Donate SIGN UP

Christians & Muslims

Avatar Image
Theland | 09:47 Tue 25th Jan 2011 | Religion & Spirituality
103 Answers
Whatever "Team" you support, do you agree that a Christian who sticks closely to the teachings of the New Testament will not ever become a physical threat to anybody, whereas a Muslim who adheres to Koranic teaching, would applaud the violence we see around the world, the latest in Moscow.?

Your chances of being blown up by the former are nil, but by the latter? Increasing daily!

Worldwide, the first step in thwarting these attacks is to study what the koran actually teaches.

Or is it just coincidence that all over the world, the vast majority of terrorist outrages are perpetrated by muslims?
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 103rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Ankou, completely irrelevant. Both books are bloodthirsty and two wrongs never make a right.
relevant. the op is about both books.

why are you on my case again ?
Ankou, on your case? What a funny thing to say.
well if it made you laugh, then i am delighted.
Ankou, Jolly good. Now let us continue with the discussion.

Theland, no Christian follows the way of Christ. If they did, they would be Jews. Having said that, Muslim extremists are a greater threat to the world than Christian extremists not least because they murder on a bigger scale. Why don't you all just ditch religion and play nicely together? Come on ... you know it makes sense. ;o)
no i believe jake had a better premise.

come on theland, whats wrong with the old testament then ?
Ankou, I don't know what you mean. Better than what?
Far more worrisome than the grimmest of fairy tales is that someone might actually believe them.

There is a deeper more fundamental and potentially dangerous premise at work here; the belief that believing makes something real and that faith is a justification for believing in anything. Acting on faith is the prescribed method of demonstrating ones devotion to beliefs that have no basis in reality. Blowing up others along with oneself is the ultimate demonstration of ones willingness to stand on convictions for which there is no possible real means of proving or rational justification for believing. Do we really need to ask, or for that matter prove, whose faith is greater, stronger . . . or more devastating?
//when someone else’s god comes knocking at your door be prepared to reap the harvest of that which you have sown. //

And that is the most pertinent point. By justifying one belief, believers and their apologists are necessarily justifying all belief. And then they contradict that which they defend so vehemently by declaring one God right and all others wrong. Why can’t they see that in a world where religions conflict, as they always do and always will, there will never be peace - and in those circumstances how can anyone claim the religious belief is morally justified - or that any is morally right?
Question Author
Teachings in th OT are mainly concerned with obedience to a law, whereas the NT is concerned with accepting forgiveness, and forgiving others.
Forgiveness implies wrongdoing. When neither side is able or willing to accept that they are wrong no one will be able or willing to accept forgiveness let alone acknowledge the need to be forgiven . . . neither by others nor themselves.

Apart from an objective standard based on a rational understanding of the essential rights stemming from the requirements imposed by the need to conform to a common reality, an understanding not to be found in nor to be derived from the pages of any religious text, there can be no mutually agreed determination of right from wrong nor a desire and will to abide by the natural laws which govern mutually beneficial rational self interest.

Better than forgiveness is learning to distinguish and determine right from wrong and to demonstrate and teach why one should be preferred over the other so that there is much less need to grant or seek forgiveness in the first place.
Question Author
A broader view of the OT is to realise that it was also concerned with building a nation from nothing.
Some nations that stood in the way were heathen nations that God demanded were destroyed, others, were simply passed over.
The NT shows that same nation under occupation and being taught by the Son of God that the time of the sword was over.
Jake I know buggerall about religion being an atheist, but I think yu will find that the old testament is a jewish book and pre dates christianity so they cannot be held responsible for its appalling sentiments.
//The NT shows that same nation under occupation and being taught by the Son of God that the time of the sword was over. //

Which of course is why Jesus told his disciples to sell their cloaks to buy swords. Doesn't quite gel somehow does it.
jom, Jesus was a Jew - he was never anything other than a Jew - and the Christian holy book includes the Old Testament. Neither Christianity nor Islam existed at the time of Jesus.

Incidentally, the Koran is based on the Old Testament.
I think your premise is completely wrong, Theland - you only have to look at the Crusaders - the Christians fighting the Muslim Saracens in the Holy Land in those days were hardly "not a physical thread to anyone".
The Koran does exhort believers to defend their faith when it is threatened (that being the operative concept, not random violence for the sake of it) - it does not endorse the concept of suicide bombers, the taking of innocent life without reason is seen as an abhorrence, not a bonus.
Boxy, Islamic suicide bombers are convinced the Koran endorses their actions - and they would no doubt give you clear Koranic references to prove their point - but as you are often known to say, it all depends upon interpretation.
There may be a Surah which states that if you're attacked you should defend yourself. There are similar verses in the bible.
I know, naomi, they are so (I hesitate to say brainwashed) convinced that this is the most heroic thing that they can do in "defence" of their faith - and IMO this is due to Koranic wording being taken out of context, or interpreted to suit their intentions, the assurance they will have immediate Paradise... I'm sure they can quote chapter and surah, as you say! Howver - the religion of peace and submission just doesn't square with that for me.
So much war and suffering, all in the name of religion.... whichever one the warring sides are supporting - if only they realised how much they all have in common, if some of them bothered to look.
Sandyroe - here's one:
“Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loves not aggressors.” Al-Qur’an 2:190

21 to 40 of 103rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Christians & Muslims

Answer Question >>