Science Vs Religion: will science eventually prove or disprove religion? ( Archived) (116)

When jihadists kill the innocent, they are following Mohammad's edicts and life example. He was doing exactly as the terrorists up until his rightful agonizing death at the hands of the jewess he had so heinously wronged. When a professing Christian does the same, he is not following the commandments of Christ or his life example. The terrible things done by characters in the bible are not condoned or encouraged, or intended for us to emulate. The violence in the Koran override any and all peaceful verses because they come later. Islam was pathetically small until it became violent and deadly. They were what Mohammad was "all about" until he died.

Violent commandments in old Testament is limited to that time and place. It was limited to those specific instances and not open ended for all times. One the other hand, the violence in Quran is open ended and applicable for all times and places.

The Old Testament is a history of origins.
That´s why it is very questionable to follow it as a living guide without the message of Jesus, who renewed everything. Nothing in the Old Testament is a guide for Christians except the Ten Commandments .
The Bible "violence" was actually the self-defence type, especially against genocide like some countries today wish on Israel. There is no doctrine in the Bible to kill others of different faiths because we are all sinners needed salvation which is a personal choice of taking God's offer of Jesus and his way.

Just contrast the living conditions of the Muslim world to that of the Jewish and Christian community and the evidence speaks for itself.
The New Testament does NOT tell or order Christians to kill Non-Christians!

In political Islam hadith is important, remember that Sharia laws are made out of Hadiths. Hadiths are written to this day and the 'scolars' who write them are in the pay roll of oppressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia.

Except calling names, is there anything that you can explain in a civilised way of discussion?

You are true extrimist Bolshevik communist reborn Stalin mentality.

Lee,
You make some valid claims and I particularly like:

I have written about this before in different threads.

We are dealing with "morality" and "division".
When dealing with morality, we must remember that it is changing (assimilating) someone into what others consider "normal". This person is a completely free agent and willingly subjects themselves to the laws.
Under the Western set of Morality, we have determined that this is the way reality must be.

The confusion exists for the feminists who classify using a positive division - inclusion is permitted even if there are negative traits. (ex. The plant is called a tree because it has a main stem, branches and leaves. It may be short, but it is still a tree.) They connect a moral to a logical decision. "I am good if I accept all people."

But, the new arrivees that you have spoken of operate under a dichotomy - black and white - you either are or you aren't. Therefore, their set of morality is completely different. As we have seen, the sanctity of life is not adhered to in their set of morality. If it did, the allowances you mentioned above would not exist in practice and would be disgraceful and dishonoring.

Feminists fail to see that they are playing with people who are using a different set of rules. The opposition says, "You are either with us or against us. And if you are against us, I have a right to do __X__ to you."

Both groups have a right to choose their method of division. The playing grounds are just cleaner if both sides play by the same rules.

Because it's against the actual religion to force people into it.

I see people trying to force people into hating Muslims as equally as bad as people forced into be a Catholic or Christian.

It's not that we can all make our own informed choices as adults is it?

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/extremist

Here, as you think it's a name.

It was a pre-marital conditional thing being forced into Catholicism....
My parents forced me and my siblings into Catholicism because they swore to the church that they would bring us up in the chatholic Faith if they could be married in the Catholic Church. This was not uncommon.....

Oh I understand it Gal. One of my Grandmother's was a devout Christian. Luckily for me the other was not.

Please don't get me wrong, she was a good woman. She did a lot for her Church and community. I wouldn't knock that. But I don't think forcing people to believe in something actually helps.