Replies

Zarqawi et al. seem to think that they are self-deputized to kill all those who have not converted to Islam.

I agree totally, he gets that idea from the Koran, his "holy" books as the word of his God sent to him to carry out.

Christians and Jews do not currently believe and practice such things.

They sure did at one time. I agree they do not do it today as zarqawi does and I also agree that is a difference. However this difference does not change the comparison I was trying to point out. Both books teach their followers that there is punishment for thinking differently. Punishment for lack of following along with the program as stated. Zarqawi claims to do the will of Allah, what Allah would do if he did not. Who does it isn't what I was trying to compare. The fact that punishment is threatened is.

Would you agree that punishment is stated in the Koran for lack of following what it says absolutely and that the Bible also lays out punishment for lack of following what it says absolutely?

Did jesus die for my sins or did he die so I had to aknowledge he did so,in order that my sins could be forgiven? Speaking of shoving down throats.....

added during the 1950's to draw a distinction between the US and Marxists, and NOT to shove Christianity down people's throats.

The line of distinction being CHRISTIANITY and diety belief right? Hmmmmm, interesting. I would offer that if Newdow had a physical currency he could use that did not espouse a diety belief he would not have a case to make. God was put IN the pledge and ON the money after the fact as a way to advance christianity and diety belief. These are both governent functions and that entity is not supposed to install a diety of their own. Newdow is going to win my friend. Regardless of wether or not it was beneficial to do so at the time.

Scotus struck Newdow down last time, not on the merits of his case, but indeed on a technicality. That being lack of custodial control over his daughter.

Basically, SCOTUS punted on that one, other families have come forward and that is not an issue they can be dismissed on. IF SCOTUS could have heard and dismissed this case on the merits they would have done so and ended it already. Truth is, they didn't. My supposition is they couldn't, but we will soon find out.

I am not disputing the many differences between Islam and Christianity. They are many and they are good. I do not think that a case can be made( and supported) that states differences negate similarities.

My fruit example is circular reasoning? Citing similarities that hold up to testable examples is circular? Islam is a religion based on book called the koran said to be handed down from Allah. Christianity is a religion based on a book said to be handed down from God. (Both oranges.) Improvement upon or heresey of is perspective based. Both being organized religions based on books handed down from each of their gods is a statement of fact as both entities claim (neither of which can prove mind you). I do not see where you get circular reasoning from.

As for quotes from the koran, a good many can found at faithfreedom.org.

I know the comparison I made hurts, blunt truth often does. I am not attempting to equate the two as wholes, just point out similarities.. But the comparison I made is present and accurate. Both books preach punishment for lack of compliance. Who carries out the punishment may be different, but that does not eliminate the threat or where it comes from or what that threat punishes. Punishment for alternate thought when no proof exists today that can codify either complete book as legitimate. Thought, belief, is the only thing that can codify it today. I would offer that is exactly why both books, and thus religions, push this aspect of punishment for lack of belief.

I agree with your last paragraph and will offer that answering those very questions is what that punishment, for thought other than what is posed, is designed to stop. My next question is "WHY". If the bible,or the koran, is true, why the threat of punishment for reserving belief until such time as proof can be found thru answering these questions? Why, If I believe the day I stand before my God, on the day I die is it too late?

If I want you to believe something,I would pose tangible evidence of it rather than a threat of eternal damnation.Could it be that your God is a victim of his own devices? Rather, God makes people victims of his own devices? If God gave us free will and that is the device, why not put in place something that establishes truth. In other words PROVE IT in no uncertain terms? God could do so, right? Not doing so strikes me as a vicious game. One he plays willingly. That is hardly worth worship in my book. Now I stray.....I'll stop that now.