YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
How odd, I wouldn't have thought you to have masochistic tendencies.Come join me in a private chat though. It will be a more productive forum.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How odd, I wouldn't have thought you to have masochistic tendencies.Come join me in a private chat though. It will be a more productive forum.
I don't see any other religion killing each other in the name of god or a warlord named Muhammad now a days except one... (that's so dark-ages)
The one we all see on the news.
I see the ignore function as very useful to filter out noise. Some members just post trash and useless drivel (as you say), and I don't have time to even bother about what they're saying. (And obviously, you're not on the list. For obvious reasons. You do have sensible and educative things to share. )What is amazing to me is that now, twice in one week, I have debated with myself on whether to utilize the ignore feature on two new RF acquaintances. It's amazing because I've never seriously thought of ignoring given posters permanently in all the years I've been here.
So, yeah, kudo's on the thread hijacking for a driveling narrative.
Yeah. I love it! It's like they don't even exist anymore. On occasion, when I feel curious, I click on the "Show Ignored Content" at the bottom of the page.One great thing about the software they use here on RF is that once someone is on ignore, you never even know they're posting. They just vanish entirely. Other forums, you still see the posts go by, they're just blocked with "You are ignoring this user". Good job, whoever wrote the software and kudos to RF for using it.
There are plenty of calls to violence across Islam and Christianity so it is profoundly dishonest to say that xtian and Muslim terrorists are not following the real religion.
That being said each person interprets their religious texts how they choose. To say my interpretation is correct and someone else's is not because they ignore a different part than you is also dishonest.
Also considering religions are "living", evolving entities (not the same today as it was 500 years ago) it is also meaningless to say that they are not following the true religion.
Those men would not have attacked charlie hebdo if they were not Muslims. This does not mean all Muslims are like that, this does not mean that all branches of Islam teach this way. But some do and they are part of the religion as well.
In the end people have died. Their families weep for the loss of their loved ones. Those who choose to defend their religion rather than condemn those terrorists show a profound lack of empathy.
Yeah, that Jesus was a huge terrorist and warlord.There are plenty of calls to violence across Islam and Christianity so it is profoundly dishonest to say that xtian and Muslim terrorists are not following the real religion.
Yeah, that Jesus was a huge terrorist and warlord.
Here's an article I think you may be interested in: Are Judaism and Christianity as Violent as Islam? :: Middle East QuarterlyWhether Jesus did or not, there's plenty of language in both the OT and the NT that is violent. I agree that the Quran is more systematic and violent, but it is present in Christianity as well.
The very first step to overcoming any obstacle in life is acceptance and admission of ones lack of understanding or knowledge of any given subject or obstacle that they are trying to overcome.
In Religion one has to accept that they are a sinner and have sinned before God can help them.
Atheism like Radical Islam is dangerous. (prepared to kill and godless/non-believers who do not value life as "sacred")
I do not know whether Mohammed would be sickened and denounce as blasphemy the murders committed in his name. All I know is that fundamentalism or the belief one can possess perfect truth about God turns people into monsters. Perhaps there are faithful who would make a movie about the life of this prophet who is visited by Satan who tries to tempt him into giving up by gloating how he will hijack Islam and fool followers to serve Satan.An atheist blogger at Patheos says yes:
Sure, Saudi Arabia’s government is solely at fault when it executes someone for speaking out against it. But you can’t blame the government alone for Saudi blogger Raif Badawi’s sentence of 1,000 lashes and ten years in prison for the crime of insulting Islam. To do so is an insult to Badawi and the countless others killed in the name of blasphemy, like those at Charlie Hebdo.
Werleman knows politics, and he is often correct about the political climate in the US and elsewhere. He is also often correct about the steps we need to take politically to ease tensions and remove a powerful recruitment method from these extremists. But he seems too wrapped up in his own ideological position to see the damage done by ignoring all of the problems of Islam, thereby exempting it from any responsibility.
While there seems to be a growing number of non-Muslim Islam apologists, this rule of “anything but Islam” does not seem to transfer to all religions, making the argument even more spurious. When Christians attack an abortion clinic and say they were inspired by religious belief, we take them at their word and rely on moderate, liberal Christians to speak out and condemn such actions. But when Muslims chant religious text while blowing themselves up or gunning down a magazine staff, and then religious terrorist groups take credit for the attack, the faux-liberal Islamic apologists claim religion had nothing to do with it. Anyone who claims otherwise a racist and Islamophobic. If we continue to ignore religion’s influence on Islamic extremism we are allowing these groups carte blanche to exploit religion as one of the most effective recruitment tools in their struggle for power.
What do you think? Does Dan Arel have a point?
Whether Jesus did or not, there's plenty of language in both the OT and the NT that is violent. I agree that the Quran is more systematic and violent, but it is present in Christianity as well.
Yet the murderers shouted islamic slogans. Islam must have at least provided some kind of rationale for what they did.Of course not, what a stupid question!
The deranged and moronic, may find a "rationale" for justifying absolutely anything.Yet the murderers shouted islamic slogans. Islam must have at least provided some kind of rationale for what they did.
Islam doesn't make anybody do bad things. It's an idea and it depends on the person. The person is responsible, not the idea itself.