Christian forums

[Napoleon Ier]

America isn't an ideology tonky...you know that!

[Napoleon Ier]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Perhaps you can argue that, though I maintain that to be a muslim you would need a little more than just acceptance of that, for example, "Mohammad", if someone interpreted Mohammad as being Elijah, they obviously wouldn't be muslim. Nonetheless, the original discussion did center around Islam. And you're whole "literalism" thing may apply for the Qu'uran, though these commandments are issued as clear law as opposed to poetic imagery as in the Books of the Prophets or commandments to Israel of the early times and OT in the Bible...
The issue is also re-inforced of course with the actions of Mohammad, who was let us be blunt : a terrorist.

[got tonkaed]

America isn't an ideology tonky...you know that!

i wasnt disputing ideology so much as the idea that you can make a silly claim and pass it off like it has any meaning at all.

[Neoteny]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Perhaps you can argue that, though I maintain that to be a muslim you would need a little more than just acceptance of that, for example, "Mohammad", if someone interpreted Mohammad as being Elijah, they obviously wouldn't be muslim. Nonetheless, the original discussion did center around Islam. And you're whole "literalism" thing may apply for the Qu'uran, though these commandments are issued as clear law as opposed to poetic imagery as in the Books of the Prophets or commandments to Israel of the early times and OT in the Bible...
The issue is also re-inforced of course with the actions of Mohammad, who was let us be blunt : a terrorist.

I wouldn't call Mohammad a terrorist. Underhanded, perhaps. But I'm not so sure his actions were too far outside the norms as far as war goes.

[Frigidus]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Perhaps you can argue that, though I maintain that to be a muslim you would need a little more than just acceptance of that, for example, "Mohammad", if someone interpreted Mohammad as being Elijah, they obviously wouldn't be muslim. Nonetheless, the original discussion did center around Islam. And you're whole "literalism" thing may apply for the Qu'uran, though these commandments are issued as clear law as opposed to poetic imagery as in the Books of the Prophets or commandments to Israel of the early times and OT in the Bible...
The issue is also re-inforced of course with the actions of Mohammad, who was let us be blunt : a terrorist.

I wouldn't call Mohammad a terrorist. Underhanded, perhaps. But I'm not so sure his actions were too far outside the norms as far as war goes.

Absolutely. War was always (and still is in a way) underhanded. Hell, just read a bit of Livy to see examples of broken truces, kicking someone when they're down, assassinations, raping and pillaging, oppression of the populace (the list goes on). Unless you're referring to something outside of the way in which he began creating an empire.

[Jenos Ridan]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Ok, then why is the world, according to the Koran, divided into the Dar al-Islam(house of submission) and the Dar al-Harb (house of war). Look up Sura 9; tell me it doesn't flat-out say to slay infidels.

[comic boy]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Ok, then why is the world, according to the Koran, divided into the Dar al-Islam(house of submission) and the Dar al-Harb (house of war). Look up Sura 9; tell me it doesn't flat-out say to slay infidels.

So how many Muslims do you know personally that have attempted to slay you ?

[Neutrino]

So how many Muslims do you know personally that have attempted to slay you ?

Oh, lots. I have to dodge scimitars on my way to school.

[Napoleon Ier]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Ok, then why is the world, according to the Koran, divided into the Dar al-Islam(house of submission) and the Dar al-Harb (house of war). Look up Sura 9; tell me it doesn't flat-out say to slay infidels.

So how many Muslims do you know personally that have attempted to slay you ?

Worst possible argument
Why do we have to know anyone personally to condemn them or their ideology?
Do you know any Creationists? Nazis? Racial Supremacists?
However I did see 9/11 (but that was all a conspiracy was it?).
I saw Hezbollah rocket Israel, I saw Jews and Whites get beaten to death in the outskirts fo Paris, I saw Ahmadinejad call for Israel to be "wiped off the map", I saw the rampant anti-semitism and anti-westernism, the pan-islamism throughout the arab world. Most importantly, I see how Mohammad and his Koran created Islam from his vile desire to command an empire. That's enough for me to have woken up.

[comic boy]

Of course neither of you has actually posted scripture from the Koran to back up your arguments...which is kind of what you're arguing about in the first place.

That's not what we're arguing about. It's his definition of muslim.

Follower of Islam.

Islam (root SLM) = Submission.
Muslim (SLM) = Submitted One. (muC1C2iC3)

My studies of arabic pay off

A "Muslim" who does not believe in Jihad is no more a muslim than a "Christian" who does not believe in Prayer.

As tonkead already said, Jihad doesn't have to be a physical struggle. You could easily say that a jew who doesn't believe in stoning adulterers to death isn't a real jew.

You are basically saying that the only possible interpretation is a literal one, and futhermore that everyone besides you is wrong. Not wrong in the sense that they don't understand the danger of islam, but wrong in the sense that they don't know what words mean when reading them in the encyclopedia.

For shits and giggles I'm including the wikipedia entry here:
Most Muslims accept as a Muslim anyone who has publicly pronounced the Shahadah, which states, "There is none worthy of worship except God, and Muhammad is His Messenger."

Does Jihad appear anywhere in that sentence?

Ok, then why is the world, according to the Koran, divided into the Dar al-Islam(house of submission) and the Dar al-Harb (house of war). Look up Sura 9; tell me it doesn't flat-out say to slay infidels.

So how many Muslims do you know personally that have attempted to slay you ?

Worst possible argument
Why do we have to know anyone personally to condemn them or their ideology?
Do you know any Creationists? Nazis? Racial Supremacists?
However I did see 9/11 (but that was all a conspiracy was it?).
I saw Hezbollah rocket Israel, I saw Jews and Whites get beaten to death in the outskirts fo Paris, I saw Ahmadinejad call for Israel to be "wiped off the map", I saw the rampant anti-semitism and anti-westernism, the pan-islamism throughout the arab world. Most importantly, I see how Mohammad and his Koran created Islam from his vile desire to command an empire. That's enough for me to have woken up.

Your arguments are laughably one dimensional;

9/11 was one terrorist attack,London was bombed for 20 years by Catholic terrorists.
Syria (Christian) was firing rockets at Israel before Hezbollah even existed.
Arabs and Jews have been beaten up by right wing French thugs for decades,the desecration of Jewish cemetries was not the work of Muslims.
The Arabs have been trying to wipe Israel off the face of the earth since 1948, in all that time they have managed to kill rather less Jews than a certain Austrian gentleman did - A Christian I think you will find.
Harking back to Mohammad is as relevent as me pointing out the inquisitions,persecution of the Jews for centuries, slaughter of so called heretics and other amusing snippets of benign Catholic love towards others.

[Napoleon Ier]

What more to do than laugh at the sheer ignorance you display?
Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)
Syria....Christian...of course! Like Ahmadinejad is a Texan pastor, isn't he?
The IRA...of course, so backed by the papacy they received automatic excommunications (meaning they were kicked out of Catholicism).
Harking back to Mohammad is completetly different from pointing out the Inquisition or any other excess since Mohammad is Islam's prophet. It is as if you harked back to Jesus, pretty relevant to understand the ideological pillars of Christianity wouldn't you say?

[comic boy]

Post after post where you brand all Muslims as potential terrorists and yet refuse to accept the attrocities commited by nominal Christians.

Muslim - Potential terrorist or he is not a real Muslim !
Christian - If he has slaughtered and maimed he is not a real Christian !




So how about all your Catholic countrymen who are violently anti semitic to this day,the Vichy government which aided the hollocaust, those God fearing Colonialists who tortured and butchered their way through North Africa.

I SUPPOSE THEY WERE NOT CHRISTIAN EITHER !

Fanatics are Fanatics and the Christian World has spawned more than its fair share, to deny this is as I said before laughable.

[Snorri1234]

Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)

He sure was a supporter of the churches. At least in public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat
A treaty signed with the Catholic church where they acknowledged each side was totally ok.

Hitler wasn't a very big fan of the normal christian churches, but he was most certainly a christian. That sentence you quoted is an attack at the traditional christian church. Hitler was a follower of Jesus, just not of what the churches had done to his message.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."*
How is that not christian?



*Cited in Norman H. Baynes, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, p. 19-20 ISBN 0-598-75893-3. ]

[Snorri1234]

The IRA...of course, so backed by the papacy they received automatic excommunications (meaning they were kicked out of Catholicism).

So, the catholic church also excommunicated protestants. Are they suddenly not christians anymore?

Harking back to Mohammad is completetly different from pointing out the Inquisition or any other excess since Mohammad is Islam's prophet. It is as if you harked back to Jesus, pretty relevant to understand the ideological pillars of Christianity wouldn't you say?

But in the part above this you basically claimed that anyone excommunicated by the Catholic church is not a christian anymore, so why is what the church does relevant there but not when discussing the Inquisition?

[unriggable]

Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)

http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm

"Hence today 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."

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter."
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)

[Neoteny]

"Flabby" is a religious description I am unfamiliar with. I will now use it in everyday conversation.

Hitler seems to have either been religious, or used religion to help control Germany. Either way, Hitler was a dick, and it probably had nothing to do with his religious convictions. He probably would have killed a bunch of Jews if he was Hindu too.

[Jenos Ridan]

Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)

He sure was a supporter of the churches. At least in public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat
A treaty signed with the Catholic church where they acknowledged each side was totally ok.

Hitler wasn't a very big fan of the normal christian churches, but he was most certainly a christian. That sentence you quoted is an attack at the traditional christian church. Hitler was a follower of Jesus, just not of what the churches had done to his message.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."*
How is that not christian?



*Cited in Norman H. Baynes, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, p. 19-20 ISBN 0-598-75893-3. ]

You know, if you spend more time reading books like The Master Plan by Heather Pringle instead of playing with yourself you might actually know why Hitler was not a christian. I mean come on, the guy was trying to bring the old Teutonic pagan religion back, filling the very large gaps in knowledge with loads of total fakery. Nothing he did was christian, none of his henchmen were nor anything they did was christian. If you've read the Bible you would know that and nobody would have to explain this to you.

[Iliad]

Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)

He sure was a supporter of the churches. At least in public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat
A treaty signed with the Catholic church where they acknowledged each side was totally ok.

Hitler wasn't a very big fan of the normal christian churches, but he was most certainly a christian. That sentence you quoted is an attack at the traditional christian church. Hitler was a follower of Jesus, just not of what the churches had done to his message.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."*
How is that not christian?



*Cited in Norman H. Baynes, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, p. 19-20 ISBN 0-598-75893-3. ]

You know, if you spend more time reading books like The Master Plan by Heather Pringle instead of playing with yourself you might actually know why Hitler was not a christian. I mean come on, the guy was trying to bring the old Teutonic pagan religion back, filling the very large gaps in knowledge with loads of total fakery. Nothing he did was christian, none of his henchmen were nor anything they did was christian. If you've read the Bible you would know that and nobody would have to explain this to you.

a masturbating joke in an internet debate? New one!

Why do Christians try to disasscosciate themselves with christians who killed yet assosciate terrorists with muslims. Double standards?

[Iliad]

"moderate Nazis"

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. That's like saying 'moderate communist'. It doesn't work. Yes moderate muslims exist, assuming they're all America-haters is like thinking all jews where yamacas.

Which was exactly my point...there cannot either be moderate muslims, only false "muslims".

to snorri
1/"u sed nazis so ur wrongzor11111" does not count as a valid case
for a disanalogy.
2/An ideology is not defined by people but by principles it holds.

Yes there can be. Muslims who are not extremists are muslims. Christians who go on a killing spree are still christians

[Jenos Ridan]

Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)

He sure was a supporter of the churches. At least in public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat
A treaty signed with the Catholic church where they acknowledged each side was totally ok.

Hitler wasn't a very big fan of the normal christian churches, but he was most certainly a christian. That sentence you quoted is an attack at the traditional christian church. Hitler was a follower of Jesus, just not of what the churches had done to his message.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."*
How is that not christian?



*Cited in Norman H. Baynes, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, p. 19-20 ISBN 0-598-75893-3. ]

You know, if you spend more time reading books like The Master Plan by Heather Pringle instead of playing with yourself you might actually know why Hitler was not a christian. I mean come on, the guy was trying to bring the old Teutonic pagan religion back, filling the very large gaps in knowledge with loads of total fakery. Nothing he did was christian, none of his henchmen were nor anything they did was christian. If you've read the Bible you would know that and nobody would have to explain this to you.

a masturbating joke in an internet debate? New one!

Why do Christians try to disasscosciate themselves with christians who killed yet assosciate terrorists with muslims. Double standards?

Not double standards, reallity: A Christian who murdurs is not a Christian, period. No if, ands or buts; No two ways around it! That is how the religion works. I really shouldn't have to explain, but there I go yet again.

Islam, on the other hands, has excuses for killing unbelievers. Instead of sitting at your computer looking up porn, I suggest you try what I've suggested: PROVE ME WRONG! Show that their are no Satanic Verses, Show that Dhirmitude is ficticious, Show that Mohammad didn't order his followers to kill off dissenters.

[Iliad]

Hitler, Christian? Don't make me laugh.Have you read Mein Kampf? Or even any history of the Third Reich? "The Mohametan religion would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness that we find roots in...."(Adolf Hitler)

He sure was a supporter of the churches. At least in public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat
A treaty signed with the Catholic church where they acknowledged each side was totally ok.

Hitler wasn't a very big fan of the normal christian churches, but he was most certainly a christian. That sentence you quoted is an attack at the traditional christian church. Hitler was a follower of Jesus, just not of what the churches had done to his message.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."*
How is that not christian?



*Cited in Norman H. Baynes, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler: April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1, New York: Oxford University Press, 1942, p. 19-20 ISBN 0-598-75893-3. ]

You know, if you spend more time reading books like The Master Plan by Heather Pringle instead of playing with yourself you might actually know why Hitler was not a christian. I mean come on, the guy was trying to bring the old Teutonic pagan religion back, filling the very large gaps in knowledge with loads of total fakery. Nothing he did was christian, none of his henchmen were nor anything they did was christian. If you've read the Bible you would know that and nobody would have to explain this to you.

a masturbating joke in an internet debate? New one!

Why do Christians try to disasscosciate themselves with christians who killed yet assosciate terrorists with muslims. Double standards?

Not double standards, reallity: A Christian who murdurs is not a Christian, period. No if, ands or buts; No two ways around it! That is how the religion works. I really shouldn't have to explain, but there I go yet again.

Islam, on the other hands, has excuses for killing unbelievers. Instead of sitting at your computer looking up porn, I suggest you try what I've suggested: PROVE ME WRONG! Show that their are no Satanic Verses, Show that Dhirmitude is ficticious, Show that Mohammad didn't order his followers to kill off dissenters.

Wow you keep getting better! I watch porn now!

The point is if a christian kills he is still a christian yeah the bible told him not to it just means he's an inefficient christian.

Now how about you stop wanking to making jokes about the other person watching porn

[muy_thaiguy]

Look Iliad, it is quite simple, Christians (true Christians) are taught to follow the Bible and Jesus's teachings, and one of the main things that it teaches us, is NOT to murder. Doing so, means you throw out all of the correct teachings of the bible, and thus people make many mistakes about it, and the true meaning of being a Christian. Mohamed, whom is considered the true prophet of Islam, and the only one that had to do with the Koran, taught to either kill those who do not recognize Islam as the true religion, or pretty much make them to slaves. If you do not believe me, simply look it up.

[F1fth]

Just went through the site. (I know, I know, days behind).

I rather liked this one:

If the Bible is wrong when it tells us it is infallible, then it contradicts itself. If it contradicts itself, then it is unreliable. If it is unreliable, then our faith is totally shattered and Christianity is a lie. You need to seriously reconsider your logic.

But seriously, the Bible says to stone children who are disobedient (Deuteronomy 21:18-21). If your child has done something you told him not to do, and you haven't thrown rocks at them yet, then you did not follow the Bible, and therefore are not a Christian.

So basically, it says you should murder (children. Well, bad children).

[Skittles!]

Look Iliad, it is quite simple, Christians (true Christians) are taught to follow the Bible and Jesus's teachings, and one of the main things that it teaches us, is NOT to murder. Doing so, means you throw out all of the correct teachings of the bible, and thus people make many mistakes about it, and the true meaning of being a Christian. Mohamed, whom is considered the true prophet of Islam, and the only one that had to do with the Koran, taught to either kill those who do not recognize Islam as the true religion, or pretty much make them to slaves. If you do not believe me, simply look it up.

So then, I guess all Catholics in Middle Ages are not true Christians cause they killed. Right.

[Neutrino]

Look Iliad, it is quite simple, Christians (true Christians) are taught to follow the Bible and Jesus's teachings, and one of the main things that it teaches us, is NOT to murder. Doing so, means you throw out all of the correct teachings of the bible, and thus people make many mistakes about it, and the true meaning of being a Christian. Mohamed, whom is considered the true prophet of Islam, and the only one that had to do with the Koran, taught to either kill those who do not recognize Islam as the true religion, or pretty much make them to slaves. If you do not believe me, simply look it up.

Is war still good then? Not just defensive war, either. Korea or Vietnam, maybe. Wars where the US takes the offensive when no significant threat exists.
You said murder, and nothing committed in a war counts as murder unless a War Crimes tribunal becomes interested...