There still is a difference. Dying at 18 or 80. Throw in your towel if you will. I ain't doing that.

To those of us who consider themselves Christians, life is sacred and is a tribute to God. And we have the duty and obligation to protect it, even though we know that it will eventually end in the material sense of the word.

 

Humans place other humans in groups. They discriminate the humans by race, gender, religion, and a host of other metrics.

Do I believe all _____ are capable of violence against ______. Capable, yes. Likely will, no.

History is replete with humans doing other humans harm. Their tribal groups, then evolved to countries or states, then evolved to nations.

Like a cancer, those evil humans need to be neutralized or eradicated.

 

To those of us who consider themselves Christians, life is sacred and is a tribute to God. And we have the duty and obligation to protect it, even though we know that it will eventually end in the material sense of the word.

I'm an atheist however I fear reincarnation. It could be random for all I know /

I love life(oh it can get gloomy at times) and I can't see how I could ever choose who/what lives or dies. It would be ego that I can't afford.

 

Humans place other humans in groups. They discriminate the humans by race, gender, religion, and a host of other metrics.

Do I believe all _____ are capable of violence against ______. Capable, yes. Likely will, no.

History is replete with humans doing other humans harm. Their tribal groups, then evolved to countries or states, then evolved to nations.

Like a cancer, those evil humans need to be neutralized or eradicated.

Agreed... add to those parameters another layer such as nationality, language, income, and even the way people dress, and you have a complete system of castes in which one claims superiority over the other. It's a perfect recipe for the destruction and hatred that we're now witnessing.

 

It's a fairly common feature of Abrahamic religions to have the death cult virus but unfortunately for some reason modern radical Islam has become the major carrie

Don't agree with that. It's not the religions, it's the "men" who run the separate offshoots of the religions. Men who can't stand to see someone above their ego's having power. Isis is no different than the so called christian religions like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Marshal Applegate, etc. They find people that can't think for themselves and promise them greatness if they just "follow them".

 

... promise them greatness

and that's their main source of temptation for the ignorant: "Thou shalt be better than others if thou join me"

 

Don't agree with that. It's not the religions, it's the "men" who run the separate offshoots of the religions. Men who can't stand to see someone above their ego's having power. Isis is no different than the so called christian religions like Jim Jones, David Koresh, Marshal Applegate, etc. They find people that can't think for themselves and promise them greatness if they just "follow them".

I agree with your statement that it's the 'men' not the religions but the 'rules' of the religions do matter. Islam, Christianity and Judaism share a common ancestral belief that makes 'Religious' terrorism by brainwashing IMO easier than Zen Buddhism.
There are places where Islam and Christianity are attacked by others.
https://news.vice.com/article/chris...more-persecution-by-hindu-extremists-in-india

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4534558/PIERS-MORGAN-refuse-believe-knew-ANYTHING.html

They must be stopped.

To do that, we have to change the mind-set of those who find the bright hideous lights of ISIS so enticing.

I can’t do that. No young impressionable Muslim is going to give a stuff what I, a middle class, middle aged white guy, has to say about their religion.

But they might care what fellow Muslims who live around them say about Islam if an alternative view is expressed with enough conviction. It’s time for Muslim community leaders to dramatically step up the war on these twisted, deviant minds abusing their religion.

And it’s time for non-violent Muslims everywhere to step up their efforts to identify, isolate, expose, and name and shame those who are trying to drag Islam into a gutter of sickening unrelenting terror.

Be bold. Be brave. Speak up.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4534558/PIERS-MORGAN-refuse-believe-knew-ANYTHING.html

I agree with your statement that it's the 'men' not the religions but the 'rules' of the religions do matter. Islam, Christianity and Judaism share a common ancestral belief that makes 'Religious' terrorism by brainwashing IMO easier than Zen Buddhism.
There are places where Islam and Christianity are attacked by others.
https://news.vice.com/article/chris...more-persecution-by-hindu-extremists-in-india

I find it very hard to believe that a religion that forbids the exercise of personal revenge, that tells you to love your enemy, and that encourages it's adherents to practice forgiveness and to turn the other cheek, is also a religion that makes for easy terrorism brainwashing and breeding ground....

 

I find it very hard to believe that a religion that forbids the exercise of personal revenge, that tells you to love your enemy, and that encourages it's adherents to practice forgiveness and to turn the other cheek, is also a religion that makes for easy terrorism brainwashing and breeding ground....

http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/104/html

Conclusions

From our brief analysis of thirty texts it emerges clearly that the Qur'an is taken as guidance very selectively to suit the jihadists' particular strategic and political agenda and to strengthen the accompanying narrative set forth by proponents of militant Islamism. Numerous verses and sections of the Qur'an that call for peaceful co-existence and mutual respect, counter-balancing many of the verses used to justify (terrorist) violence, are ignored and excluded from their one-sided narrative. This is typical of the tailored, politically motivated foundation upon which much of the militant jihadist discourse rests. Quoting from the Holy Book of Islam is shamelessly selective in order to serve their propaganda objectives.

The English-language output from militant Islamist figures relies heavily on the repeated use of a limited number of Qur'anic verses to justify political violence. Their arguments appear to rely on truncated rather than complete passages from the Qu'ran and are designed to fit their strategic narrative rather than being in conformity with the nuances of meanings of the Qur'an. The same 'doctored' use can be found in some of the abridged translations of medieval texts and more recent seminal works edited by jihadist publishing and distributing networks, which are also meant to serve contemporary jihadist propaganda.

When juxtaposed to the requirements set forth by Salafism for doctrinal purity and literal interpretation of the Qur'an (which includes the originally intended meaning) - values frequently invoked by the militant Islamists themselves - their peculiar selective utilization of the Qur'an appears paradoxical. Rather than being guided by the teachings of the Qur'an through the unadulterated application of its message, the narratives put forward by militant Islamists rely on a Qur'an a la carte, based on cherry-picked passages from specific verses to fit their pre-determined religio-political ideology and inform their messages to advance their group-specific ambitions.

Several authors in a previous issue of Perspectives on Terrorism [34] exploring the concept of counter-narratives and the potential for counter-terrorism efforts, have advocated measures to challenge extremist narratives given their role in recruitment and radicalisation. Such efforts rely, in part, on identifying irregularities and flaws in the extremist argument. Our investigation illustrates how the narrative of militant Islamism seeks to frame its legitimisation for violence through tapping into the authority of the Qur'an. This scrutiny of a sample of major English-language jihadist texts also indicates that propagandists of jihad violate the Salafists' own demands for doctrinal purity in terms of adherence to the Qu'ran. In other words - they tend to be dishonest and hypocritical.

About the Author: Donald Holbrook is a Research Fellow at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence, University of St. Andrews. He holds postgraduate degrees from Cambridge University and St. Andrews University. His current research focuses primarily on the language of extremism and, in particular, Al-Qaeda leadership communiqués.

In other words - they tend to be dishonest and hypocritical.

 

I found this a fascinating read. It's a little long, but worth the time in my mind.
https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...yria-from-pre-civil-war-to-post-assad/281989/

 

I found this a fascinating read. It's a little long, but worth the time in my mind.
https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...yria-from-pre-civil-war-to-post-assad/281989/

Good stuff:

The United States has a long history of covertly aiding insurgents in Syria, and has engaged in propaganda, espionage, and various sorts of dirty tricks. The rebels, naturally, have regarded the aid they’ve received as insufficient, while the government has regarded it as a virtual act of war. Both are right: it has not been on a scale that has enabled the rebels to win, but it is a form of action that, had another country engaged in it, seeking to overthrow the government, any American or European administration would have regarded as an act of war under international law.

Such covert intervention, and indeed overt intervention, is being justified on two grounds, the first being that the Syrian government is a tyranny. By Western standards, it is undoubtedly an authoritarian regime. Whether or not it gassed hundreds of its citizens, it has certainly killed thousands with conventional weapons. (According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the rebels are known to have killed at least 20,000 and perhaps as many as 30,000 government soldiers, about twice the number of rebel casualties, and both sides have committed documented atrocities.) However, the standards Western nations proclaim have been applied in a highly selective way. The EU and the U.S. enjoy cordial and mutually beneficial relations with dozens of tyrannical governments including most of the countries now attempting to regime-change Syria.

Unfortunately Syria became a post Cold-War causality of the current US Russia frictions much like Afghanistan when we tried to destabilize the Assad government by using proxies.

 

http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/104/html


In other words - they tend to be dishonest and hypocritical.

I was referring to Christianity...

 

What you have are people wanting to commit suicide, then in their last minute, justify killing others out of disappointment of their own pitiful life. The real Murder's hide behind drapes, in an old time puppet show.

They had no life before they died but and believe they will have one in the next worth living as told by their puppet masters.

kv

 

I was referring to Christianity...

Exactly the same method is used with the bible and Christian texts. Just slightly change the names, places and blasphemers.

In other words - they tend to be dishonest and hypocritical.

For the record I don't consider myself to be christian. My dog-tag had "No Preference" .

 

In other words - they tend to be dishonest and hypocritical.

So you've just discovered human nature? ... I'm afraid you'll find that sort of thing in all institutions, be they religious or not.

 

So you've just discovered human nature? ... I'm afraid you'll find that sort of thing in all institutions, be they religious or not.

"I find it very hard to believe that a religion..."

What? You asked this in a religious context so I gave answers within that context. If you had asked about human nature in general then you would have gotten a general answer, not one coached in religion. The type of CON depends on the target RUBE.

 

"I find it very hard to believe that a religion..."

What? You asked this in a religious context so I gave answers within that context. If you had asked about human nature in general then you would have gotten a general answer, not one coached in religion.

My apologies then if I failed to be clear... My intention was to distinguish Christianity from the other two religions that (in my opinion) you unfairly bundled in a single group when you called them "ambrahamic". I won't argue that case against Judaism, since it's Abrahanism is clearly true. But I consider Islam to be nothing more than a scam. In fact, I don't even recognize it to be a religion at all, but rather a form of government built around a set of oppressive rules...

 

My apologies then if I failed to be clear... My intention was to distinguish Christianity from the other two religions that (in my opinion) you unfairly bundled in a single group when you called them "ambrahamic". I won't argue that case against Judaism, since it's Abrahanism is clearly true. But I consider Islam to be nothing more than a scam. In fact, I don't even recognize it to be a religion at all, but rather a form of government built around a set of oppressive rules...

I'm not the one who bundles them, it's just about every religious scholar on the planet that does. The roots of Christianity are Abrahamic but it evolved into a modern secular rule comparable religion in most religions of the world.

Christianity was born from within the Jewish tradition, and Islam developed from both Christianity and Judaism.

 

I'm not the one who bundles them, it's just about every religious scholar on the planet that does.

I don't recognize those "scholars" either... I'm funny that way...

Islam developed from both Christianity and Judaism.

A judeo-christian scam? ... I don't think so... Have you actually read the history of Mohammed? (even from the 'qumran itself, or from the corresponding hadiths) In my opinion, Islam developed from an opportunistic warlord that realized that religion can be good business ...