The difference of cousre is that Phelps is not in power of a nation/state. If he were then I imagine he would enact policy to kill homosexuals. This simply shows that Phelps does not have the support of mainstream Christianity were as the Islamists do (that of Muslims, not Christians obviously), which is an indication of the followers of the leaders not the leaders themselves. I consider any man who claims God kills those who do not follow/worship/whatever him (i.e 9/11 victims) to be comparible to those who say they have the authority to kill for God. A for no moral equivalence, do you consider support for terrorism to be morally equivalent to terrorism itself? If not fine, but if so you are by your own admission a sick person and a hypocrite.
Little Jimmy: I repeated Sachin's point in hopes that you read it and understand it. Stop trying to whitewash Muslim extremist violence and accept the reality of their actions. And yes, Christianity is a religion of peace. That is the topic of this thread and what it concerns; i.e., Muslim misunderstanding of the Pope's message... in addition to violence the fanatical Muslims are also largely illiterate as most took the comments out of context: Pope Benedict XVI "remarks came in a Sept. 12 lecture, "Faith, Reason and the University," at Germany's University of Regensburg. A former professor of theology at that university, the pope offered a scholarly rumination on the Greek origins of reason in Christianity. He quoted from a 14th-century dialogue between the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus and an "educated Persian" about the relationship between religion and violence. The context for that dialogue was the siege of Constantinople by the Ottomans."
I am not trying to "whitewash muslim extremist violence", it is evil and reprehensible in any form. I also agree that most Muslims have a great misunderstanding of what the pope said and their reaction is not helping matters in the slightest. My problem is that despite asking you three times you have refused to conmemn the actions of men who commit attrocities or preach hate in the name of Christianity. Just about everyone else responded woth condemnation of Rudolph but you have not. Why not? Is it that you have no problem with their actions and idealologies? So for a fourth time what is your view of James Charles Kopp and Eric Rudolph, their actions and beliefs? In your personal opinion, is violence towards gays or abortionists justified?
This reminds me of when the Da Vinci code came out. Catholics littered the streets of Roma and overturned cars and lit the streets ablaze. From Italia to the United States and thru Latin America Catholics threaten to kill Dan Brown and asked him to "convert or die". The barbaric catholics beheaded anyone with the last name of a crayola color and posted it on youtube. There have only been 5,000 terror attacks this decade in the name of Islam according to your fascist radio host Larry Elders. There have been 25,000 abortion clinics bombed by Christians in Little Rock, Arskansas alone. Eric Rudolph is proof that Christians are the real problem here, after he blew up that building all the Christians of Jesusland (aka the U.S.) were seen on CNN jumping up and down celebrating like the blacks did when the OJ verdict was read. My Uncle was an atheist and he died of liver failure, one can only assume this was no coincidence. Catholics and the Pope (Eddie too if you count his world cup performance) are the real problem in the world.
Again i am not trying to equate maistream Christianity with Rudolph just asking one poster on here to condemn Rudolph or stop condemning Muslim terrorist. I find your criticsm of Islamic fundamentalism to be justified as you willing renounced Rudolph and his actions and have an overall opposistion to terroists. Please try to understand that I am not in any way justifying Islamic extremism and terrosim. I am just concerned that in ITN appears to have no problem with terrorism when he shares the terrorists ideology (abortion is murder in this case). If he renounces Rudolph as you have I will gladly admit I was wrong and leave the discussion. Untill then I will continue to hold him in the same regard as the Muslims who will not condemn al Qaeda et al.
James Charles Kopp and Eric Rudolph were convinced by Satan that killing was the right thing to do. Why not? It certainly convinces some folks that true Christians are no better than the Islamic terrorists and therefore, hurts the Christian faith. But let’s not be naïve. The Bible has many cases of God taking out folks for various reasons. Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed for immoral acts committed. Pharaoh’s son was killed because Pharaoh would not set Moses’ people free. Job’s family was killed to prove the point that he was faithful to God no matter what adversity came his way. Not everyone that dies early in life is killed by God because of His vengeance. FYI- Christians die too! No one knows the reason for the innocent dying such as in a 9/11. Those that claim to know really don’t. And just because God has the authority to terminate life, does not mean we have the same authority. Your statement/belief in your post is too broad and not well thought out. God is God and we are not. Period. I would like to point out one vital difference between Islam, Judaism, and Christianity: Israeli commandos do not cite the Hebrew prophet Joshua as they go into battle, but Muslim insurgents can readily invoke the example of their Prophet, Muhammad, who was a military commander himself. And while the Crusaders may have fought with the cross on their shields, they did not — could not — cite words from Jesus to justify their slaughters.
You stated that wanting homosexuals to die has no moral equivalence to actually killing homosexuals. I am saying that by that logic wanting Americans to die in 9/11 etc has no moral equivalence to actually killing Americans in 9/11. Quite simply you believe that support for a crime has no moral equivalence to comitting that crime. I was just qondering whether you applied the same belief for terrorist supporters/sympathisers as you do for Phelps.
You seem to be making the assumption that: a, there is a God, despite there being no physical proof of a God b, this God has the ability to "terminate life" which again I can't see any real proof for c, that events in the old teatament should be interpreted literally rather than as metaphors to help people understand God Other than that I found your post to be well thought through and the last paragraph, in particular, to be a good assesment of the issue.
I have now asked you four times to condemn men who commited terrorist actions and four times you have refused to do so. My conclusion is that you are nothing more than a terrorist sympathiser who can talk big when it comes to Islamic terrorsim but goes missing when the issue of Christian terrorists is brought up. I suspect your issue is with Islam is general as you clearly have no problem with terrorists. So a few more questions (I don't expect you to answer them, but I'll try any way) Is it against God to blow up an abortion clinic? Is it against God to kill a homosexual? Have you ever partaken in either of the above acts? Do you consider those who do partake in these acts to be a good Christian? Just to be clear these questions are for IntheNet and IntheNet only. I wouldn't think for a minute that anyone else here shares his terrorist sympathies.
Ah, so that's your logic. Of course sympathizing with terrorists, no matter how beyond belief that could be, is not the same as engaging in terrorist activities. Both are reprehensible but there is an order of magnitude between thinking something and acting on said thoughts, WRT homosexuals and terroism.
I'm a Christian but I don't believe in literal interpretation of all biblical stories. The Cathoilic Church, for example, accepts that modern evolutionary theory means the creation story can not be true as it is in Genesis. So don't tell me Christians believe the bible must be interpreted literaly.
And I will continue to be untill IntheNet tells me blowing up abortion clinics is wrong and against Christianity. Surely I am not the only one here who finds his support for terrorism disturbing am I? I'm sorry if other people have trouble with me but when a guy essentially says "terrosrism is OK as long as it's not Muslims doing it", I get kind of angry. Also as a Christian I have a problem with anyone who claims to be a Christian finding murder of abortionists or homosexuals not to be against Christianity. I just get this awful feeling that had ITN been born in the Middle East rather than the US he would be one of the loudest shouting "Praise to Allah, death to the infedels".
Sorry pal, you're statements right here blow your cover. Good try, though. I've never seen a Christian that needs physical proof of God before. I see proof around me everyday. Also, you might want to look up the word "faith".
Patton insults Arabs: "It took me a long time to realize just how much a student of medieval history could gain from observing the Arab. ... It seems to me a certainty that the fatalistic teachings of Mohammed and the utter degradation of the Arab women are the outstanding causes for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have been developing." http://www.pattonhq.com/unknown/chap13.html
Where did I say I needed physical proof. I'm pretty sure what I said was there was no physical proof of a God. As for your above post, you contradict yourself, you say you see proof everyday while still bringing up the issue of "faith". Surely if you have proof of a God (which you claim to) it is not an issue of faith but of reason. Those with true faith concede there to be no physical proof of a God but chose to believe anyway for various reasons. I'd like some more information on exactly what the proof you see around you everyday is. Just a question, do you believe in the creation stories in Genesis (either of them, or both) or do you accept that modern science proves them to be myths? As for me not being a Christian, I can guarantee 100% to you I am. If you believe a Christian who critically analyzies aspects of the bible which cannot be true and of God's existence is less of a Christian than those who blindly believe what they are told, then I guess there are more similaritities between Christianity and Islam than I first thought.
No that is not true; I have faith and accept there is ample physical proof. If your faith is strong enough, which clearly it isn't young jimmy, then you don't need "proof". But just in case you need something tangible, try tomorrow's sunrise.
I think you'll find tomorrows sunrise to be a result of the Earth's rotation about its axis which allows the sun to be viewed only for part of the day. How this is proof to an existence of God is beyond me. Then again I suppose a several thousand year old book of myths is probably a greater authority than modern science so these really no point arguing with you. PS. When you blow up abortion clinics, what kind of explosives do you normally use?