Religious Extremism

[Davies]

...,Mother Theresa's works did not include flying planes into buildings.

Ok, I think I have to give you that one.

I suppose if you took the teaching of the Quran and properly interpreted it with the writings about Mohammed, compare it with the actions of Islam's presumed followers, you might say Bin Laden's actions were not extreme. It could be said Bin Laden was doing what Mohammed said for his followers to do.

But on the other hand (I feel like the actor on the Fiddler on the Roof, Topol), knowing if you go to Afghanistan or Pakistan without connections providing gun safety, where the slip of the tongue regarding Mohammed, or God forbid, if you convert from the Muslim faith, you could be put to death. They don't think that's extreme over there, or is it only their governments who don't think this kind of legislation is extreme?

- Davies

 

[Sinthesis]

I agree.

Unfortunately you believe that the statement, "all scripture is inspired by God", applies to the entire Bible.

That is your belief.

And since you believe that Revelation is inspired by God.
And since you believe that Jesus is God.

Then according to your beliefs Revelation 19 is a teaching of Jesus.

And it is possible that this verse is what inspired Bush to have the innocent Iraqi people killed.

Revelation 19 is a teaching of Jesus. Do Muslims find it authoritative?

Rev 19:11 ¶ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.​

"In righteousness he doth judge and make war" means that the war and judgment of Christ is done in righteousness. Surely Muslims believe in the ideas of just judgment and just war.

Misguided as he might have been, Bush ultimately became the rod of judgment against Saddam and his corrupt regime. The tragedy has been the willingness throughout it all for Muslims to kill innocent Muslims. Not surprising really.2

 

[MarbleShooter]

Hey, Lance, I don't know what happened to spark all this anger out of you, but don't resort to your old ways okay?

Much of your post is blatant twisting of Biblical accounts, and can be easily refuted.

Don't explode like you've done in the past, k?

I actually wasn't angry when I wrote that. I wanted to avoid religious talks, but topics like this get me. It shows a complete ignorance of the history surrounding Europe and the early Americas to say that Christianity didn't go through an extreme phase. I also didn't twist the Bible. In the Book of Numbers there are rule laid out in how to obtain, treat, and pass on permanent slaves. If you were captured during a raid and you weren't a jew. The Book of Numbers says you are then property of the person who captured or bought you. That isn't twisting. I can get the verses if you like. This is psalm 137. This is a psalm about being a captive and sing out to yahwe to take vengance on your captors. Here is the Psalm : 137 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat There we wept as we remembered Zion. On the poplars we hung our lyres: For there our captors requested words of song, And our mockers (demanded) joy. “Sing a song of Zion to us!†How could we sing songs of YHWH On enemy territory? If I forget you, Jerusalem, Let my right hand wither. Let my tongue cling to my palate If I do not remember you, If I do not exalt Jerusalem over my greatest joy. Remember, YHWH, against the sons of Edom, The day of Jerusalem. (Remember) the ones who called, “Strip her! Strip her! Down to her foundation!†Daughter of Babel, (you) destroyer, Happy is the one who pays you back. Happy is the one who grabs your children And smashes them against the rock. The Book of Joshua is where the People of Israel reclaim their land from those who took it. Its a book about war. The villages and cities were raided, all who lived there were killed. The kings were hung from a tree by day, and at night they were put in a cave and then sealed within. I didn't twist that. In the sermon on the mount, Jesus is asked about the old law. Jesus states that the Old law is in affect and Jesus even scolds the listeners for becoming soft in it. Jesus then states that he will become the lamb, but the rules about everyday life and being clean where still in effect. Many kingdoms enforced the death penalties for incest, homosexuality, adultery, theft, kept slavery, the dress codes, etc. Many of these rules didn't change until well after the dark ages had past. This isn't a bash, or said out of anger, its the truth. The book of Revelations is about the end and how all those who do not or didn't accept Jesus will be judged and thrown into the lake of fire with the "beast" and as others have posted. The white horse will wage war against the non believers first. There is also the part where God will burn the non believers to prove them blasphemous, then destroy them. What am I twisting? I'm not bashing your religion. I'm only referencing whats in your very book. I was actually just pointing out that Christianity calmed down and now focuses on the teaching the Jesus did about community, love, faith, and non violence against thine neighbor. The middle east is starting to catch up with the modern world. Islam is going to go under a massive change. Just like how Christianity, Hinduism, and Judaism did in the past. I'm actually complimenting you guys.

 

[kidcanman]

Revelation 19 is a teaching of Jesus.

Rev 19:11 ¶ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him [was] called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.​

"In righteousness he doth judge and make war" means that the war and judgment of Christ is done in righteousness. Surely Muslims believe in the ideas of just judgment and just war.

Bush ultimately became the rod of judgment against Saddam and his corrupt regime.

There you go drummer4christ. Sinthesis believes that Jesus taught violence (of course he might deny it now that I have pointed it out). And not only that. But he also believes that according to Christianity, attacking a sovereign nation without first being attacked is justified. So is Sinthesis like mother Teresa or is he an extremist?

 

[kidcanman]

But on the other hand (I feel like the actor on the Fiddler on the Roof, Topol), knowing if you go to Afghanistan or Pakistan without connections providing gun safety, where the slip of the tongue regarding Mohammed, or God forbid, if you convert from the Muslim faith, you could be put to death. They don't think that's extreme over there, or is it only their governments who don't think this kind of legislation is extreme?

These claims are misleading.

 

[jasoncran]

These claims are misleading.

misleading

i was in afghanistan and under orders not to prosyltise! general order number one and we had muslim men who wanted bibles and told us that if they openly confessed conversion they would be beaten and in kabol or other areas they would die!

thats a well known fact.

 

[jasoncran]

There you go drummer4christ. Sinthesis believes that Jesus taught violence (of course he might deny it now that I have pointed it out). And not only that. But he also believes that according to Christianity, attacking a sovereign nation without first being attacked is justified. So is Sinthesis like mother Teresa or is he an extremist?

the afghanis believe that their country is being punished by allah for what the taliban did.

so i know that muslims believe that allah punishes nations. and you misquote synthesis , he didnt say bush or we should have but that god judged hussein for what he did

is it in the quran to gas women and children who are muslims?
is it in the quran to kill ****ties?
to commit crimes against humanity?

 

[Drummer4Christ]

There you go drummer4christ. Sinthesis believes that Jesus taught violence (of course he might deny it now that I have pointed it out). And not only that. But he also believes that according to Christianity, attacking a sovereign nation without first being attacked is justified. So is Sinthesis like mother Teresa or is he an extremist?

So you admit that a verse instructing Christians to invade Muslim countries was divinely inspired by the Son of God, not corrupted by anti-Islamists?

 

[theLords]

I actually wasn't angry when I wrote that. I wanted to avoid religious talks, but topics like this get me. It shows a complete ignorance of the history surrounding Europe and the early Americas to say that Christianity didn't go through an extreme phase. I also didn't twist the Bible. In the Book of Numbers there are rule laid out in how to obtain, treat, and pass on permanent slaves. If you were captured during a raid and you weren't a jew. The Book of Numbers says you are then property of the person who captured or bought you. That isn't twisting. I can get the verses if you like. This is psalm 137. This is a psalm about being a captive and sing out to yahwe to take vengance on your captors. Here is the Psalm : 137 By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat There we wept as we remembered Zion. On the poplars we hung our lyres: For there our captors requested words of song, And our mockers (demanded) joy. “Sing a song of Zion to us!†How could we sing songs of YHWH On enemy territory? If I forget you, Jerusalem, Let my right hand wither. Let my tongue cling to my palate If I do not remember you, If I do not exalt Jerusalem over my greatest joy. Remember, YHWH, against the sons of Edom, The day of Jerusalem. (Remember) the ones who called, “Strip her! Strip her! Down to her foundation!†Daughter of Babel, (you) destroyer, Happy is the one who pays you back. Happy is the one who grabs your children And smashes them against the rock. The Book of Joshua is where the People of Israel reclaim their land from those who took it. Its a book about war. The villages and cities were raided, all who lived there were killed. The kings were hung from a tree by day, and at night they were put in a cave and then sealed within. I didn't twist that. In the sermon on the mount, Jesus is asked about the old law. Jesus states that the Old law is in affect and Jesus even scolds the listeners for becoming soft in it. Jesus then states that he will become the lamb, but the rules about everyday life and being clean where still in effect. Many kingdoms enforced the death penalties for incest, homosexuality, adultery, theft, kept slavery, the dress codes, etc. Many of these rules didn't change until well after the dark ages had past. This isn't a bash, or said out of anger, its the truth. The book of Revelations is about the end and how all those who do not or didn't accept Jesus will be judged and thrown into the lake of fire with the "beast" and as others have posted. The white horse will wage war against the non believers first. There is also the part where God will burn the non believers to prove them blasphemous, then destroy them. What am I twisting? I'm not bashing your religion. I'm only referencing whats in your very book. I was actually just pointing out that Christianity calmed down and now focuses on the teaching the Jesus did about community, love, faith, and non violence against thine neighbor. The middle east is starting to catch up with the modern world. Islam is going to go under a massive change. Just like how Christianity, Hinduism, and Judaism did in the past. I'm actually complimenting you guys.

It's certainly a back handed compliment. You accuse Jesus of being violent, well please, provide Scripture verses for every Biblical passage you've misinterpreted and let's see if what you say is correct.

Since you've provided a Psalm:

This is not proper exegesis.

One needs to understand something about the Psalms - they are not be "read" as theologically normative, that is, as if they are informing us about how we should live, and what we should do.

The Psalms, and other so-called "writings" books like Ecclesiastes, serve an entirely different function. As Phillip Yancey observes, the Psalms capture the expressions of the emotions of the writer as he struggle with life.

So, for example, when the Psalm writer asks God to "dash the infants of the enmemy on the rocks", this is not something that God "approves of"!!! Such a statement is, instead, the writer "venting", or expressing his view that life is unfair. It should not be taken as expressing fundamental truths about the nature of God.

To make the point further - many of the Psalms complain about God abandoning the writer. Others accuse God of injustice.

Has God abandonned the writer? No!!!

Has God been unjust? No!!!

It is a HUGE mistake to take "one-liners" from the Psalms and try to make a theological or moral position out of them. Many of the Psalms provide a record of the "feelings" of a writer who sees injustice in the world and demands that God "explain Himself".

The Psalms are not a reliable source of "theology", in the sense that we read a book like Romans and correctly discern things about God.

So

 

[Free]

There you go drummer4christ. Sinthesis believes that Jesus taught violence (of course he might deny it now that I have pointed it out). And not only that. But he also believes that according to Christianity, attacking a sovereign nation without first being attacked is justified. So is Sinthesis like mother Teresa or is he an extremist?

Jesus never taught violence; quite the opposite actually. Revelation 19 is speaking of the final war and judgment against against those who oppose God. Sure, some can and like do twist it to justify going to war, but that clearly is not what is being stated. Context, context, context.

 

[Sinthesis]

There you go drummer4christ. Sinthesis believes that Jesus taught violence (of course he might deny it now that I have pointed it out). And not only that. But he also believes that according to Christianity, attacking a sovereign nation without first being attacked is justified. So is Sinthesis like mother Teresa or is he an extremist?

Kidcanman, please do not try to speak for me as you obviously do not know what I believe. You most certainly did not point out that I believe "that Jesus taught violence" or "that according to Christianity, attacking a sovereign nation without first being attacked is justified" based upon the fullness of my previous post. Rather, you simply manufactured these errant opinions and then attributed them to me.2

Jesus did not teach violence to His followers. However, Jesus, being God, is fully within His right as God to both judge and make war on any aspect of creation, using any aspect of creation as His instrument. Bush was not justified through Christianity in his actions against Saddam, yet Christ is justified in using Bush's hubristic folly to bring down Saddam's regime to His own purpose.

 

[Hitch]

Jesus never taught violence; quite the opposite actually. Revelation 19 is speaking of the final war and judgment against against those who oppose God. Sure, some can and like do twist it to justify going to war, but that clearly is not what is being stated. Context, context, context.

I wonder how Ghandi or King would have ground their enemies to powder, non violently.

 

[MarbleShooter]

It's certainly a back handed compliment. You accuse Jesus of being violent,

He condoned the old law. Meaning slavery and the death penalty for a wide range of sins. Sin. Why is this so offenseive? This is pretty clear from a reading of the BIble. I don't have to twist anything. Its written out pretty plainly. Slavery This was the comand given to what is to be done with fellow jewsih slaves. Leviticus 25:39-43 39 “‘If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves. 40 They are to be treated as hired workers or temporary residents among you; they are to work for you until the Year of Jubilee. 41 Then they and their children are to be released, and they will go back to their own clans and to the property of their ancestors. 42 Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. 43 Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God. this is usually the one I'm given and explained to how slavery wasn't so bad. What I've noticed is that there are a few lines after that, that deal with non jews, here we go Leviticus 25:44 -46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. Basiclaly, if they aren't believers and are foriegners, they can be bought or captured as slaves. I'll tackle the book of Joshua next. For now I have to go to work. As I already Stated, this isn't a bash. I'm just reading your own book.

 

[Free]

I wonder how Ghandi or King would have ground their enemies to powder, non violently.

I don't follow.

 

[Free]

He condoned the old law. Meaning slavery and the death penalty for a wide range of sins. Sin. Why is this so offenseive? This is pretty clear from a reading of the BIble. I don't have to twist anything. Its written out pretty plainly. Slavery This was the comand given to what is to be done with fellow jewsih slaves. Leviticus 25:39-43 39 “‘If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves. 40 They are to be treated as hired workers or temporary residents among you; they are to work for you until the Year of Jubilee. 41 Then they and their children are to be released, and they will go back to their own clans and to the property of their ancestors. 42 Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. 43 Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God. this is usually the one I'm given and explained to how slavery wasn't so bad. What I've noticed is that there are a few lines after that, that deal with non jews, here we go Leviticus 25:44 -46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. Basiclaly, if they aren't believers and are foriegners, they can be bought or captured as slaves. I'll tackle the book of Joshua next. For now I have to go to work. As I already Stated, this isn't a bash. I'm just reading your own book.

Be careful about taking things written for a certain group of people, at a certain time, for a specific purpose, and applying them to others in different times. None of the Law can be used to support violence against others, slavery, etc. Context is everything, including the historical and social contexts.

 

[theLords]

He condoned the old law. Meaning slavery and the death penalty for a wide range of sins. Sin. Why is this so offenseive? This is pretty clear from a reading of the BIble. I don't have to twist anything. Its written out pretty plainly. Slavery This was the comand given to what is to be done with fellow jewsih slaves. Leviticus 25:39-43 39 “‘If any of your fellow Israelites become poor and sell themselves to you, do not make them work as slaves. 40 They are to be treated as hired workers or temporary residents among you; they are to work for you until the Year of Jubilee. 41 Then they and their children are to be released, and they will go back to their own clans and to the property of their ancestors. 42 Because the Israelites are my servants, whom I brought out of Egypt, they must not be sold as slaves. 43 Do not rule over them ruthlessly, but fear your God. this is usually the one I'm given and explained to how slavery wasn't so bad. What I've noticed is that there are a few lines after that, that deal with non jews, here we go Leviticus 25:44 -46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly. Basiclaly, if they aren't believers and are foriegners, they can be bought or captured as slaves. I'll tackle the book of Joshua next. For now I have to go to work. As I already Stated, this isn't a bash. I'm just reading your own book.

You're treading on thin ice, Lance 2

Matthew 5:17
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Christ has fulfilled the Law of Moses.

Matthew 5

21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

23Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

24Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

25Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

26Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

30And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

33Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

34But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

 

[Hitch]

Be careful about taking things written for a certain group of people, at a certain time, for a specific purpose, and applying them to others in different times. None of the Law can be used to support violence against others, slavery, etc. Context is everything, including the historical and social contexts.

Especially when considering what Jesus said .

Are only those aspects of the Law specifically said to be valid still applicable?

 

[Hitch]

I don't follow.

Doubtless you remember Ghandi and King as heros of 20th century non-violence. And you recognize the allusion to M 21;44. I was wondering whether anyone could come up with an example or two of 'powdering' his enemies nonviolenty.

 

[Free]

Doubtless you remember Ghandi and King as heros of 20th century non-violence. And you recognize the allusion to M 21;44. I was wondering whether anyone could come up with an example or two of 'powdering' his enemies nonviolenty.

42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the Scriptures: "'The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'? 43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits. 44 And the one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him." 45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them. (ESV)

Since Jesus was speaking about the chief priests and Pharisees, perhaps you can now show me where any of them were actually "crushed" or ground to powder. If you can do that, you have a point. But since you can't, I suggest that you are taking Scripture out of context and trying to make it say something it clearly is not. So what did Jesus really mean?

 

[Davies]

Doubtless you remember Ghandi and King as heros of 20th century non-violence. And you recognize the allusion to M 21;44. I was wondering whether anyone could come up with an example or two of 'powdering' his enemies nonviolenty.

I'm thinking this is figurative speech as there is the resurrection of the damned, indicating no annihilation.

Matthew 21:44

King James Version (KJV)


44And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.


- Davies