Of course not!
Posted on 10/11/2001 10:52:36 AM PDT by Chuckmorse
I refer to the former. This borrowing is far more widespread than most Christians realize (or than you imply). Most of the "colorful" and popular customs of the churches spring from these sources, notably pretty much all the customs associated with holidays. This is especially true of Catholic and Orthodox pracice. Protestants, having severely limited the popular imports in favor of a stripped-down religion, have fewer "pagan" imports.
Depending on your point of view, this borrowing can be considered as either a sanctification of the pagan practices, or as a pollution or contamination of the purity of Christianity. This is very definitely a matter of opinion. The origin of the customs is not.
So find a pre-PC encyclopedia and look under Christmas, Easter, etc. I recommmend the (1911?) edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Did I not make it plain that I'm implying no such thing?
I am merely pointing out that if a person insists that Islam is illegitimate because it incorporates elements with roots in paganism, then an intellectually honest person is required to apply the same standard to Christianity. I'm not implying that I apply this standard to either religion.
To those who say these terrorists are just a fringe element and that Islam as a whole is peaceful and not responsible for the behavior and positions of the fringe:
What exactly was the last time Lutheran extremists bombed a building?
When did you last hear about that infamous fringe Methodist group hijacking a plane?
How about those fanatic Buddhist madmen taking control of an impoverished country?
And those Catholic thugs cooking up chemical weapons to wipe out their rivals?
And of course we have all heard those stories about Presbyterian sleepers infiltrating a country, intending to live quietly until it's time to commit their terrorist acts ...
IS THE POPE CATHOLIC?
I'll give it a shot.
This is a great illustration of the power of the English language.
The slight shading of meaning and the implicit message in the choice of word.
"Comparing" assumes no prior judgement about the items being compared; they can have more similarities than differences or vice-versa.
"Contrasting" is a comparison between things assumed or known to be different.
One of the constant characteristics of Islam is "might makes right" (that is the clear message in "by the sword").
Assuming that notion to be defensible then yes, taking over Saudi Arabia makes total sense.
Of course not!
If you really believe this, you must live in a parallel universe.
Newly created Muslim world? Quite a trick, since the "Golden Age" of Islam is considered the latter half of the 8th Century, and the first Crusade was not launched until 1096...
Forcibly convert or kill them? That's a Muslim/Arab concept.
Kill them? of course! The raping thieving Mass Murderers were cutting a swath through the Balkans and Eastern Europe.
Lots of Booty? LOL.
Even Grade school children know this is probably the primary motivation for the Jihad which has lasted almost uninterrupted for 1300 years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.