Posted on 03/07/2002 6:07:31 AM PST by iav2
Oh, I'm sure they have some.
What churches do they attend?
I'm guessing it's not the United Methodist Church (the self-proclaimed, "Hate-Free Zone"!). ;-)
What words of Jesus do they point to in order to justify their actions?
Not to pick nits, but in my humble opinion, ALL the words in the Holy Bible are the words of Jesus (not just the red ones! :-).
And Reagan called the Mujahedin the "moral equivalent of our founding fathers."
Bush says we're not in a war against Islam and people like you continue to claim we are. Don't you believe the President?
Helmsman: But to pretend that Christians were not responsible for many of the greatest atrocities in history is not dealing with reality.
The Man: Second, while it is true that atrocities were committed in the name of Christ, it is simply historically imbalanced to speak of them as being among the greatest atrocities in history, because they simply were not.
The Man's statement IS accurate - To say something is among "The greatest atrocities in history," one must point out that the pain and death inflicted by such event is large enough to rank amongst them.
The greatest atrocities in history have still been brought about by state-ordained atheism. China. Vietnam. Korea. Soviet Russia. Germany.
26 million people dead (and counting) as a direct result of mandated atheism. Stop blaming religion for Mankind's evils. Islam may certainly be violent by nature, but it takes mankind to act out on the evils it teaches.
:) ttt
More correctly, 26 million dead as a direct result of fundamental disregard for the rights of individuals.
(a trait shared by communist totalitarians, and religious fanatics alike)
He and his supporters picket the funerals of homosexuals (particularly those who are murdered because they are homosexual, like Matthew Sheppard_) and carry signs reading "God Hates Fags," "AIDS Cures Fags," and "Fags Die - God Laughs."
Helluva guy.
The Roman Catholic Church sure as hell didn't kill 26 million people. Neither has the Southern Baptists Convention.
I know what you're getting at, but I'm gonna pick nits with you - The posters above were talking about including Christianity amongst some of the most gruesome acts in history. The Man was simply pointing out that it's not totally accurate (nor historically honest) to assert that, since there are absolutely worse examples in history of human conflict than the ones aforementioned.
The Mongol invasion of Russia.
The conquests by Alexander the Great
The Islamic invasion of western Europe and northern Africa (which sparked both the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades)
The Communist atrocities of the 20th century (not even counting the horrors that were WWI and WWII...)
There is no common thread between any of these events, other than the fact that Mankind, being inherently evil, was involved in all of them. Get my point? (I'm trying to say "Being historically dishonest does not justify, nor require, the bashing of any religion"...) The concept that all wars are a result of entities "trampling on" the "inherent liberties" of others is intellectually dishonest, and ignores the core trends of human behavior throughout history.
:) ttt ;) ttt
The Conquistadors and the Crusaders certainly killed hundreds of thousands if not millions combined... (but they were a little lacking in the technology of war)
Why do you continue to attempt to excuse the attrocities comitted by these evil men claiming to represent Jesus? (even while acting in diametric opposition to his teachings)
Why not just admit that their actions were evil, instead of trying to excuse those actions with some lame "but they didn't kill as many" excuse mongering?
It would do wonders for your credibility.
Your point is well taken, however you have left one varaiable out of your reasoning. And that is, for a LONG time "the church" WAS both church and state...and during that time people did not have access to the Bible.(they weren't called the Dark Ages for nothing! and the medival church leaders knew that control over literacy and the distribution of the Bible equated to control over the "peasants") I argue that there were very few true Christians during the Dark Ages, and if there were, they were tortured/imprisoned/killed due to their opposition to the "Holy" Roman Empire.(the said medival society)
There are alot of people who claim to know about Muslims including The President who has had his State Department amass a list of Muslims the world over who have publically denounced the attacks and terrorism in general. If you visit the State department web site you will see this list. It is quite impressive and you will not find the Muslim haters visiting for fear of shattering closely held illusions.
Point out the statement where I condoned these events. I'm waiting.
(Why do you continue to evade the questions presented to you? Are you completely unable to rationally and honestly look at historical events, without allowing your anti-religious biases to show? Surely, war is terrible, as is the killing of innocents. Nowhere have I said otherwise. I will continue to assert, even though you have yet to honestly address the issue, that anyone who says "Christianity is responsible for the most heinous atrocities in history" is historically ignorant at best, intellectually dishonest at worst.)
;) ttt
Most excellent points, indeed! I think you may have hit the nail on the head with your post.
:) ttt
The horrors committed by so-called “Christians” consitute supreme blasphemy. They are not to be excused. They also are in direct opposition to Jesus Christ and His teachings, and they always were. Those who committed such atrocities, one might say, “served Satan”--certainly not God.
There are so-called “Christians”, in the world today, who do the same thing. In fact, these are false-Christians (I like “faux--Christians”, myself)
Whether or not contemporary Islam is analgous to this I don't know. Some say it is. Some say it isn't. Maybe Bin Laden et al. are “faux--Muslims”; I certainly hope so.
I myself tend to be Oprahized. I think that people can probably get to God by train, plane, automobile, flying carpet or what you will. However--for myself--Jesus Christ is the only One to Whom I am willing to entrust a matter of such importance, and , therefore, I am willing to accopt no other mediator, advocate, or guide.
I have asked Him to bring me to God, and I believe that He is doing that. I also believe that He will bring anyone.
There may be another way--but I'm not taking a chance on it. And furthermore, Jesus Christ is All that I want.
Some form of Islam may be a way for all I know.
However, you can be sure that Muslims who behave as Bin Laden and Al Qaida and these jihadists and the faux--Christians who commit similar acts are not worshipping God--and on some level they no doubt know it.
I did not say you condoned them.
I said you excused them (and continue to excuse them) by suggesting that these evil acts were somehow less evil, because the numbers weren't as big.
You can pretend that's not what you're trying to do, but it's a pretty weak pretense.
Not all people claiming to be Christian are good. Some are evil.
Not all people claiming to be Muslim are evil. Some are good.
Try thinking instead of hyper-emotionalizing.
Read my above post again. I'm tired of arguing with you (you seem to have no desire to listen, nor respond to anything in this argument of substance), so I'll let my previous statements stand. Let me know if you ever decide to honestly look at history.
:/ ttt
The North and South American Aboriginals wish to have a word with you about your peaceful missionaries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.