Thats what I was talking about thanks....

I think the Bible says she was a servant. Pretty sure.

Gentle sigh. "There is a right and wrong faith. Not all can be right only one". Ah, but who is to say theirs is the 'right' one and all others are wrong. Therein is the 'rub'.

As solaris32 stated, there was no mention of 'infidels' in his paper. But for every single religion there has been and likely always will be extremists. And how sad it is that any of us judge another's religious beliefs, even if we don't understand them - perhaps we should simply respect that it is their religion and they care as much about it as one cares for their own. As ussr1943 said, it's disrepectful - and if I might add, often hurtful.

When religion - all religions - are respected by all, world peace stands a chance. Barring that, I can understand the song John Lennon wrote, 'Imagine'.

Right now, I'm humming right along with BlackSpyder's "Why Can't We Be Friends"

I'm sorry....so did the Christian radical group kill someone or commit a terrorist act? What were they armed with?

(Also, Christians are given a chance to convert, failure to do so results in death. The end result is always death.)

Stop using wikipedia for a source of substance. It is editable by anyone. Secondly, you make me laugh. I don't condone and am very set against this ideological thinking by the "army of god"....however to bring them up is an absolute strawman argument. What about the Christian patriot? Did I miss the news about that group committing terrorist atrocities around the world? You are grasping.

USSR...people like me? I read news from all perspectives. I don't know if you know this....but American media favors Islam and does not favor Christianity...so your theory doesn't hold weight. Im sorry. I'm not assuming anything. I read about the views of "moderate muslims" and interestingly enough, when asked questions, they the majority of the time think the attacks are justified. I'm hard-pressed to find muslims that don't try to blame America.

I think people like Brigitte Gabriel are extraordinary people. Read the book "Because They Hate". She's not the only one either...

What have Christians done to anger the peoples of the Middle East?? We've done plenty

1)The Crusades (We started this no holds barred fight now we're complaining about the rules we set.)
2)We setup the state of Israel ("Lets pick a side in a fight that knows no rules" genius!!)

"I see you standing in the welfare line...."

The record of the birth of Issac and Ishmael is the Book of Genesis. Ishmael was born first because Abraham's wife Sarah became afraid that Abraham would become so old he would never be able to father a child and she was unable to have a child herself. She convince Abraham to father a child through Hagar, her Egyptian maid servant. In doing this she sowed a lack of trust in God's word. Hagar became arrogant and started to feel superior to to Sarah. If Sarah and Abraham had trusted God's word, instead of trying to make it happen on their own, this whole mess between the Moslems and the Jews would not have happened. Issac is the child that God promised to Abraham and Sarah, not Ishmael. Ishmael was born by a fertile woman (Hagar) and a man (Abraham) still young enough to father a child. Issac was born by the power of God by a woman (Sarah) who was sterile and well past child baring age and a man (Abraham) who was also too old to father a child. That is why God's chosen people are the Jews, because He caused the first in the Hebrew Line to be born.

Seafox14

From what Seafox just said I also wanted to add...and that is why there will NEVER be peace between those two nations. Or those two sides of the family from the two brothers.

Yet from what you have said earlier you assume all muslims hate jews and want to strap bombs to their chests in the name of God. The army of god supports the second defensive action statement which states

ok lets hear about thier members who work for god


Theres your proof of Christian terrorism, but you havent said anything about the crusades, hmmm.. or the spanish inquisition.

heres a little about the crusades


ok now about your argument of wikipedia being an unreliable site, would be completely valid had there not been any links to trusted sites such as many university sites for the information,that are posted at the bottom of the pages, I have gathered about the crusades.

Don't tell me Christians are all good and Muslims are all heathens.
Ignorance is no excuse. Don't tell me you know everything and can't back it up. I'm completely offended by your posts and actions, and I bet some others are too. This was supposed to be a polite topic, but when you start assuming things or stereotyping people then you just show how ignorant you are and you're trying to start trouble.

USSR are you Muslim, I am just curious?

A friendly reminder:

Please keep all comments civilized.
Name calling, threats, and other inflammatory remarks, will not be tolerated.
In the future, such remarks will be removed, without explanation.
As this topic has brought out some interesting viewpoints, I would hate to see it closed, because a few can't follow the rules.

Topic rules:

Forum Rules:

Here is an interesting article from Aug 2006 on a survey of Muslims living in Britain. To summarise:

----------

Forty-five percent of British Muslims say 9/11 was a conspiracy by the American and Israeli governments.

One in four British Muslims believe that the 7/7 attacks on London were justified because of British support for the U.S.-led war on terror.

Thirty percent of British Muslims would prefer to live under Sharia law than under British law.

Twenty-eight percent hope for the U.K. one day to become a fundamentalist Islamic state.

One-third of British Muslims believe that Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to end it.

----------

Wonder what those percentages would be in some of the Muslim countries?


In my opinion, as long as the number of Muslims that support violence remains so high, it will not be viewed as a "religion of peace" by the majority of non-Muslims around the world.


This perception is only solidified by the results of that poll.


Muslim leaders need to speak out against the violence and not just make claims that their religion is one of peace. The perception will only change when it is shown to be wrong, and this will not happen while some Muslim countries support and protect those who promote violence.


In general -

is is indeed unfortunate that religions allow the worst of man to come out, rather than our good side.

I agree completely with JohnWho's last post.

In a sense, what a religion IS is what its adherents show it to be, and that is how the world must---because it is the only way it can--- judge it. By the fruits shall ye know them, as it were.

What sense does it make to say," Well, there is the way a certain religion is practised, and then there is the TRUE religion? In this case the TRUE religion is what I WANT it to be, and I can pick and choose to make my point. Or consider for a moment that the "Christianity" of the Crusades was much different than the "Christianity" of Wilberforce---not necessarily because of dogma (though the emphasis was no doubt changed) but because of the actions undertaken by its adherents.

Regards,
John

While I should not, and am trying not to, speak 'for' others here, when I saw the 'warning' posted by TG1911, I was relieved.

For while many posts with differing opinions are made in a polite and kind way, I do understand why a member may object - strongly - to the way some have been worded.

To make blanket statements such as, "islam's goal is extermination of the jews. They are filthy animals according to allah" - is, although unintentional I'm sure, a 'slap in the face' to any who are of the Muslim Faith. Especially to those who are peaceful.

Because those of each Faith likely consider theirs and theirs alone to be the 'true' Faith ... I'm sincerely curious. Why is it that one can't be content to simply believe that. - That theirs is the one and only 'true' one and silently believe others to be 'wrong'. Why do humans have this seemingly huge urge to not just believe others to be 'wrong' but to put another's Faith down - either verbally or through war.

Can believing in one's own Faith and inner assurance that it and only it is the 'true' one not be enough?

With respect, it seems the non-ending conflict within religious beliefs causes more havoc within humanity than anything else.

Most Faiths teach loving one's fellow man and peace. What went wrong, I wonder. Huge sigh.

- - - -

Forgot to ask ...

I wonder if it's possible for our Moderators to perhaps just remove an individual post that contains offensive remarks (and give the poster a 'slap on the wrist') rather than removing an entire thread? Thanks so much.

Yes.

Why do so many, in an attempt to defend their religion, resort to attacking other religions?

Defend it by showing what is right and good with your beliefs, not by trying to show what is wrong with some other religion.

Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is. ~ Mohandas Gandhi


nn23

I believe TG's warning was in response to USSR's saying "there will be trouble."

It was my opinion that I expressed. By all means express your opposing opinion.

You are absolutely right and secular humanism is no exception.

While I am not sure what is meant by "secular humanism," I cannot understand how it has caused more havoc to the world than anything else, especially the thousands of years of religious wars whose holy armies marched over the countryside devasting cities and countries in their wake. Indeed, if there is a counter-weight to religious extremism, enthusiasm, and authoritarianism, it has been the emphasis on openness, reason, tolerance, and science that has been humanism's contribution to the improvement of mankind and mankind's life.
Regards,
John

Secular Humanism, can be defined as a religious worldview based on atheism, naturalism, evolution, and ethical relativism.

It's okay we have differing opinions but please explain how 'Secular Humanism' is responsible for all the unrest and seemingless endless urge to make others believe what they do.

As Jgweed said, "emphasis on openness, reason, tolerance, and science that has been humanism's contribution to the improvement of mankind and mankind's life" - all these seem good things to me.

I'm not taking it personally - being a non-believer is simply my choice. And although they may exist, I've yet to meet an atheist who makes it his or her life's work to reform others to non-belief. Few fights break out in our world when one is content to let others choose - and believe that their own belief system is pretty darn good - gentle smile.

I guess hitler and stalin and others like Mao and Pol Pot were not materialistic humanists. We'll have to rewrite history.

(And from what I've read, they were responsible for more deaths than all "religious" or other wars, put together.)

What do you expect when you make man a deity, and classify him as nothing but a mere animal.

Just my opinion.

Hmmm. To classify all who do not believe in God as 'materialistic humanists' in the same catagory as "hitler and stalin and others like Mao and Pol Pot" is a tad harsh and truly senseless.

In fact ... although I've read many articles disavowing Hitler as a Christian, most of our libraries contain copies of his actual handwritten memoirs. And over and over again, he believes himself a good and true Christian.

(Quote_ Hitler wrote: "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." As a boy, Hitler attended to the Catholic church and experienced the anti-Semitic attitude of his culture. In his book, Mein Kampf, Hitler reveals himself as a fanatical believer in God and country. This text presents selected quotes from the infamous anti-Semite himself. (Unquote)

Source and full articles: http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm (I apologise for the source but as I said above, nearly all libraries can provide one with books containing this same quote from his own journal).

This does not mean that I would ever classify all Christians in the same catagory as Hitler, merely because they believe they are Christians and so did he.


And who, please, has decided that people such as myself (an atheist) "make man a deity", I wonder?

(That is a very poor source.)
I never said hitler was an atheist. He was a materialistic naturalist.

Bzzz.try again. Ive hear it all before.
All of these are quotes from Adolf Hitler:

Night of 11th-12th July, 1941:

National Socialism and religion cannot exist together.... The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things. (p 6 & 7)

10th October, 1941, midday:

Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure. (p 43)

14th October, 1941, midday:

The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... Christianity the liar.... We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State. (p 49-52)

19th October, 1941, night:

The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.

21st October, 1941, midday:

Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer.... The decisive falsification of Jesus' doctrine was the work of St.Paul. He gave himself to this work... for the purposes of personal exploitation.... Didn't the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it's in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St.Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea. (p 63-65)

13th December, 1941, midnight:

Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery.... .... When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease. (p 118 & 119)

14th December, 1941, midday:

Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don't believe the thing's possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself.... Pure Christianity-- the Christianity of the catacombs-- is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism, under a tinsel of metaphysics. (p 119 & 120)

9th April, 1942, dinner:

There is something very unhealthy about Christianity (p 339)

27th February, 1942, midday:

It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie. Our epoch Uin the next 200 yearse will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold ." (p 278)


What about the others?

I never said you said Hitler was an atheist. I said he felt he was a Christian. (Unsure of the integrity of 'quotes' below but it may be that he well and truly 'lost it' towards the end, but when he started out rallying the German people to his cause, he considered himself a Christian and doing a Christian duty). And the huge number of Christians within Germany would never have followed him otherwise.

Whether you or I would consider him a Christian, isn't the point really. The point is that within each 'group' there are nutters - whether they be Christian or otherwise. And perhaps it's best to remember that being labeled as something, be it an atheist, Christian, materialistic naturalist or whatever doesn't necessarily make it so.

Perhaps naively, I firmly believe that many Christians not only believe in gentleness and kindess towards others, they live lives filled with gentleness and kindess towards others. And because we are human and fallible, many lurch towards the other extreme, as do all people that fall within 'labels' - perhaps becoming one's own worst enemy and doing harm to how the world may perceive others within that same 'label'.

Are you saying this as an absolute?

Let's say I grant you this point. Would you agree that these mass murderers are generally persons that feel they have no higher authority than themselves? No ultimate consequence for whatever actions they may take?

My comment was not aimed at anyone, in particular.
It was merely a reminder, for everyone, of the rules for posting.

Thanks for clarifying the intent of the gentle warning, tg1911

- - -

Re: " And because we are human and fallible" and in response to [i]"Are you saying this as an absolute?"[/i]...

I'm laughing here but yes, I consider us human beings. An upper level animal to some, something else to others. Doesn't really matter what label is tagged on us, surely, as most know the intent behind using the word 'human' in a sentence.

And as for people being "fallible" - yup, in my opinion, this would be an absolute. I don't know of any person/human who has not made at least one mistake along the way - and, in fact, most that claim to be perfect are indeed quite frightening.

- - -
jgweed, your statement of, " Indeed, if there is a counter-weight to religious extremism, enthusiasm, and authoritarianism, it has been the emphasis on openness, reason, tolerance, and science that has been humanism's contribution to the improvement of mankind and mankind's life. - really does make my heart smile.

For often, with emphasis on one religion being better than another and surely better than having none, we perhaps tend to forget that many wonderful things that benefit all are created by both religious non-religious scientists and a heck of a lot of simply non-religious people.

Let's say I grant you this point. Would you agree that these mass murderers are generally persons that feel they have no higher authority than themselves? No ultimate consequence for whatever actions they may take?

Well, I am glad I could make you laugh. My question was more pointed towards the fallible part. How do you associate mistakes with being fallible? Since you are an atheist, and I assume you are your own authority and have no repercussions for any actions you take...why would it matter if man is fallible?

Re: "How do you associate mistakes with being fallible? Since you are an atheist, and I assume you are your own authority and have no repercussions for any actions you take...why would it matter if man is fallible?".

I'm quite sure you may not have intended your words to sound the way they do. But do you realize what an incredible insult they are?

No, I don't. I definitely don't mean to insult. Explain why its an insult.

"Atheism is a doctrine that states that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own."

Groan. Gentle sigh.

And as for the quote ... "Since you are an atheist, and I assume you are your own authority and have no repercussions for any actions you take...why would it matter if man is fallible?".


Perhaps I should explain it this way ...

When you say, "Since you are an atheist, and I assume you are your own authority" - that is true. I and I alone am responsible, in my opinion, for any wrong I do to others, whether by wilful act or neglect - and in turn, I (who I am as a person and my moral code) alone make decisions regarding any good I choose to do while walking upon this earth.

But when you add, "and have no repercussions for any actions you take...".

1. If there exists "no repercussions for any action" I take, would that not make me a scary person walking this earth.
2. If there exists "no repercussions for any action" I take, to reach this conclusion it would appear that an assumption of 'no concience" exists.
3. Ergo, because I have no Faith, this would be the cause of my having "no repercussions for any action" I take.

Honestly, although I'm sure it wasn't intended as such, it's an insulting statement. For rather than "Since you are an atheist, and I assume you are your own authority and have no repercussions for any actions you take...why would it matter if man is fallible?", in reality, I and many, many others similar to me, have a strict moral code we try to live by. And, in fact, there are massive "repercussions" for every action I take. And the ones the law imposes are minor compared to my own self-respect and respect for others.

Well said, MaraM

I am just wondering why some posters feel the need to be overbearing and aggressive. Is it because they believe that their opinion is the only one that counts?

Cheers

Well said 'rowal5555' I have allways thought this to be the case. Easy Solution. I am not replying to these Taunts and what I consider unfriendly posts,as I think it only adds fuel to their fire. I am confident sooner or later they should get the message.After all we should be one big happy family here on BC.IMHO.

I am not sure that there is only ONE authority by which one judges one's own and other's actions, and that must have its foundations in a particular religions creed, or that taking responsibility for one's choices is strickly limited to religious individuals. One might just as easily argue that:
1. Following a religious creed (one of the many sects of Christianity, for example) is psychologically an avoidance of responsibility for actions one takes.
2. The creed one uses as a basis of morality and action is either subject to prior choices about whether or not it is moral, or a matter of place and time of birth.

I would suggest that many people who AVOID religious morality are not DEVOID of morality. And by understanding that human choice is fallible, these people make choices in "fear and trembling" and with more careful consideration than a "true believer."

Regards,
John

This is my first Topic reply and you could knock me down wiv a feather at the subject matter, considering I came here for some help with PC

My "faith" in Buddhist teachings stem from Buddhism being a philosophy and not a faith, per se.

We don't subscribe to the "sack-cloth and ashes" mentality. Life is for living and enjoying, providing that our pleasure isn't at the expense of another's.

No creature is to be killed or harmed unless it is for food or is a threat or (in extreme cases) downright annoying - lol. Some won't kill another creature, even under these circumstances.

We try to live and let live and are happy for you if you discover our "faith", but it's not our work to force or even try to convince you of Buddhism and it's outlook on how we best serve ourselves and others.

If I gotta make your life better in order to improve my own, I'm gonna try to make your life better - A "No-Brainer", really.

That, in a nutshell, is a pretty accurate description of Buddhism.

Oh, yeah. And we DO believe in spirits/ghosts and the supernatural, just not a Supreme Being.

as for reprocussions, it doesnt matter what race/belief/ethnicity you are this is a common for all, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If you say something as little as saying "Hi how are you today" you can really make someone feel good about themself, your action : "Hi" the reaction is mental satisfaction.

Side note: sebD, I really enjoy hearing about buhddism in the world, this is a great belief as it doesn't attempt to cause harm or conflicts.


Mod Edit: Edited to remove inflammatory remark.

The only thing I'm assuming is that the first two paragraphs aren't directed at my post or I - lol.

I'm no more a believer in a "devine Entity" than any Atheist. And if Atheists only believe in the physical, who can say that a spirit is not physical?

Just cuz I can't see air or many other gasses or see or touch gravity, it doesn't make these any the less a physical existence.

Is light physical?

Is smell?

Why not a soul?

Why not, even, thought?....

......Just a thought.


Mod Edit: Edited to remove inflammatory remark, from the quote.

So do Buddhists believe in eating meat or killing a mosquito or any animal for food? I mean no matter what not even for survival no killing animals or people in self defense? Curious....

I'm the first to admit I'm not an expert, but is not Buddism a peaceful religion of a philosophical nature - and in fact, have never trampled other's beliefs and Faiths?

As for a 'soul'? I don't have the answer to that one either. But I have watched my brain during medical tests - and must say, it was fascinating. Knowing something intellectually is so different from actually seeing the different areas work when we speak or add figures in our head, etc. Wow!

Re: "spirits/ghosts and the supernatural, just not a Supreme Being". I find this fascinating because a few of my friends do, as well, and in turn they take some gentle teasing from other friends who happen to be Christian and don't believe in them. Yet, these same Christian friends believe in 'souls' and 'angels'. We're all friends so no mini-wars break out, but does make for zippy conversation over dinner sometimes.

Woops dummy me...Thanks TG....

Re: ""The fool hath said in his heart, 'There is no God'"

I respect your right to feel this way - after all, it's truly an opinion not a fact that I and others like me are fools. Gentle sigh.

But at least I'm a happy, content and caring 'food' - grin.

Are you saying that someone that believes psalm 14:1 can't be happy and content?

How on earth do you make an assumption like that. ????????

From the words...."But at least I'm happy and content." The word "but" suggests that what follows it is contrary to what was previously said.

"SAIMA KHAN wants to die a martyr. Life is transient, she told her father in a telephone call last week, and the real glory is to sacrifice it for Allah. Her statement would be alarming at any age, but Saima is only 10."

Read more here.

Look what palestinian kids are watching.

Makes one wonder -

if the majority of Muslims are peace loving,

why is stuff like that being supported?

Yes, and why is it not detested by public figures on an ongoing basis. Why are there no movements to clarify teachings?

They are not being supported on a widespread scale, also many times Muslims can't not support it. Think of it this way Germany and hitler in ww2, The germans knew hitler was killing thousands of Jews, but noone would stand up for what is right, they kept their mouth shut, because they knew units like the gestappo would kill their family and tourture them.
Still if you're assuming all Muslims are bad then you are totally mistaken my friend I hope you can see this. Also you must also realize that you are probably looking for one side of the story, have you tried to look about the other side? Even if you don't like others points of view you should atleast get some sort of understanding of where it's coming from. But by this time I'm pretty sure you have your mind made up so no matter what anyone says or does you may just always think Muslims are blood thirsty animals. Theres a big word you don't really think about in this process though, "Extremists" this implies that these people are on the extreme end of the scale, meaning that not all are like this. As for Palestine, I consider Hamas to be a terrorists group, so I don't find anything shocking about anything they put on T.V. or radio.