HighlandFP

bear says, "I, and all those who have looked seriously and dispassionately this subject see Christianity as the antithesis of Islam.
As for violence, the whole ethos of Islam is based on violence to the transgressor.
It’s not the culture that makes Islam violent, it’s the other way around. It’s Islam that makes for a violent culture, especially towards non Muslims."

Please The Bear, seek professional help. Go to your docter and tell him/her that you are suffering from unreasonable anger and hatred.

or http://www.nhs24.com/

__________________
WARNING: By reading or downloading this post you may be committing an offence under some or all of these Terrorism Acts.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/securit...m-and-the-law/

EU = Ein Volk ~ Ein Reich.

The Bear

As it happens my doctor, who has spent even more time overseas than I have, has an even harder view on Islam,

Could it be that you are still being "fed milk"? (First feed them milk)

__________________
I am an old man. I have eaten much salt.

tito

Ah, got to love content based advertisements.

See attachment.

Attached Images

Screenshot.jpg (20.9 KB, 6 views)

__________________
For life, Liberty and Prosperity
http://lpuk.org/

BonnieDundee

[quote]Actually Europe had more warfare and the Roman Catholic church did not really gain strong control until after 800AD which it then began to lose by the 13th century. The Pope wasn't even the sole head of Western xtianity at the time, he had to compete with the emperor.

Well I don't. Xtianity is much the same.

Xtianity and Judaism are just the same, in fact Judaism and Jewish xtianity arose from the same semitic culture as Islam did. They are much the same.

__________________
"It is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state."
-Bruce Schneier

How to Overthrow the System: brew your own beer; kick in your TV; build your own cabin and p*ss off front porch whenever you bloody well feel like it.
Edward Abbey

Leopold Kohr.

The Bear

[quote=BonnieDundee;496798]No they are not.

Islam is about submitting absolutely to the alleged word of Allah as told to Mohammed by the angel Gibreel and the communicated by Mohammed to the masses.

Islam distorts and makes use of parts of the Jewish and Christian beliefs as a glue to hold the ideology of Islam together, an ideology that is actually counter to both Judaism and Christianity in form and construct.

__________________
I am an old man. I have eaten much salt.

BonnieDundee

Firstly Xtianity does just this to Judaism. It is part distorted Judaism, part classical paganism and part Greek philosophy. It's concepts of things like the messiah are very different from the Jewish ones. It is incorrect to consider Xtianity the natural follow on from Judaism.

Secondly Xtianity as it came about in the thousand years after the alleged birth of Christ is about submitting to Jesus or going to hell.

__________________
"It is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state."
-Bruce Schneier

How to Overthrow the System: brew your own beer; kick in your TV; build your own cabin and p*ss off front porch whenever you bloody well feel like it.
Edward Abbey

Leopold Kohr.

The Bear

It’s a good point that you raise, and a constant source of irritation especially to the more Fundamentalist Christians (who odd though it may seem are actually NOT fundamentalist Christians) to raise their hackles by pointing out that so much in the KJV Bible and its predecessors and derivatives that all share the common ancestry of the Conference of Nicea, that the thing that THEY call Christianity should really be called “Paulianity”! It really gets their goat!

As for it being incorrect to consider Christianity the natural successor to Judaism, I’m not convinced. The Jewish people at the time of the birth of Jesus were facing a civilisation in which the place of the Pharisees in the practice of Judaism was overpowering the basis of Judaism itself. In essence the lawyers had taken over.

Jesus was one of many who were opposing this and pressing for a return to the spirit of the religion and not the letter which is what was being twisted.

In so doing he was both pushing the clock back but at the same time moving the religion forward to recognise and accommodate the changes that had taken place in society whereby fighting for survival was not the thing it once had been and establishing morality based on stable and expanding civilisation was the pressing need.

On that basis I argue that Christianity was the natural successor to Judaism and time would appear to support that view.

The thing that Rome distorted and used as a means of power and control did.

Christianity did not.

I contend that the Roman Catholic Church makes use of Christianity but is inherently and by definition NOT Christian in substance.

In Christian belief there’s no “submission” involved, simply acceptance of Jesus having been sent by God to take on the sins of men for all time if they will accept him as their saviour, and trying to in all things follow the examples he made and taught.

True Christianity has no place for confessions, no place for priests, no place for excommunications, Christianity in its pure form does not even ask that people should get it right, simply that they should recognise what right is based on the life of Jesus and do the best that they cam as often as they can.

Islam is different. If you don’t submit to what you’re told, if you break the law, you’re toast. Much as is the case with so many churches based on Christianity but with far more deadly consequences.

In its pure form Christianity is about as good a morality as could be.

In its pure form Islam is as oppressive and warped as an ideology could be.

Fortunately not all Muslims follow Islam to the letter, though they should under the direction of the Koran.

Unfortunately not all Christians follow the pure form of Christianity but follow various Churches that use Christianity as the basis of what they then adorn with their own peculiarities.

Pure Christianity? A good place to start to look is in the beliefs of the Brethren or other very “low” churches. Probably the last place to look in my opinion is Roman Catholicism.

For myself I’m a confirmed atheist.

__________________
I am an old man. I have eaten much salt.

BonnieDundee

Well the sources for the real Jesus are few or nil and although there is probably a real person(s) behind the stories there were many different takes and what became Xtianity took many centuries to really come together and when it did it was very different philosophically to Judaism. The Jewish idea of the messiah is not very much like the xtian idea of Christ.



Well some early forms of Xtianity such as the gnostic xtians believed in reincarnation and this belief seems to have been popular among xtians until past 400 AD when the idea of heaven and hell became much more common. But conventional xtianity has long held that you if you don't believe in Jesus you will go to hell and that is as much a call to submission as Islam.


I quite likes the Catholic churchs like the Roman, Orthodox and Church of England. For all their faults they are less fanatical and more inspiring to me than the puritanical protestant churchs.

I lean deist or mystical myself.

HighlandFP

Cowardly xian bombers drop depleted uranium bombs from 20,000 feet then fly away.

__________________
WARNING: By reading or downloading this post you may be committing an offence under some or all of these Terrorism Acts.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/securit...m-and-the-law/

EU = Ein Volk ~ Ein Reich.

Westcountryman

Cowardly Muslims blow up civilians?

__________________
Anyone who supports 42 days pre-charge detention should read this:

42-day detention: the threat to our liberty | John Major - Times Online

and this:

Why David Davis is right to make a stand | Mail Online