NationStates Jolt Archive

A church in Australia is putting up signs saying Jesus loves Osama and love your enemy. Why is Jesus cool with terrorists? Maybe he should be on a no-fly list or something.

http://www.wfmynews2.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=79108

I say that Jesus is either with us or against us.

:eek: Christians acting Christian!!??!?!? What the hell is going on?!?!?

This just in, President Bush has just come back from a meeting with God and God said he will send Jesus to his room and it was ok to consider Jesus a terrorist.

Bring it on, Jesus.

This just in, President Bush has just come back from a meeting with God and God said he will send Jesus to his room and it was ok to consider Jesus a terrorist.

I bet the long hair, beard, and his being middle eastern helped with the decision, too.

AH-HA! Nice try Libs, but what if he said to love BUSH (who I happen to hate)?
Also, Jesus was nice and all, but don't forget what happened to him. Do YOU want to be crucified?

Well, yes, the Christian way isn't to hold grudges, to put it lightly, but that goes without saying if you've ever read the New Testament.

Regardless though, I'm going to enjoy seeing the so-called Christians enter this thread going "oh nonono, that's not true", and we get to see how they pick and choose aspects of the bible to excuse their bigotry and hatred rather than actually believing anything Jesus said.

I do find the modern american bible-belt conception of Christ to be hilarious by the way, if only because it's nothing like he really was. All this damning of others, hatred, bigotry, and an exciting pro-war attitude. Jesus must have been the world's first redneck if their word is anything to go by.

Back on topic though: I should note however I'm a Christian myself. And while Osama is a criminal, I would agree that it's wrong to demonise him as inhuman, claim he's consigned to hell, and other such family orientated activities modern christians enjoy. But I don't think being Christian is a neccesity to understand this.

Well, yes, the Christian way isn't to hold grudges, to put it lightly, but that goes without saying if you've ever read the New Testament.

Regardless though, I'm going to enjoy seeing the so-called Christians enter this thread going "oh nonono, that's not true", and we get to see how they pick and choose aspects of the bible to excuse their bigotry and hatred rather than actually believing anything Jesus said.

I do find the modern american bible-belt conception of Christ to be hilarious by the way, if only because it's nothing like he really was. All this damning of others, hatred, bigotry, and an exciting pro-war attitude. Jesus must have been the world's first redneck if their word is anything to go by.

Back on topic though: I should note however I'm a Christian myself. And while Osama is a criminal, I would agree that it's wrong to demonise him as inhuman, claim he's consigned to hell, and other such family orientated activities modern christians enjoy. But I don't think being Christian is a neccesity to understand this.

Well, I don't really HATE Osama, but I sure-as-hell don't love him. I would probably just shoot him if I could, simple and easy.

AH-HA! Nice try Libs, but what if he said to love BUSH (who I happen to hate)?


I think lots of people already do love bush :D
*goes away*

book of matthew



43 "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
44 But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,
45 that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust.
46 For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same?
47 And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same?
48 So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.

book of matthew

Glad I'm not Christian. I like to be able to hate my enemies.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/JesusShades.gif +http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/binladen.gif = :fluffle:

Looks like someone finally remembered Jesus' message. Good! Now, if only there were more Christians like those.

who was it that said "i keep my friends close, but i keep my enemies closer"? jesus was just being sensible, there was no forgiveness going on.

:p

who was it that said "i keep my friends close, but i keep my enemies closer"? jesus was just being sensible, there was no forgiveness going on.

:p

Sun Tzu I believe.

Sun Tzu I believe.

right, great minds and all that...

Oh my god! Someone's actually following the Bible!

Another way to look at this:

What if the West would have had love and respect for Islam and the culture of the MidEast? Would there have been an Osama or a 9/11? Osama and his followers see a threat to Islam and their way of belief. That is the root cause of their movement. I would bet Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson would lead a Holy War if Christianity and the Western culture were under constant attack by a powerful people. Come to think about it, they and their followers ARE conducting a Holy War against people they see as trying to destroy western culture and attacking Christianity.

Another example:

What would happen if Israel and the Western powers would have love for the Palestinians instead of hate? What would happen if instead of investing in war in the MidEast the western powers would take that money and build the economy of Gaza? With the money they have given Israel to kill they could build roads, water supplies, electrical, schools, a port, etc., and then give micro loans to those wishing to start businesses. In 50 years Gaza could look like Hong Kong. And the fighting would be over. Instead 60 years have been spent trying to keep one people in poverty while subsidizing another people to make them a modern nation. If you were one of those in poverty, and you knew it was because of a hate of your religion and culture, would you not fight? And would you not use any weapon available, even if it were only rocks?

Hate breeds Hate. Love breeds Love. If someone hates you, one of the most disarming things to do is give them aid and respect. They are so stunned because they would not do the same for you.

An example:

Nearly every marriage councilor will tell the couple to start doing things they would do if they were in love rather than hate. Buy flowers, cook a favorite meal. do the things they did while dating. The actions of love then lead to the emotions of love. Replacing the actions of hate with the actions of love works. It has saved many marriages.

Another way to look at this:

What if the West would have had love and respect for Islam and the culture of the MidEast? Would there have been an Osama or a 9/11? Osama and his followers see a threat to Islam and their way of belief. That is the root cause of their movement. I would bet Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson would lead a Holy War if Christianity and the Western culture were under constant attack by a powerful people. Come to think about it, they and their followers ARE conducting a Holy War against people they see as trying to destroy western culture and attacking Christianity.

Another example:

What would happen if Israel and the Western powers would have love for the Palestinians instead of hate? What would happen if instead of investing in war in the MidEast the western powers would take that money and build the economy of Gaza? With the money they have given Israel to kill they could build roads, water supplies, electrical, schools, a port, etc., and then give micro loans to those wishing to start businesses. In 50 years Gaza could look like Hong Kong. And the fighting would be over. Instead 60 years have been spent trying to keep one people in poverty while subsidizing another people to make them a modern nation. If you were one of those in poverty, and you knew it was because of a hate of your religion and culture, would you not fight? And would you not use any weapon available, even if it were only rocks?

Hate breeds Hate. Love breeds Love. If someone hates you, one of the most disarming things to do is give them aid and respect. They are so stunned because they would not do the same for you.

An example:

Nearly every marriage councilor will tell the couple to start doing things they would do if they were in love rather than hate. Buy flowers, cook a favorite meal. do the things they did while dating. The actions of love then lead to the emotions of love. Replacing the actions of hate with the actions of love works. It has saved many marriages.

I agree with you and all that, but you're putting the responsibility on the wrong person. If I hated you, and you beat me to death with a baseball bat, and then some one came by and said "well, you should have loved..." wouldn't that be messed-up?
Plus, love won't do it, they have no morals. They depend on us to care about people, that's why they use human shields, and take hostages.
The truth is if we just sent over a bunch of sociopathes for soldiers, we would have won by now. So don't try to tell me our morals are to low, it's our sacrifice to hold on to them.

Jesus was nice and all, but don't forget what happened to him. Do YOU want to be crucified?

So... if we don't want to be crucified, we should be - dicks?

I agree with you and all that, but you're putting the responsibility on the wrong person. If I hated you, and you beat me to death with a baseball bat, and then some one came by and said "well, you should have loved..." wouldn't that be messed-up?
Plus, love won't do it, they have no morals. They depend on us to care about people, that's why they use human shields, and take hostages.
The truth is if we just sent over a bunch of sociopathes for soldiers, we would have won by now. So don't try to tell me our morals are to low, it's our sacrifice to hold on to them.
If only those "fighting the good fight" were holding onto the morals that our societies stand for!
That's the problem to begin with: Trying to do the right thing with the wrong means will never let you achieve your goals.

That is the problem.

So... if we don't want to be crucified, we should be - dicks?

Correct.

Correct.

I'll choose not to be a dick and take my chances, thanks.

A church in Australia is putting up signs saying Jesus loves Osama and love your enemy. Why is Jesus cool with terrorists? Maybe he should be on a no-fly list or something.

http://www.wfmynews2.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=79108

It's ok to love your enemies and still beat the shit out of them. Maybe even kill them too.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/JesusShades.gif +http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/binladen.gif = :fluffle:

Looks like someone finally remembered Jesus' message. Good! Now, if only there were more Christians like those.

Scientific investigation has concluded that the above equation is 100% accurate.

It's ok to love your enemies and still beat the shit out of them. Maybe even kill them too.
Ermm... right...

Wouldn't that really be considered killing them, which is the big number one on the Ten Commandments?

And don't give me any of that "don't murder, not don't kill" crap, because Europe has had The Bible for longer than the US, so your own translation means absolutely fuck all.

Well, I don't really HATE Osama, but I sure-as-hell don't love him. I would probably just shoot him if I could, simple and easy.

It's ok to love your enemies and still beat the shit out of them. Maybe even kill them too.

That sort of statement really says something about the character of the speaker...:rolleyes:

I've never been in favor of murdering someone when you can kick the shit out of him. That way you can come back for more fun the next Tuesday.

If you are Christian you are supposed to be kind to everyone. But that is really hard, isn't it? You are not going to go to Hell or anything if you hate someone.

Ermm... right...

Wouldn't that really be considered killing them, which is the big number one on the Ten Commandments?

And don't give me any of that "don't murder, not don't kill" crap, because Europe has had The Bible for longer than the US, so your own translation means absolutely fuck all.

Eh what that has to do with I have no idea but as everyone knows, the Europeans aren't the ones who made the Bible so they don't have monopoly on its proper translation. That would be the Israelis.
Speaking of Europe and the Bible, it sure did them a lot of good over the thousands of years they went all over the place butchering billions of innocent people.

AH-HA! Nice try Libs, but what if he said to love BUSH (who I happen to hate)?
Also, Jesus was nice and all, but don't forget what happened to him. Do YOU want to be crucified?

Many Christians have this thing I like to call a "persecution complex", in which they think they are being persecuted against. Of course they aren't, but they love to think it. If they were actually being persecuted, I would suspect the number of Christians in the world to plummet.

A tangent.

That sort of statement really says something about the character of the speaker...:rolleyes:

Par for the course here in NSG on both sides, I'm afraid, amigo.

Ermm... right...

Wouldn't that really be considered killing them, which is the big number one on the Ten Commandments?

And don't give me any of that "don't murder, not don't kill" crap, because Europe has had The Bible for longer than the US, so your own translation means absolutely fuck all.

Does "do not kill" include terrorists? By my standerds, they aren't humans, after all we kill bacteria every time we breath. And after all, killing them will save other people from being killed, thereby helping the Ten Commandments. And I also suscribe to the philosophy that people in general should follow morals, but a leader who follows them over the good of others is selfish. Politics change everything. If a guy has to go to hell for the greater good then so be it.

Jesus doesn't love you, but:

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i80/TerroristCakes/jesusthinksyourehot2.jpg

That sort of statement really says something about the character of the speaker...:rolleyes:

Well, do you eat meat? Ergo you must hate the cow or whatever? After all, anyone who would slaghter something, and eat it when there are plenty of other meals to choose from MUST hate it.
Hate's a tough thing. If I didn't kill him, then I would be hating the people who he would/could later kill.

Eh what that has to do with I have no idea but as everyone knows, the Europeans aren't the ones who made the Bible so they don't have monopoly on its proper translation. That would be the Israelis.
Yes, well since the original text has been bastardised a million times over, but until a couple of hundred years ago it was "thou shalt not kill", I think we're in the right about this one.

My point still stands, though, that you can't kill anyone if you're a Christian. That's not really on.
Speaking of Europe and the Bible, it sure did them a lot of good over the thousands of years they went all over the place butchering billions of innocent people.
I didn't say I like the Bible ffs. On another note entirely, we didn't butcher billions of people over it, simply because until the Industrial Revolution and urbanisation of the mid 19th century, there weren't billions of people around.

And the mods have struck again. They've replaced my well thought out title, "If this is true Jeusus is a dick" to "Jesus is a naughty boy".

Does "do not kill" include terrorists? By my standerds, they aren't humans.
Yes, well your standards are very wrong indeed. They're people, albeit often misguided ones.

And the mods have struck again. They've replaced my well thought out title, "If this is true Jeusus is a dick" to "Jesus is a naughty boy".

Must...resist...Life of Brian...quote...

Must...resist...Life of Brian...quote...

ROFL.

Must...resist...Life of Brian...quote...

Heh. That's actually where I got the idea from. I figured I had to change it to something G-rated since the new standard for titles is higher than the standard for post content, but it could still be humorous and eye-catching.

NationStates Forum Moderator
HotRodia

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. ~Mahatma Ghandi.

While I don't love Osama, I certanly don't hate him, nor should any of us. He's our enemy, and we can defend ourselves, but we should respect and honor our enemies.

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. ~Mahatma Ghandi.

While I don't love Osama, I certanly don't hate him, nor should any of us. He's our enemy, and we can defend ourselves, but we should respect and honor our enemies.

What's wrong with hate? Hate can motivate you to destroy your enemies. Some people, like Bin Laden, need destroying.

Hate if you want to hate
If it keeps you safe
If it makes you brave -Soundgarden, My Wave

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. ~Mahatma Ghandi.

While I don't love Osama, I certanly don't hate him, nor should any of us. He's our enemy, and we can defend ourselves, but we should respect and honor our enemies.

I agree with respecting and honoring conventional enemies, but he has the thought pattern of Hitler (but not the capability) and does not deserve such treatment. Rommel maybe, but not Osama.

New idea for the title: "If this is True, Jesus was a Terrorist."

Yes, well since the original text has been bastardised a million times over, but until a couple of hundred years ago it was "thou shalt not kill", I think we're in the right about this one.

My point still stands, though, that you can't kill anyone if you're a Christian. That's not really on.

I didn't say I like the Bible ffs. On another note entirely, we didn't butcher billions of people over it, simply because until the Industrial Revolution and urbanisation of the mid 19th century, there weren't billions of people around.

Prove the Bible has been radically altered millions of times.

Even the days when the Bible was being written, the people who wrote it were engaged in killing. Even they believed that it only prohibited murder, not killing in self or national defense. The people who put the commandments in the scripture constantly killed people in self defense or in national defense.
The interpretation of the people who wrote the commandments seems to differ from yours.

But as soon as you got the chance you proceeded to, it took took me to stop you from killing all the jews, natives, gays, and blacks.

What's wrong with hate? Hate can motivate you to destroy your enemies. Some people, like Bin Laden, need destroying.

Hate if you want to hate
If it keeps you safe
If it makes you brave -Soundgarden, My Wave

Hate renders one irrational, violent and cruel, it clings hold of you and it doesn't let go without a fight. Anger, perhaps, is a passing emotion useful for motivation in battle, whose only side effects are crimes of rage. Hate, however, leads you to cold, calculated evil. It's a disease. If one can't be courageous or safe without hatred, one shouldn't be asked for either.

Yes, well your standards are very wrong indeed. They're people, albeit often misguided ones.

If they threaten to kill you or your relatives then you have the right to kill them. It's called pre emptive self defense.

Hate renders one irrational, violent and cruel, it clings hold of you and it doesn't let go without a fight. Anger, perhaps, is a passing emotion useful for motivation in battle, whose only side effects are crimes of rage. Hate, however, leads you to cold, calculated evil. It's a disease. If one can't be courageous or safe without hatred, one shouldn't be asked for either.

That's just silly. Hate can motivate you over a long period of time. Anger fades. As long as what you hate is truly worthy of hate you won't be "evil".

I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ. ~Mahatma Ghandi.

While I don't love Osama, I certanly don't hate him, nor should any of us. He's our enemy, and we can defend ourselves, but we should respect and honor our enemies.

You want me to respect and give honor to someone who wants to kill me? You got to be kidding.

I agree with respecting and honoring conventional enemies, but he has the thought pattern of Hitler (but not the capability) and does not deserve such treatment. Rommel maybe, but not Osama.

New idea for the title: "If this is True, Jesus was a Terrorist."

That's what makes us different from him and from Hitler. We are immeasurably better than either of them especially because we won't stoop to their level - we admit or at least should admit that all men, even the most vile of men, are men and thus have their rights and should be respected.

Does "do not kill" include terrorists? By my standerds, they aren't humans,

By God's standards, they are. In reality, they are. So you're own little made up standards mean nothing in a debate as to weather or not Christians can hate and kill their enemies.

Is the debate "does the Parkus Empire think it's ok for people to hate and kill terroists?" No. It's not. So you lose.


I agree with respecting and honoring conventional enemies, but he has the thought pattern of Hitler (but not the capability) and does not deserve such treatment. Rommel maybe, but not Osama.

God didn't quantify, why do you think you can?

If they threaten to kill you or your relatives then you have the right to kill them. It's called pre emptive self defense.

Not according the to the US government. There was a case near the start of the Iraq invasion in which a man, knowing that another man was looking for him to kill him, sought out and killed the other man first. He was charged with murder and sent to jail, where he resides to this day, and will do so for 20-life.

I agree with you and all that, but you're putting the responsibility on the wrong person. If I hated you, and you beat me to death with a baseball bat, and then some one came by and said "well, you should have loved..." wouldn't that be messed-up?
Plus, love won't do it, they have no morals. They depend on us to care about people, that's why they use human shields, and take hostages.
The truth is if we just sent over a bunch of sociopathes for soldiers, we would have won by now. So don't try to tell me our morals are to low, it's our sacrifice to hold on to them.

First, they (Islam) does have morals, the culture is just different, the religion is much the same as Christianity. Just as they have a "religious right" that warps their religion into one of hate, so do we.

Second, when dealing with Osama we have to think how they would have to deal with a Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson who also claim to have morals while hiring the US military to kill those that believe different than they do. Since Osama doesn't have an army to hire to attack those that are trying to destroy his religion and his culture, he hires those that use a different type of warfare. One man's army is another man's terrorist.

Third, anybody who's been in combat will tell you that a sociopath with a rifle is not a bad thing when you are in an insane situation. They don't hesitate to pull the trigger. Most sane soldiers do. That's why when they find a mass murderer in the real world, usually he is a "war hero".

Fourth, when you find someone who hates you, and you would rather they not hit you with a baseball bat, if you do something kind to or for them it will make it much harder for them to swing the bat. Going back to my original example, if the west would have spent the last 60 years respecting Islam and the culture of the MidEast, and building the Palestinian lands equal to the Israeli lands, it would have been far more difficult for them to do a 9/11. Instead, we ridicule a culture that gave the world most of it's food, most of the basis for civilization, and a religion that worships the same God as they worship. Isn't it strange the conservatives of both religions have a God of peace and love but worship hate and death.

A church in Australia is putting up signs saying Jesus loves Osama and love your enemy. Why is Jesus cool with terrorists? Maybe he should be on a no-fly list or something.

http://www.wfmynews2.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=79108

Your title got modded.

Surely Jesus must hate something!

Surely Jesus must hate something!

God is love

First, they (Islam) does have morals, the culture is just different, the religion is much the same as Christianity. Just as they have a "religious right" that warps their religion into one of hate, so do we.

Second, when dealing with Osama we have to think how they would have to deal with a Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson who also claim to have morals while hiring the US military to kill those that believe different than they do. Since Osama doesn't have an army to hire to attack those that are trying to destroy his religion and his culture, he hires those that use a different type of warfare. One man's army is another man's terrorist.

Third, anybody who's been in combat will tell you that a sociopath with a rifle is not a bad thing when you are in an insane situation. They don't hesitate to pull the trigger. Most sane soldiers do. That's why when they find a mass murderer in the real world, usually he is a "war hero".

Fourth, when you find someone who hates you, and you would rather they not hit you with a baseball bat, if you do something kind to or for them it will make it much harder for them to swing the bat. Going back to my original example, if the west would have spent the last 60 years respecting Islam and the culture of the MidEast, and building the Palestinian lands equal to the Israeli lands, it would have been far more difficult for them to do a 9/11. Instead, we ridicule a culture that gave the world most of it's food, most of the basis for civilization, and a religion that worships the same God as they worship. Isn't it strange the conservatives of both religions have a God of peace and love but worship hate and death.

I am NOT critizing a religion. I once contemplated converting to Islam. The fact remains, that it was not just the last 60 years, it was the last 1000 or more. And don't you dare tell me mass-murders are heroes here. With the way we treat SUSPECTED soldier-murderers you have got to be kidding. If they barge in a on a bunch of terrorists who have guns in the house, and shoot them they get tried.
And that cock-and-bull about killing people because they are Muslim is retarded. Terrorists sure-as-hell target Christians, but unless they are acually shooting at us, our troops have virtually NO power to fight.
If you were debating during WWII, it's not entirely unlikely you would say Hitler was defending himself from the evil Jews.

Surely Jesus must hate something!

Hate. :D

they aren't humans,

I wanna be an airborne ranger
I wanna live a life of danger
I wanna go to Viet Nam
I wanna kill an evil Cong......


This is how the military gets soldiers to kill. All nations do it. There has never been a human killed in war in the history of mankind. We've killed redcoats, krauts, nips, gooks, cong, ragheads....... and they have killed yankees, limeys, etc...

No mother teaches her child to kill a human. Not even Osama's. So part of the training is to give the enemy a name that isn't human. And that is also what the leaders do to their populations. They give the enemy the face of evil so the population will support the war. So Osama gives the west nonhuman names and the west gives all of Islam and the MidEast nonhuman names. And both do it in the name of a loving God.

And that my friends is how war is able to happen.

I won't even bother...

I wanna be an airborne ranger
I wanna live a life of danger
I wanna go to Viet Nam
I wanna kill an evil Cong......


This is how the military gets soldiers to kill. All nations do it. There has never been a human killed in war in the history of mankind. We've killed redcoats, krauts, nips, gooks, cong, ragheads....... and they have killed yankees, limeys, etc...

No mother teaches her child to kill a human. Not even Osama's. So part of the training is to give the enemy a name that isn't human. And that is also what the leaders do to their populations. They give the enemy the face of evil so the population will support the war. So Osama gives the west nonhuman names and the west gives all of Islam and the MidEast nonhuman names. And both do it in the name of a loving God.

And that my friends is how war is able to happen.

I have to agree. And what I meant to say is that they are human, but by their actions they lose the rights that come with being a human. I wish it were the good ol' days when you knew your enemy had morals, just like you. You knew you were fighting a war over something stupid, and you fought, because it was your duty, but you didn't HATE your enemy.

I am NOT critizing a religion. I once contemplated converting to Islam. The fact remains, that it was not just the last 60 years, it was the last 1000 or more. And don't you dare tell me mass-murders are heroes here. With the way we treat SUSPECTED soldier-murderers you have got to be kidding. If they barge in a on a bunch of terrorists who have guns in the house, and shoot them they get tried.
And that cock-and-bull about killing people because they are Muslim is retarded. Terrorists sure-as-hell target Christians, but unless they are acually shooting at us, our troops have virtually NO power to fight.
If you were debating during WWII, it's not entirely unlikely you would say Hitler was defending himself from the evil Jews.

Over recorded history Europe and western culture has been the most waring group in the world. The Mid East has been relatively peaceful. Admittedly a peace forced by the Roman Empire, followed by the Byzantine Empire, followed by the Ottoman Empire. In fact most wars in the MidEast have had roots in Europe and western culture. The present war is an extension of the West following WW1, and WW2.

Who killed more, "terrorists" on 9/11 or US bombs? "Terrorists" on 9/11 or US machines in the hands of Israel? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Remember the US fighting the British were the first guerrilla terrorists. Or is it patriots?

And yes, as defined by Hitler, the Jews were evil non humans. But then so were French, English, Russians and Americans. And the Germans were rotten cabbage. That is the rhetoric of war.

Well, yes, the Christian way isn't to hold grudges, to put it lightly, but that goes without saying if you've ever read the New Testament.

Regardless though, I'm going to enjoy seeing the so-called Christians enter this thread going "oh nonono, that's not true", and we get to see how they pick and choose aspects of the bible to excuse their bigotry and hatred rather than actually believing anything Jesus said.

I do find the modern american bible-belt conception of Christ to be hilarious by the way, if only because it's nothing like he really was. All this damning of others, hatred, bigotry, and an exciting pro-war attitude. Jesus must have been the world's first redneck if their word is anything to go by.

Back on topic though: I should note however I'm a Christian myself. And while Osama is a criminal, I would agree that it's wrong to demonise him as inhuman, claim he's consigned to hell, and other such family orientated activities modern christians enjoy. But I don't think being Christian is a neccesity to understand this.

Yeah. It amazes me how many Christians whine and cry about how much they hate hippies, while their Saviour was a hippie himself. :p

Over recorded history Europe and western culture has been the most waring group in the world. The Mid East has been relatively peaceful. Admittedly a peace forced by the Roman Empire, followed by the Byzantine Empire, followed by the Ottoman Empire. In fact most wars in the MidEast have had roots in Europe and western culture. The present war is an extension of the West following WW1, and WW2.

Who killed more, "terrorists" on 9/11 or US bombs? "Terrorists" on 9/11 or US machines in the hands of Israel? One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Remember the US fighting the British were the first guerrilla terrorists. Or is it patriots?

And yes, as defined by Hitler, the Jews were evil non humans. But then so were French, English, Russians and Americans. And the Germans were rotten cabbage. That is the rhetoric of war.

Gee, did American "terrorists" kill 3000 British civilians?

And the mods have struck again. They've replaced my well thought out title, "If this is true Jeusus is a dick" to "Jesus is a naughty boy".

The new title gives me the oogies.

::shudders::

Personally, I think the bible is pure bollocks from start to finish... However, I must say it's pretty funny to see yanks try to find "loopholes" in the ten commandments.

Gee, did American "terrorists" kill 3000 British civilians?

Probably, I don't have a count. Remember every civilian killed was a British citizen. It must have been enough that there was a mass of refugees that fled to Canada.

Well, do you eat meat? Ergo you must hate the cow or whatever? After all, anyone who would slaghter something, and eat it when there are plenty of other meals to choose from MUST hate it.
Hate's a tough thing. If I didn't kill him, then I would be hating the people who he would/could later kill.

Unless you are planning on eating Bin Laden, then your analogy is faulty. As omnivores, humans eat meat.

If they threaten to kill you or your relatives then you have the right to kill them. It's called pre emptive self defense.

Obviously not a christian, then. Turn the other cheek, and all that.

That's just silly. Hate can motivate you over a long period of time. Anger fades. As long as what you hate is truly worthy of hate you won't be "evil".

And the one who decides whether they are truly worthy of hate would be......? Right.

That's what makes us different from him and from Hitler. We are immeasurably better than either of them especially because we won't stoop to their level - we admit or at least should admit that all men, even the most vile of men, are men and thus have their rights and should be respected.

Gitmo. nuff said

Gee, did American "terrorists" kill 3000 British civilians?

WWII internment camps for the Oriental.

There's no use attempting to strive for moral high ground when the debate is over who has more right to kill the other guy. It's just silly.

Probably, I don't have a count. Remember every civilian killed was a British citizen. It must have been enough that there was a mass of refugees that fled to Canada.

You mean every soldier?

Unless you are planning on eating Bin Laden, then your analogy is faulty. As omnivores, humans eat meat.



Obviously not a christian, then. Turn the other cheek, and all that.



And the one who decides whether they are truly of hate would be......? Right.



Gitmo. nuff said



WWII internment camps for the Oriental.

There's no use attempting to strive for moral high ground when the debate is over who has more right to kill the other guy. It's just silly.

Humans have a choice whether or not to eat meat. If you want to put us on par with the animals, then why would you blame anyone for wanton killing.

I, personally am not a Christian.

Hate is a personal grudge agaist a person, group, country, object ,ect.

FDR was a moron. I don't know what his actions have to do with fighting terrorists, and as dumb as he was, I don't recall him executing any Japanese-American civilians.

Humans have a choice whether or not to eat meat. If you want to put us on par with the animals, then why would you blame anyone for wanton killing.

It was not I who made the analogy, and you just made the point I was getting at, with the exception of the fact that eating meat is NOT a choice. It a biological imperative. You need the proteins to survive and be properly healthy. There are alternatives, yes, but they are not as rich in the supplements as natural meat.

I, personally am not a Christian.

That comment was directed at USOA. I think you mentioned earlier that you weren't.

Hate is a personal grudge agaist a person, group, country, object ,ect.

Misspeak on my part. I neglected to include the word "worthy". Worthy of hate.

FDR was a moron.

I won't argue that.

I don't know what his actions have to do with fighting terrorists,

Nothing. It has everything to do with terrorizing innocent civilians.

and as dumb as he was, I don't recall him executing any Japanese-American civilians.

That don't mean it didn't happen. I couldn't say for sure that it did, but there were scores, if not hundreds or thousands of families torn apart and imprisoned by the American gov't when their only crime was being oriental. Change that to a bunch of white people being terrified of another bomb going off in their city when all they did was be white. There's definitely some similiarities to be had.

All I'm saying is that there's no progress to be made by trying to morally or religiously justify hatred or actions of hate. That goes for all sides of the conflict, not just the american. Saying that you are morally justified in killing somebody because he has killed in the past or will kill in the future is silly. The numbers involved are irrelevant to morality. I will not argue the occassional unfortunate necessity of killing, but I cannot justify it morally.

And the mods have struck again. They've replaced my well thought out title, "If this is true Jeusus is a dick" to "Jesus is a naughty boy".

:eek:

INNUENDO!

It was not I who made the analogy, and you just made the point I was getting at, with the exception of the fact that eating meat is NOT a choice. It a biological imperative. You need the proteins to survive and be properly healthy. There are alternatives, yes, but they are not as rich in the supplements as natural meat.



That comment was directed at USOA. I think you mentioned earlier that you weren't.



Misspeak on my part. I neglected to include the word "worthy". Worthy of hate.



I won't argue that.



Nothing. It has everything to do with terrorizing innocent civilians.



That don't mean it didn't happen. I couldn't say for sure that it did, but there were scores, if not hundreds or thousands of families torn apart and imprisoned by the American gov't when their only crime was being oriental. Change that to a bunch of white people being terrified of another bomb going off in their city when all they did was be white. There's definitely some similiarities to be had.

All I'm saying is that there's no progress to be made by trying to morally or religiously justify hatred or actions of hate. That goes for all sides of the conflict, not just the american. Saying that you are morally justified in killing somebody because he has killed in the past or will kill in the future is silly. The numbers involved are irrelevant to morality. I will not argue the occassional unfortunate necessity of killing, but I cannot justify it morally.

Then we have an accord. Except health-wise. I'm sure there are PLENTY of healthy vegetarians out there. As a-matter-of-fact a lot of them do it for health reasons. Omnivores can eat either meat, or not. They don't need both, but it won't kill them to have both.

A church in Australia is putting up signs saying Jesus loves Osama and love your enemy. Why is Jesus cool with terrorists? Maybe he should be on a no-fly list or something.

http://www.wfmynews2.com/news/watercooler/article.aspx?storyid=79108

I think that what they're saying is that we should not be hating these people. No one is condoning their actions; they are simply trying to keep us from harbouring hate against these people. What terrorists do is wrong, but yelling at them isn't going to convince them of that. A kind word turns away wrath, and all that.

Well, I don't really HATE Osama, but I sure-as-hell don't love him. I would probably just shoot him if I could, simple and easy.

Of course, the question isn't do you love him, but does Christ love him. To claim that because what someone does provokes anger in ordinary mortals that must mean it would also prompt Jesus to revoke his love of that person is not only myopic, but also blasphemous. Many right-wing Christians hold exactly that myopic, blasphemous, view.

For example, there was a guy on Real Time with Bill Maher who was asked to justify his belief in the death penalty from a Christian perspective. He responded that people on death row were horrible people who did horrible things. That's a mortal perspective, not a Christian one. The fact that it's espoused by a self-proclaimed Christian does not itself make the statement Christian.

Gee, did American "terrorists" kill 3000 British civilians?

If you define "British" during the American Revolution as the self-proclaimed Loyalists, and the "American 'terrorists'" as the irregular forces of the self-proclaimed Patriots then I'd wager they killed many more. Patriots did use terrorism to punish loyalist civilians.

And now, American forces have killed many thousands of Iraqi civilians, so we're not much nicer now.

Whoever it was who lobbied to get the title of this thread changed is lame beyond all believable bounds...

Whoever it was who lobbied to get the title of this thread changed is lame beyond all believable bounds...

I don't think anyone lobbied. Hot Rodia saw it and changed it. Thread titles have to be G- Rated.

I don't think anyone lobbied. Hot Rodia saw it and changed it. Thread titles have to be G- Rated.

But "Dick" is a relatively polite, dare I say it, "G-Rated" euphemism for penis - which in and of itself isn't a particularly rude word anyway.

Prudes.

Edit: and "naughty boy"? Give me a break, it changes the meaning of the thread title.

But "Dick" is a relatively polite, dare I say it, "G-Rated" euphemism for penis - which in and of itself isn't a particularly rude word anyway.

Prudes.

I dunno. This new title is down right unnerving. It sounds like Jesus got caught with an alterboy in the broom closet.

I know it's a life of Brian quote, but out of context it just sounds wrong.

I think the conservatives need to be congratulated for supposedly being 'Christian' and warmongering at the same time yet not spontaneously exploding from the manifest hypocrisy.

I don't see any meaning to this thread.

It is possible to kill someone and not hate them....

And love them.

I know it's a life of Brian quote, but out of context it just sounds wrong.

Ludicrous, more like. My single-greatest objection to this ongoing censorship is that the resulting re-named threads always seem to come out of it sounding terribly lame. Evidently being a Mod doesn't mean you're necessarily possessed of much in the way of wit.

Malheureusement.

You mean every soldier?

No I'm talking of civilians. At the start of the war less that half were in favor. By the end it was a little more than half. There were great and emotional divisions in the colonies. There were crimes of each side against the other. This was a classic civil war. Even in "battlefields" civilians were in the line of fire. Since the Americans didn't fight a conventional war this was a war that involved the civilian population. Under the customs of war they should have lined up in an open field and fired at each other until one side withdrew. This would have protected the civilians as was done in Europe. Instead by using guerrilla tactics, they involved civilians. And the British used tactics to counter this kind of war that also involved civilians. Hence, the third amendment. Also as noted above, there was a mass exodus of patriotic British citizens to Canada and to a lesser extent to British lands in the Caribbean. These people left for fear of their lives among former friends and neighbors. I'm sure there were atrocities as there always are in civil wars. But the winner isn't going to record them in history.

snip
Not replying to your post, just wanting to comment on your stats:
Jolter
New Member

Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 15
Wtf! 32 months you've been here and you've paid 15 posts!
That's one every 9 weeks!
Amazing.

How do you keep yourself so restrained?
I'll check back in a couple of months for your reply.

Jesus is a great bloke, he loves everyone.

But "Dick" is a relatively polite, dare I say it, "G-Rated" euphemism for penis - which in and of itself isn't a particularly rude word anyway.

Prudes.

Edit: and "naughty boy"? Give me a break, it changes the meaning of the thread title.

I thought it was going to be some crackpot story about Jesus sleeping with Mary Magdalene.

And "dick" really isn't a rude word... not even in America, where we really don't mind saying that our vice prez is a Dick.... :p

Not according the to the US government. There was a case near the start of the Iraq invasion in which a man, knowing that another man was looking for him to kill him, sought out and killed the other man first. He was charged with murder and sent to jail, where he resides to this day, and will do so for 20-life.

Are you sure it was the US government and not the socialist republic of California? That is something that California would do rather than the federal government.

Wtf! 32 months you've been here and you've paid 15 posts!
That's one every 9 weeks!
Amazing.

I think we've found the ultimate forum lurker; the one all lurkers aspire to be.

I think we've found the ultimate forum lurker; the one all lurkers aspire to be.

Lurkers<puppets<idiots<trolls<spammers<master debators.

:)

Lurkers<puppets<idiots<trolls<spammers<master debators.

:)

an our Pancake Queen

well i guess if he forgave a man who sold his life for 30 pieces of silver, a man who hammered nails through his wrists, a man who stuck a spear in his side and two murderers who happened to be in the area like, he probably doesn't get what the fuss over Bin laden is about?

well i guess if he forgave a man who sold his life for 30 pieces of silver, a man who hammered nails through his wrists, a man who stuck a spear in his side and two murderers who happened to be in the area like, he probably doesn't get what the fuss over Bin laden is about?There is no need of forgiveness. And Jesus sucks, no matter how you look at it.

BTW, if Jesus is Mary's child, and if Jesus is a god, and if Mary got pregnant by that god, isn't Jesus a mf ?

an our Pancake Queen

Queen? Nah, just the Pancake :)

BTW, if Jesus is Mary's child, and if Jesus is a god, and if Mary got pregnant by that god, isn't Jesus a mf ?

Also a violator of the temporal principle. Which is impossible by both general and special relativity and quantum mechanics. Which proves that it's all fake, so Osama is just another nutter with too much money and resources.
KILL THE RICH NUTTERS!!!!!!!!:sniper: :gundge: :mp5:

Also a violator of the temporal principle. Which is impossible by both general and special relativity and quantum mechanics. Which proves that it's all fake, so Osama is just another nutter with too much money and resources.
KILL THE RICH NUTTERS!!!!!!!!:sniper: :gundge: :mp5:

Either that, or Mary was not a virgin. :eek:

Queen? Nah, just the Pancake :)

ok but what about Queen of :fluffle: :fluffle:

ok but what about Queen of :fluffle: :fluffle:

I am the NS Goddess of Pancakes, confused genders, the bullied, and incessant fluffle spam. :fluffle::fluffle: It says so in my sig. :fluffle::fluffle:

:fluffle:

Either that, or Mary was not a virgin. :eek:

Yes - the mucky little slapper.

I am the NS Goddess of Pancakes, confused genders, the bullied, and incessant fluffle spam. :fluffle::fluffle: It says so in my sig. :fluffle::fluffle:

:fluffle:

ha the sig must check it more then i do :) :cool:

Someone say sumat ded cleva den like wot i did - or U all thick? Im clevera then wot U r. I 8 usame 2 u no.:(

Someone say sumat ded cleva den like wot i did - or U all thick? Im clevera then wot U r. I 8 usame 2 u no.:(

:confused:

The hell?

Someone say sumat ded cleva den like wot i did - or U all thick? Im clevera then wot U r. I 8 usame 2 u no.:(

But can you back that up with obervable evidence?

But can you back that up with obervable evidence?

Of course. But I don't want to. My mystery is my strength.

Of course. But I don't want to. My mystery is my strength.

You're the Father?! :eek:

of jesus, nitwits :rolleyes:

Incest ftw. :p

Self-incest...where did his DNA pattern come from?

just blame Canada

just blame Canada

That's a bit unfair - haven't they got enough to worry about as it is?

Self-incest...where did his DNA pattern come from?

Ummm.....

gun smileys?

just blame Canada

No.

Blame Clinton. :p

Self-incest...where did his DNA pattern come from?Mary caught some semen coming in by the window...
she bop, you know...

That's a bit unfair - haven't they got enough to worry about as it is?
how would i know i live on the other side of the world
No.

Blame Clinton. :p

which one ,the one who want to take over Gods job or the sex up one

Mary caught some semen coming in by the window...
she bop, you know...
Bitchkitten had this to say in the region I'm in...
...Mary didn't have an immaculate conception. She got her kink on with a little lamb.

Bitchkitten had this to say in the region I'm in...

you know what they call that :eek:

Bitchkitten had this to say in the region I'm in...
Is that the same Mary?

Ummm.....

gun smileys?

Lol! Do I detect a note of sarcasm? Well founded if so. No but really, If Jesus was the son of god, he would have to grow up, travel back in time to impregnate his mother, and so again - where did the DNA come from for the sperm? And I know it wasn't those ever helpful gun smileys - they were busy healing lepers somewhere else.

Is that the same Mary?
Ask Bitchkitten. :p

But if you ask me, I'll assume Yes.

Lol! Do I detect a note of sarcasm? Well founded if so. No but really, If Jesus was the son of god, he would have to grow up, travel back in time to impregnate his mother, and so again - where did the DNA come from for the sperm? And I know it wasn't those ever helpful gun smileys - they were busy healing lepers somewhere else.

Jesus is Chuck Norris! :eek:

Jesus is Chuck Norris! :eek:

Really? I did wonder why dumb-fuck rednecks felt such a kinship with him. (not that I'ld actually say that to His face if he was good ole Chucky)

Really? I did wonder why dumb-fuck rednecks felt such a kinship with him. (not that I'ld actually say that to His face if he was good ole Chucky)

:D

:D

Ok then. I can see you've done this before. If you don't want to contribute to a reasonable debate then perhaps you should let some other normal people talk. After all, you wouldn't catch me saying stupid nonsense just to provoke a response.:( (;) )

Ok then. I can see you've done this before. If you don't want to contribute to a reasonable debate then perhaps you should let some other normal people talk. After all, you wouldn't catch me saying stupid nonsense just to provoke a response.:( (;) )

You don't want to be my friend anymore? :(

You don't want to be my friend anymore? :(

I don't know - I've never had a friend before. My interest in pustulating sores tends to put people off.

I don't know - I've never had a friend before. My interest in pustulating sores tends to put people off.

You see! now no-one wants to talk to me!

I'll go away now. I know when I'm not wanted. B*******s. You see if I care . . . . chunter chunter chunter...............

Drugs should be illegal... :rolleyes:

:eek: Christians acting Christian!!??!?!? What the hell is going on?!?!?

OH NOOOO!!!!!!!

I'll go away now. I know when I'm not wanted. B*******s. You see if I care . . . . chunter chunter chunter...............

Bye!

To quote bash:

I love God, he's great. It's his fanclub I can't stand.

To quote bash:

I love God, he's great. It's his fanclub I can't stand.No. The god is just like the fanclub that fabricated him.

But "Dick" is a relatively polite, dare I say it, "G-Rated" euphemism for penis - which in and of itself isn't a particularly rude word anyway.

Prudes.

Edit: and "naughty boy"? Give me a break, it changes the meaning of the thread title.

If you think you have a case, just challenge the action in the thread where it was reported (http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=516776).

NationStates Forum Moderator
HotRodia

Yeah. Sure. Whatever.

Yeah. Sure. Whatever.

It isn't even worth it. I am, however, tempted to post a thread titled "DICK Cheney once owned PUSSY cat" just because those words were edited out of my titles yesterday and I don't think they'd edit them out in this context.

WWII internment camps for the Oriental.


As well as deliberate attacks on German and Japanese civilian populations to demoralize them and break their will to fight. That's the definition of terrorism.

No I'm talking of civilians. At the start of the war less that half were in favor. By the end it was a little more than half. There were great and emotional divisions in the colonies. There were crimes of each side against the other. This was a classic civil war. Even in "battlefields" civilians were in the line of fire. Since the Americans didn't fight a conventional war this was a war that involved the civilian population. Under the customs of war they should have lined up in an open field and fired at each other until one side withdrew. This would have protected the civilians as was done in Europe. Instead by using guerrilla tactics, they involved civilians. And the British used tactics to counter this kind of war that also involved civilians. Hence, the third amendment. Also as noted above, there was a mass exodus of patriotic British citizens to Canada and to a lesser extent to British lands in the Caribbean. These people left for fear of their lives among former friends and neighbors. I'm sure there were atrocities as there always are in civil wars. But the winner isn't going to record them in history.


Acully, there are records of certain founding fathers boasting about taking a colonial army and rounding up Loyalist civilians and town and butchering them.


Are you sure it was the US government and not the socialist republic of California? That is something that California would do rather than the federal government.

Accully, it was right here in DC. So it was the federal government themselves.

And calling California a socialist republic is bullshit to the point of laughability.

Jesus sucks, no matter how you look at it.

Care to back that up?

All that helping the poor, preaching forgiveness and peace, giving a population living under opression hope, yea, all that really sucked

Care to back that up?
All that helping the poor, preaching forgiveness and peace, giving a population living under opression hope, yea, all that really suckedThe condition for all that was and is submission under the fabricated Jewish god. That sucks big time.
And what "population under oppression" do you mean?

The condition for all that was and is submission under the fabricated Jewish god. That sucks big time.
And what "population under oppression" do you mean?

The "population under oppression" would be the Jews, under the Romans.

Sorry, I didn't quite understand that first part. Could you put in into other words?

The "population under oppression" would be the Jews, under the Romans.The Jews weren't oppressed by the Romans. You really should learn more about the area and time of Yeshua. And you really shouldn't take biblical narratives as accurate historical accounts.

Sorry, I didn't quite understand that first part. Could you put in into other words?No. It was clear enough.

Quite simply, I will not ever believe in any religion that is souly responsible for more human deaths in history than any other cause. Monotheism is a bigoted and close minded belief. I'm not saying that the pagans we're totally peaceful themselves, look at Alexander. But they didn't go crusading across the planet slaughtering anyone who didn't believe in Zeus, Oden or Set, as the Christians have done for generations.

In my opinion, anybody who follows the bible too closely turns out to be bigoted, domineering (men) submissive (women) and robotic (children). For example, the Witch hunts so long ago in Europe and the states, so many tens of thousands of women being murdered by Christians because they had the balls to say what they thought.

Why is something so powerful when it's fucked so many innocent people over? Christians wont even accept other religions and say anybody who doesn't believe in their god is going to hell.

If the followers of Christ love Osama though have a major rep of murdering countless innocent people. Then i think the followers are high and should be smacked.

Quite simply, I will not ever believe in any religion that is souly responsible for more human deaths in history than any other cause. Monotheism is a bigoted and close minded belief. I'm not saying that the pagans we're totally peaceful themselves, look at Alexander. But they didn't go crusading across the planet slaughtering anyone who didn't believe in Zeus, Oden or Set, as the Christians have done for generations.

In my opinion, anybody who follows the bible too closely turns out to be bigoted, domineering (men) submissive (women) and robotic (children). For example, the Witch hunts so long ago in Europe and the states, so many tens of thousands of women being murdered by Christians because they had the balls to say what they thought.

Why is something so powerful when it's fucked so many innocent people over? Christians wont even accept other religions and say anybody who doesn't believe in their god is going to hell.

If the followers of Christ love Osama though have a major rep of murdering countless innocent people. Then i think the followers are high and should be smacked.

Religion doesn't kill people. People kill people.

Quite simply, I will not ever believe in any religion that is souly responsible for more human deaths in history than any other cause. Monotheism is a bigoted and close minded belief. I'm not saying that the pagans we're totally peaceful themselves, look at Alexander. But they didn't go crusading across the planet slaughtering anyone who didn't believe in Zeus, Oden or Set, as the Christians have done for generations.

In my opinion, anybody who follows the bible too closely turns out to be bigoted, domineering (men) submissive (women) and robotic (children). For example, the Witch hunts so long ago in Europe and the states, so many tens of thousands of women being murdered by Christians because they had the balls to say what they thought.

Why is something so powerful when it's fucked so many innocent people over? Christians wont even accept other religions and say anybody who doesn't believe in their god is going to hell.

If the followers of Christ love Osama though have a major rep of murdering countless innocent people. Then i think the followers are high and should be smacked.

What a load of blithering, generalised, nonsensicle rubbish.

where did the DNA come from for the sperm?

Maybe Mary was an XXY female.

No. It was clear enough.

What I got from that was that Jesus sucked because he propogated submission to the Jewish God. If what you ment was different, you can either clarify it, and we can have a reasoned discussion, or you can refuse to, for whatever reason. In which case, no skin off my nose.

Either way, Jesus did not "suck whatever way you look at it." You can look at it in that he preached peace and forgiveness, charity for the poor, and helped inspire such modern day figures as Ghandi and MLK jr,. both men of peace and justice. If your only argument is that he told people to believe in God (people who already did believe in God, mind you), then you have a weak case indeed.


Quite simply, I will not ever believe in any religion that is souly responsible for more human deaths in history than any other cause. Monotheism is a bigoted and close minded belief. I'm not saying that the pagans we're totally peaceful themselves, look at Alexander. But they didn't go crusading across the planet slaughtering anyone who didn't believe in Zeus, Oden or Set, as the Christians have done for generations.

In my opinion, anybody who follows the bible too closely turns out to be bigoted, domineering (men) submissive (women) and robotic (children). For example, the Witch hunts so long ago in Europe and the states, so many tens of thousands of women being murdered by Christians because they had the balls to say what they thought.

Why is something so powerful when it's fucked so many innocent people over? Christians wont even accept other religions and say anybody who doesn't believe in their god is going to hell.

If the followers of Christ love Osama though have a major rep of murdering countless innocent people. Then i think the followers are high and should be smacked.


I wonder why Christains alive today are deemed to be responcible for the acts of Christians almost 1000 years ago. I believe in Jesus Christ, I don't believe in killing, crusades, forced "conversions", or whichever Pope called whichever crusade. So enough of this "Christians kill everybody!!" crap.

I also wonder why everyone seems to forget that Christians today are involved in many, many charity projects. From community organizations that feed the poor, to free job training for the unemployed, to missions to undeveloped nations of the world, Christains give and save lives every day. But, since there's a crazy right wing faction that is extremely vocal, and since hundrends of years ago Christains engaged in some very un-Christain activities (killing, war), all of the good seems to be swept under the rug.

It's clear from your rant that you don't even have an understanding of the religion you seem to hate so much.

I wonder why Christains alive today are deemed to be responcible for the acts of Christians almost 1000 years ago. I believe in Jesus Christ, I don't believe in killing, crusades, forced "conversions", or whichever Pope called whichever crusade. So enough of this "Christians kill everybody!!" crap.

I also wonder why everyone seems to forget that Christians today are involved in many, many charity projects. From community organizations that feed the poor, to free job training for the unemployed, to missions to undeveloped nations of the world, Christains give and save lives every day. But, since there's a crazy right wing faction that is extremely vocal, and since hundrends of years ago Christains engaged in some very un-Christain activities (killing, war), all of the good seems to be swept under the rug.

It's clear from your rant that you don't even have an understanding of the religion you seem to hate so much.

It is simply because every religion has a "pharisee" element and whenever that element gets governmental power all of that history becomes current news. Those elements overwhelm the true Christianity that is out doing good acts and promoting love of mankind.

The acts that you describe as 1000 year old events are front page news in 2007. The power behind GW is that element. A great deal of the support for war is that his base sees this as a crusade to convert the infidel. Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and the rest of the so called "religious" right have no thought of aiding the poor of the world for the sake of helping them. They see no need of love for Muslims when they can hire soldiers to kill them. They forget that the "Good Samaritan" just helped where help was needed with no thought of conversion. They forget that a true Christian need not tell anyone s/he is a Christian as their acts will speak louder than their words. Instead we have the religious right speaking for Christians and their acts are anything but what Jesus taught. So all with the name of Christian are being labeled by their actions. As I said above, this is true in all religions. Islam is being labeled by their religious right also. And their pharisee element doesn't represent true Islam any more than the Christian religious right is true Christianity.

What I got from that was that Jesus sucked because he propogated submission to the Jewish God. If what you ment was different, you can either clarify it, and we can have a reasoned discussion, or you can refuse to, for whatever reason. In which case, no skin off my nose.

Either way, Jesus did not "suck whatever way you look at it." You can look at it in that he preached peace and forgiveness, charity for the poor, and helped inspire such modern day figures as Ghandi and MLK jr,. both men of peace and justice. If your only argument is that he told people to believe in God (people who already did believe in God, mind you), then you have a weak case indeed.Those people believed in a fabricated God. Sucks one. And Jesus never gave forgiveness or anything else unconditionally, but only in exchange for submission under this God. Sucks two. And he claimed that there was no access to this God for anyone, except through him, again demand for submission. Sucks three. And never forget that the name of this God is Jealousy and the sin of his followers is Pride.

Religion doesn't kill people. People kill people.Religion makes people kill people. And worse: it makes people dumb.

Religion makes people kill people. And worse: it makes people dumb.

If there was no religion, people would find other reasons to kill each other. Like it or not, it's human nature.

If there was no religion, people would find other reasons to kill each other. Like it or not, it's human nature.

That's one opinion, anyway. Like it or not.

What's wrong with hate? Hate can motivate you to destroy your enemies. Some people, like Bin Laden, need destroying.

Hate if you want to hate
If it keeps you safe
If it makes you brave -Soundgarden, My Wave

I'd take rationality and self-protection over hate as a reason for conflict any day. Hate would just inflame your senses and impair your judgement.

I'd take rationality and self-protection over hate as a reason for conflict any day. Hate would just inflame your senses and impair your judgement.

"Anger is an energy" - Johnny Lydon.

Religion doesn't kill people. People kill people...

...because of religion, with guns.