[Skybird]

Originally Posted by scandium

He also died 2,000 years ago which means he isn't around to admonish those who pervert his teachings or selectively ignore them. All of which happens and has happened under the christian banner. In fact there is probably no better cover for irrational behavior on a mass scale than religion, including christianity.

No because being a more evolved religion, christianity exercises more subtle forms of control. The example I cited here has led to censorship, in many countries, of a movie that is pure fiction. More significant than this trite example would be the influence exerted by the christian abstinence lobby on the developed world, where their efforts have succeed in curbing safe-sex practices and condom distribution. This has profound effects on the Western hemisphere as well when sexually transmitted disease are further spread there and find their way here as people emmigrate and travel.

This is the problem skybird: you equate a critique on christianity with a criticism of Jesus. They are not the same thing. There is, in fact, considerable room for interpretation of the bible and the various christian religions are very diverse from the different faiths interpreting it in different ways - not all of them even remotely "mainstream". And not everyone who goes to church or adopts the banner of christianity is a theologist. Far from it. Many know little more than their pastor's/priest's/minister's interpretation and he can have considerable power over his congregation irrespective of whether or not he "gets it right" or what the New Testament actually preaches. Jonestown is an example. Waco, Texas, is another.

That is of little consolation to the victims. The fact is that, right or wrong, people who do bad things in the name of christianity are every bit as convinced of their righteousness as those who do bad things in the name of Islam.

I don'T get what you want to point out.

Islamic violance against infidels is because it is acting in conformity with this ideology's rules and dermands. Muhammad practiced it with his own hands. He ordered it, Quran demands and praises it black on white. Several Hadiths call for it. Where Muhammad felt just offended, he took revenge and answered with massacre of males and boys and ensalving of women and girls. A Muslim being violent for these causes is in congruency with his religion's very basics.

Jesus did talk against violance. He did not raise his hands aginst others, he discouraged his followers to be aggressive against others. Nowhere in his teachings you find a writtendemand to kill and to overcome those that disagree with Jesus. Nowhere you find the written demand to wage war against infidels. Where jesus not only was offended, but even treated brutally and brought to dfeath - he did not call for revenge, but forgave his attackers. Where a Christian is acting violantly against someone of other faiths, or is oignoring the suffering of others caused by his own way of living, he is not in congruency with his religions basics, but he is explicitly violating it.

You cannot compare modern Christianity with Islam. Islam's clerics very much are in conformity with the teahcings of their religion, although sometimes being creative in finding reasons in the scriptures that are justifiying their doing (a good part of the Hadith may have been created that way, eventually). But the christian church IS NOT in conformity with the teachings of Jesus and the new testament where it is acting with war and powerpolitics like in the medieval (I exclude the crusades, becasue they would not have taken place if europe and the ancient Roman heritage of Christianity would not have been attacked by Islam first). Islam is right in it's critizism that the priests of the infidels have abandoned and distorted their own scriptures. In all my posts, for that rreeason I make clear distinctions between church and Christian religion in the understanding of new testament and Jesus, for that reason. I wrote that often enough. So far, so well. Problem is that Islam does not have to offer an altermnative that is of more value. The church in the past acted intolerant in violation of it'S religious basis. Islam still acts intolerant because that is it's religious basis. Chriszian countires have opened their societies for other cultures and religions, and now are overrun by Islam. Islam has progressed with a program of ethnical and cultural cleansing in it'S countries since it's very beginning, until today. The secret service of the Vatican, I referred to that repeatedly, said early in this decade, they have counted 100.000 slaughtered christians in Muslim nations per year, until today, victims of intentional and targetted murder and local progroms. It takes place in ALL Muslim nations, in some more, in some less. Now show me where this happens in Christians countries today! In Germany there is a weeks-long scandal every time there is a single assault against a single foreigner of dark skin or Muslim looking, and I can hardly imagine that in North America and all eiurope Muslims get slaughtered in progroms by the tens of thousands each year.

There has never been a valid fatwah against the slaughtering of infidels in Muslims countries, btw.

Really, I do not understand what you are aiming at. Are you trying to make Islamic danger appear less harmful by distracting attention towards the cruelty of other factions or times? Okay, interesting historical or political comment, then, but in no way it decreases the threat Islam poses to the rest of the world.