• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Brussels Under Attack

Underhill

Well-Known Member
What you don't understand is that if you don't pick and choose the verses, but actually accept the message as a whole, you will end up being a pacifist if you are a Christian and a Jihad fighter if you are a Muslim. You atheists cannot understand this because you don't know what is to believe in something. You think that our interpretation of the sacred texts depends on our cultural values, when in fact it is the exact opposite: our cultural values depend on our interpretation of the text. The only atheist that comes close to understanding this is Sam Harris, since he has pointed out that the link between Islam and violence cannot be a coincidence. He has acknowledged the fact that Christians are peaceful because their role model, Jesus, is peaceful, whereas Muslims are violent because their role model, Muhammad, was a warlord.

What you don't understand, is that I have a firm grasp of the bible as a whole. I spent 15 years of my life as a christian. Went to church, sunday school, private christian school and a year of bible college. So you can stow the condescension.

Jesus is a role model to modern moderate christians. But tell me then how the crusades were justified? How slavery was justified? How the klan justifies their behavior? How those who bomb abortion clinics justify their behavior? And you know that is just the tip of the iceberg.

My point is simple. The old testament, which is not written off by many christians, allows for justification of a whole host of evil behavior. Just as picking and choosing which portion of Muhammad's life you will emulate gives different messages to different people.

Most religions with any success do the same. They are forced to by shifts in culture and world events. When an eye for an eye is deemed necessary you use it to justify everything from self defense to warfare. When turning the other cheek is the wise move, you talk about gods peace and love thine enemy.
 

Crypto2015

Active Member
Now that is truly an ignorant statement because you simply do not know me well enough to know what I believe.

Nuff said to you as well, but maybe you and FB can think more about your behavior here at RF over the Easter holidays. As for me, I'm gonna be out of the country for a week, so if you continue to post more of your stereotypes and bigotry because I ain't gonna be able to read it anyway, but I do feel sorry for you having such hatred.

Telling the truth is not a sin, but a virtue. Enjoy your holidays, man.
 

Crypto2015

Active Member
What you don't understand, is that I have a firm grasp of the bible as a whole. I spent 15 years of my life as a christian. Went to church, sunday school, private christian school and a year of bible college. So you can stow the condescension.

Jesus is a role model to modern moderate christians. But tell me then how the crusades were justified? How slavery was justified? How the klan justifies their behavior? How those who bomb abortion clinics justify their behavior? And you know that is just the tip of the iceberg.

My point is simple. The old testament, which is not written off by many christians, allows for justification of a whole host of evil behavior. Just as picking and choosing which portion of Muhammad's life you will emulate gives different messages to different people.

Most religions with any success do the same. They are forced to by shifts in culture and world events. When an eye for an eye is deemed necessary you use it to justify everything from self defense to warfare. When turning the other cheek is the wise move, you talk about gods peace and love thine enemy.

If you had had a good understanding of what Christianity is you would not be saying the things that you are saying. The crusades cannot be justified from a Christian point of view. If it wasn't OK to defend Christ using violence (Jesus told Peter to put down his sword when the latter tried to stop the High Priest's servants), then violence is never justified, not even in self defense. However, this is something that not all Christians are willing to accept. After Muhammad's dead, Islam swiftly conquered all of North Africa, most of the Middle East, the Iberian Peninsula, Southern Italy, and large parts of South East Asia. The Muslim warriors of that time had a deep hatred of Christianity. They behaved even worse than the members of ISIS. In the conquered territories they routinely raped and killed Christians in the most gruesome ways. Knowing that all of Europe was about to fall under the Islamic onslaught, the Emperor of the Byzantine Empire asked the Pope for help. Pope Urban II mobilized troops to help the Christians that were being attacked by Islam. The crusades later on degenerated into a bloody, grotesque conflict. So, the crusaders were wrong from a theological perspective, but their initial goal was simply to protect other Christians from armies that were no different from ISIS. Also, Europe would probably have been conquered by Islam if it hadn't been for the Crusades.

Regarding slavery, it was profitable to have slaves, so some people chose to pretend that American slavery was compatible with Christianity. Just read Exodus 21:16 and you will see that slave traders must be put to death according to the Law of Moses. Hence, American slavery was utterly incompatible with Christianity. Of course that some people preferred to ignore verses like Exodus 21:16. After all, there was a lot of money involved.

The KKK is not even near to being Christian, regardless of what they claim to be. If you had ever been a real Christian, you would know this. There are innumerable ways to prove that the KKK would make Jesus puke in disgust. For instance, consider the fact that the first non-Jewish Christian was a black Ethiopian (Acts 8:26-40).

My advice to you is to go back to the Bible and read it. Perhaps you will understand it this time.
 

buddhist

Well-Known Member
Y'all tryin' to pull a fast one on me? Nothing happened in Brussels. Listen to Brussel's tourism dept instead:

 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Sorry, wishful thinking on your part, Godnotgod. A pure heart has nothing to do with one's devotion to a creed. Consider the Nazi movement. It's followers would not have what you call a pure heart, but they were certainly devoted to the death cult created by Hitler and friends. Similarly, ISIS and other Islamist's are devoted followers of the Koran, which they constantly quote. Moderate Muslims pass over those many passages that the fanatics rest their case upon.

Of course, because they are driven by an agenda, which those particular passages support. The easiest thing to do is to use scripture to support divine authority for your cause. Christians do exactly the same thing. But, you see, that is the difference between a devotee with a pure heart and a zealot or a fanatic: the devotee has no ax to grind as does the fanatic or agenda to push as does the zealot. I would say that the disciples who followed Yeshua were devotees; that the monks who followed the Buddha were devotees.

In the case of the Nazis, Hitler simply exploited the then current economic condition in Germany to point the finger at the Jews as those who were stealing German jobs, thereby exciting their hysteria and subsequent allegiance to the Nazi party, Fear is the fuel of the fanatic; love the fuel of the true devotee, the former being mentally conditioned, the latter having an awakened consciousness.


The Nazis weren't devoted to the cause; they were falsely driven by its propaganda and lies. Had the German people paused to reflect when Hitler stood on his soapbox, they might have laughed him clean off of it into oblivion. Had Americans truly been awake when George Bush led them by the nose to the ultimate invasion and bombing of Iraq due to 'WMD's and other such nonsense, we might never have been facing the level of terrorism rampant today as a result of naive belief in his false claims. But Americans chose to be swept along by whatever supported retaliation out of fear and hysteria, while only a few saw through the ploys because their eyes were opened, rather than glossed over with fantasies and myth.
 
Last edited:

skl

A man on a mission
What you don't understand is that if you don't pick and choose the verses, but actually accept the message as a whole, you will end up being a pacifist if you are a Christian and a Jihad fighter if you are a Muslim. You atheists cannot understand this because you don't know what is to believe in something. You think that our interpretation of the sacred texts depends on our cultural values, when in fact it is the exact opposite: our cultural values depend on our interpretation of the text. The only atheist that comes close to understanding this is Sam Harris, since he has pointed out that the link between Islam and violence cannot be a coincidence. He has acknowledged the fact that Christians are peaceful because their role model, Jesus, is peaceful, whereas Muslims are violent because their role model, Muhammad, was a warlord.

What rubbish, atheists understand as much as anyone else in fact more than the indoctrinated Christian and Islamic faithful.

Your interpretation of the so called sacred text is your issue, however your actions against humanity are an issue for all of us.

Sam Harris may be correct but both religions have remained in the past with superstitious belief. Islam still in ancient times with religious laws cuts of heads and stones people to death and the Christians have moved on slightly due to enforced judicial laws from burning witches into condemning certain groups within our society, and I might add causing some of them to commit suicide from religious discrimination.

We atheists actually see the reality of life in a modern scientific world, not the fantasy world seen through indoctrinated religious eyes.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
...You think that our interpretation of the sacred texts depends on our cultural values, when in fact it is the exact opposite: our cultural values depend on our interpretation of the text.

It's corrupt either way.

John 5:39English Standard Version (ESV)
39 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,

What Yeshua is saying here is that the true Reality cannot be accessed via scripture; that one must go first to the Source, and then the scriptures will be made clear. To go first to the Source means to abandon all cultural values and interpretations, because none of them have any bearing on Reality.

...Christians are peaceful because their role model, Jesus, is peaceful, whereas Muslims are violent because their role model, Muhammad, was a warlord.

Revelation 19 - Jesus Returns as Conquering Lord

1. (11-16) Jesus returns to earth with an army from heaven.

Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written:KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.
 
Last edited:

godnotgod

Thou art That
Oh my god that is disgusting.

Words cannot describe the stark reality staring us in the face.

Christian missionaries seek out the least educated, the poorest in the world to indoctrinate. In India, they target the Untouchable class for conversion, operating under the pretense of compassion and loving kindness.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
Christian missionaries seek out the least educated, the poorest in the world to indoctrinate. In India, they target the Untouchable class for conversion, operating under the pretense of compassion and loving kindness.
Yes I agree, I think many isolated tribes would have been better of if the Christian missionaries kept their manipulation of peoples freedom to themselves.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Yes I agree, I think many isolated tribes would have been better of if the Christian missionaries kept their manipulation of peoples freedom to themselves.

The role of the missionaries was to first destroy the native religions and then subjugate the people to the new religion as docile servants, now made malleable for the monied interests to follow with false promises of jobs and a nice future. Instead they got the outright robbery of their lands and resources as well as enslavement. In America, the extermination of the buffalo was a device to starve the Indians outright, a form of genocide.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
The role of the missionaries was to first destroy the native religions and then subjugate the people to the new religion as docile servants, now made malleable for the monied interests to follow with false promises of jobs and a nice future. Instead they got the outright robbery of their lands and resources as well as enslavement. In America, the extermination of the buffalo was a device to starve the Indians outright, a form of genocide.
Ha, and to think that they call themselves civilized people.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Ha, and to think that they call themselves civilized people.

Of course being civilized meant there were the uncivilized to deal with, requiring the projection of their Shadow onto them as less human, less worthy, less everything, justification for the maltreatment they received. Indians were equal to dogs in their eyes. In the eyes of the Christian, non-Christians can never be equal to them.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
Of course being civilized meant there were the uncivilized to deal with, requiring the projection of their Shadow onto them as less human, less worthy, less everything, justification for the maltreatment they received. Indians were equal to dogs in their eyes. In the eyes of the Christian, non-Christians can never be equal to them.
Bloody disgusting that's for sure, and so many fell for it, which makes it more disgusting.
 

Crypto2015

Active Member
Y'all tryin' to pull a fast one on me? Nothing happened in Brussels. Listen to Brussel's tourism dept instead:


Caller: Hello! Do you see people who are fighting with guns or with bombs?
Belgian Jihad fighter: No, No way! LOL. We have already killed everyone in this area.
 

Crypto2015

Active Member
What rubbish, atheists understand as much as anyone else in fact more than the indoctrinated Christian and Islamic faithful.

Your interpretation of the so called sacred text is your issue, however your actions against humanity are an issue for all of us.

Sam Harris may be correct but both religions have remained in the past with superstitious belief. Islam still in ancient times with religious laws cuts of heads and stones people to death and the Christians have moved on slightly due to enforced judicial laws from burning witches into condemning certain groups within our society, and I might add causing some of them to commit suicide from religious discrimination.

We atheists actually see the reality of life in a modern scientific world, not the fantasy world seen through indoctrinated religious eyes.

You have nothing to do with science. Most of you do even know what a differential equation is.
 
Top