Astral Fridge Magnet wrote:The old testament speaks of massacres and wars. The new testament doesn't.
Just eventual Armageddon......
In fact, most religions who have matured through the ages do preach peace, and never war. Islam preaches sometimes peace, and sometimes war. But if Islam preaches both, which interpretation is the right one? Is it right to be at peace? Or is it right to be at war?
Islam teaches that to fight for a just cause is OK. Makes sense to me.
In fact, if both interpretations are true, an interesting paradox arises. While christianity states that non-christians cannot reach salvation (although modern Catholic teachings have denied this too), christianism doesn't state that you should kill non-christians.
Uh? What were the Crusades about?
Hebraism, which is surely theoretically less peaceful than christianism, has nonetheless a history of patience towards oppression, instead of a history of violence. Just think of the Holocaust.
Israel doesn't strike me as a bastion of tolerance.
In fact, one of the interesting aspects of Islam, is that it conquered aggressively most of the then known world, while Christianism spread through peaceful conversion until the crusades (and the crusades were a reaction to Islamic invasion), and Hebraism through migration. The crusades killed far more christians than muslims anyway. But the crusaders themselves were terribly misguided as are the fundamentalists are today.
OK so the muslims are responsible for all the pagans murdered in northern Europe?
Again let me say that I am no expert on the matter ( though I know a little) and my position is one of agnosticism. All I am stating are facts and I have no intention to incite hatred or whatever. That is clearly said in my previous posts. I should also make clear that I am not trying to reduce Islam to those quotes I mentioned. Islam is a legitimate religion and I am not in a position to judge it and I am in no way attacking it.
Yes you are, you are stating that the religion itself is more violent than Christianity. It's the same argument that I could give about Live, "It was originally marketed at DJ's, therefore it's responsible for all a brainless dance music around. Logic, SX3, and Pro Tools are much more suited for real music, and have a long history of more complex intelligently written songs, but I'm not attacking Live.... I'm in no position to judge...." I could argue all day long that I am not pointing fingers, but if I bristle at any attack on Logic....
The point I was making in previous posts is that fundamentalists are using those quotes to legitimise their murders, while most muslims don't buy into that shit. Also to contradict the statement that islam is a religion of peace, when there are quotes like that written in the koran.
There are plenty of ugly parts of every religious texts IMO, but when you start trying to justify your belief that the Koran is a violent text, and then try to state that you're not attacking Islam....
Granted the Koran has some violent parts, state what you believe but please don't go into double speak with this whole I'm not attacking..... nonsense, you are very much trying to use the Koran to state your argument that Islam is a more violent religion on the whole than others.
What bothers me is the lack of real physical evidence that any religion is any less violent than another? Even the Buddhists in Tibet backed the Nazis.....oops!
I think you're just a bit less tolerant of Islam than you are of Christianity, that's all I see here. Even suicide bombers, well you join the Green Beret, and your chances of coming home alive in full on war, are pretty slim. Of course then you can argue that young men think they are invincible, but what does that say about the people and society who send those young men in?
I'm Atheist to the core BTW, Agnostics are just Christians in doubt, according to my Christian friends....
