Go ahead and Talk about Religion

[BehindBlueI's]

It would seem to me if the ISIS individuals were NOT following the quran and doing things the way mohammed wanted them to, then we would be hearing a whole chorus of islamic folks speaking out against their actions. There are a few muslim leaders stating that ISIS' actions aren't those of true muslims. But I think the deafening silence coming from the huge majority of mohamed's followers states they are at least ok with it. Or more simply stated, they support it simply by not taking a stand against it.
I know if there were folks claiming to be Christians cutting off people's heads if they didn't convert you would hear an uproar of voices condemning that action.

With that being said I would have all people come into a saving knowledge of the grace and mercy of God. ISIS included. Even the guys that cut off people's heads.
Perhaps this thread can actually do some good and open some eyes to what is real.

(Removed a statement that served no good purpose)

I'm curious as to how many Muslims you know and how many you've polled. Or because the rank and file aren't making news in the Western media you just assume they are silent? Or the simple fact that most people just go about their day and try to make their own life without feeling the need to comment in public over every wrong in the world doesn't mean they are complicit? When was the last time you spoke up about, say human trafficking by Americans? Obviously slavery is (now) against the American way of life, so if you aren't condemning it publicly you must be supporting it by not taking a stand against it. While we're on that note, what have you done to stand up to ISIS? The Kurds are taking foreigners, so grab a ruck and head out and take a stand against it or be complicit. That's the standard, right?

Let's be realistic. Most of ISIS's victims are Muslim. Most of the people fighting them on the ground are also Muslim. It doesn't hold logically that most Muslims agree with them because they haven't publicly gathered for a press conference to send to you that says "I don't agree with those guys" when Muslims are the ones fighting them and the ones suffering at their hands. Muslims are not some homogenous block of people. If I'm a shoe salesman in Malaysia, WTF does ISIS have to do with me and why do I need to transmit my disapproval of their actions to the US?

I still have friends and family in Jordan. They are deeply concerned about ISIS, as I've posted on here before. From this side of the world, they are mostly anonymous bad guys who have little danger of impacting any of us. They actively recruit on social media and the like, but even a successful terror attack is unlikely to involve any of us because we are a huge country with a huge population. Jordan is in their backyard, is a much smaller country, and is a much more densely populated country. The same attack there is much more personal.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I can use most any book ever printed as source material to defend most any conceivable position. Please review: I not only specify taking the Bible in context, not pulling out random verses devoid of context. I also very specifically addressed the instruction and example of the founders of both religions who by definition are the arbiters of the nature of the religion in question. Christ never killed, enslaved, tortured, stole, or conscripted anyone as child soldiers, nor did he instruct anyone else to do so. Mohammad did. It is indeed false equivalency. By your standard, I could pull words out of Webster's dictionary and use it to 'prove' most any point of my choice about people who speak English. You are employing an argument that simply does not work.

Mohammed never claimed to be divine nor perfect. He described an ideal society and understood that reality was not compatible with it. He brought a very temporary peace to a war torn nomadic region based on the radical idea of being able to leave a tribe and form a new tribe that wasn't based on blood lines. He was very much a radical, and like most radicals caught the establishment's eye with his crazy ideas of an egalitarian society, the evil of hording wealth, and he absolutely killed because if not his new little tribe would have been decimated. Pacifism works great in story books or when there's other powers in the world that will act to stop a genocide. The arabic world was not that. It was like the Plains Indians, only worse, where if you were not part of a tribe your life was forfeit because the only law was retribution, and without a tribe there was no one to avenge you.

As we've discussed before, you also need context to understand the Koran. Mohammed was dealing with a cultural backwater formed on violence and raiding for the limited resources that were available, without the civilizing advantages of an agricultural society. Judging from the literal interpretations of the modern Western mind and ignoring the conditions of the culture he was dealing with will leave you with a very different understanding of what he actually managed to accomplish and what he taught.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Wat? You do know Christ is God in the flesh, right? Do you want a body count of the peoples killed and society's destroyed by his command or outright action?

OK, you have chosen to expand the point outside of the scope of what I said. I was specifically referring to the 33 +/- years of Christ's time of corporeal life. I would consider those 33 years or so to be the culmination of the thousands of years in which the Jews lived according to the Law which God modified to address their inventiveness in going astray which more important demonstrated that they are incapable (as are all) of meeting the standard of perfection on their own. Christ fulfilled the law but also taught a new example that He could have prefaced with 'now that you have figured out that the way you have been doing things doesn't and can't work...'.

Christianity is properly defined by the teachings of Christ during that 33 years time (the majority of which derives from the last 3 years or so). I defy you to show me anything printed in red letters accepting any of the undesirable actions previously addressed. You are trying to paint an equivalency that simply does not exist.

Mohammed never claimed to be divine nor perfect. He described an ideal society and understood that reality was not compatible with it. He brought a very temporary peace to a war torn nomadic region based on the radical idea of being able to leave a tribe and form a new tribe that wasn't based on blood lines. He was very much a radical, and like most radicals caught the establishment's eye with his crazy ideas of an egalitarian society, the evil of hording wealth, and he absolutely killed because if not his new little tribe would have been decimated. Pacifism works great in story books or when there's other powers in the world that will act to stop a genocide. The arabic world was not that. It was like the Plains Indians, only worse, where if you were not part of a tribe your life was forfeit because the only law was retribution, and without a tribe there was no one to avenge you.

As we've discussed before, you also need context to understand the Koran. Mohammed was dealing with a cultural backwater formed on violence and raiding for the limited resources that were available, without the civilizing advantages of an agricultural society. Judging from the literal interpretations of the modern Western mind and ignoring the conditions of the culture he was dealing with will leave you with a very different understanding of what he actually managed to accomplish and what he taught.

I can understand your point. Mohammad brought at least more order to the middle east than was there when he started, was a very capable administrator, and a brilliant strategist and tactician as well as politician. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and concede that he was probably at least as good and perhaps better than street average for the Arabian culture of the time. I would also point out that (while accounting for Mohammad neither being nor claiming to be God) centuries earlier Christ presented a far different message in a culture dominated by an empire which was one of the bloodiest in world history before a local population which was looking for a Messiah to kick asses, take names, and reinstitute the Jewish Kingdom. There was more order, but certainly no more desire for peacefulness. Those violent aspirations were just more narrowly focused and opposed by a larger, more powerful, and very organized foe. That did not force Christ to become Judas Maccabeus 2.0 nor did it prevent him from preaching a message of peace regardless of circumstances rather than peace through the elimination of those who disagree with you.

At the end of the day, I still am left with Christianity is what it is which aside from quality of adherence is the same as Christ preached, did, and had recorded from doing so. Likewise, Islam is what Mohammad wrote, preached, and did. In either case, failure to comply with that standard is tantamount to not being a follower of that faith, or perhaps using one or both of those faiths as source material for your own religion. I believe that the freedoms we encapsulated in the First Amendment rest on the implied freedom of thought which ultimately comes down to the right to be wrong. That said, anyone is entitled to believe whatever he likes even if he is pillaging other religions for source material. That said, pillaging Christianity for source material does not make you a Christian and pillaging Islam for source material does not make you a Moslem. Doing as Christ did and instructed does make you a Christian, and doing as Mohammad did and instructed does make you a Moslem.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Mohammed did not eliminate those who disagreed with him solely because they disagreed. His original tribe was made up of Jews, pagans, and what would become Muslim. His own statements were that he did not come to rewrite the faith of others, add their revelations were valid for them. The idea that Islam contains orthodoxy came well after his death.

 

[Cpt Caveman]

Who did Jesus eliminate?
So mohammed was a real understanding fella that took others feeling into consideration? Is that what you are saying?

 

[mbills2223]

Well...we are a week deep in this. How are we doing? Look good from what I've seen.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Well...we are a week deep in this. How are we doing? Look good from what I've seen.

Agreed.

 

[jamil]

Well...we are a week deep in this. How are we doing? Look good from what I've seen.

It seemed to be a frenzied topic at first. Then it kinda petered out.

 

[churchmouse]

It seemed to be a frenzied topic at first. Then it kinda petered out.

We have been watching.
I am pleased. Discussion for the most part has been good.
You folks are very deep.

 

[JollyMon]

I wish we still couldnt talk about it..... it will be arguements round and round with no one ever changing their mind.... similar to our glock vs 1911 debates.... which always end up the same way.

 

[Cameramonkey]

I wish we still couldnt talk about it..... it will be arguements round and round with no one ever changing their mind.... similar to our glock vs 1911 debates.... which always end up the same way.

In that case we should probably also ban the discussion of OCing long guns outside of the context of organized rallies on the courthouse lawn. (like taking your rifle to Starbucks or the Airport slung at the low ready) Same thing really. A constant "Its myee ryeeeet!" vs "just beause you can doesnt mean you should" crowd.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Well...we are a week deep in this. How are we doing? Look good from what I've seen.

It seemed to be a frenzied topic at first. Then it kinda petered out.

We have been watching.
I am pleased. Discussion for the most part has been good.
You folks are very deep.

It makes perfect sense to me. You start with a lot of pent up frustration about having to dance around the subject, then open it up, all that pressure gets let out, and even though it slows down, the conversation takes on a life of its own and we move beyond the things we have been itching to say but couldn't into a more developed conversation in which a variety of people from different backgrounds speaking freely precipitate a much deeper conversation in which questions are asked and answered, people are forced to take a good hard look in the mirror at themselves, their beliefs, and why they believe what they believe, and it eventually slows down a bit, but will continue getting deeper. That said, reasonable people of different backgrounds can have some very interesting, enjoyable, and informative conversations you just can't have in an echo chamber, and I see this being proven right here.

 

[warthog]

I have had times where I had to keep myself from going over "The Line" but for the most part I avoid this stuff.

I know my duty as a Born Again Christian s to spread the Good News as much as I can so everyone gets at least one time to hear it and repent. I have been in Google Plus Hang Outs with religious and not religious folks and debated and have posted things etc in an attempt to get the Wird out and see if anyone has a change of heart or wants to hear more and I have found, for the most part, NEITHER side has any wish to hear the other nor will they change despite seeing evidence, real scientific evidence, to support whichever side.

I KNOW that there is a Creator who once caused the world, WHOLE world, to flood. Geomorphological and fossil evidence abounds. I have seen the actual stuff, not just pictures or hearing it through the grapevine. I started out an Atheist but the more I looked, the more I saw proof of the flood at least. The more I looked at the "evidence" for Evolution, the more I saw a Creator. I went and got two Bachelors of Science from the UIUC and started to get a masters from AZ State so I do understand how science is supposed t work but these days it is more of a faith than a science. ALL evidence that Evolution isn't true is suppressed despite the way many feel no such thing is possible since we are talking science. Science wants to find things out, not to suppress things, right? Not from what I have seen. People are actively disgraced and forced out of mainstream science and the funds needed to further investigate if there is even a hint that the scientist believes in even a possibility of Intelligent Design let alone that the Bible describes real events. You can claim it isn't true but that doesn't make it untrue.

Therefore I have mostly stayed out of the whole thing. I would rather look further into the Truth than try and open eyes that are so firmly closed they can't see it if you put it in their faces. The schools make it so that even Christian Children who must be in a Public School are so indoctrinated that by the time they go to college 70% of Christian raised kids leave the curch and stop believing. I am not a parent so I will refrain from giving advice to parents who want the children to see things with OPEN minds rather than see what others want them to see so they can choose on their own.

So I may start a thread of my own showing the evidence or I may not. Most of the times I have done so most of the atheists simply say the source is bad desite these folks having the same credentials as their precious mainstream scientists only Creationists can't be doing science by definition as I am told so why try. It take my tie to do the post and if it is simply going to be thrown out by virtue of my being Christian as are the scientists.

I will say this, willful ignorance won't save you when your time comes. Only Jesus can and that is Faith too, just like the current state of science. Except I know and see the evidence with my own eyes while if presented you will likely close yours and say science has nothing to do with the Bible. OK, that is indeed your choice.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I have had times where I had to keep myself from going over "The Line" but for the most part I avoid this stuff.

I know my duty as a Born Again Christian s to spread the Good News as much as I can so everyone gets at least one time to hear it and repent. I have been in Google Plus Hang Outs with religious and not religious folks and debated and have posted things etc in an attempt to get the Wird out and see if anyone has a change of heart or wants to hear more and I have found, for the most part, NEITHER side has any wish to hear the other nor will they change despite seeing evidence, real scientific evidence, to support whichever side.

I KNOW that there is a Creator who once caused the world, WHOLE world, to flood. Geomorphological and fossil evidence abounds. I have seen the actual stuff, not just pictures or hearing it through the grapevine. I started out an Atheist but the more I looked, the more I saw proof of the flood at least. The more I looked at the "evidence" for Evolution, the more I saw a Creator. I went and got two Bachelors of Science from the UIUC and started to get a masters from AZ State so I do understand how science is supposed t work but these days it is more of a faith than a science. ALL evidence that Evolution isn't true is suppressed despite the way many feel no such thing is possible since we are talking science. Science wants to find things out, not to suppress things, right? Not from what I have seen. People are actively disgraced and forced out of mainstream science and the funds needed to further investigate if there is even a hint that the scientist believes in even a possibility of Intelligent Design let alone that the Bible describes real events. You can claim it isn't true but that doesn't make it untrue.

Therefore I have mostly stayed out of the whole thing. I would rather look further into the Truth than try and open eyes that are so firmly closed they can't see it if you put it in their faces. The schools make it so that even Christian Children who must be in a Public School are so indoctrinated that by the time they go to college 70% of Christian raised kids leave the curch and stop believing. I am not a parent so I will refrain from giving advice to parents who want the children to see things with OPEN minds rather than see what others want them to see so they can choose on their own.

So I may start a thread of my own showing the evidence or I may not. Most of the times I have done so most of the atheists simply say the source is bad desite these folks having the same credentials as their precious mainstream scientists only Creationists can't be doing science by definition as I am told so why try. It take my tie to do the post and if it is simply going to be thrown out by virtue of my being Christian as are the scientists.

I will say this, willful ignorance won't save you when your time comes. Only Jesus can and that is Faith too, just like the current state of science. Except I know and see the evidence with my own eyes while if presented you will likely close yours and say science has nothing to do with the Bible. OK, that is indeed your choice.

You don't need evidence, just keep your faith.

 

[warthog]

It was evidence that led me to my Faith at first. Rather led me from disbelief to belief in the All Powerful Creator God. So as a Christian and with the Great Commission I feel it is the best way for me to reach the Lost. It is what is always touted by Science followers as the reason they do not believe. Mind you with very few exceptions, most of the Sciece faithful I have spoken with haven't had any science training since High School and have little understanding of what they say proves me as the one being fooled. My hope is this might help get some of them, or even ONE to see that they aren't getting the facts they think they are getting.

In any case, my Faith is strong. The Bible tells me about how much the Creator has done and how far He goes and how patient He is to let us continue letting the majority of us spit in His Face before He finally says ENOUGH! and send His Judgement. It actually makes me sad to think of how many souls will be heading to Hell. All these had to do was accept the Grace He showed in sacrificing HIS OWN SON for our sake that we could have all of our sins show paid.

 

[mrjarrell]

 

[Cpt Caveman]

The first part of Penn's statement is correct. "Believing there's no God means I can't really be forgiven...." He's right.
Jesus is the only way.
"The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God."-Psalm 14

 

[Cpt Caveman]

Did I kill it?

 

[churchmouse]

I live my life this way and I do believe.
I have very good reason to.

 

[Cpt Caveman]

I'm confused . You believe what?