NationStates Jolt Archive

Seriously, I think its very stuid if your beliefs are somehow threatened to then drop the values you have in order to defend them. This is why religious extremeism leading to vilonce is stupid, these people want to defend Islam yet by killing both themselves and many others around them they are not adhearing to their beliefs. This is why I get annoyed with people claiming Mohammad would never have behaved like the suicide bombers. Mohammad prerached a religion of peace, love and understanding yet immidatley when he was threattened he droped those principals and went to kill all of those who were threatening him. He failed, in this regard, to practise what he preached. Jesus was far more logical in this regard. When Jesus's life was threatened, he simpley allowed them to kill him. He didn't resist and didn't try to stop them. Daniel did the same thing in the Old Testement, when Darius passed the order to make prayer to anyone other than him a criminal offence, Daniels beliefs were threatened. But what did he do? Did he go and kill Darius, or those who had set the rule up? No, he just prayed. I think you can clearly see that if you want to stand up for your beliefs, the last thing you should do is go against them.

(Imortant note: Here I'm not criticising Islam, I'm criticsing Mohammad, the two are vastly diffrent)

jolt

I agree. I think its horrible how there were all those corrupt popes too. :rolleyes:

I agree. I think its horrible how there were all those corrupt popes too. :rolleyes:

Exactly, the holy land was taken. Ok, so go back there as pilgrims, you dont need to millitarly control it.

You know what there are a lot of examples of people not "following" their beliefs in all religions. To single out one group while not looking at the faults of your own doesnt really make you look good. Instead of trying to point out the faults of others why not just look at whatever religion/belief you have and see the mistakes its made and try to learn from them. Christianity is far from spotless wheter it is catholicism or protestantism.

Exactly, the holy land was taken. Ok, so go back there as pilgrims, you dont need to millitarly control it.

actually it was a little more complicated than that. The muslims had taken over land that belonged to the byzantine empire ( eastern Rome). The Byzantine emperor asked the Pope for help, he sent vivid accounts of the abuse occuring to the christians in occupied lands(pilgrims being killed or robbed destruction of holy sites etc..), so the Pope sent help. At that time it didnt matter that there was a quarrel between east and west because most people saw their brotherhood in christ as more important than their theological or political problems. Knights lined up for service of Holy Mother Church. Some were more interested in fortune than protecting their christian brothers from the muslim invaders, but most so it as a just war to protect the innocent.

I think all I believe in is Entropy, and there's no point standing up for a belief like that...

No way. Doing what I say everyone should do takes way to much effort!

I agree. I think its horrible how there were all those corrupt popes too. :rolleyes:
wait a minute... i'm tired here so forgive me: you seriously think the popes and the curch weren't corrupt?? :confused:
a topic for another thread methinks



but as Gandhi said: "If you wish for change, you must be that change"

unfortunatley thats very hard for a communist to achieve in a non-communist political society :p (but i suppose this is more about religion anyway)



anyways im off to bed. night all :)

wait a minute... i'm tired here so forgive me: you seriously think the popes and the curch weren't corrupt?? :confused:
a topic for another thread methinks
Perhaps the sarcastic smiley should have tipped you off man. :rolleyes:

You know what there are a lot of examples of people not "following" their beliefs in all religions. To single out one group while not looking at the faults of your own doesnt really make you look good. Instead of trying to point out the faults of others why not just look at whatever religion/belief you have and see the mistakes its made and try to learn from them. Christianity is far from spotless wheter it is catholicism or protestantism.

I was examining the founders, and how in my opinion they radically differ

Perhaps the sarcastic smiley should have tipped you off man. :rolleyes:

You said they were, and added a sarcastic smiley, which could mean you think they weren't. It's overall a very confusing post.

I don't always adhere to the standards of my religion, much as I try to do so. Humans aren't perfect, by any measure, and I'm as imperfect as the next person. That's why I'd agree it's not right to decide on a set of standards and then punish anyone who doesn't conform to them - at least unless you're damn sure you can maintain them yourself. But that doesn't mean it's never helpful to outline a set of standards that you think might help people live better lives.

Offering is one thing. Enforcing is something else.

Fundamentalist Islam and Christianity try to enforce. They have 'rules' that you must follow or you will be damned/burned/tortured/whatever. More moderate versions of these religions can be guilty of this sort of coercion to a greater or lesser degree, simply because there is an all-powerful entity (not to mention an earthly clergy) waiting to judge you.

Buddhism, on the other hand (and I'm not saying Buddhism or Buddhists are perfect either, just that in this sense it fits the point I'm making), offers a set of principles and says you will be a better person if you adhere to them - but that when all's said and done the only person you must answer to for failure is yourself.

There is nothing wrong with setting standards for yourself, even if you don't always manage to maintain them. But as the OP suggests, if you wish to set standards for OTHERS, then you MUST be able to meet them yourself.

I agree. I think its horrible how there were all those corrupt popes too. :rolleyes:
Exactly, the holy land was taken. Ok, so go back there as pilgrims, you dont need to millitarly control it.nah,

Give them 3 months warning...and then...

JUST NUKE THE HOLY LAND...

NOHOLYLAND = NOPROBLEMO

enough... Christian crusades, Jewish terrorism, Muslim terrorism...Enough Already.

nah,

LETS NUKE THE HOLY LAND...

NOHOLYLAND = NOPROBLEMO

No...once we do that, we'll just have more problems.

Imagine the paperwork alone...

I was hoping someone would actually take what I was saying seriously. Oh well

I was hoping someone would actually take what I was saying seriously. Oh wellI'm sorry, I thought I had.

Besides, I wouldn't be too quick to assume that people like OceanDrive2 are joking. Based on my experience there are a lot of people who DO genuinely believe, for reasons I can't begin to fathom, that an act of obscene brutality such as 'nuking the Holy Land' would actually make things BETTER.