Christian terrorist attack in Pakistan kills 57.....

[calitennis127]

Breaking news here. These fundamentalist Christians are really a severe threat to civilization. I am tired of them using the Bible to justify these kinds of acts, considering that Christianity is "one of the world's three great monotheistic religions".

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3e5194c4-6314-11e4-aa14-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3I12qRMSE

 

[Kieran]

There's a paywall on that site, brother, but other news agencies are claiming the Taliban and other Muslim terror groups have taken responsibility for this attack, which is horrible, indeed...

 

[calitennis127]

There's a paywall on that site, brother, but other news agencies are claiming the Taliban and other Muslim terror groups have taken responsibility for this attack, which is horrible, indeed...

And that is precisely the joke of the thread's title.....Islamic terrorist groups across multiple continents are pulling off these kinds of acts monthly, but the self-hating/post-Christian ignorant morons who have power in the Western world are in ceaseless denial about it.

The power "elites" of the West try to equate one attempted bombing of an abortion clinic in the last 30 years by an insane Evangelical Christian with the constant string of terrorist attacks and atrocities perpetrated by Islamic jihadis each month of the year across the world, and they do this because they have fallen into a silly form of illogical self-hatred.

 

[Billie]

I knew that Cali was being sarcastic. These pieces of news don't seem to concern regular folks anymore. It seems that we've become comfortably numb...like in that Pink Floyd song.

People are dying left and right, lots live in great poverty; the world we live in.:cry

 

[calitennis127]

I knew that Cali was being sarcastic. These pieces of news don't seem to concern regular folks anymore.

Because of the silly foreign policy of the United States under both parties and the outright sutpidity of immigration and economic policies in the West, the "regular folks" won't be able to avoid the problem of Islamic militancy very much longer.

It is only going to get much worse in the coming decades. The rise of ISIS, the Parliament attack in Canada, the beheading in Oklahoma, the latest attack in India, and so forth are only a preview. And it is all a product of the West's cultural and educational self-demolition in the last century.

 

[Kieran]

Sorry Cali, the joke went whoosh over me head, but it's a good point. Plus, the terrorists get to blame us for their atrocities. Fascinating world we live in...

 

[calitennis127]

Sorry Cali, the joke went whoosh over me head, but it's a good point. Plus, the terrorists get to blame us for their atrocities. Fascinating world we live in...

Well, I do think the terrorists have a point about U.S. intervention being a wicked intrusion into Islamic-Middle-Eastern affairs, but that doesn't erase the immense doctrinal problems that exist in Islam. The EU leaders and media pundits would have you believe that Christianity is no better than Islam, but that is simply because they are ignorant of their own cultural traditions.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

How come you never posted a link or started a thread in July 2011 Cali, when Anders Behring Breivik, who identified himself as a "Christian crusader" killed 77 people, mostly children, in Norway?In his 1500 page manifesto he said " Immigrants were undermining Norway's traditional Christian values"

I know , I know...he was crazy...or "interpreted" the books wrong...or just did not believe in the "right" kind of Christianity, am I right?

Terrorism is horrible and no religion is innocent. If you say Breivik is not the right kind of Christian, then some others will say Atta was not the right kind of Muslim, Netenyahu is not the right kind of Jew, etc....Until you question "religion" itself, understand the fact that what you believe in is a %95 geographical coincidence , that if you were born in Tora Bora, most likely you were going to have jihadist tendencies , and that there is someone else somewhere that believes equally strongly that THEIR God is the only true God and they are willing to kill and die for it, this world is going nowhere...

:nono

 

[shawnbm]

I hear what you are saying, Murat, but there is a key distinction--that maniac in Norway was not a religious leader who spoke out for Christians to do that which occurred there. Furthermore, the attack was UNIVERSALLY condemned by dozens of not hundreds of Christian denominations and the Catholic Church, in particular. That is a very far cry from modern Sunni (mostly) Islam. In fact, the opposite happens when these attacks occur; many Muslim leaders and sheiks have to be cajoled to speak out and to do so forcefully. Many don't and, in fact, say this is what happens when X or Y occurs in world politics (speaking of blatant terror attacks on innocents). Medieval writers were right when they said that Islam was spread by the sword, conquest and imposition of Muslim law--that is a historical fact. Only after that occurred did people start to reproduce and more people were born to Muslim parents and brought up with the religion. But for the first thousand years of Islam (and is still the case with jihadists today), the world must be BROUGHT UNDER Islam--one way or another. This is in stark contrast to the Christian ideal, which speaks of conversion of the heart and mind--not the rifle or the sword. Not all religions are equal, from an objective standpoint. I have focused on Christianity and Islam in this response because of the call of the question.

 

[calitennis127]

How come you never posted a link or started a thread in July 2011 Cali, when Anders Behring Breivik, who identified himself as a "Christian crusader" killed 77 people, mostly children, in Norway?In his 1500 page manifesto he said " Immigrants were undermining Norway's traditional Christian values"

I know , I know...he was crazy...or "interpreted" the books wrong...or just did not believe in the "right" kind of Christianity, am I right?

Terrorism is horrible and no religion is innocent. If you say Breivik is not the right kind of Christian, then some others will say Atta was not the right kind of Muslim, Netenyahu is not the right kind of Jew, etc....Until you question "religion" itself, understand the fact that what you believe in is a %95 geographical coincidence , that if you were born in Tora Bora, most likely you were going to have jihadist tendencies , and that there is someone else somewhere that believes equally strongly that THEIR God is the only true God and they are willing to kill and die for it, this world is going nowhere...

:nono

Well, for one thing, Breivik and modern jihadists are pikers compared to atheists such as Lenin or Pol Pot. Let's get that out of the way first.

But as for Christianity v. Islam in causing terrorism, Murat, there is no comparison either doctrinally or empirically in terms of results. Even if we were to say that Breivik was motivated by Christian doctrines calling for the murder of non-Christians (which is incorrect), then that would still be just one attack. Sunni Muslim groups, on the other hand, have accounted for just some of the following in recent years:

- Tanzania and Kenya embassy bombings
- 9/11
- 7/7 London attacks
- 3/11 Madrid attacks
- Beslan school hostage taking
- Mumbai bombing
- Nigeria mall bombing
- Boston marathon bombing
- Fort Hood shooting by Nidal Hassan
- Countless suicide attacks in Iraq and Palestine
- Canadian Parliament attack

How about the violent response of riots to the Danish cartoons and Pope Benedict's remarks in 2006?

Give me a parallel list of Christians doing the same kind of things and then we can talk. But you can't, because there is no comparison.

Pretty much everywhere in the world where there is a boundary between an Islamic society and a non-Islamic society, there is major tension because of jihadism. Jihadist militants and insurgents are littered throughout the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Europe, and North America. There is no parrallel whatsoever in Christianity today.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I hear what you are saying, Murat, but there is a key distinction--that maniac in Norway was not a religious leader who spoke out for Christians to do that which occurred there. Furthermore, the attack was UNIVERSALLY condemned by dozens of not hundreds of Christian denominations and the Catholic Church, in particular. That is a very far cry from modern Sunni (mostly) Islam. In fact, the opposite happens when these attacks occur; many Muslim leaders and sheiks have to be cajoled to speak out and to do so forcefully. Many don't and, in fact, say this is what happens when X or Y occurs in world politics (speaking of blatant terror attacks on innocents). Medieval writers were right when they said that Islam was spread by the sword, conquest and imposition of Muslim law--that is a historical fact. Only after that occurred did people start to reproduce and more people were born to Muslim parents and brought up with the religion. But for the first thousand years of Islam (and is still the case with jihadists today), the world must be BROUGHT UNDER Islam--one way or another. This is in stark contrast to the Christian ideal, which speaks of conversion of the heart and mind--not the rifle or the sword. Not all religions are equal, from an objective standpoint. I have focused on Christianity and Islam in this response because of the call of the question.

Honestly, that is where the problem lies. Would you change your mind if I recited 100 versus from the Old and the New testament that encourage violence? When you read Samuel 15;3 and it says ""This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' ", you see conversion of heart and mind???? Come on man...When you hear Peter 2;18 say "“Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.” you do not for a minute think how slavery was condoned in the US for centuries and maybe, just maybe this verse has something to do with it? Where is the conversion of heart there ?

We have to be honest with ourselves, not live in a fairy tail world. Religions are violent. If you tell me you disregard the violence, only read the happy parts, well, that is great, but it does not change the facts.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

How come you never posted a link or started a thread in July 2011 Cali, when Anders Behring Breivik, who identified himself as a "Christian crusader" killed 77 people, mostly children, in Norway?In his 1500 page manifesto he said " Immigrants were undermining Norway's traditional Christian values"

I know , I know...he was crazy...or "interpreted" the books wrong...or just did not believe in the "right" kind of Christianity, am I right?

Terrorism is horrible and no religion is innocent. If you say Breivik is not the right kind of Christian, then some others will say Atta was not the right kind of Muslim, Netenyahu is not the right kind of Jew, etc....Until you question "religion" itself, understand the fact that what you believe in is a %95 geographical coincidence , that if you were born in Tora Bora, most likely you were going to have jihadist tendencies , and that there is someone else somewhere that believes equally strongly that THEIR God is the only true God and they are willing to kill and die for it, this world is going nowhere...

:nono

Well, for one thing, Breivik and modern jihadists are pikers compared to atheists such as Lenin or Pol Pot. Let's get that out of the way first.

But as for Christianity v. Islam in causing terrorism, Murat, there is no comparison either doctrinally or empirically in terms of results. Even if we were to say that Breivik was motivated by Christian doctrines calling for the murder of non-Christians (which is incorrect), then that would still be just one attack. Sunni Muslim groups, on the other hand, have accounted for just some of the following in recent years:

- Tanzania and Kenya embassy bombings
- 9/11
- 7/7 London attacks
- 3/11 Madrid attacks
- Beslan school hostage taking
- Mumbai bombing
- Nigeria mall bombing
- Boston marathon bombing
- Fort Hood shooting by Nidal Hassan
- Countless suicide attacks in Iraq and Palestine
- Canadian Parliament attack

How about the violent response of riots to the Danish cartoons and Pope Benedict's remarks in 2006?

Give me a parallel list of Christians doing the same kind of things and then we can talk. But you can't, because there is no comparison.

Pretty much everywhere in the world where there is a boundary between an Islamic society and a non-Islamic society, there is major tension because of jihadism. Jihadist militants and insurgents are littered throughout the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Europe, and North America. There is no parrallel whatsoever in Christianity today.

The problem is , I can give you a list but you do not accept it. Because they are , like I said before, not your kind of Christians to begin with. The people that are dead though, do not really care at this point what kind of Christian killed them. They are dead, terrorized before death, like:

-Victims of Army of God
- Victims of Eric Rudolph (whom is praised by Army of God as " a brave Christian who is doing God’s work.
-The murder of Barnett Slepian by James Charles Kopp (another star according to AOG)
-Let's not forget the good old KKK, whose motto was "reestablish Protestant Christian values in America by any means possible" Those morons have terrorized Jews, blacks, everyone, raped tortured, killed....Great resume.
-Ever heard of Joseph Kony, and his Lord's resistance Army, who is spreading the gospel by using child soldiers, mutilations, massacres, rapes and has his boys recite verses from the Bible right before these atrocities, to get them going, you know...He calls himself the "spokesperson for God"




Listen...just accept that religions have been used for violence ever since they were created by men. It is just the way it is. To the dead, it does not matter what interpretation of what religion was used.
Not one is better than the other. They all have blood in their hands.

 

[Kieran]

Men use pickaxes and peace marches for violence too. Atheists aren't immune from picking a fight. Scientists aren't immune from creating destruction. Liberals have a whole holocaust of violence in the womb on their hands. Let's be equal opportunity here, Murat, the misuse of religion isn't the only cause of violence. It's part of the human condition to be violent. People don't have peace in their own hearts, so it's not a huge leap for them to find reasons to go to war...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Men use pickaxes and peace marches for violence too. Atheists aren't immune from picking a fight. Scientists aren't immune from creating destruction. Liberals have a whole holocaust of violence in the womb on their hands. Let's be equal opportunity here, Murat, the misuse of religion isn't the only cause of violence. It's part of the human condition to be violent. People don't have peace in their own hearts, so it's not a huge leap for them to find reasons to go to war...

Never suggested it. I am only saying religions are inherently violent. " But others are doing it too" is not an excuse.

 

[Kieran]

Men use pickaxes and peace marches for violence too. Atheists aren't immune from picking a fight. Scientists aren't immune from creating destruction. Liberals have a whole holocaust of violence in the womb on their hands. Let's be equal opportunity here, Murat, the misuse of religion isn't the only cause of violence. It's part of the human condition to be violent. People don't have peace in their own hearts, so it's not a huge leap for them to find reasons to go to war...

Never suggested it. I am only saying religions are inherently violent. " But others are doing it too" is not an excuse.

They're not "inherently violent." They're belief systems and almost all of them preach peace. How they're used and abused after that is another matter. If you were to say that man is an "inherently violent" creature, then we would be in agreement.

He doesn't need religion for that...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Men use pickaxes and peace marches for violence too. Atheists aren't immune from picking a fight. Scientists aren't immune from creating destruction. Liberals have a whole holocaust of violence in the womb on their hands. Let's be equal opportunity here, Murat, the misuse of religion isn't the only cause of violence. It's part of the human condition to be violent. People don't have peace in their own hearts, so it's not a huge leap for them to find reasons to go to war...

Never suggested it. I am only saying religions are inherently violent. " But others are doing it too" is not an excuse.

They're not "inherently violent." They're belief systems and almost all of them preach peace. How they're used and abused after that is another matter. If you were to say that man is an "inherently violent" creature, then we would be in agreement.

He doesn't need religion for that...

Which reminds me of a great quote by Steven Weinberg : “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” This quote was uttered in regards to Mark Twain talking about his mother:

"Mark Twain described his mother as a genuinely good person, whose soft heart pitied even Satan, but who had no doubt about the legitimacy of slavery, because in years of living in antebellum Missouri she had never heard any sermon opposing slavery, but only countless sermons preaching that slavery was God's will. "

What a great example of really good folk doing evil because of religion.

I have seen examples of that hundreds of times.

 

[Kieran]

Men use pickaxes and peace marches for violence too. Atheists aren't immune from picking a fight. Scientists aren't immune from creating destruction. Liberals have a whole holocaust of violence in the womb on their hands. Let's be equal opportunity here, Murat, the misuse of religion isn't the only cause of violence. It's part of the human condition to be violent. People don't have peace in their own hearts, so it's not a huge leap for them to find reasons to go to war...

Never suggested it. I am only saying religions are inherently violent. " But others are doing it too" is not an excuse.

They're not "inherently violent." They're belief systems and almost all of them preach peace. How they're used and abused after that is another matter. If you were to say that man is an "inherently violent" creature, then we would be in agreement.

He doesn't need religion for that...

Which reminds me of a great quote by Steven Weinberg : “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.” This quote was uttered in regards to Mark Twain talking about his mother:

"Mark Twain described his mother as a genuinely good person, whose soft heart pitied even Satan, but who had no doubt about the legitimacy of slavery, because in years of living in antebellum Missouri she had never heard any sermon opposing slavery, but only countless sermons preaching that slavery was God's will. "

What a great example of really good folk doing evil because of religion.

I have seen examples of that hundreds of times.

Hey buddy, I've seen countless examples of good people of liberal conscience voting for things that only bring death and evil, especially to the most vulnerable.

Would you agree with me that this is a frailty common to humanity, and not restricted to religion? Your friend Weinberg wrote a groovy aphorism that doesn't hold up to scrutiny...

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Hey buddy, I've seen countless examples of good people of liberal conscience voting for things that only bring death and evil, especially to the most vulnerable.

Would you agree with me that this is a frailty common to humanity, and not restricted to religion? Your friend Weinberg wrote a groovy aphorism that doesn't hold up to scrutiny...

I will agree with you on that. This whole thing started , once more, because Cali things only one religion is responsible for the whole bloodshed in the worlds history, and I know it to be false and I know that every religion has blood on their hands. That is all.

As far as the Weinberg quote...honestly , you cannot see it happening? You have never seen examples?

I have said this before: It is a lot easier to convince people to do horrible things in the name of God then, say, in the name of gravity. Religion touches deeper places inside people, sometimes darker places. When George Bush said, right before he attacked Iraq (for false reasons of course) "God is on our side" , he instantly made it a religious war in the minds of all Muslims. That easy... And Muslims, as you know, do not need a lot of encouragement for violence...

Right now , a solid %50 of Americans believe the literal creation in Genesis, that the world is 6-7 thousand years old. If that does not scare you for the future of mankind, I don't know what would.:nono

 

[Kieran]

Hey buddy, I've seen countless examples of good people of liberal conscience voting for things that only bring death and evil, especially to the most vulnerable.

Would you agree with me that this is a frailty common to humanity, and not restricted to religion? Your friend Weinberg wrote a groovy aphorism that doesn't hold up to scrutiny...

I will agree with you on that. This whole thing started , once more, because Cali things only one religion is responsible for the whole bloodshed in the worlds history, and I know it to be false and I know that every religion has blood on their hands. That is all.

As far as the Weinberg quote...honestly , you cannot see it happening? You have never seen examples?

I have said this before: It is a lot easier to convince people to do horrible things in the name of God then, say, in the name of gravity. Religion touches deeper places inside people, sometimes darker places. When George Bush said, right before he attacked Iraq (for false reasons of course) "God is on our side" , he instantly made it a religious war in the minds of all Muslims. That easy... And Muslims, as you know, do not need a lot of encouragement for violence...

Right now , a solid %50 of Americans believe the literal creation in Genesis, that the world is 6-7 thousand years old. If that does not scare you for the future of mankind, I don't know what would.:nono

Well, there are things which scare me more than this, I must admit, the growing barbarity of secularism in the west, to be honest. But as for Weinberg's quote, of course I've seen so-called good religious people do evil - but he says that "for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."

This is observably false...

 

[calitennis127]

How come you never posted a link or started a thread in July 2011 Cali, when Anders Behring Breivik, who identified himself as a "Christian crusader" killed 77 people, mostly children, in Norway?In his 1500 page manifesto he said " Immigrants were undermining Norway's traditional Christian values"

I know , I know...he was crazy...or "interpreted" the books wrong...or just did not believe in the "right" kind of Christianity, am I right?

Terrorism is horrible and no religion is innocent. If you say Breivik is not the right kind of Christian, then some others will say Atta was not the right kind of Muslim, Netenyahu is not the right kind of Jew, etc....Until you question "religion" itself, understand the fact that what you believe in is a %95 geographical coincidence , that if you were born in Tora Bora, most likely you were going to have jihadist tendencies , and that there is someone else somewhere that believes equally strongly that THEIR God is the only true God and they are willing to kill and die for it, this world is going nowhere...

:nono

Well, for one thing, Breivik and modern jihadists are pikers compared to atheists such as Lenin or Pol Pot. Let's get that out of the way first.

But as for Christianity v. Islam in causing terrorism, Murat, there is no comparison either doctrinally or empirically in terms of results. Even if we were to say that Breivik was motivated by Christian doctrines calling for the murder of non-Christians (which is incorrect), then that would still be just one attack. Sunni Muslim groups, on the other hand, have accounted for just some of the following in recent years:

- Tanzania and Kenya embassy bombings
- 9/11
- 7/7 London attacks
- 3/11 Madrid attacks
- Beslan school hostage taking
- Mumbai bombing
- Nigeria mall bombing
- Boston marathon bombing
- Fort Hood shooting by Nidal Hassan
- Countless suicide attacks in Iraq and Palestine
- Canadian Parliament attack

How about the violent response of riots to the Danish cartoons and Pope Benedict's remarks in 2006?

Give me a parallel list of Christians doing the same kind of things and then we can talk. But you can't, because there is no comparison.

Pretty much everywhere in the world where there is a boundary between an Islamic society and a non-Islamic society, there is major tension because of jihadism. Jihadist militants and insurgents are littered throughout the Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Europe, and North America. There is no parrallel whatsoever in Christianity today.

To the dead, it does not matter what interpretation of what religion was used.
Not one is better than the other. They all have blood in their hands.

Murat, there are two main arguments to make in response to this which you clearly have no response for:

1) Religion is simply one of many causes of war throughout history. It is not the main cause or the only cause. Wars are typically very complex affairs that incorporate a number of different factors. You single out religion in a blatantly unfair manner.

2) The history of Islamic imperialism is far more extensive than that of Christian imperialism. In other words, if you make this comparison, the conversation is pretty definitive:

The times throughout history when Muslims have picked up the Qu'ran or the other texts referencing the actions and teachings of Muhammad and said "we are going to kill because of what Allah wills and what Muhammad did and taught"

v.

The times throughout history when Christians have picked up the Bible or referenced the example of Christ and said "we are going to kill because of what God teaches or what the Church wants"


Muhammad led armies. He was a warlord. Christ was such a peacenik that even many atheists at least grant that "yeah, he was a pretty good guy; probably not divine, but he was a good person". Muslims, on the other hand, can pull off beheadings and then refer to Ibn Ishaq's biography to say "Muhammad did it". When they make this claim, they are called bad Muslims by non-Muslim post-Christian leaders who purport to know more about Islam than Muslims themselves.

Isn't it funny when Barack Obama tells the "Islamic State" that it isn't really Islamic?