Obama Just Compared Christianity With Islam…At National Prayer Breakfast

[Pop23]

Saddam Hussein died because God told George W. Bush to invade Iraq. The Christian Crusades continue...

Ummmm, the crusaderes were Europeans, or hadn't you heard?

 

[Paperman299]

Some Christians, sure. But Scripture is clearly pro-slavery, and so those Christians were essentially radicals. And please - no one is more eager to forget their darker periods of time than Christians. You can bring it up pretty much in passing at breakfast and stir up the hornet's nest...

New testament isn't pro slavery it doesn't advocate either way really. But Christ came to Earth for something far more pressing than abolition and that was the salvation of humanity, slave or free.

Ephesians 6:5-8 (NASB): 5Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; 6not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free.

That passage doesn't advocate slavery. But obedience to God like obedience to one's master. Its called an analogy.

It's not an analogy. It's a passage explaining that being a good slave is being a good Christian, which is about as pro-slavery as Christianity can get.

Of course, Christians today don't advocate slavery, but telling me mid-19th Century Christians had no New Testament passages to justify their position is incorrect.

Yes it it, I can't help if you can't read. It clearly says be obedient to God as you are to your master. If you can't see this, this is your problem, not mine. As I said before, there are passages that could be put forth to both advocate slavery and abolition in the Bible. The fact remains, slavery predates Christianity. It was Christians, White Christians specifically, I know, the horror, that founded the abolition movement on religious principles. It was the British Empire that effectively ended the global slave trade. So Christianity is not responsible for slavery, but it is responsible for ending slavery in the Western world and most of the world all together. though unfortunately it continues today in parts of Africa, Muslim areas more specifically. But the existence of slavery cannot be blamed on Christianity. Without Christianity, there would have been no abolition movement. And as I said before, the Bible is not a political manifesto. Christ sought salvation for all mankind, slave and free, gentile and jew, greek and roman, man and woman. He brought us something far more important than abolition in this world, he gave us eternal life in the next.

This is sort of like saying a manual on how to swim doesn't advocate swimming. Claiming a book on How To Slavery doesn't advocate slavery is some serious cognitive dissonance. And we're limiting ourselves to the New Testament right now, of course...

As far as your other points, hrm. The British Empire started the Atlantic Slave Trade Triangle. They needed African slaves because Native American ones were dying too fast. Bringing over African slaves didn't save the Native Americans, though. Christians continued their campaign to annihilate them, if not physically, then culturally with aggressive efforts to erase their identity and "civilize" them.

Christianity gets no points for not inventing slavery. That's not even a defense. "Hey, it's not like I'm the first guy to ever murder!" Christianity's shame is not cleared away because many abolitionists were also Christians. Southern pastors argued just as vigorously, and with just as much theological merit, and over the next 150 years it would be the most religious states that would most bitterly cling to institutionalized racism.

 

[Paperman299]

Army of God United States - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Maybe I should have underlined and bolded the word major.

Oh my

People at the dozen or so abortion clinics and the 1996 Summer Olympics, which were bombed by associates of the organization, might consider it somewhat major.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army

The LRA was initially formed to resist the Uganda People's Defence Force (UPDF), called the National Resistance Army(NRA) before it took control of the country. The NRA/UPDF has been accused of widespread murder, rape, and pillage.[12][13]In June 2006, Radhika Coomaraswamy, the UN's special representative for children, found more than 5000 children recruited in the Ugandan government army.[14]

If your going to disagree with my post, please do so in a sane manner.

The name of the major Christian religion that instructs its people to kill in the name of God please?

It's easier to just say " I can't think of one"

The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord's Resistance Movement, is a militant movement which is "Christianist," extremist Christian,[6] acting as a new religious movement or a cult which operated in northern Uganda and South Sudan. Originally known as the United Holy Salvation Army and Uganda Christian Army/Movement, its stated goals include ruling Uganda according to the Ten Commandments.[7]

MAJOR dummy!

Thanks for not bothering to actually dispute any of my examples.

 

[tinydancer]

One thing struck me about the Moralizer in Chief's bullshit speech.

He describes ISIS.

“a brutal vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism.”

As far as I know and have read about his speech he never says Islam. Nor does he call them Muslims. Nor does he say that they commit atrocities "in the name of Allah"

As compared to his usage of "in the name of Christ".

Obama shortly thereafter said, “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. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

Rev. Graham to Obama Unlike Christ Mohammed Killed Many Innocent People - His True Followers Emulate Him CNS News

 

[Lakhota]

Saddam Hussein died because God told George W. Bush to invade Iraq. The Christian Crusades continue...

Ummmm, the crusaderes were Europeans, or hadn't you heard?

Who the fuck is Tony Blair?

 

[Pop23]

Maybe I should have underlined and bolded the word major.

Oh my

People at the dozen or so abortion clinics and the 1996 Summer Olympics, which were bombed by associates of the organization, might consider it somewhat major.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army

The LRA was initially formed to resist the Uganda People's Defence Force (UPDF), called the National Resistance Army(NRA) before it took control of the country. The NRA/UPDF has been accused of widespread murder, rape, and pillage.[12][13]In June 2006, Radhika Coomaraswamy, the UN's special representative for children, found more than 5000 children recruited in the Ugandan government army.[14]

If your going to disagree with my post, please do so in a sane manner.

The name of the major Christian religion that instructs its people to kill in the name of God please?

It's easier to just say " I can't think of one"

The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), also known as the Lord's Resistance Movement, is a militant movement which is "Christianist," extremist Christian,[6] acting as a new religious movement or a cult which operated in northern Uganda and South Sudan. Originally known as the United Holy Salvation Army and Uganda Christian Army/Movement, its stated goals include ruling Uganda according to the Ten Commandments.[7]

MAJOR dummy!

Thanks for not bothering to actually dispute any of my examples.

Desperation noted

 

[Pop23]

Saddam Hussein died because God told George W. Bush to invade Iraq. The Christian Crusades continue...

Ummmm, the crusaderes were Europeans, or hadn't you heard?

Who the fuck is Tony Blair?

Did you picture Tony Blair?

What the hell you smoking?

 

[SAYIT]

I believe many of us believe this is an absolute truism....

How did you leave out the good ol' boys of the Taliban?
You may end up without your head for that!

 

[tinydancer]

New testament isn't pro slavery it doesn't advocate either way really. But Christ came to Earth for something far more pressing than abolition and that was the salvation of humanity, slave or free.

Ephesians 6:5-8 (NASB): 5Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; 6not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free.

That passage doesn't advocate slavery. But obedience to God like obedience to one's master. Its called an analogy.

It's not an analogy. It's a passage explaining that being a good slave is being a good Christian, which is about as pro-slavery as Christianity can get.

Of course, Christians today don't advocate slavery, but telling me mid-19th Century Christians had no New Testament passages to justify their position is incorrect.

Yes it it, I can't help if you can't read. It clearly says be obedient to God as you are to your master. If you can't see this, this is your problem, not mine. As I said before, there are passages that could be put forth to both advocate slavery and abolition in the Bible. The fact remains, slavery predates Christianity. It was Christians, White Christians specifically, I know, the horror, that founded the abolition movement on religious principles. It was the British Empire that effectively ended the global slave trade. So Christianity is not responsible for slavery, but it is responsible for ending slavery in the Western world and most of the world all together. though unfortunately it continues today in parts of Africa, Muslim areas more specifically. But the existence of slavery cannot be blamed on Christianity. Without Christianity, there would have been no abolition movement. And as I said before, the Bible is not a political manifesto. Christ sought salvation for all mankind, slave and free, gentile and jew, greek and roman, man and woman. He brought us something far more important than abolition in this world, he gave us eternal life in the next.

This is sort of like saying a manual on how to swim doesn't advocate swimming. Claiming a book on How To Slavery doesn't advocate slavery is some serious cognitive dissonance. And we're limiting ourselves to the New Testament right now, of course...

As far as your other points, hrm. The British Empire started the Atlantic Slave Trade Triangle. They needed African slaves because Native American ones were dying too fast. Bringing over African slaves didn't save the Native Americans, though. Christians continued their campaign to annihilate them, if not physically, then culturally with aggressive efforts to erase their identity and "civilize" them.

Christianity gets no points for not inventing slavery. That's not even a defense. "Hey, it's not like I'm the first guy to ever murder!" Christianity's shame is not cleared away because many abolitionists were also Christians. Southern pastors argued just as vigorously, and with just as much theological merit, and over the next 150 years it would be the most religious states that would most bitterly cling to institutionalized racism.

First slaves in America were white street children from the streets of London.

Cromwell got busy shipping the Irish to the colonies too. Oh and by the way, First Nations had slaves. Other First Nations and blacks.

 

[Lakhota]

Saddam Hussein died because God told George W. Bush to invade Iraq. The Christian Crusades continue...

Ummmm, the crusaderes were Europeans, or hadn't you heard?

Who the fuck is Tony Blair?

Did you picture Tony Blair?

What the hell you smoking?

Maybe you should reread the thread title.

 

[Vigilante]

I believe many of us believe this is an absolute truism....

How did you leave out the good ol' boys of the Taliban?
You may end up without your head for that!

So many muslim terrorist, but just so much room on a picture!

 

[Paperman299]

Ephesians 6:5-8 (NASB): 5Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; 6not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free.

That passage doesn't advocate slavery. But obedience to God like obedience to one's master. Its called an analogy.

It's not an analogy. It's a passage explaining that being a good slave is being a good Christian, which is about as pro-slavery as Christianity can get.

Of course, Christians today don't advocate slavery, but telling me mid-19th Century Christians had no New Testament passages to justify their position is incorrect.

Yes it it, I can't help if you can't read. It clearly says be obedient to God as you are to your master. If you can't see this, this is your problem, not mine. As I said before, there are passages that could be put forth to both advocate slavery and abolition in the Bible. The fact remains, slavery predates Christianity. It was Christians, White Christians specifically, I know, the horror, that founded the abolition movement on religious principles. It was the British Empire that effectively ended the global slave trade. So Christianity is not responsible for slavery, but it is responsible for ending slavery in the Western world and most of the world all together. though unfortunately it continues today in parts of Africa, Muslim areas more specifically. But the existence of slavery cannot be blamed on Christianity. Without Christianity, there would have been no abolition movement. And as I said before, the Bible is not a political manifesto. Christ sought salvation for all mankind, slave and free, gentile and jew, greek and roman, man and woman. He brought us something far more important than abolition in this world, he gave us eternal life in the next.

This is sort of like saying a manual on how to swim doesn't advocate swimming. Claiming a book on How To Slavery doesn't advocate slavery is some serious cognitive dissonance. And we're limiting ourselves to the New Testament right now, of course...

As far as your other points, hrm. The British Empire started the Atlantic Slave Trade Triangle. They needed African slaves because Native American ones were dying too fast. Bringing over African slaves didn't save the Native Americans, though. Christians continued their campaign to annihilate them, if not physically, then culturally with aggressive efforts to erase their identity and "civilize" them.

Christianity gets no points for not inventing slavery. That's not even a defense. "Hey, it's not like I'm the first guy to ever murder!" Christianity's shame is not cleared away because many abolitionists were also Christians. Southern pastors argued just as vigorously, and with just as much theological merit, and over the next 150 years it would be the most religious states that would most bitterly cling to institutionalized racism.

First slaves in America were white street children from the streets of London.

Cromwell got busy shipping the Irish to the colonies too. Oh and by the way, First Nations had slaves. Other First Nations and blacks.

I never said blacks were the first slaves (in fact, I said the opposite), but how is enslaving white children better???

And I also never suggested Christianity invented slavery. Again, these are weak arguments - isn't Christianity supposed to make you a better person?? But if you want to compare atrocities, I think we can agree Christianity was much more ambitious about slavery than those examples you've cited.

 

[Steinlight]

New testament isn't pro slavery it doesn't advocate either way really. But Christ came to Earth for something far more pressing than abolition and that was the salvation of humanity, slave or free.

Ephesians 6:5-8 (NASB): 5Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; 6not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free.

That passage doesn't advocate slavery. But obedience to God like obedience to one's master. Its called an analogy.

It's not an analogy. It's a passage explaining that being a good slave is being a good Christian, which is about as pro-slavery as Christianity can get.

Of course, Christians today don't advocate slavery, but telling me mid-19th Century Christians had no New Testament passages to justify their position is incorrect.

Yes it it, I can't help if you can't read. It clearly says be obedient to God as you are to your master. If you can't see this, this is your problem, not mine. As I said before, there are passages that could be put forth to both advocate slavery and abolition in the Bible. The fact remains, slavery predates Christianity. It was Christians, White Christians specifically, I know, the horror, that founded the abolition movement on religious principles. It was the British Empire that effectively ended the global slave trade. So Christianity is not responsible for slavery, but it is responsible for ending slavery in the Western world and most of the world all together. though unfortunately it continues today in parts of Africa, Muslim areas more specifically. But the existence of slavery cannot be blamed on Christianity. Without Christianity, there would have been no abolition movement. And as I said before, the Bible is not a political manifesto. Christ sought salvation for all mankind, slave and free, gentile and jew, greek and roman, man and woman. He brought us something far more important than abolition in this world, he gave us eternal life in the next.

This is sort of like saying a manual on how to swim doesn't advocate swimming. Claiming a book on How To Slavery doesn't advocate slavery is some serious cognitive dissonance. And we're limiting ourselves to the New Testament right now, of course...

As far as your other points, hrm. The British Empire started the Atlantic Slave Trade Triangle. They needed African slaves because Native American ones were dying too fast. Bringing over African slaves didn't save the Native Americans, though. Christians continued their campaign to annihilate them, if not physically, then culturally with aggressive efforts to erase their identity and "civilize" them.

Christianity gets no points for not inventing slavery. That's not even a defense. "Hey, it's not like I'm the first guy to ever murder!" Christianity's shame is not cleared away because many abolitionists were also Christians. Southern pastors argued just as vigorously, and with just as much theological merit, and over the next 150 years it would be the most religious states that would most bitterly cling to institutionalized racism.

Your verse isn't a verse on "how to slavery", it is a verse on how slaves should obey God as they obey their master. So it doesn't apply at all. There is no cognitive dissonance. You are just proscribing your preconceived prejudices against Christianity, than trying to rig together text that in reality doesn't fit your claims at all.

Slavery, even in it's chattel form, existed prior to the British with the Arabs, Spaniards, Portuguese, and others. This also doesn't include the several European Christian nations that had no slaves, and the those same nations had many who were were enslaved by the Ottomans. The British didn't have a monopoly on slavery. Though their Empire is responsible for ending the trade globally. This is getting off topic though. The point is Christians don't have a monopoly on the slave trade, though Christians are behind Abolition. This is what makes Christianity unique, not that it created slavery but it gave birth to the concept that ended globally. Without Christianity, there would have not been an abolition movement. Yet you don't address this.

As I said, salvation is a far more important issue, not material and earthly political issues like abolition. Your issue is your pride, which is inflamed by your ardent materialism and humanism. You think you have a greater moral grasp of our universe and more compassion for man than our Lord, who is all knowing and omnipotent, which is unbridled arrogance.

 

[tinydancer]

That passage doesn't advocate slavery. But obedience to God like obedience to one's master. Its called an analogy.

It's not an analogy. It's a passage explaining that being a good slave is being a good Christian, which is about as pro-slavery as Christianity can get.

Of course, Christians today don't advocate slavery, but telling me mid-19th Century Christians had no New Testament passages to justify their position is incorrect.

Yes it it, I can't help if you can't read. It clearly says be obedient to God as you are to your master. If you can't see this, this is your problem, not mine. As I said before, there are passages that could be put forth to both advocate slavery and abolition in the Bible. The fact remains, slavery predates Christianity. It was Christians, White Christians specifically, I know, the horror, that founded the abolition movement on religious principles. It was the British Empire that effectively ended the global slave trade. So Christianity is not responsible for slavery, but it is responsible for ending slavery in the Western world and most of the world all together. though unfortunately it continues today in parts of Africa, Muslim areas more specifically. But the existence of slavery cannot be blamed on Christianity. Without Christianity, there would have been no abolition movement. And as I said before, the Bible is not a political manifesto. Christ sought salvation for all mankind, slave and free, gentile and jew, greek and roman, man and woman. He brought us something far more important than abolition in this world, he gave us eternal life in the next.

This is sort of like saying a manual on how to swim doesn't advocate swimming. Claiming a book on How To Slavery doesn't advocate slavery is some serious cognitive dissonance. And we're limiting ourselves to the New Testament right now, of course...

As far as your other points, hrm. The British Empire started the Atlantic Slave Trade Triangle. They needed African slaves because Native American ones were dying too fast. Bringing over African slaves didn't save the Native Americans, though. Christians continued their campaign to annihilate them, if not physically, then culturally with aggressive efforts to erase their identity and "civilize" them.

Christianity gets no points for not inventing slavery. That's not even a defense. "Hey, it's not like I'm the first guy to ever murder!" Christianity's shame is not cleared away because many abolitionists were also Christians. Southern pastors argued just as vigorously, and with just as much theological merit, and over the next 150 years it would be the most religious states that would most bitterly cling to institutionalized racism.

First slaves in America were white street children from the streets of London.

Cromwell got busy shipping the Irish to the colonies too. Oh and by the way, First Nations had slaves. Other First Nations and blacks.

I never said blacks were the first slaves (in fact, I said the opposite), but how is enslaving white children better???

And I also never suggested Christianity invented slavery. Again, these are weak arguments - isn't Christianity supposed to make you a better person?? But if you want to compare atrocities, I think we can agree Christianity was much more ambitious about slavery than those examples you've cited.

Who's arguing? Truly I have absolutely no argument with historical facts.

I believe as a faith Christianity has come out of the dark ages because the Word was translated so that we were able to read the Bible for ourselves.

And that the common man was able to see for themselves what's in the Word and not take the say so of a Pastor or a Priest on an interpretation of a passage

Problem was no one could freaking read. So again the common man had to trust the Pastor, the Priest or the scholar to interpret the Bible.

Until the last half of the last century many were illiterate. And sadly even today you've got a whole batch of souls who believe they are good Christians and yet have never read the book that they base their faith on.

The "Sunday" Christians.

On my journey in faith I've heard some awesome interpretations of the Word but on the other hand I've heard some pretty whacked out interpretations of scripture in my time.



So good men and women of faith in the past had to rely on "interpretations" of scripture. I don't see how any man or woman who has read the New Testament for themselves could have ever endorsed slavery.

 

[Agit8r]

Islam is basically just a Christian sect.

 

[Paperman299]

Ephesians 6:5-8 (NASB): 5Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ; 6not by way of eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. 7With good will render service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free.

That passage doesn't advocate slavery. But obedience to God like obedience to one's master. Its called an analogy.

It's not an analogy. It's a passage explaining that being a good slave is being a good Christian, which is about as pro-slavery as Christianity can get.

Of course, Christians today don't advocate slavery, but telling me mid-19th Century Christians had no New Testament passages to justify their position is incorrect.

Yes it it, I can't help if you can't read. It clearly says be obedient to God as you are to your master. If you can't see this, this is your problem, not mine. As I said before, there are passages that could be put forth to both advocate slavery and abolition in the Bible. The fact remains, slavery predates Christianity. It was Christians, White Christians specifically, I know, the horror, that founded the abolition movement on religious principles. It was the British Empire that effectively ended the global slave trade. So Christianity is not responsible for slavery, but it is responsible for ending slavery in the Western world and most of the world all together. though unfortunately it continues today in parts of Africa, Muslim areas more specifically. But the existence of slavery cannot be blamed on Christianity. Without Christianity, there would have been no abolition movement. And as I said before, the Bible is not a political manifesto. Christ sought salvation for all mankind, slave and free, gentile and jew, greek and roman, man and woman. He brought us something far more important than abolition in this world, he gave us eternal life in the next.

This is sort of like saying a manual on how to swim doesn't advocate swimming. Claiming a book on How To Slavery doesn't advocate slavery is some serious cognitive dissonance. And we're limiting ourselves to the New Testament right now, of course...

As far as your other points, hrm. The British Empire started the Atlantic Slave Trade Triangle. They needed African slaves because Native American ones were dying too fast. Bringing over African slaves didn't save the Native Americans, though. Christians continued their campaign to annihilate them, if not physically, then culturally with aggressive efforts to erase their identity and "civilize" them.

Christianity gets no points for not inventing slavery. That's not even a defense. "Hey, it's not like I'm the first guy to ever murder!" Christianity's shame is not cleared away because many abolitionists were also Christians. Southern pastors argued just as vigorously, and with just as much theological merit, and over the next 150 years it would be the most religious states that would most bitterly cling to institutionalized racism.

Your verse isn't a verse on "how to slavery", it is a verse on how slaves should obey God as they obey their master. So it doesn't apply at all. There is no cognitive dissonance. You are just proscribing your preconceived prejudices against Christianity, than trying to rig together text that in reality doesn't fit your claims at all.

Slavery, even in it's chattel form, existed prior to the British with the Arabs, Spaniards, Portuguese, and others. This also doesn't include the several European Christian nations that had no slaves, and the those same nations had many who were were enslaved by the Ottomans. The British didn't have a monopoly on slavery. Though their Empire is responsible for ending the trade globally. This is getting off topic though. The point is Christians don't have a monopoly on the slave trade, though Christians are behind Abolition. This is what makes Christianity unique, not that it created slavery but it gave birth to the concept that ended globally. Without Christianity, there would have not been an abolition movement. Yet you don't address this.

As I said, salvation is a far more important issue, not material and earthly political issues like abolition. Your issue is your pride, which is inflamed by your ardent materialism and humanism. You think you have a greater moral grasp of our universe and more compassion for man than our Lord, who is all knowing and omnipotent, which is unbridled arrogance.

Fine. A verse that begins "Slaves, be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling," is not an instruction to slaves saying God wants them to be loyal, fearful slaves, but something that is not that.

Absolutely no one is claiming that Christianity started slavery. Why you keep bringing up these other polities as if their actions absolve Christianity for its massive hand in slavery is beyond me. It's one of the religion's most incredible traits: a complete refusal to simply and straightforwardly face up to its own blemishes. We can't even bring Christianity's role in slavery up in passing without triggering shrill protestations and wild attempts to shift blame. "What about Mauritania? What about the Portugese?" What about YOU? Why can't even one Christian have the moral courage to stand up and admit to the baser history of his creed, without the usual barrage of rationalizations, disclaimers, and self-exculpations?

What's really outrageous here is that you can't even address Christianity's historic role in the slave trade without trying to snatch credit for ending it. If Christianity was truly the animating factor in ending slavery, it damn well took its time, don't you think? Judaism existed with slavery for thousands of years. Christianity had few dissenters in nearly two millennia. It was only when we reached the Age of Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, that rationality could begin to reform Christianity. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad Christian institutions stopped spit-roasting these people long enough to listen and for some of those ideas to penetrate. But Christians today certainly don't get to absolve their institutions by bringing up those Christians who forced the other Christians to stop practicing Biblical slavery, based on ideas that originated outside of religious thought.

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Kondor3]

Islam is basically just a Christian sect.

Islam is a hybrid of Judaism + Christianity + Arabic Paganism; a copycat, knock-off, rip-off or plagiarized knocked-together collection of borrowed/stolen concepts plus its own fair share of hallucinations, foisted upon the gullible locals (Arabs) by a self-excusing, bloodthirsty pedophile and war-monger.

The Jews and Christians of the time thought it was a shabby joke. They were right.

 

[Pogo]

Islam is basically just a Christian sect.

Islam is a hybrid of Judaism + Christianity + Arabic Paganism; a copycat, knock-off, rip-off or plagiarized knocked-together collection of borrowed/stolen concepts plus its own fair share of hallucinations, foisted upon the gullible locals (Arabs) by a self-excusing, bloodthirsty pedophile and war-monger.

Replace the specific proper nouns with generics and you have a worthy definition of any of those religions.
But you know what, let's single one out and pretend it's "different". That way we need not inspect our own.

 

[Kondor3]

Islam is basically just a Christian sect.

Islam is a hybrid of Judaism + Christianity + Arabic Paganism; a copycat, knock-off, rip-off or plagiarized knocked-together collection of borrowed/stolen concepts plus its own fair share of hallucinations, foisted upon the gullible locals (Arabs) by a self-excusing, bloodthirsty pedophile and war-monger.

Replace the specific proper nouns with generics and you have a worthy definition of any of those religions.
But you know what, let's single one out and pretend it's "different". That way we need not inspect our own.

The Founder of Christianity (Jesus of Nazareth) preached peace and love and tolerance.

The Founder of Islam (Muhammed) preached war and bloody violence and oppression against Unbelievers, and against those who oppose Believers.

The former is a Religion of Peace.

The latter is a Warrior's Religion.

When Christianity has spawned warfare and violence, its leaders were doing so in direct violation of the precepts of their Founder.

When Islam has spawned warfare and violence, its leaders are doing so in direct compliance with the precepts of their Founder.

Huge phukking difference.

The basic or Core Teachings of Christianity supply a braking and self-correcting mechanism which always brings the philosophical wings back towards the center.

The basic or Core Teachings of Islam supply permissions and justifications for war and violence which serve as a perpetual breeding ground for fresh radicalisms.

Purveyors of faux equivalencies and those unable to distinguish these vast and all-important differences cannot be expected to agree with such distinctions.

If you can show us where Jesus of Nazareth gave repeated permissions and justifications for war and if you can show us where Jesus of Nazareth embarked upon campaigns of bloody conquest and if you can show us where Jesus of Nazareth stormed Jewish citadels and slaughtered their chiefs then forcibly-married the widow of one of those chiefs on the evening of her husband's killing and if you can show us where Jesus of Nazareth porked little girls, then, maybe, you've got a ballgame here.

We both already know you can't, so don't even bother.