Baskineli- "This is not only about religion - all monotheistic religions are very bloody. It is about the combination of the religion and social norms. The combination of social norms in Arab countries and Islam religion is what makes Islam followers in Arab countries very dangerous." Please show me in the New Testament where followers of Christ are commanded to engage in violence against others, or non-believers.

Do you have anything better to do with your time than regurgitate your own hatred into this thread for the hundredth time?

bo sox - No hatred here. Trying to get people to understand the evils of Islam. Churchill understood Islam could end Western Civilization, especially when the ignorant ignore the threat.

And its funny - people complain when I don't respond, and you complain when I do. "you know you are on target when you are taking flack"

It's not hatred to call 1.6 billion people evil?

Please demonstrate how Islam is threatening to end our civilization.

"Please show me in the New Testament where followers of Christ are commanded to engage in violence against others, or non-believers."

Please show me in the parts of the Quran *most* Muslims (as opposed to a niche) believe to be genuinely from Mohamed where followers of Allah are commanded to engage in violence against others.

You can't compare the entire Quran to a rather small part of the Bible. It just doesn't make sense in any way.

And again, you did not read the actual Quran and you'll need to ask someone who speaks the language what the message is.
In summary, what you're doing wrong:

1. You clearly don't see the delicacy of language as a factor and refuse to find out what the message is. Religious books tend to be symbolic in some ways, not literal.
2. You're making up a non-existing thing you call Muslim, taking parts from various groups of Muslims and throwing them together as if it's all the same thing.
Again: you see a dolphin, you see a rhino so every mammal has horns and lives in the water. It's just not true.
3. You compare the New Testament to the Quran and ignore the fact that some texts have weak claims, simply put, and the equivalent of the New Testament would scrap those texts.

And if that doesn't clear things up for you, I'm giving up on you. You'll just have to keep sinning in ignorance I guess.

No, steephie, no are sinning by wasting time ;)

Bo Sox -"It's not hatred to call 1.6 billion people evil?" I never called all Muslims evil. I don't know 1.6 billion people. I called Islam, the religion, the religion that in their Holy Books are commanded to behead non-believers and commit other atrocities, Evil.


"Please demonstrate how Islam is threatening to end our civilization."
I'll let Winston Churchill do the talking here:
Here is a quote from an 1899 book by Winston Churchill, "The River War", in which he describes Muslims he apparently observed during Kitchener's campaign in the Sudan:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

A pox on all religions.

I know that it provides great comfort to believers at times of stress in their lives but on the other hand how many wars must we tolerate? How much abuse of children? or attacks on those with different beliefs? before we say "enough"?

Abuse of children?

"Abuse of children?" Have you been asleep for the last ten+ years?

I'm just struggling to see how the abuse is the fault of religion, rather than just the individual abusers. I doubt that it was religion that encouraged them to be abusers. Indeed, I suspect that quite a few potential abusers have been given the strength to resist abusing by their faith.

Octavious -" I doubt that it was religion that encouraged them to be abusers." Great point. The abuse of children was done by men who were not true to their vows or the teachings of Christ. Very flawed men who abused their position. There is noting in Scripture that encourages the abuse of children. Scripture tells believers to protect the children. The Koran, does instruct its followers to behead non-believers Huge difference. .

@Octavious:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases

When a Church is an institution which controls a lot of people's lives and the influences the state's laws. And then hides child abusers from the police, moves them around the country or to the Vatican, to stop the authorities from catching up with them.

When this church controls education (still runs 90% of the primary schools in Ireland). you have a system which empowers people who have abused children in the past; and a job description which is attractive to paedophiles - so they are more likely to become catholic priests in the first place...

So em, yeah. That is an institutional problem, and organised religion can - on an institutional level - be held responsible for the actions of it's members, when it protects and shields them.

Every bit as much as if they encouraged the beheading of adulterers.

orathaic "Every bit as much as if they encouraged the beheading of adulterers." The big difference is that beheading non-believers is in the Koran. There is no verse in the Bible that tells priests or anyone to bugger little boys. The problem was that there were homosexual pedophiles allowed into the priesthood. It wasn't the theology. It was flawed people. And yes, a Church hierarchy that didn't crack down.

"The problem was that there were homosexual pedophiles allowed into the priesthood."

actually the sexuality of the paedophiles is rather irrelevant. They could have screwed little boys or little girls, and it would equally have been wrong.

"It wasn't the theology." - i don't actually give a fuck whether there were any verses supporting their actions. Actions speak louder than words.

" It was flawed people. And yes, a Church hierarchy that didn't crack down."

The Church hierarchy specifically moved people from one community to another, to prevent them from being brought to justice. Some may be in the Vatican now (and voted on the current pope)

This isn't a criticism of theology; but of religion. The organised human power structures which claim to have their basis in theology, and their greater understanding of God.

Regardless of what you think about scripture, these humans decided that protecting their church's reputation was more important than protecting the children in their care from sexual abuse. Because the net good of their Church's actions was, in their own opinion, more important.

It was not merely that they 'didn't crack down' - they intentionally covered it up; and merely required that the sinners within their ranks seek forgiveness. Because God's justice was enough. Secular state justice couldn't be applied, because that would undermine their power.

Literally 'The organised human power structures' which make up an organised religion - did this evil thing - because power structures protect themselves from loss of power.

That is in the nature of human created power structures. All of the ones which exist.

@BOG
There have been a lot of bloodshed in the last thousand years because of the teachings of the New Testament. So, please.

Alot of pseudo-theological discussion from a bunch of retarded nerds trying to out do each other.

All I can say is that the insecurities you show by your continual posting on a subject where you know you won't win, but try to prove yourselves "intellectually superior" is pretty ridiculous.

You can all stop now. It's OK - you all win! Alright dears?

Bask- Perhaps you can point to the specific teachings of the New Testament that tells its followers to engage in bloodshed and violence. Please.

Wusti - So you don't like debate and dialogue with people who hold a different opinion. You just believe what your leaders tell you to believe, and only dialogue with similar automatons incapable of logic and reason.

yes BOG, yes, me too, I'm a retarded that don't even mind what my leaders want me to believe...
happy? you've won already, smile :)

regarding "logic and reason", I certainly don't understand yours very well

just in case, there were a bit of sarcasm in my previous comments, sorry coud not avoid it.
Now, I just wanna make a serious comment about "logic and reason". It's that they are important, no doubt. But they are abstract too, and one must consider definitions and facts too, otherwise, by pure reason and setting the convenient definitions, we can prove anything we want (anything that is not a contradiction in itself, I mean).

But also seriously, I really don't go through life thinking "what my leaders want me to believe?" I already know they won't help whenever I wonder about something.

Finally, sorry again for my sarcasm, but your last comment BOG, was a bit insulting towards wusti.

princip- Wusti calls people debating here " a bunch of retarded nerds trying to out do each other" and you say I'm insulting? Funny.

sorry, did not pretend to reproach (though I could, since I'm not sure it's to christian tha you answer insults with insults),
but no, I know it was not clear, but I was just pointing what motivated me to be sarcastic, and now that I see Wusti's phrase, that motivation just increases. But I should control myself, I guess.

Thanks for discriminating against Christians, I like it!

In their own words. It is Arabic with subtitles.

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/5093.htm

According to an ISIS video posted on the Internet on October 4, 2015, when the town of Qaryatayn, Syria, was taken over by ISIS, the Christians remaining there were required to convert to Islam or pay the jizya poll tax "in submission" and "live as dhimmis in the Islamic State."

The narrator quotes the verses I posted. That many of you say are taken out of context.

Open your eyes.

Following are excerpts:

"The Media Bureau of Damascus Province"

"[Fight those who do not believe in Allah] until they give the jizya willingly in submission."

Voice of ISIS Member: Praised be Allah, who bestowed His blessings upon His supporters, and granted them victory and the conquest of the town of Qaryatayn. Islamic law has taken over the town, and its inhabitants from among the People of the Book became submissive. Some of the town's Christians converted to Islam, while others chose to sign the dhimma contract and pay the jizya tax. They preferred to live in peace and security under Islamic rule in the Islamic State.

[…]

Images of ISIS taking over churches

ISIS Member: Allah said: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day, and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful, and who do not adopt the religion of Truth from those who were given the Scripture. [Fight them] until they give the jizya willingly in submission."

Allah granted His monotheistic servants the conquest of the town of Qaryatayn by force. Some Christians from the town were taken captive, while others fled to the abodes of disbelief, ruled by Bashar the Nusairi and his soldiers. Since they were captured before they sought to sign the dhimma contract and pay the jizya tax, there were four options regarding them: One, for the men to be killed and the women and children to be enslaved. Two, to be exchanged [for prisoners, money, or booty]. Three, to be pardoned [provided they leave the Caliphate]. Four, to pay the jizya and live as dhimmis under the rule of the Caliphate.

The Caliph of the Muslims displayed kindness and generosity, and agreed to accept their jizya tax, and to allow them to live under the rule of the Caliphate as part of the dhimma contract. He also gave the Christians who fled the town an opportunity to return to their homes and fields within a month from the signing of the dhimma contract.

To conclude, this is a message to all the Christians in the East and West, and to America, the defender of the cross: Convert to Islam, and no harm will befall you. But if you refuse, you will have to pay the jizya tax. As our Sheikh Al-'Adnan said: The payment of the jizya is a thousand times less than the Christian investment in the futile war against the Islamic State.