Here you go you dumbs$%&#@

[Forever_frost]

Not necessarily a response to Islam. It was to take back the Holy Land, which Muslims were in control of. That does not justify what followed, however.



That wasn't meant to be directed at you. It was intended for the OP, but I wasn't clear.

I didn't say it was a well reasoned response but it was a response. Personally, I'd have not stopped until Islam was gone from the earth and the entire sect stripped from history but I do have a personal axe to grind. I don't pretend to be impartial nor do I pretend to be a peaceful Christian. It's an open wound I deal with daily.

No harm, no foul my man. I'm still hobbling around after having fun at my birthday yesterday. Tip for today: Don't lift heavy trailers and drag them around the yard.

[jasone]

WTF that's ironic, I am listening to that right now, 4hrs long but worth it

If you enjoy it, check out his series about the khan's I think it is called wrath of the Khan.

[SBFORDTECH]

Pump your brakes, kid.

Jesus does a fantastic job on my lawn for an extremely reasonable rate.

I am typically offended by a lot of what is said here about Christianity. I lol'd at this though.

[Mongoose]

You do realize the Crusades were a response to Islam correct? I have a very educated view of Islam (been there) and am always studying the Bible and scripture. I know both sources though I admittedly have applied more time in study of one than the other.

So how were the Crusades a responce to Islam? There were started by the Church in Rome with a desire to liberate the Holy Land from the Muslims. Most were a failure due to greed, backstabbing, and barbaric butchery on the part of the Western Kings that often produced terrible results. It led to the further weakening of the Byzantine Empire and ultimately led to the Turks deciding that the best defense was a good offense which led to the fall of Constantinople in 1453, a Christian/Arab war in the Balklands that continues unto this day.

[YALE]

I am typically offended by a lot of what is said here about Christianity. I lol'd at this though.

Suck it up.

[Mongoose]

There's quite a few but that's the neat thing about Islam. There's really no bedrock. One fatwa can override another with no stability. Even the Koran is open to change as a high ranking Imam decides. One could actually conceivably come out and outlaw pedophilia and violence against non Muslims and it'd have the force of Momo himself.

And thus why you have Muslims going around saying Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance and those people that do those things dont speak for Islam.

So why is it DIFFERENT when Christians do the same thing about Christianity in current or historical contexts? Even as we`ve seen already on this thread?

Why? Its because of Human Nature.

So we have two competing religions claiming to be the "truth", yet their own believers still react in the same ways and thinks that the "do-do" on their side doesnt stink.

Sorry, I`m just not impressed - With either side.

[Mongoose]

I didn't say it was a well reasoned response but it was a response. Personally, I'd have not stopped until Islam was gone from the earth and the entire sect stripped from history but I do have a personal axe to grind. I don't pretend to be impartial nor do I pretend to be a peaceful Christian. It's an open wound I deal with daily.

No harm, no foul my man. I'm still hobbling around after having fun at my birthday yesterday. Tip for today: Don't lift heavy trailers and drag them around the yard.

First of all, Thank you Frost for your service.

I certainly understand why you dont like them, but I do hope that in time you can learn to let go as staying angry is more harmful in the long run

[racrguy]

The verses you quoted said nothing about when it would happen.

Sure they did, you just didn't read it.

As The King pointed out, you also omitted the following verse that specifically says nobody knows when it will happen.

Which was contradicted in what I quoted.

You're as bad about picking and choosing what applies to your narrative as Christians, and Gasser64 are.

By pointing out things that don't make sense, sure.

There are quite a few scholarly interpretations of parts of the Olivet prophecies / Olivet discourse. re: "generations"

Is he speaking of the generation present in front of him hearing him speak, or is he speaking of the generation that will be present when the end times come... as that's the subject of that entire passage?

It's possible that he could have been speaking of a future generation, but that's not indicated in anything that he says.

Or maybe those things were actually fulfilled in the first century AD?

We know that the things he spoke of in the Matthew scripture I cited did not happen because all of the things that are said to cease once the rapture happens still exist.

Or could it be language nuances?

This too is a possibility, the problem being that the KJV was written in the 1600's and there is no "original" source material to check for accuracy against.

Maybe the issue is the use of the word "this" instead of "that" in the verse. "That" would make this a non-issue for you, right?

The use of clearer terms would make intent easier to determine.

I don't have your answer; just saying that "he's a liar" is maybe a bit farfetched.

I disagree. Reading the words that are written and not engaging mental gymnastics points to someone that said something was going to happen that ultimately didn't. It's possible that liar is a strong term as it implies knowledge of deceit, but given the entirety of the bible I don't think I was out of line making that judgement.

[SBFORDTECH]

Suck it up.

i think I'll be ok.

[Forever_frost]

If you want to know which is more violent, hold hands with another man and kiss in the middle of the day, in an open market while wearing:

A t-shirt criticizing Christ in at the Vatican

A t shirt criticizing Momo in any Muslim majority country.

Let me know which tolerates you.

[Forever_frost]

And thus why you have Muslims going around saying Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance and those people that do those things dont speak for Islam.

So why is it DIFFERENT when Christians do the same thing about Christianity in current or historical contexts? Even as we`ve seen already on this thread?

Why? Its because of Human Nature.

So we have two competing religions claiming to be the "truth", yet their own believers still react in the same ways and thinks that the "do-do" on their side doesnt stink.

Sorry, I`m just not impressed - With either side.

Simple, Christianity has a bedrock. The Holy Bible. You can disagree with it, but you won't find any that say it changes. The dead sea scrolls are pretty much word for word what is in the Book.

Islam has an undercurrent itself. You can criticize Christ and no one is empowered, using anything in the document, to harm you. You can dip the cross in urine, smear the virgin Mary in feces and you're going to be okay. You draw a picture of Mohammad, you're going to die.

[Forever_frost]

First of all, Thank you Frost for your service.

I certainly understand why you dont like them, but I do hope that in time you can learn to let go as staying angry is more harmful in the long run

I'm thinking of the song from Frozen but nah. keeps me warm and motivates me for my class.

[racrguy]

Simple, Christianity has a bedrock. The Holy Bible. You can disagree with it, but you won't find any that say it changes. The dead sea scrolls are pretty much word for word what is in the Book.

Islam has an undercurrent itself. You can criticize Christ and no one is empowered, using anything in the document, to harm you. You can dip the cross in urine, smear the virgin Mary in feces and you're going to be okay. You draw a picture of Mohammad, you're going to die.

The bible never changes? I lol'd.

[Gasser64]

No, bcoop is correct. Your apparent ignorance of the Old Testament, beginning with your opening post, does indeed show how little you know of the Bible.

So you disagree that we're supposed to live by the old testament, and not the new. Please cite specifically, where exactly I'm wrong and what points I've made that you're contradicting.

The two are not mutually exclusive, and a justification doesn't make an action less violent.

So you're still going with whipping a few people with a chord (not even a whip), is the same as parading their heads around on spikes. Modern day equivalent would be me grabbing a paddle (instead of a sword) or a paintball gun (instead of a real gun) and going around and using that on some people. Vs mass murder.

And thus why you have Muslims going around saying Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance and those people that do those things dont speak for Islam.

So why is it DIFFERENT when Christians do the same thing about Christianity in current or historical contexts? Even as we`ve seen already on this thread?

I've explained this to you several times already. The example we are told to live by, in the bible, is that of non violence. They're told to butcher people. Those are both facts. What part of that, is so difficult to understand? Lets simplify it to two countries. One country's king orders the people to be non violent. The other country's king orders the people to butcher anyone who disagrees with him or his manner of rule. That's the gist of it. Its all been explained to you by various people here, at this point its pretty clear that you just don't want to believe it.

[YALE]

So you're still going with whipping a few people with a chord (not even a whip), is the same as parading their heads around on spikes. Modern day equivalent would be me grabbing a paddle (instead of a sword) or a paintball gun (instead of a real gun) and going around and using that on some people. Vs mass murder.

Did I characterize them as equivalent? No. I refuted your claim to Jesus being non-violent. You said he, "wouldn't hurt a fly," when in fact, he did hit at least a few people, and behaved violently while doing so. I'm not the one making a claim, apart from my observation that I find both religions annoying.