Nothing like proving the point-

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Nephythys

You have Christian radicals- and some people happily paint all Christians with that brush.

You have Muslim radicals- and people jump in to defend the group and insist that it's just a fringe.

Um... I find quite the opposite to be MUCH more prevalent.

Granted the handful of posts in this thread have been defending the Muslim faith. But far and wide you will find the faith under severe attack in the Western World while those same folks are much more apt to dismiss the Christian fringe as just individuals.

[lashbear]

Don't forget the KKK - I think they burn things to the ground in the name of religion too, don't they?

...I think they're religious?



I

[lashbear]

wierdo double post thingy

[lashbear]

OOooooo how did that happen ??


anyhoo... I think the Hare Krishna movement has it right - you never see them causing violence !

[Alex]

Personally, I view interdenominational violence to be a hugely systemic element if Islam. But fortunately one that the vast majority of Muslims have rationalized out of their own practice of the faith.

Combine these systemic elements with social conditions that tend to create violent radicalism (poverty, lack of education, insularity) and widespread violent fundamentist Islam is pretty much inevitable.

It is a simple fact that the holy source text for the religion explicitly lays out how non-believers are to be overran, oppressed, and forcibly converted.

Certainly people of all faiths have found ways to use their faith in support of violence but some require more twisting than others (with Christianity, specifically, it tends to require going to the grumpy-God of the Old Testament rather than the specific teachings of "Jesus Christ."

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

It is a simple fact that the holy source text for the religion explicitly lays out how non-believers are to be overran, oppressed, and forcibly converted.

The old OT, a font of beauty and wisdom, also runs red with blood, anger and genocidal intolerance.

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

Certainly people of all faiths have found ways to use their faith in support of violence but some require more twisting than others (with Christianity, specifically, it tends to require going to the grumpy-God of the Old Testament rather than the specific teachings of "Jesus Christ."

The holy source text for the Christian religion is not just the teachings of Jesus Christ. It is in great measure Paul, which is all about conversion and, impliedly, how the unconverted are not worthy. It is also, ultimately, Revelations. While the Christian holy source text has an eschatological focus, it appears that the world has not ended, and that same Christian holy source text has provided many with ample inspiration and opportunity to play God.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Strangler Lewis

It is in great measure Paul, which is all about conversion and, impliedly, how the unconverted are not worthy.

To the contrary.

The New Testament (Paul's writings specifically) is about how none are worthy. Paul called himself the least of all and the greatest of all sinners. Paul was despised by the religious establishment during his day because not only did he turn from being a member of that very leadership, he dared to extend the circle from Jews only to include gentiles.

I won't bore people here by referencing his writings, but I very much disagree with your assessment.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Paul was despised by the religious establishment during his day...

Let us not forget John and George.

Though people mostly left Ringo alone.

[Strangler Lewis]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

To the contrary.

The New Testament (Paul's writings specifically) is about how none are worthy. Paul called himself the least of all and the greatest of all sinners. Paul was despised by the religious establishment during his day because not only did he turn from being a member of that very leadership, he dared to extend the circle from Jews only to include gentiles.

I won't bore people here by referencing his writings, but I very much disagree with your assessment.

I said impliedly, and I didnt' say anything against Paul. Paul was a ballsy MF (though a bit of a smug prig). However, the reality is that Acts and Paul's letters are a major part of the New Testament. The plot of those writings is conversion. If you're looking for an excuse--and a lot of people are--how hard is it to leap from that general concept to the persecution of others (which, of course, was Paul's first job).

[innerSpaceman]

Hate to say it, but I'm with Neph on this one.

In this day and age, Islam - thru the acts of its extreme and twisted adherants - is getting a repulation for violence. And its vast majority of peaceful practicioners are not doing enough to counter the label they are being stuck with unfairly.


This week, Colin Powell wrote, "The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism." Can we deny America's piss-poor repulation in the world? And yet it's true that most Americans are peaceful, justice-loving folk. But we are hiding our heads in the sand if we don't realize that our government is acting with powerful forces that erode our reputation in the world.

The same thing may be happening to Muslims. But it's no more mistaken, imo, to say that Islam is a violent religion than it is to say America is a violent nation.