permissions to Wage War and to commit Violence Against Unbelievers - supposedly, the Word of God himself, as revealed to Muhammed.

Clearly, the Islamic vision of the godhead is a bloodier and more violent vision that that offered to Mankind by Jesus of Nazareth.

Equally clearly, the Founder of Islam was a being of far commoner clay and far more violent than the Founder of Christianity.

It is failure to make and understand and apply these differences, which allows faux equivalences between Islam and Christianity.

But... amongst those who perceive and understand these differences... the far more savage and brutal nature of the Core Teachings of Islam come into a clear focus.

Obumble - the Failed Messiah - is a high-profile purveyor of the falsehood inherent in such faux equivalencies.

It's irrelevant what's in the storybooks.

99% of Muslims manage to live peacefully.

99% of Christians manage to ignore the extreme pacifist admonitions of Christ and still call themselves Christians.

Yes, yes, yes...

Anything that runs contrary to your viewpoint is 'irrelevant'...

Horseshit...

And...

99% of Muslims manage to live peacefully, while 99% of Christians are belligerent in nature?

Double Horseshit...

Although, by that statement, you reveal whose side you're on...

And it's not ours...

Out-ed.

Nothing you said has anything to do with what I said. Learn to read at an adult level, then come back.

 

[Kondor3]

No, did you somehow miss that I responded to, "beheadings", not war.

They killed people with swords, happily trowing infants into the air and slicing them to pieces, as well as bashing their heads in with rocks. Do you really think they didn't behead people?

And you will be referencing which book or will you simply dictate that you are right, of course you may simply draw a card from the deck of google, so.......

Enjoy: Crimes of Christianity The Crusades

"Such was the carnage in the Mosque of Omar, that the mutilated carcasses were hurried by the torrents of blood into the court; dissevered arms and hands floated into the current that carried them into contact with bodies to which they had not belonged. Ten thousand people were murdered in this sanctuary. It was not only the lacerated and headless trunks which shocked the sight, but the figures of the victors themselves reeking with the blood of their slaughtered enemies. No place of refuge remained to the vanquished, so indiscriminately did the insatiable fanaticism of the conquerors disregard alike supplication and resistance. Some were slain, others were thrown from the tops of the churches and of the citadel." [192:1]"

You'll especially like the beheading and setting afire parts.

And maybe this:


"Michaud remarks that the contemporary Christian historians describe these frightful scenes with perfect equanimity. Even amid recitals of the most disgusting details they "never allow a single expression of horror or pity to escape them." [193:8] Nor did the clergy feel any more compunction than the laymen. There is a letter written by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, to the Pope, in which he says: "If you desire to know what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses." [193:9]"

It says headless trunks not beheading, and again you are confusing war with beheading.

So, the Christians, who are not allowed to go to war, can chop off heads in war but Muslims beheading people is barbaric? Is that your position?

Anyone following (what I style as) the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth is prohibited from committing violence of any kind against his fellow Man.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's why I (accurately) call dimocraps the scum of the earth -- They are

In the name of political expediency, in the name of defending one of their own (the Lying Cocksucker in Chief) they will not only denounce their own Faith, their own Country, their own People, their own Culture and the Heroes that protect them from those who would harm ALL of us (especially them).....

People, dimocraps are NOT good people with bad ideas. They are NOT misguided, mistaken or misremembering. dimocraps are NOT like us, they do NOT want what's best for all of us but in a different way, with a different approach

dimocraps are the scum of the earth.

Period.

You don't reason with this kind of insane scum, you destroy it.

Then why aren't you out killing Democrats?

 

[NYcarbineer]

They killed people with swords, happily trowing infants into the air and slicing them to pieces, as well as bashing their heads in with rocks. Do you really think they didn't behead people?

And you will be referencing which book or will you simply dictate that you are right, of course you may simply draw a card from the deck of google, so.......

Enjoy: Crimes of Christianity The Crusades

"Such was the carnage in the Mosque of Omar, that the mutilated carcasses were hurried by the torrents of blood into the court; dissevered arms and hands floated into the current that carried them into contact with bodies to which they had not belonged. Ten thousand people were murdered in this sanctuary. It was not only the lacerated and headless trunks which shocked the sight, but the figures of the victors themselves reeking with the blood of their slaughtered enemies. No place of refuge remained to the vanquished, so indiscriminately did the insatiable fanaticism of the conquerors disregard alike supplication and resistance. Some were slain, others were thrown from the tops of the churches and of the citadel." [192:1]"

You'll especially like the beheading and setting afire parts.

And maybe this:


"Michaud remarks that the contemporary Christian historians describe these frightful scenes with perfect equanimity. Even amid recitals of the most disgusting details they "never allow a single expression of horror or pity to escape them." [193:8] Nor did the clergy feel any more compunction than the laymen. There is a letter written by Daimbert, archbishop of Pisa, to the Pope, in which he says: "If you desire to know what became of the enemies we found in Jerusalem, know that in the portico of Solomon and in the temple, our soldiers had the vile blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses." [193:9]"

It says headless trunks not beheading, and again you are confusing war with beheading.

So, the Christians, who are not allowed to go to war, can chop off heads in war but Muslims beheading people is barbaric? Is that your position?

Anyone following (what I style as) the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth is prohibited from committing violence of any kind against his fellow Man.

And what percent of Christians adhere to that teaching?

 

[Kondor3]

...Nothing you said has anything to do with what I said. Learn to read at an adult level, then come back.

You are the one excusing 99% of Muslims and condeming 99% of Christians, not me. You have declared your position. You stand with them, not us.

Message received.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Anyone following (what I style as) the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth is prohibited from committing violence of any kind against his fellow Man.

That would be terrific. An actual act of faith. Any idea when such a thing might just happen, for once?

 

[Kondor3]

...Anyone following (what I style as) the Core Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth is prohibited from committing violence of any kind against his fellow Man.

And what percent of Christians adhere to that teaching?

I have no idea.

It is terribly difficult to go through this life without committing violence of some kind or another against your fellow man.

That is the true challenge of Christianity.

It is, on the other hand, terribly easy to commit violence against your fellow Man, when you believe yourself justified, and when your God says it's OK.

That is the trap and the basis of the savagery and the violence inherent in Islam.