Sinke, on Sep 21 2006, 08:22 PM, said:
Beefonthebone,
Quote
Distinct lack of Muslim examples at the end there - those with faith in Islam have brought as much peace and prosperity to the world, we in the West just tend not to have heard of them.
Actually, Muslim scholars were translators of Aristotle's writings, and the whole Europe owns them for having culture the way it is. Without Arabs, Aristotle could easily be forgotten and thanks to them the whole European history of thought was shaped, ( since somebody translated Arab translation ). We had some spin-offs and references to the text but we owe original form to Muslim scholars.
Well, would there be European culture as it is without Aristotle's writings?
Sinke, on Sep 21 2006, 08:22 PM, said:
As for the rest of discussion,
If it weren't for Christianity, it would be something else. People have tendency to connect moral values to their opinions, while in reality there is no such connection at all.
I must disagree. Moral values do have a lot to do with peoples' opinions and there are some patterns "sane" human mind follows.
Sinke, on Sep 21 2006, 08:22 PM, said:
But what I want to say, it is silly to apply extremism just on religion. Radical anarchists don't believe in God and they commit quite many vandalisms and intolerances- not just to Churches. Radical liberalism brought us to level that certain shops don't put "Merry Christmass" signs in their buildings- because some people don't believe in God but celebrate "Season" and therefore it is forbidden ( even politically incorrect) to celebrate religious day on religious way. Communism was prosecuting religious groups. Japanese fanatism for Emperor brought kamikaze on stage etc etc etc etc....
There I strongly agree. As some may know, I've been speaking on behalf of natural mix of nations, not unnaturally hasted globalization, which has brought different nations and cultures into same neighborhood. And those thinking now I'm racist: go ahead, think what you want, but then I rate some people with foreign roots that I know far higher than you. They accept me and my opinions, though they are all globalists.
Problem is, that like always nice thoughts, as equality, pacifism, world peace, you know the drill, they are only nice, not working. If people were to be united into homogenous megamix of cultures, it would actually need one culture conquering the whole world. Which, by the way, happens to be alternative modern warfare. War, which we've been in for centuries. Once it was driven with weapons, nowadays mostly with media.
Then greywolfie:
Quote
Being "radical" is a good thing, as it means that you're willing to sacrifice personal things for the greater good of God's glory and kingdom, be it donating money to missions efforts overseas, suffering the rejection of friends for constantly trying to witness to them, or anything else that might relate to that. Note that extreme violent actions are not even considered, as that goes against the very thing that Christians believe. Unfortunately, it would seem that some "Christians" have a rather warped view of the world, and some wish harm upon their enemies, although, as Tom mentioned, it goes against the very thing that they are supposed to represent. Some even take it to the extreme of violence, which I don't think the vast majority of Christians agree with, much less condone.
First of all, there have been made huge number of polls, revealing that not so small part of Catholics (ok, you're speaking of Christians, but still) support not so pacifistic resolutions and some do believe in crusades and that Israel was really promised to Jews by god. Point being, the Christian front isn't spotless.
Quote
I think the biggest problem is that most Christians are taking this to mean that they can't live how the Bible and Jesus himself instructed them to live, while everyone else sees the phrase "radical Christian" as interchangeable with "terrorist," which it *can* be.
Do you believe that Mohammed's writings were rewritten after his death? Do you know reason why? Out of curiosity, leading nicely to my next subject: how did catholicism evolve from jewish religion? Okay, I'm keeping it short: this is my opinion, of course and thus as valid as anyone elses - or so they say. What religions are? Why they exist? To control subjects? Yes. If ruling class(es) were able to get people afraid of unexplained things (dating possibly even to "invention" of fire) and get them believe that they could defend their subjects. Slowly these superstitions evolved to far more complex and priests (shamans, mages (no, not the ones in fantasy literature), whatever) gained power. Population grew, beliefs evolved and voilá, after all there were highly refined hierarchy of ruling classes, repressing weaker ones. Of course there was always also thought of afterlife and what happens then. Though that 7th, or whatever commandment it was, failed as you might see it. In truth (at least mine truth) it was excellently used afterwards. As social structures were incapable to maintain huge masses happy, death penalties - in the name of god of course - to wrong-doers reduced population growth. And now we're not speaking of 20th century death penalties, we're speaking of judgements without even a slightiest possibility for judged to defend himself. Not to mention Inquisition, witch hunts, etc. Excellent examples of how religions can drive people in to atrocities. As well as can certain ideologies.
If you didn't read the last paragraph to the end, you'd better read history and facts that even Vatican has approved true how Church has been used for politics in every century, in every decade (though about that I'm not sure how accurately Vatican has approved this true).
And to end this unholy Bible, I must say I'm not attacking any particular religion by above text. I attack every single religion existing, I'm only using Christianity because I assume it's best known here...
Amen.
...70 years... LOL
0
, that makes no sense.
