Is Islam intolerant?

[freetibet]

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" Qur'an 9:29

It would seem that, according to the Qur'an, non-muslims are only allowed to live if the pay the jizya and become dhimmis.

I for one think this is very intolerant. Imagine if predominately Christian nations taxed Muslims for being Muslim. They would never tolerate such a thing, yet coptic Christians, and all other religions, must pay a tax, or risk being killed or imprisoned.

[cstrikehero]

definatly not right

[freetibet]

what isn't right?

[Nebuchadnezzar]

ZOMG THEY SAID SOMEFING BAAAAD!
Not to, you know, assume that their belief system can't evolve like yours can (as I've heard).

Personally I think taxing non-believers is much better than converting them forcibly with the viable alternative of being burned at the stake.

Yes, I know no Christian government would do that nowadays. Why? Because none of the current Christian governments apply themselves to fundamentalist ideals. If Muslim governments had chosen the same path, there is absolutely no way they would tax nonbelievers today.

[freetibet]

do you have any scriptural evidence to prove that burning people at the stake is part of Christianity?

no?

then stfu

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Of course I don't. I do, however, have historical evidence that this is what Christians thought God was telling them to do.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Inquisition.html

[Deetinator]

Yes, because when someone claims God told them to do it, it automatically makes them right. That's called blasphemy, and it's a sin.

When prophets in old times said God was talking to them, they gave signs for it, to prove it was from God. If you deny this, it's nothing but ignorant.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

So you're saying that the leaders of the Spanish Inquisition knew that they were being cruel and blasphemous, not doing what they thought god would have wanted?

[Deetinator]

That's exactly what I'm saying.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

So, you think that their belief in god was somehow less valid than your belief in god? How is their god different?

I guarantee that they thought they were righteous. If they didn't think so, they'd say that it was because of what Jews were doing to the economy or something, a far more valid idea anyway.

[freetibet]

k we all know christians have killed non-christians for their beliefs. It isn't part of Christianity though. Taxing/killing non-muslims IS part of Islam.

[Deetinator]

So, you think that their belief in god was somehow less valid than your belief in god? How is their god different?

Their belief is less valid because they claim to follow my God, but don't do anything that he would have them do!

I guarantee that they thought they were righteous. If they didn't think so, they'd say that it was because of what Jews were doing to the economy or something, a far more valid idea anyway.

Which is what they probably said. You can't guarantee that. You can have an opinion.

Ditto what freetibet said.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Killing nonbelievers was very much part of Christianity at the time, just as taxing nonbelievers was very much part of Islam, and still is. The only difference is that Islam has yet to evolve into a more progressive stance, that and the fact that the idea of Christian killing non-Christian was not written down in the Bible.

Does the Bible encompass all of Christianity for you?

If so, why?

[Deetinator]

No, I think a lot of superstition was added. Like praying to Mary, among other things.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

and so,
Killing nonbelievers was very much part of Christianity at the time, just as taxing nonbelievers was very much part of Islam, and still is. The only difference is that Islam has yet to evolve into a more progressive stance, that and the fact that the idea of Christian killing non-Christian was not written down in the Bible.


asdfg

[freetibet]

Killing nonbelievers was very much part of Christianity at the time, just as taxing nonbelievers was very much part of Islam, and still is. The only difference is that Islam has yet to evolve into a more progressive stance, that and the fact that the idea of Christian killing non-Christian was not written down in the Bible.

No it wasn't part of Christianity at the time... It was part of Catholicism at the time, two very very different things.

and Islam won't 'evolve' to the point where non-muslims are treated fairly. Dhimmis are part of the Quran, and so are part of Islam.

[eva23]

k we all know christians have killed non-christians for their beliefs. It isn't part of Christianity though. Taxing/killing non-muslims IS part of Islam.

It seems that killing non-christians is in the bible, so I think it's safe to say that it is part of christianity. I mean, check out 2 Chronicles 15:12-13...
"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman."
This isn't just part of catholicism.

[freetibet]

It seems that killing non-christians is in the bible, so I think it's safe to say that it is part of christianity. I mean, check out 2 Chronicles 15:12-13...
"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman."
This isn't just part of catholicism.

It doesn't say anywhere in there that Christians should kill non-Christians.

Also that is in the old testament.

[a2thae]

Does anywhere in the bible say that jesus was middleeastern? (He sure as fuck wasn't white)

[eva23]

It doesn't say anywhere in there that Christians should kill non-Christians.

Also that is in the old testament.

The old testament? So? Creation was also in the old testament, should we ignore that too? We can't pick and choose which parts of the old testament we like and don't like. Also, there are many verses in the new testament stating that we cannot ignore the old testament, eg;
Matthew 5:18-19
Luke 16:17
Matthew 5:17
2 Peter 20-21
And so on.

Also, if the verse from chronicles was insufficient...

"If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst."

[freetibet]

I don't believe in the creation story... and I also don't feel like going through every single one of those verses just to disprove each of them.

Pick 1 part of the bible you think says Christians should kill non-Christians and i'll disprove you on that.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

So now the old testament doesn't count as the bible? Pardon me if I'm being ignorant, it's four in the morning, but isn't that considered not believing in part of the bible?

You can't claim that your beliefs holds any validity at all if you decide to ignore a very large portion of your faith's early teachings.

Not a current part of Christianity, you say? Why are all bibles still printed with the old testament? Why isn't the new testament instead known as "bible 2"?

Unless I'm very much mistaken, you were shown a direct quote from the bible. Justify the old testament not being the bible, please.

[freetibet]

I never said that the old testament isn't part of the bible... The New testament takes precedence though.


"Unless I'm very much mistaken, you were shown a direct quote from the bible."

Yes I was, and I said why it didn't apply to present day Christians. I was then shown many other quotes, but I don't really feel like going through them all, so i said pick 1 and i'll disprove that 1.

[a2thae]

Answer my fucking question, does it say jesus's race in the bible? If it doesn't does that mean he was raceless?

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Do you decide what applies to everyday Christians?

Do you decide that the new testament takes preference?

Who does?

And why?

[freetibet]

@a2thae
I'm pretty sure Jesus was a Jew.

If you really wanted to I bet there is a verse on Jesus' race, its not really all that important to me though...

edit*
@nebacapob
"Do you decide what applies to everyday Christians?

Do you decide that the new testament takes preference?

Who does?

And why?"

Well the fact that it was naming a specific group of people shows that it doesn't apply to everyday Christians...

Jesus decided the new testament takes precedence (not preference :P)

you seem really concerned about all this for an atheist...

[Nebuchadnezzar]

What does Jew mean to you? Last time I checked, it's a religion.

During the time of Jesus it was based out of the middle east.

Perhaps that oft-quoted line from the Quran doesn't apply to everyday Muslims.

Really! So he said: "this is gonna be in the bible, right? You guys are gonna write about me? Ok, in that case, make it more important than all the stuff my dad did."

I'm addicted to religious arguments (not really).
Every new reserve you call upon, every fresh line you pull, I love striking them down with as close as I can come to reason and logic in my brand and worldview.

[a2thae]

@a2thae
I'm pretty sure Jesus was a Jew.

If you really wanted to I bet there is a verse on Jesus' race, its not really all that important to me though...

Jesus was not WHITE is the point I'm trying to make. I seriously doubt that it says Jesus's race in there...(plus there are paintings depicting him with blonde hair, and blue eyes which is ALSO utter bullshit.)

What I'm trying to get at is just because it doesn't say something in the bible, doesn't mean that it wasn't in a part of christianity in reality at some point.

[freetibet]

@a2thae
So your saying since alot of people depict jesus as a white person, killing non-Christians used to be part of Christianity...

Perhaps that oft-quoted line from the Quran doesn't apply to everyday Muslims.

That Quran quote was addressing all Muslims

Really! So he said: "this is gonna be in the bible, right? You guys are gonna write about me? Ok, in that case, make it more important than all the stuff my dad did."

No he said he came to fulfill the old law and bring a new law.

I'm addicted to religious arguments (not really).
Every new reserve you call upon, every fresh line you pull, I love striking them down with as close as I can come to reason and logic in my brand and worldview.

ummm lol ok well if thats the way you see it. Enjoy striking down my arguments with your supreme logic I guess...

[Nebuchadnezzar]

a2thae is (I hope) about to make the point that since Jesus is depicted as white, mostly by white people, the Jesus depicted in scripture is merely an ever-adapting symbol, a cover-all salvation for those who need to believe. Even if Jesus was a 450 pound asian woman, people today would see the skinny white guy because that's what they need to see. Religion is your crutch, religion is your bandage. That's what it has always been. That is what I deny!

[freetibet]

a2thae is (I hope) about to make the point that since Jesus is depicted as white, mostly by white people, the Jesus depicted in scripture is merely an ever-adapting symbol, a cover-all salvation for those who need to believe. Even if Jesus was a 450 pound asian woman, people today would see the skinny white guy because that's what they need to see. Religion is your crutch, religion is your bandage. That's what it has always been. That is what I deny!

You have some serious issues...

[Nebuchadnezzar]

No he said he came to fulfill the old law and bring a new law.

So I ask again, why do you consider the old law part of the bible if it has no relevance?

Edit: You have some serious issues...
I'm sure I do.

[freetibet]

So I ask again, why do you consider the old law part of the bible if it has no relevance?

and I tell you again, it does have relevance, the New Testament just has precedence

[Nebuchadnezzar]

What's the relevance?

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Before google strikes, I'll revise the question. What's the relevance to you?

[freetibet]

omg why do you care?!!?

lol I can see why you would ask if you actually were interested in religion/spirituality but all your trying to do is 'prove' Christians are supposed to be killing people.

Your like a little kid who keeps asking its parents why over and over. You don't really care what the answer is you just enjoy the process.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Well sure, otherwise I'd ask someone I respect.

Still, there's some merit to the process. For example, you are becoming increasingly frustrated and I s***l an "I'm not posting in this thread anymore" on the way.

I always knew it would be impossible for you or cstrikehero or deetinator to actually admit that you were wrong, that's not human nature. I expected you to fight like badgers as the atheists isolated your points one by one, then leave with a desperate blow at our personalities, our habits or our arguments.

Prove me wrong.

[freetibet]

Well sure, otherwise I'd ask someone I respect.

Still, there's some merit to the process. For example, you are becoming increasingly frustrated and I s***l an "I'm not posting in this thread anymore" on the way.

I always knew it would be impossible for you or cstrikehero or deetinator to actually admit that you were wrong, that's not human nature. I expected you to fight like badgers as the atheists isolated your points one by one, then leave with a desperate blow at our personalities, our habits or our arguments.

Prove me wrong.

oh... thats cold

Yes I am becoming frustrated because you keep asking stupid questions.

I can admit I am wrong, I used to be very devoted to a different religion, but when I realized it was wrong, I converted to my current belief system. You on the other hand would have nothing to do with you life if you couldn't argue with theists :p

prove you wrong on what? The question about the old testament being relevant?

The morals you can learn from the old testament still apply to people today. There is your answer for ya.

Your a troll... just admit it

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Is it a coincidence that the stupid questions are the hardest to answer? If the morals of the old testament still apply, then why does the moral philosophy of killing non-christians no longer apply?

You see, to me an opponent's argument is like a powerful line of battle. I look at your words and see them as divisions, arrayed against mine. I see a phrase I can exploit, a mistake or a potential misinterpretation, and that's where I hit you. In this case, it was the old testament posts, and now your flank has caved in.

However, in my defense, this has not been merely for your frustration. I truly believe that organized religion is corrupt and inordinately powerful, and I truly wished to share my point of view, however I express it.

EDIT: oy, let's pick this up later, like around 12:00 am EST... I've gotta do homework later today, and I can't if I sleep till 3.

[freetibet]

Is it a coincidence that the stupid questions are the hardest to answer? If the morals of the old testament still apply, then why does the moral philosophy of killing non-christians no longer apply?

You see, to me an opponent's argument is like a powerful line of battle. I look at your words and see them as divisions, arrayed against mine. I see a phrase I can exploit, a mistake or a potential misinterpretation, and that's where I hit you. In this case, it was the old testament posts, and now your flank has caved in.

However, in my defense, this has not been merely for your frustration. I truly believe that organized religion is corrupt and inordinately powerful, and I truly wished to share my point of view, however I express it.

No, the stupidest question are the easiest to answer. The problem is you ask a ridiculously large number of them. Give me a quote from the Bible about killing non-Christians, and i'll explain to you why it doesn't apply to me, while still showing that the old testament has useful information for those seeking answers.

I've decided you are either a troll, or a meglomaniac. In case you don't know what a megalomaniac is: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/megalomanic

Maybe your just a troll, your avatar mocks christians, your signature is basically saying religious people believe what they do out of 'blind faith'. You add nothing to any conversation i've seen you in, you just try to piss people off. You definitely have some meglomaniac like traits though... seeing yourself as 'flanking' me is a little ridiculous I must say. Most likely your a troll with a case of meglomania

I agree with you on the last point... surprisingly...

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I'm not entirely sure what you expect/want me to say. Am I to admit I'm a troll and a megalomaniac? I could start calling you schizophrenic and a xenophobic anti-Islam Christian zealot because of what you've said in this thread, but that would remove any shred of mature discourse that remained here. Finding a quote from the bible specifically referring to Christians is not at all necessary: Christians take the entire bible as holy and attempt to live by its guidelines.

What's this? Do you believe your faith is blind? Don't even bother answering that, that was picayune of me.

If you consider me a troll, that means you consider anyone who gets into pointless internet arguments to be a troll, including yourself. My avatar shows that I am no Christian. If the Saint Peter's Cross offends you, I apologise.

In case I don't know what megalomaniac means? I don't intend to dignify that with comment.

[freetibet]

I'm not entirely sure what you expect/want me to say. Am I to admit I'm a troll and a megalomaniac? I could start calling you schizophrenic and a xenophobic anti-Islam Christian zealot because of what you've said in this thread, but that would remove any shred of mature discourse that remained here. Finding a quote from the bible specifically referring to Christians is not at all necessary: Christians take the entire bible as holy and attempt to live by its guidelines.

What's this? Do you believe your faith is blind? Don't even bother answering that, that was picayune of me.

If you consider me a troll, that means you consider anyone who gets into pointless internet arguments to be a troll, including yourself. My avatar shows that I am no Christian. If the Saint Peter's Cross offends you, I apologise.

In case I don't know what megalomaniac means? I don't intend to dignify that with comment.

I'm no xenophobe, I was just pointing out that the Quran tells Muslims to tax non-muslims for their beliefs. I'm still waiting on a specific bible quote from you by the way...

I'm a religious person and I'm in this section of the site to discuss my own beliefs and the beliefs of others. I want learn about other's faiths and learn more about my own. Why are you in this section? To meet religious people on your imaginary field of battle? To see how mad you can make theists with your mocking?

[a2thae]

Wait freetibet...are you now saying that some things written in the bible aren't true?

Because if you are, then we've established that the bible has its flaws; and if you can recognize them without overly-analyzing the bible, then there have to be other flaws which you are blind to; mainly due to your extreme faith in christianity.

This is where I was going with the jesus argument:

If it's in there, and incorrect that means the bible has flaws.

If it isn't in there, but was a part of christianity; just left out for some sort of convenience; then that means that other parts could be left out for other conveniences...including killing non-christians.

[freetibet]

Wait freetibet...are you now saying that some things written in the bible aren't true?

Because if you are, then we've established that the bible has its flaws; and if you can recognize them without overly-analyzing the bible, then there have to be other flaws which you are blind to; mainly due to your extreme faith in christianity.

This is where I was going with the jesus argument:

If it's in there, and incorrect that means the bible has flaws.

If it isn't in there, but was a part of christianity; just left out for some sort of convenience; then that means that other parts could be left out for other conveniences...including killing non-christians.

Ya i'd say the Bible does have flaws. That truthortradtion site I mentioned in another thread even points out differences between the original greek and KJV of the bible.

I believe Christ and his words were flawless though, that is why I would consider myself a Christian, among other things.

edit*
Christ promoted peace though, so I don't think there is any lost passages of the bible that told people to kill non-Christians. If anything Constantine would have added verses about killing people to justify conquering people.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I'm no xenophobe, I was just pointing out that the Quran tells Muslims to tax non-muslims for their beliefs. I'm still waiting on a specific bible quote from you by the way...

I'm a religious person and I'm in this section of the site to discuss my own beliefs and the beliefs of others. I want learn about other's faiths and learn more about my own. Why are you in this section? To meet religious people on your imaginary field of battle? To see how mad you can make theists with your mocking?

Let me get this straight. You want to learn more about the faiths of others, as well as your own, and you do this by posting threads called "Is Islam intolerant?" Honestly, what do you expect to learn from such an innately biased point of view? As for a bible quote from me, I don't own a bible, so here's one from someone you almost completely ignored: 2 Chronicles 15:12-13...
"They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman."
When this was originally posted, you said that it was part of the old testament (as if it made a difference). Later, you said that the old testament's morals were still to be followed; killing non-Christians is a moral philosophy for those who believe in god.

I'm in this section partly to share my opinion and partly because misinformation, even on the internet, is irritating to me. I could not let your obviously biased stance stand unchallenged.

[freetibet]

Let me get this straight. You want to learn more about the faiths of others, as well as your own, and you do this by posting threads called "Is Islam intolerant?" Honestly, what do you expect to learn from such an innately biased point of view? As for a bible quote from me, I don't own a bible, so here's one from someone you almost completely ignored:
When this was originally posted, you said that it was part of the old testament (as if it made a difference). Later, you said that the old testament's morals were still to be followed; killing non-Christians is a moral philosophy for those who believe in god.

I'm in this section partly to share my opinion and partly because misinformation, even on the internet, is irritating to me. I could not let your obviously biased stance stand unchallenged.

Well I was hoping that Muslim guy would still be here to help clarify on the meaning of the verse. I really am curious whether or not there is an excuse for the verse though it seems pretty concrete to me.

and about the bible verse, I said before that it says "they entered" meaning a specific group of people at one time did what was described. It didn't say I should do what they did.

edit*
You can find all of the bible online, you don't need to buy one. I go to lds.org when i need a digital copy of a something.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

you mean the guy with the unpronounceable username? Yeah, he was cool. I think, honestly, that he may have ignored it because of the standoffish-sounding thread name; he probably thought it would be a bunch of american rednecks trashing Islam

As for the quote, I admit that it refers to a group of people. I have to say, however, that unless the entire group of people was punished by god for their zeal, the story is little more than an invitation to do the same.

[freetibet]

well if thats the way you interpret it... I'm glad you're an atheist :P

[Phoenix Fire]

I saw a vision of Muhammed once...
He was fucking a ca***..

[Nebuchadnezzar]

well if thats the way you interpret it... I'm glad you're an atheist :P

Seriously though, think about it: Pretend you're a religious zealot 3000 years ago. Now, a group of people is opposing your religion, challenging everything you hold dear. Now, let's say you kill them all. If god punishes you with plagues/famine/death etc, it probably won't happen again. However, if god lets you off the hook entirely because they were non-believers, what will you tell your children about killing non-believers?

p.s. Phoenix, weren't you gonna go join the army and die?

[freetibet]

well 3000 years ago Christ hadn't been born yet...

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Am I to assume you're going somewhere with that?

[freetibet]

So 3000 years ago they would have been Jews not christians :P

[Nebuchadnezzar]

So now the old testament does apply only to jews?

[freetibet]

No, 3000 years ago there were no christians.

So there were no christians for it to apply to.

this isn't that hard to understand lol

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I'm talking about the fact that Christians of current convention follow the values of the old testament; they follow the moral practices of those Jews as if they had been Christian.

[freetibet]

omg would you just pick one viewpoint on the subject and stick with it. I can't debate someone so inconsistent with their arguments lol.

I showed you why the quote doesn't apply to me or any other Christians. Christians aren't supposed to kill non-christians. GET OVER IT!

[Nebuchadnezzar]

You told me, and I didn't accept your explanation; The quote is from a text that Christians idolize, the people in the quote do not suffer god's wrath, and if Christians do not follow the old testament it is a waste of paper in the beginning of the bible. However, you have often established that Christians do follow the moral principles of the old testament, suggesting that the moral philosophies of the people from that time would be included in said belief group. Thus, explain to me how everything in the bible is Christian holy writ, including the principles of the old testament, yet the philosophies included in that text, the aforementioned holy writ, are not relevant to Christians.
My points constantly shift because your arguments constantly shift...

[freetibet]

This debate is obviously over your head...

If you have any other point you want to debate besides Christians supposedly needing to kill people, let me know.

just out of curiosity... how old are you?

[a2thae]

Ya i'd say the Bible does have flaws. That truthortradtion site I mentioned in another thread even points out differences between the original greek and KJV of the bible.

I believe Christ and his words were flawless though, that is why I would consider myself a Christian, among other things.

Yes, you do believe but you have to acknowledge it is a possibility that christ and his words were flawed, and since you acknowledge that the bible has flaws you have to acknowledge that you don't know what other flaws the bible may contain.

Like leaving out certain things...such as killing non-christians.

Also maybe constantine didn't think of adding that, he probably thought that there was no need.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

'Over my head', huh? This debate is about whether or not Islam is intolerant due to a policy about taxing non-believers. In the spirit of giving Islam its due diligence, I asked whether or not Christianity could be considered intolerant because of similar policies that had been inacted in the past, such as the policies of the Spanish Inquisition. That stirred up a 5-page shitstorm in which that ti***y quote brought up the issue of the old testament's relevance.

All this time, I have remained calm and composed: Not once have I insulted you personally or cast aspersions on your rights as a human being to believe what you will; I have merely stated point and counterpoint.

I use questions as my medium of argument; it draws your opinion out so it can be plainly seen by all. Besides, since I ask the question you are forced to respond on my terms.

I'll tell you everything you want to know about me after you provide a counterpoint to my earlier statement:
The quote is from a text that Christians idolize, the people in the quote do not suffer god's wrath, and if Christians do not follow the old testament it is a waste of paper in the beginning of the bible. However, you have often established that Christians do follow the moral principles of the old testament, suggesting that the moral philosophies of the people from that time would be included in said belief group. Thus, explain to me how everything in the bible is Christian holy writ, including the principles of the old testament, yet the philosophies included in that text, the aforementioned holy writ, are not relevant to Christians.

[Phoenix Fire]

Seriously though, think about it: Pretend you're a religious zealot 3000 years ago. Now, a group of people is opposing your religion, challenging everything you hold dear. Now, let's say you kill them all. If god punishes you with plagues/famine/death etc, it probably won't happen again. However, if god lets you off the hook entirely because they were non-believers, what will you tell your children about killing non-believers?

p.s. Phoenix, weren't you gonna go join the army and die?


I'm working on it...

[freetibet]

well hopefully your not working on dying...

who will scare off the n00bs if you die?

All this time, I have remained calm and composed: Not once have I insulted you personally or cast aspersions on your rights as a human being to believe what you will; I have merely stated point and counterpoint.

buahahahahahahahahaha

oh wait... your serious?

and I already provided a counterpoint, I even repeated myself once for you. It's not my fault your incapable of comprehending me.

Yes, you do believe but you have to acknowledge it is a possibility that christ and his words were flawed, and since you acknowledge that the bible has flaws you have to acknowledge that you don't know what other flaws the bible may contain.

Like leaving out certain things...such as killing non-christians.

Also maybe constantine didn't think of adding that, he probably thought that there was no need.

Well if I was a roman emperor in the process of editing the bible, I'd probably edit it to make my subjects more willing to go to war for me.

Also, Christ preached peace, so killing people is not likely something he promoted.

I thinks its far too unlikely to be considered

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Counterpoint, huh? this is all you've said since my original posting of that argument:
This debate is obviously over your head...

If you have any other point you want to debate besides Christians supposedly needing to kill people, let me know.

just out of curiosity... how old are you?

I have yet to insult your intelligence our your personal capacity, merely your argument. Obviously this makes you....more mature than I?

I think the extent of my emotional involvement has been using a couple of exclamation points. You have resorted to exasperated OMGs and insinuations about my age and mental development.

[freetibet]

I said
and about the bible verse, I said before that it says "they entered" meaning a specific group of people at one time did what was described. It didn't say I should do what they did.

Which was my 2nd time making that point.

and I just asked how old you are, didnt know it was a sensitive subject O_O

edit*
Your more subtle than I am, but your just as insulting. Your signature and avatar also mock religion, at least i'm respectful enough not to mock what you believe.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

you have often established that Christians do follow the moral principles of the old testament, suggesting that the moral philosophies of the people from that time would be included in said belief group. Thus, explain to me how everything in the bible is Christian holy writ, including the principles of the old testament, yet the philosophies included in that text, the aforementioned holy writ, are not relevant to Christians.
I'm not going to argue over who's more insulting... it might just be me. As for my age, it's true that I can't help but be irritated at having to justify it in this context, but it's not really that sensitive; I'm 16.

I don't really care whether or not you counterpoint my whole statement... this is getting stale, even for me.

My avatar shows that I am no Christian. If the Saint Peter's Cross offends you, I apologise.
It certainly adds emphasis to the 'faithless'.

Your avatar openly mocks anyone who wants the Dalai Lama's head on a platter... like most of the Chinese government!

[freetibet]

I don't really care whether or not you counterpoint my whole statement... this is getting stale, even for me.

ya, i'm sure thats it...


It certainly adds emphasis to the 'faithless'.

Your avatar openly mocks anyone who wants the Dalai Lama's head on a platter... like most of the Chinese government!

You really think those are on the same level?

[Nebuchadnezzar]

As opposed to what? I left it up to you. I'm just saying that it's getting old for me, not to say I'm not up for more.

You really think those are on the same level?

no, I was making fun of you.

[freetibet]

So you were making fun of me, yet you don't take it to a personal level?

You are a very interesting person lol

All this time, I have remained calm and composed: Not once have I insulted you personally or cast aspersions on your rights as a human being to believe what you will; I have merely stated point and counterpoint.

remember this? hahahahaha

[a2thae]

I thinks its far too unlikely to be considered

But you still believe that it could be possible then. Aha! Mission accomplished...

Soon this thought will begin to eat at you; because you have accepted that it is a possibility that christians killing non-christians was a part of christianity. Oh no, you want to block it out...little by little it will subconsciously devour you, but you can only repress it for so long until it eats too much...

[eva23]

Apologies for the absence, my internet cracked the shits.


Also, Christ preached peace, so killing people is not likely something he promoted.

I thinks its far too unlikely to be considered

He didn't promote it, but he also said that the old testament was not to be discounted, and none of god's law was to be discarded or ignored. It was written that the heavens and earth would sooner pass away than one letter of god's law become invalid.

And seeing as none of god's law can become invalid to his followers, we kinda have to take him seriously when he says;
"If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery."

and;

"Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death."

and also;

"Suppose there are prophets among you, or those who have dreams about the future, and they promise you signs or miracles, and the predicted signs or miracles take place. If the prophets then say, 'Come, let us worship the gods of foreign nations,' do not listen to them. The LORD your God is testing you to see if you love him with all your heart and soul. Serve only the LORD your God and fear him alone. Obey his commands, listen to his voice, and cling to him. The false prophets or dreamers who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of slavery in the land of Egypt. Since they try to keep you from following the LORD your God, you must execute them to remove the evil from among you."

I know you believe that the new testament takes precedent, but just because it does, it really doesn't mean that you can ignore the parts of the old testament that make you feel icky.

And just in case you feel tempted to interpret these verses in different ways...
"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God."
Which is from the new testament by the way.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

So you were making fun of me, yet you don't take it to a personal level?

You are a very interesting person lol

Taking it to a personal level would be actually insulting you, instead of your point of view...

I remember back when I was calm; I'm such a raving maniac now, right?

[freetibet]

Why are we even debating if Christianity is intolerant? This is about whether or not Islam is intolerant.

@eva23
"I know you believe that the new testament takes precedent, but just because it does, it really doesn't mean that you can ignore the parts of the old testament that make you feel icky."

They don't make me feel icky, that was the old law, Christianity is the new law. Why do you even care if you're an atheist? I believe in Christ and i'm telling you that killing people from other religions is not part of my religion. There are old testament scriptures that seem to promote violence but that was the OLD law. You don't have to understand it, and you most likely don't want to understand it. So just forget about it and go back to reading Richard Dawkins or whatever atheists read to make themselves feel better.

Taking it to a personal level would be actually insulting you, instead of your point of view...

Oh ok, so you were just making fun of me, you weren't insulting me. How foolish of me to mix those up.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Indeed. :)

The debate began with Islam's intolerance, but since intolerance is relative, the question whether or not Christianity is intolerant became equally relevant.

[eva23]

Why are we even debating if Christianity is intolerant? This is about whether or not Islam is intolerant.


They don't make me feel icky, that was the old law, Christianity is the new law. Why do you even care if you're an atheist? I believe in Christ and i'm telling you that killing people from other religions is not part of my religion. There are old testament scriptures that seem to promote violence but that was the OLD law. You don't have to understand it, and you most likely don't want to understand it. So just forget about it and go back to reading Richard Dawkins or whatever atheists read to make themselves feel better.

I know it was the "old law", you've said that already. However, the old law is not obsolete. I've given you verses regarding this from your own holy book, and you apparently didn't see it, or didn't like it.
I know the debate is about whether Islam is intolerant. Yes, I know that in their book it says to tax non-muslims. I just think that you have no right to harp on about it, considering the things that your books says. Both books are as bad as each other, and Christianity as a religion is just as intolerant as Islam. You have stated that perhaps I don't want to understand it. I understand perfectly, having studied various religions for a very, very long time. I think that you are the one who doesn't understand, as is the case with a great deal of christians who don't understand their own bible.

Why do I care if I'm an atheist? I'll tell you why I care. I constantly see religious people taking away the freedoms of others, killing themselves and others, and brainwashing innocents, all in the name of their gods. This stuff affects my life also, even though I am an atheist, so I feel that I have a right to have some say.

Also, your Richard Dawkins comment was lol-worthy. Why don't you go forget about it, and go back to reading books about sky-fairies, or whatever religious people read to feel better.

[freetibet]

I know it was the "old law", you've said that already. However, the old law is not obsolete. I've given you verses regarding this from your own holy book, and you apparently didn't see it, or didn't like it.
I know the debate is about whether Islam is intolerant. Yes, I know that in their book it says to tax non-muslims. I just think that you have no right to harp on about it, considering the things that your books says. Both books are as bad as each other, and Christianity as a religion is just as intolerant as Islam. You have stated that perhaps I don't want to understand it. I understand perfectly, having studied various religions for a very, very long time. I think that you are the one who doesn't understand, as is the case with a great deal of christians who don't understand their own bible.

Why do I care if I'm an atheist? I'll tell you why I care. I constantly see religious people taking away the freedoms of others, killing themselves and others, and brainwashing innocents, all in the name of their gods. This stuff affects my life also, even though I am an atheist, so I feel that I have a right to have some say.

Also, your Richard Dawkins comment was lol-worthy. Why don't you go forget about it, and go back to reading books about sky-fairies, or whatever religious people read to feel better.

As far as i know, muslims will openly say that dhimmis and such are part of their religion; but Christians say 'hate the sin not the sinner'. I don't really want to explain to you how to old testament is still a viable source of uplifting material and at the same time the old law. Honestly I thought it was obvious... You'll just have to settle for what Christians tell you they believe, rather than what you tell them they are supposed to be believing.

I really doubt you are old enough to have studied religion for a "very, very long time" The majority of atheists on this site are 13-18yr old kids who are mad at their parents for making them go to church.

So you see bad people who are religious, and that makes you think religion is bad? typical...

and I know it was lol-worthy, that is why I said it :D

[eva23]

As far as i know, muslims will openly say that dhimmis and such are part of their religion; but Christians say 'hate the sin not the sinner'. I don't really want to explain to you how to old testament is still a viable source of uplifting material and at the same time the old law. Honestly I thought it was obvious... You'll just have to settle for what Christians tell you they believe, rather than what you tell them they are supposed to be believing.

I really doubt you are old enough to have studied religion for a "very, very long time" The majority of atheists on this site are 13-18yr old kids who are mad at their parents for making them go to church.

So you see bad people who are religious, and that makes you think religion is bad? typical...

and I know it was lol-worthy, that is why I said it :D

Yes, christians often say that. You know why? Because most of them don't know a thing about the bible. If they want to deviate from it, they should form a cult or some shit, rather than parade their beliefs under the wrong banner. I'm not telling them what they are supposed to be believing, they tell me when they profess their adoration for a book. I just inform them of what they really are worshiping.

And just so you know, I don't think you have cause to say I'm a kid, mad at my parents because I had to go to church. I was a christian, and I studied religion in-depth for 6 years. I also have done much research independently.

Also, I don't judge entire religions because I met a few people who are dicks. I understand that there are dicks in every religion, and also atheists who are dicks. However, there are numerous religions where I consistently meet followers who are complete and utter dicks, disregarding the welfare of everyone around them. Their worship material is usually filled with passages advocating murder, rape and genocide, in which case, i will judge them, and judge them harshly.

Also, I really am sick of trying to explain the old testament, and how applicable it is to you. Continue to live in a dream world where you ignore your own scripture. I'm sure the sky-fairies will love you for that when you ascend to the heavens.

[freetibet]

So you really think you need to 'inform' people they should be killing non-christians? It's bad enough you believe in your messed up faith, now you gotta go around telling everyone else "what they are really worshiping" lol

ok, i'll keep living in my little dream world where I believe what I do. And you can keep living in your dream world where all the Christians are supposed to be out killing heathens.

And just so you know, I don't think you have cause to say I'm a kid, mad at my parents because I had to go to church. I was a christian, and I studied religion in-depth for 6 years. I also have done much research independently.

oh ok, so you're not mad because they made you go to church, you're made because they made you go to church school! all right i apologize for mixing that up.

Edit*
if this makes no sense whatsover, its because i was in an all turd state of mind

[rsdbaby]

As with all religion the message can and always has been twisted to fit the needs whomever is currently in power. A simple reading of the old testament shows that the Christian god is clearly not the forgiving and loving god that modern Christians put him out to be.

I still have yet to understand how a society can openly ridicule the Greeks and Romans for worshiping Zues and Hercules, while still subscribing to the same ridiculous notions themselves.

[rsdbaby]

Of course you have to dismiss the old testament FreeTibet. The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. But by some miracle the perfect god of the old testament changed into a just and righteous God in the new testament. Could you please tell me how a perfect, all knowing, omnipresent being could ever change?

[eva23]

So you really think you need to 'inform' people they should be killing non-christians? It's bad enough you believe in your messed up faith, now you gotta go around telling everyone else "what they are really worshiping" lol

I don't tell them that they should be killing non-christians, I just tell them that the bible says they should be, there's a difference, although I won't be surprised in the least if you can't see it. I keep doing this because occasionally I can help someone, pull them out of their cycle of hypocrisy and lies. Also, I don't have a faith. I believe what I can see, I believe what can be proven, as opposed to believing in something I read in a book once.

And also, no, my parents didn't make me go to church school. Presumptuous aren't you?

[freetibet]

Could you please tell me how a perfect, all knowing, omnipresent being could ever change?

God didn't change. We changed, and Christ changed a lot of things too.

edit*
I don't tell them that they should be killing non-christians, I just tell them that the bible says they should be, there's a difference, although I won't be surprised in the least if you can't see it. I keep doing this because occasionally I can help someone, pull them out of their cycle of hypocrisy and lies. Also, I don't have a faith. I believe what I can see, I believe what can be proven, as opposed to believing in something I read in a book once.

And also, no, my parents didn't make me go to church school. Presumptuous aren't you?

So you really think you know more about the Bible than people who spent their entire lives studying it? I really don't see how you could ever help anyone by converting them to atheism. You have faith that there is no God, something you likely concluded after reading something or talking to someone who read something about it. Atheism isn't 'proven', if you really believed the way you say you do you would be agnostic.

my bad, sorry

[eva23]

So you really think you know more about the Bible than people who spent their entire lives studying it? I really don't see how you could ever help anyone by converting them to atheism. You have faith that there is no God, something you likely concluded after reading something or talking to someone who read something about it. Atheism isn't 'proven', if you really believed the way you say you do you would be agnostic.

Yes, I think I do know more about the bible than a lot of the people who devote their lives to it. Mainly because I first read it without bias, and then made up my mind, whereas the majority of people have a bias before they pick it up. I read it before I knew that much about christianity or atheism, or any other belief.

Also, yes, I can help people by "converting" them to atheism. Tends to reduce their level of idiocy, and other people don't have to put up with their "jebus loves you" crap in regular conversation.

Also, I don't have 'faith' that there is no god. Atheism isn't 'proven' because it doesn't need to be. We aren't the ones claiming that supernatural creatures exist, therefore the onus of proof is not on our shoulders. It's like, if I claim there are pink unicorns living in my closet, and then say that everyone else has faith that there aren't, because the non-existence of pink-closet-unicorns hasn't been proven yet. Ridiculous, no? Now you know how you sound to people.

[freetibet]

Yes, I think I do know more about the bible than a lot of the people who devote their lives to it. Mainly because I first read it without bias, and then made up my mind, whereas the majority of people have a bias before they pick it up. I read it before I knew that much about christianity or atheism, or any other belief.

Also, yes, I can help people by "converting" them to atheism. Tends to reduce their level of idiocy, and other people don't have to put up with their "jebus loves you" crap in regular conversation.

Also, I don't have 'faith' that there is no god. Atheism isn't 'proven' because it doesn't need to be. We aren't the ones claiming that supernatural creatures exist, therefore the onus of proof is not on our shoulders. It's like, if I claim there are pink unicorns living in my closet, and then say that everyone else has faith that there aren't, because the non-existence of pink-closet-unicorns hasn't been proven yet. Ridiculous, no? Now you know how you sound to people.

I really doubt you read the entire bible without having a few biased opinions of things. I for one, just think you are arrogant to assume you know more from reading the bible once than a priest who has read it hundreds of times. You don't believe in it, whatever, but don't think you know so much when you have so little experience in the subject.

Well I think this is one area we simply will not agree on. I think atheism is intellectually lax and presumptuous, you think religion is 'idiocy'.

Atheism makes the positive statement that there is no deity, its the equivalent of saying there are no animals in any closets anywhere.

atheist
-one who believes that there is no deity

agnostic
-a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

[eva23]

I really doubt you read the entire bible without having a few biased opinions of things. I for one, just think you are arrogant to assume you know more from reading the bible once than a priest who has read it hundreds of times. You don't believe in it, whatever, but don't think you know so much when you have so little experience in the subject.

Well I think this is one area we simply will not agree on. I think atheism is intellectually lax and presumptuous, you think religion is 'idiocy'.

Atheism makes the positive statement that there is no deity, its the equivalent of saying there are no animals in any closets anywhere.

atheist
-one who believes that there is no deity

agnostic
-a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable ; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

I haven't just read the bible once, I've read it numerous times, but the first time I read it, I had no opinion either way. I also said I knew more about the bible than a lot of the people who devote their loves to it, not all people who devote their lives to it. I find that in a lot of cases, increadibly devout people haven't even read the bible all the way through once. I do realize that there are religious people out there though who have read it, and probably know more about it than I. They just seem to be hiding...

Atheism is intellectually lax? It is the natural state of humans, until they are indoctrinated that is. If it is intellectually lax to study and come to the conclusion that mythological creatures and jewish zombies don't exist....
*sigh*

Atheism makes the statement that there are no animals in closets anywhere? Now who is telling people what they should be believing. In my case, atheism is not believing in any god (or animal in closet) until some concrete-worthy-of-a-court-of-law-evidence appears. Until then, why should I entertain the possibility? It is a waste of my time. Kinda like if I spent the day dreaming about the remote possibility of unicorns in closets instead of being productive.

[freetibet]

I haven't just read the bible once, I've read it numerous times, but the first time I read it, I had no opinion either way.

I don't think that is physically possible... unless you were never exposed to anything in your life before reading the bible, you had presumptions.

Atheism is intellectually lax?

You said, "Kinda like if I spent the day dreaming about the remote possibility of unicorns in closets instead of being productive." So in other words you don't want to bother thinking about certain questions in life. You can compare God to unicorns, but in the end it just comes down to you not wanting to find the answers. No sane person really believes in unicorns, but the vast majority of the world believes in a deity or deities. There is a reason for this, but you don't want to bother thinking about it. Most likely, I think, because it scares you.

It is the natural state of humans
Yes it is the natural state of humans, just like its the natural state of humans to know absolutely nothing about geometry.


In my case, atheism is not believing in any god (or animal in closet) until some concrete-worthy-of-a-court-of-law-evidence appears.

That sounds more like agnosticism to me...

[eva23]

I don't think that is physically possible... unless you were never exposed to anything in your life before reading the bible, you had presumptions.



You said, "Kinda like if I spent the day dreaming about the remote possibility of unicorns in closets instead of being productive." So in other words you don't want to bother thinking about certain questions in life. You can compare God to unicorns, but in the end it just comes down to you not wanting to find the answers. No sane person really believes in unicorns, but the vast majority of the world believes in a deity or deities. There is a reason for this, but you don't want to bother thinking about it. Most likely, I think, because it scares you.


Yes it is the natural state of humans, just like its the natural state of humans to know absolutely nothing about geometry.




That sounds more like agnosticism to me...

Okay... I had heard people talk about the bible, but never really listened to them. I called myself a christian because everyone else was, so I figured that I may as well be. I suppose you could say that this caused me to make assumptions about the bible, but I really don't recall any significant ones that I had made. I recall, however, reading the bible and being shocked and disgusted at both the N.T and the O.T, amazed that no one brought this up, and shocked that the pleasant background noise I'd been hearing had such vicious undercurrents that I hadn't noticed.

Also, it's not that I don't want to think about certain things in life, it's that I have thought about it, and it is a rather large waste of time. I do want the answers, but I don't believe that religion is any good for answers whatsoever. I'm not scared either. Most of the world believes in a deity because their parents did, and their parents did and so on. Religion arose because people have a thirst for answers, and when they could not deduce the answers they created gods to provide them. Now, we can deduce the answers as we have a greater understanding of the natural world, but people still cling to gods as a security blanket, or because they simply don't know any better. I'm not afraid of these people, nor what they believe, I just pity them.

Geometry doesn't command people to kill others, rape their women and steal their possessions. God does. Geometry is real. God isn't. I think it's somewhat silly to compare the two.

[freetibet]

I'd debate you more... but this no longer has anything to do with Islam's tolerance or lack thereof.

In the end it will just come down to us believing different things. You think my viewpoint is foolish, and I think yours is foolish. Something that is not likely to change anytime soon.

[eva23]

I agree that we each think the other foolish, and that is unlikely to change, so yes, maybe we should cease this part of the debate. Agree to disagree on this?

However, I do think this is still relevant to the original topic. What I have been trying to say is that you can't call islam intolerant unless you also call christianity intolerant. They both contain objectionable verses, which some followers agree with and some followers don't.

[freetibet]

but does your typical Christian tax/kill other religions?

I've tried explaining the difference between the old and new testament, apparently it hasn't sunk it...

[rsdbaby]

There is no point in debating religion. To debate a topic assumes that the topic follows the laws of logic and evidence, religion does neither. Thats why religion will never be proven or disproven. Of course the burden of proof rests on the claim being made (religion in this case).

[freetibet]

well debating religion with atheists is usually pointless.

That's because its like explaining an emotion to a robot.

in case you want to know the difference between the old and new testaments I suggest looking up jesus' sermon on the mount. I'd consider that a major turning point from the old to new law.

I haven't read it yet but this wikipedia article should help you understand:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Covenant

[rsdbaby]

If religion follows the laws of logic and is well supported by evidence then it should be fairly easy to explain to anyone. Instead religions are supported by "faith" and emotion.

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."
-Benjamin Franklin

[freetibet]

well you know what else Ben Franklin said?

"A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one."

"All who think cannot but see there is a sanction like that of religion which binds us in partnership in the serious work of the world."

"I look upon death to be as necessary to our constitution as sleep. We shall rise refreshed in the morning."

"Rebellion against tyrants is obedience to God."

and my favorite:

"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy."

The man obviously believed in a higher power. He just didn't approve of blind faith. (like that of violently intolerant Christians)

[rsdbaby]

Im not questioning his faith in God. Im simply stating that evidence must be provided for such a radical claim. You cant honestly expect people to believe there is an omnipresent, omnipotent, and an all knowing god without providing a shred of indisputable evidence. Would it really be that hard for him to realign the stars to say "I exist" or part the seas once again, or perhaps (gasp) provide food for the millions of starving people for just one day.

[freetibet]

I was just pointing out that you were interpreting his quote wrong. You made it look like he was advocating atheism when he was actually a religious man.

and like I always say, you can prove God on a personal level, but not to the world.

This is drifting further and further from the topic though. I'd make a new thread about it but debating whether or not there is a god wouldn't lead anywhere.

[madmoneynoob]

okay. this is ganna sound like some real fucked up shit.

this is soo revolutionary and you guys dont even knowww!

all the religions are pretty wrong about everythingg they teachh!

okay. in my theory barack obama is the anti crist. i dont know this and it does sound crazy but just pretend for a second he is.

his term ends 2012...worlds supposed to end 2012...

although most religions are just fucking wrong....

there is a story called the tribulation....it is about how god will take everyone who was ment to be in heaven just dissapears right from their clothes. cars will crash...plains will fall from the sky. the tribulation will be the period of 7 years when after the people vanish. the people left behind will have 7 years to repent and turn their ways over to god and all that shit.

now the anti crist is ment to be assassinated and in my thoery this is a man who calls himself IMMORTAL TECHNIQUE who i believe is ganna assassinate barack obama. i also think he is going to be one of the leaders in the revolution of the wolrd.

now after barack is killed he is supposed to come backk to life! yes back from the dead...and then end is very near. he will either make everyone get some tatoo or like computer chip or some sign showing people loyalty or alegience to him and if you refuse you are killed.

all the signs of the end being very near are the people dissapearing. barack dies and comes back. markings of us following the anti crist. and also it is said he will make all the currency in the world wich is the same..the money part may just be a riddle because the bible has alot of them..after everyone is marked or killed the people left behind are taken to hell.

also no one knowss if barack obama was actualy born in the U.S! hes a fucking black man who is president too! although the backround info is off. he was said to be from a islamic country in the middle east. althoughh america is full of sin. people are fucking terrible in todays age. so i think the end is near. why wouldnt god want to challenge the most sinfull country in the world? now remember this for when the day comes this info may save your ass! next time you see him on tv just look at his evil smile.

also the government is supper evil and they are made up of sly smart criminals who understand how life works and how the comman man is soo ignorant. they can use everything on how people work about things to their advantage. basicly their just smart. and the devil is one slyyy motherfucker so why couldnt the anti crst just talk his way into presidency??


remember....

-revolution!

[freetibet]

and you posted this here...why?

[pkirk159]

this is a pointless debate.

muslims are just following what they believe and have been taught by there preists or what ever it is for them

just like the hundreds of other examples where one religion persecutes another because they dont believe the same thing

so of course christians are gonna call it intolerant because there the ones being persecuted just as the jews called it right when they crucified your savior

im not saying any one is right or trying to wright a hate speech about any religion cause all i think is that religion causes more pain in suffering rather than saving people

[freetibet]

well why don't you take your idiotic hate somewhere else?

saying obama is the anti-christ and that religion causes suffering isn't going to accomplish anything. At least try to stay on topic if your going to stay

[freetibet]

well why don't you take your idiotic hate somewhere else?

saying obama is the anti-christ and that religion causes suffering isn't going to accomplish anything. At least try to stay on topic if your going keep posting here.

[pkirk159]

im just tryng to say that they follow what they believe in.
and every religion is intolerant every religion thinks in some way that if you dont believe what they believe in than you deserve to burn in hell or whatever you believe.
and christians have done plenty of oppressing just like islamic and jewish people.