"Islam is violent! Just read the Koran to see for yourself!"

[Bill3000]

Crimes have been committed in the name of liberalism, so is liberalism inherently wrong? No, it isn't. It's essence does not permit violence. On the other hand, essence of Communism is violent.

How the hell does liberalism not permit violence? I can simply point to liberalism's [wiki]right of revolution[/wiki] that states otherwise.

 

[Winner]

The obvious good about all this is that most Muslims don't follow the violent teachings in the book correctly.

Thank God/Allah. If they did, we'd face 1.2 billion fanatical killers.

 

[Phlegmak]

Thank God/Allah. If they did, we'd face 1.2 billion fanatical killers.

Maybe. And the Christians don't follow their genocidal god correctly either, and we're all better off because of it.

Actually, there's another point which I forgot to make earlier.

Since these religions are inherently violent, and violence=bad, then the entire world and the entirety of human history will be stuck with some nutjob coming around every once in a while committing some horrible atrocity, and saying he's perfectly justified because of his religion.

 

[Mirc]

And the Christians don't follow their genocidal god correctly either, and we're all better off because of it.

Actually, there's another point which I forgot to make earlier.

Since these religions are inherently violent, and violence=bad, then the entire world and the entirety of human history will be stuck with some nutjob coming around every once in a while committing some horrible atrocity, and saying he's perfectly justified because of his religion.

I doubt that was his point. What we (or at least I) are am trying to say is that Christianity is NOT inherently violent, and that the Christian God is not genocidal by any means.

 

[Phlegmak]

I doubt that was his point. What we (or at least I) are am trying to say is that Christianity is NOT inherently violent, and that the Christian God is not genocidal by any means.

But then we come back to the point of why would the Christian god order genocide in the Old Testament? It's the same god and the same religion.

 

[El_Machinae]

This is my one big problem with the old testament, and to an extent, traditional Christianity as a whole. The general consensus is that God is good and hence cannot do something against his nature. How then could he order humans to do what is inherently evil? Either the Bible is not inerrant and the Israelites only thought it was his will or the God of the Bible is a God of arbitrary right and wrong, who could in fact have made a world where killing innocent children is right. Which goes against the previous consensus as best outlined by Aquinas. I wish I knew how he overcame this dilemma.

I think the easiest solution is that God was not actually speaking through that prophet at that time, but that the prophet was using Theocratic power in order to enact political change. There are, of course, a massive number of these examples even in modern society.

I think the worst answer is the simple "God's ways are mysterious". I mean, it works, but it's not the least bit satisfying.

My main complaint, though, is that it's included as precedent: God might tell you through a prophet to stab babies. And the Bible clearly presents the precedent as a viable one.

 

[El_Machinae]

And I can't say anything more than God sees more than we do, sees the consequences of every action. For us to judge God's actions is to place our viewpoint above his, which doesn't make sense. Faith in his plan is one of the central pillars of our belief system.

So anybody who obeys a prophet, thinking the prophet talks for God, is not only morally allowed but obligated to do what the prophet says ... not matter how seemingly despicable?

 

[Red Door]

I doubt that was his point. What we (or at least I) are am trying to say is that Christianity is NOT inherently violent, and that the Christian God is not genocidal by any means.

The Christian God killed all first-borns of Egypt, allowed Israelis to kill many tribes in the Holy Land, etc.

 

[puglover]

So anybody who obeys a prophet, thinking the prophet talks for God, is not only morally allowed but obligated to do what the prophet says ... not matter how seemingly despicable?

There's a difference between a nut who thinks he's talking to God, and a prophet who we can trust. Remember that the prophets of the Old Testament communicated with God as leaders of their tribes, with all the miraculous signs that communication brings. We can't follow every nutjob who claims to be talking to God, but if someone like Jesus, who has fufilled prophecy, deserves to be listened to.

 

[El_Machinae]

The obvious good about all this is that most Muslims don't follow the violent teachings in the book correctly.

I agree.

I think Islam is an evil system of faith. I think that Muslims are people, and prone towards all the goodness and foibles of everyone else.

 

[Mirc]

The Christian God killed all first-borns of Egypt, allowed Israelis to kill many tribes in the Holy Land, etc.

No, the Christian God did not "allow" the Israelis to do any of this, as in "give them permission" - the Jewish holy book, the Old Testament, was, like many other ideologies were, used by the heads of the people as a pretext for their actions. Again, you're holding God responsible for what some people did thousands of years before Jesus' founding of Christianity.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

Since these religions are inherently violent ...

People are so pessimistic nowadays. Some violence in a religion doesn't make the religion violent.

But in the same way some good in a religion doesn't make it good either.

It's all in the people.

We must weed out the people doing bad stuff and then hiding behind religions ... and kill them. Or judge them at least.

 

[El_Machinae]

There's a difference between a nut who thinks he's talking to God, and a prophet who we can trust. Remember that the prophets of the Old Testament communicated with God as leaders of their tribes, with all the miraculous signs that communication brings. We can't follow every nutjob who claims to be talking to God, but if someone like Jesus, who has fufilled prophecy, deserves to be listened to.

That's then a system based 100% on gullibility.

Just because a guy can perform 'supernatural'-type miracles, should I listen to him when he says to stab babies? His ability to impress me is merely a function of my ignorance and his ability to either be impressive or convince people I trust that he's impressive.

Think of all the people you know who've been tricked by charlatans or even stage magicians into thinking that there were actual magical powers involved (and that such a person is a prophet). They'd be advised to obey, no matter the moral consequences.

The Old Man on the Mountain used to bring up young men to his castle, transport them to "Heaven" (to show that he was a prophet) and then they'd go murder people for him. This chicanery can only work in a system that says "hey, stab babies if the prophet tells you to!"

edit: here's a question. What miracles did Samuel allegedly perform that should sway a mass of people sufficiently that stabbing babies is recommended? Prophecies don't really count, because we've both seen how people selectively believe prophecies, even when it's obviously a farce.

 

[cubsfan6506]

The Quarn says to kill the unbeliever, the bible does not. Yes both have violence but the reasons are vastly different.

As opposed to god who just kills them all in a flood.

 

[Red Door]

No, the Christian God did not "allow" the Israelis to do any of this, as in "give them permission" - the Jewish holy book, the Old Testament, was, like many other ideologies were, used by the heads of the people as a pretext for their actions. Again, you're holding God responsible for what some people did thousands of years before Jesus' founding of Christianity.

Same God Mirc. Not only did he kill all first-born males of Egypt, he gave permission to attack the cities of Ai and Jerico and kill all the soldiers.

And if the people used this book for pretext as their actions, don't you think that Muslim Extremists do the same thing?

BTW, Jesus did not found Christianity, Jesus was a Jew. His apostles founded Christianity. But, it's the same God as the Jews worship.

 

[Mirc]

Same God Mirc.

The problem isn't in the fact that it's the same God - read below.

Not only did he kill all first-born males of Egypt, he gave permission to attack the cities of Ai and Jerico and kill all the soldiers.

God killed all first-born males of Egypt? No, he didn't, the people performed the atrocities! Don't you realize there is a difference between the people that perform the action and the deity in who's name these actions are performed?

And if the people used this book for pretext as their actions, don't you think that Muslim Extremists do the same thing?

Yes, of course I do think they do! But this doesn't mean that the violence in Islam is equal to the violence in Christianity.

BTW, Jesus did not found Christianity, Jesus was a Jew. His apostles founded Christianity. But, it's the same God as the Jews worship.

Wrong, the Christian Church was founded by his apostles. Christianity, and its system of beliefs were founded by Christ.

 

[puglover]

God killed all first-born males of Egypt? No, he didn't, the people performed the atrocities! Don't you realize there is a difference between the people that perform the action and the deity in who's name these actions are performed?

No. God did kill all the firstborns of Egypt. He sent the angel of death to destroy them as punishment for not letting Israel out of captivity. And he also directly ordered the destruction of Jericho and Ai. You don't sound like you are familiar with the stories.

Wrong, the Christian Church was founded by his apostles. Christianity, and its system of beliefs were founded by Christ.

This is correct, however. I must give you credit for that.

 

[El_Machinae]

Hey, if the Big Guy wants to kill people, who am I to gainsay Him*?

It's the bit where he tells his people to do His killing. I figure, let him do His own killing! I'm a 'small government' kinda guy, why set up an infrastructure for doing something that God can bootstrap on His own!

*Course, I'm gonna put a lightning rod on my property, though.

 

[Red Door]

The problem isn't in the fact that it's the same God - read below.

Yes, it is the same God.

God killed all first-born males of Egypt? No, he didn't, the people performed the atrocities! Don't you realize there is a difference between the people that perform the action and the deity in who's name these actions are performed?

29 At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. 30 Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead.

Yes, of course I do think they do! But this doesn't mean that the violence in Islam is equal to the violence in Christianity.

Currently, it's not, and that's great for Christianity. Christians used to do a lot of violent stuff too. Hopefully, extremist Islam will die out too.

Wrong, the Christian Church was founded by his apostles. Christianity, and its system of beliefs were founded by Christ.

Jesus said himself he was not on Earth to destroy the Old Ways, but to fulfill them.

 

[Mirc]

No. God did kill all the firstborns of Egypt. He sent the angel of death to destroy them as punishment for not letting Israel out of captivity. And he also directly ordered the destruction of Jericho and Ai. You don't sound like you are familiar with the stories.

I think you got me a bit wrong here. I'm not saying that according to the Old Testament, God didn't kill the male firstborns of Egypt. I'm saying that I do not believe the factual accuracy of the Old Testament, but I do believe the accuracy of the New One. As I said earlier in another thread, I believe Judaism was obviously a step forward, but I also believe stories such as the Angel of Death coming to kill all male firstborns of Egypt are intended to scare people. That's the main difference between the Old and New Testament.

Edit: BTW, I did read all the Bible, and I am very familiar with the story (exactly analyzing the Old and New Testament got me to these conclusions). You got me wrong, because I didn't say the Old Testament doesn't say so, I meant what I explained above. ^^ That's all.

Currently, it's not, and that's great for Christianity. Christians used to do a lot of violent stuff too.

Not all of Christianity though. Again, you're confusing the church with Christianity as a whole. For example, God isn't responsible for what the Conquistadors did in South America... The difference is that the Christian God condemns such practices, while Islam does not (they were pagans, aka nonbelievers). And I'm wrong when I say "the church", as there is more than one church - I have yet to see the (Edit: Corrected, partial name and messed up link) Chalcedonian Protestant Syriac Church burn someone on the stake, or a Coptic Orthodox declare that whoever does not follow their religion deserves dying.