[Lunatic Fringe]

Please... that's like reading the old Testament where God told the Israelites to kill their enemiess because they were non-believers, and applying it to today's Judaism or Chritianity.

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."

I Samuel 15:3

[Types_with_Fist]

Okay. That's good. But, I contend that the Old Testement describes occurances from ancient times. I do not believe there are any verses advocating the murder of anyone as a command. Unlike the list above from the Koran.

[Petruchio]

Can you show me even one case where the rest of Islam did anything to stop the "radical fringe element". If not, then all of Islam is just as guilty.

[Gurn]

So I have it wrong, huh? Muslims are actually supposed to have Christians and Jews as friends. Thanks for clearing that up.

Say, can you help me out again? Which verses of the Koran are to be interpreted literally, and which are to be ignored? Thanks in advance again.

Oh, and do you see no difference in the Old Testament, where God instructed the Hebrews to purge on specific piece of land of pagans, versus the Koran, which gives detailed instructions for future (prospective) behavior for all Muslims?

(Go ahead and play the "crusades" and "some Christians kill abortion doctors" cards. This is your cue, Muslim-lover.)

[New Perspective]

If you are man enough I challenge you to view these videos that translate MODERN day sermons. Then come back and tell us their meaning.

http://memri.org/video/

[Mr. Keys]

There are two kinds of Muslims. Those that murder and those that support the murderers and blame everyone else. They have given up their right to exist.

[smith288]

I Samuel 15:3

Christ's works on Earth fullfilled law (Old Test.). No longer do we offer up sacrifices or stone people for their sins because Jesus died for our sins.

And your ignorance on Christianity is astonishing.

[IrishCatholic]

I have a different take on this. Throughout history Islam has been a religion, or cult, of conquest. The Crusades were, in fact, a response to Muslim conquest. The Balkans, our involvement, ethnic cleansing etc. is the same struggle that has been going on for 700 years. Islam isn't radical and majority. It is active and passive.
To compare it with Christianity, or Buddhism, or Hinduism, or Hare Krishna, or Bob's Church of the Alien Abduction is absurd. Islam has been kept in check because Western Civilization beat it back. It festered until oil was discovered and the resulting wealth revived the disease. It was kept in check a second time by the cold war but now has festered openly. Bombed embassies, buildings, towers, the Intifada, all point to the need to cut it off at the roots again.
Do I care about Islam? No. I care about the implementation of it that causes conversion by force. "Radical" and "Mainstream" are flawed labels. I have never heard of the majority of Muslims condemning the violence. Not anywhere. Christianity does not convert by force and does not advocate forced conversion. The Old Testament also advocates the stoning of witches. I do not know of any Christian nation, or nation based on Christian tradition, that stones witches. Would you like to look up the Muslim countries that stone women? Cut of people's heads as infidels etc?
Any Muslim can come to America and put up a Mosque and practice their religion freely without fear. Can the same be told of Christians going to any Muslim country and put up a church and practice their religion freely?
Read up a little more on the religion of peace. It is only peace if you become Muslim.

[Hyacinthus Forma]

Dearest Jesus in Heaven-
Give us the courage and fortitude and permission to eradicate the evils of Islam as they continue to pervade and perverse the adherrants of that faith as it is currently being interpreted in such a dirty manner. Forgive our own transgressions but know that the final result is your glorification through a holy and peaceful worls of all men.
Amen

[proud American in Canada]

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."

The difference is, fundamentalist Christians don't actually go out and slay people in the name of their religion just because of a line in the Old Testament.

Yes, there was the abortion clinic murderer, but instances like that are rare, particularly when compared to the hundreds of murderous acts committed by radical Islamists.

Fundamentalist Christians don't hijack airplanes full of people and slam them into office buildings in the name of their religion. They don't shoot fleeing children in the back in the name of their religion. Nor do they saw people's heads off, all in the name of their religion.

[American in Israel]

You don't know the Koran, but you think you know the Bible! You to aid and comfort our enemies in a time of war while you slander your own countrymen. You sell your birthright cheaply son.

Please... that's like reading the old Testament where God told the Israelites to kill their enemiess because they were non-believers, and applying it to today's Judaism or Chritianity.

Samuel 15:3

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."

You claim here 'that God told the Israelites to kill Amalek because they were non-believers' to try and justify Islam's call to slay all unbelievers. To do so you started your cut and paste 'convienently' at 1 Samuel three, a few sentences from the begining of the paragraph to deliberatly decieve! God NEVER says to kill people for unbelief, he made a way for people to repent of their unbelief. Let me help you out here and post the sentence RIGHT BEFORE YOUR CUT:

1 Samuel 15:TWO

Thus says the Lord of hosts: 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he ambushed him on the way when he came up from Egypt.

So it seems the scripture one sentence before your cut shows that Amalak ambushed the Israeli Civilians as they passed from Egypt. Attacking civilians has a very high price in God's eyes, as does defending the killers in the act.

Want to know who Amalek was?

Amalek was the grandson of Esau, who had sold his birthright for a pot of lentils to his brother Jacob. When Esau also lost his inheritance to Jacob, Esau hated Jacob and vowed to kill him. Esau therefore taught his grandson, Amalek, to hate and pursue Jacob and his descendants, the Israelites.

You are a modern day Amalek, and a lying one to boot...

[cardinal4]

Sorry, a religion that boasts a billion adherents should be far more vocal than they are. Islam sucks.

[Theo]

"Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." I Samuel 15:3

Is *your name* Amalek? I didn't think so. There's a difference between God directing the Israelites at a particular time to destroy a particular enemy for a particular reason ... and the Koran's standing order to kill/hate "unbelievers"....

[mdmathis6]

And King Saul did not entirely slay King Amalek and he also divided up the spoils among his men. Samuel confronted Saul after beheading the King regarding God's specific commands to rout out completely an enemy that would continue to bedevil Israel. Saul's excuse regarding the spoils was that he was going to Give some of it to God. It was this type of double mindedness that caused Saul to have a curse laid on him, God rejected him and his lineage as being King over Israel, choosing instead David as his heir.

Israel's neighbors(philistines,Amalekites et al) were constantly threatening Israel with slavery and violence and Saul was acting Kerryesque in his strategy with them. But it wasn't just their militancy that God was condemning. Their forms of Idolotry were very tempting in their tolerance for sexual deviancy and other forms of immorality. Molech worship, the practise of sending ones first born or otherwise unwanted children into a firey sacrifice was all the rage at the time.(It eventually reached as far west as CARTHAGE, the practise of whiched enraged the family loving types of the ROMAN REPUBLIC). Saul was commanded by God to destroy a bastion of evil that would cause his People to be corrupted if not enslaved and he "flip-flopped". Samuel chopped King Amalek to pieces and after that he and Saul had no more contact.

Let's tell the whole story in context. God was telling Saul to drain a very evil swamp, to the point that he regarded even the livestock, spoils(house hold goods, gold, idolatrous home icons ect) as totally corrupting. Why he would spare King Amalek is beyond reasoning, though often captured Kings in that era were often spared and kept house prisoners as though they were living trophies.

[PresbyRev]

The call to herem in the conquest of a limited geographical area was limited in its scope and duration.

From the textual evidence of the Hebrew Bible, it is doubtful if full-blown herem was ever fully implemented.

There is no command in either the Hebrew Bible nor the New Testament to convert others by force, to subjugate others or to use violence in the cause of religion beyond the conquest of the promised land.

Jesus explicitly rejected the domination system of power and might in both the civil and religious realms and instead taught an ethic of inclusion, radical hospitality and peace.

Mohammed was on the other hand a violent, pedophilic sociopath.