Christianity has no shortage of terrorists [Barf Alert]

Orlando Sentinel ^ | Published November 17, 2002 | Mike Thomas

[Jael]

Osama bin Laden uses the Islamic faith to justify his nationalist, anti-Western political agenda.

It is an old religious ploy, one that Muslims were on the receiving end of during the Crusades.

Pope Urban II used love of Jesus and hatred of Muslims to motivate his troops at the beginning of the Crusades. Urban actually called Muslims "infidels."

Political leaders often wear religious disguises and exploit hatred in pursuit of their goals.

This brings me to the leaders of the religious right in this country.

[MEGoody]

"How egocentric! I hope I am an activist, but it is too presumptuous to believe God is not on my side. I am on His side."

Yes, it is presumptuous, and I would challenge anyone to provide any quote where Falwell, Graham or any of the others who were lambasted in this article EVER said God was on their side.

[swarthyguy]

Some Muslims, Most Arabs and Add Medina and Riyadh to your NukUlear list.

[joesnuffy]

Urban actually called Muslims "infidels."

Gee.....He could get throw'd in jail in Canada for that now.........

[KC_Conspirator]

This author is a lightweight moron. Once again, please tell where Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, or Jimmy Swaggert ever encouraged their followers to go out and murder others in the name of Jesus Christ? Answer is never. They send peacful missionaries who feed and care for the poor in other countries, many of them muslim. (The Red Crescent, smuggles arms to terrorists)

[xzins]

Urban actually called Muslims "infidels."

An infidel is an unbeliever.

Muslims are unbelievers.....given that the Pope spoke from a Christian viewpoint.

Unless of course, the author would like to explain to me how Muslims are actually Christians. (That would be a fun discussion.)

[EternalHope]

You, and the author of this article, have got cause and effect reversed.

The crusades were launched long after Islam launched its attacks on Europe, and long, long after the slaugher of Christians and Jews in the initial expansion of Islam in Africa and the Middle East. They were a counter-attack, pure and simple. Without them Islam would have conquered Europe.

Your moral equivalance argument just won't work.

To put it in simpler terms, what if you shot my brother, raped my wife, enslaved my kids, and are now trying to kill me too? Are we morally equivalent if I hunt you down and kill you instead?

[Jael]

I posted it. Look for my other post using the search engine. I have nothing to be ashamed of about where I stand.

It was posted because I was aghast at the article. It isn't true and it deserves to be shown as such. Not only that, I the link to the article on a website where a whole host of people agreed with the article.

http://www.nola.com/forums/faith/index.ssf?artid=20190

http://www.nola.com/forums/faith/index.ssf

That's why people like Mike Thomas going unanswered are dangerous. They lead stupid people astray and convince them that Christians are the enemey, and equal or worse than murdering terrorist.

I knew some people here would take the time in joining me in answering that article.

[stands2reason]

Well, this otta get the bible thumpers and/or bigots going.

And one Christian-basher.

[E Rocc]

Sheesh, the guy's an idiot.

He comes close to having a point with Phelps, who certainly tries to intimidate people and celebrated the 9/11 attacks as "God's wrath" or some such stupid thing. The rest of them, while often wrong-headed and sometimes ignorant, are nothing resembling terrorists.

The really dumb thing about this column is there are terrorists who claim to be acting in the name of Christianity. There's Eric Rudolph, Clayton Waagoner, the rest of the abortion clinic bombers and doctor killers, and even the KKK sometimes claims to act in the name of Christianity.

But it's not his purpose to point out that Christianity, like Islam, is infested with nuts that claim to act in its name. He's trying to slime Christianity in general, and that makes him as bad as any bigoted Muslim-basher.

-Eric

[Jael]

"Don't get all bent out of shape..."

Oh no! I'm fine!!! I just didn't want anyone to think I agreed with that article! I understand the barf alert now!

Thanks you for the information.

[xzins]

Perhaps Mike Thomas can show me pictures of the skyscraper in Saudi Arabia that Jerry Falwell has bombed.

Perhaps he can show me one child that Pat Robertson has killed.

[outlawcam]

We pay far too much tribute to "tolerance." The left embraces "intolerance" far more than the right, for as Thomas Paine said in Rights of Man, tolerance is not the opposite of intolerance, but the counterfeit of it. The latter assumes to deny God the right to accept the fruits of one's conscience, and the former assumes to grant it. In point of fact, we have no dominion over whom God accepts or doesn't.

No, the opposite of intolerance is love. In fact, to treat others as we would like to be treated, the Golden Rule, is the essence of love, and at least one half the framework on which political equality is based. It is far more powerful and just than "tolerance."

[Jael]

One more time! I don't agree with the article! I posted it for exposure of a bunch of lies and half truths about Christians. :-)

[azhenfud]

My favorite saying: "Tolerance is a good virtue, but virtue should never be sacrificed for the sake of tolerance."

[Jael]

See Eric? I knew we had common ground!

[Jael]

"And one Christian-basher."

Great reply. To the point and right on target!

[alancarp]

Assuming Mr. Thomas is educated enough to find this thread, I need to educate him on at least ONE of his blatant errors:

He says (and I quote):

"Do you believe that a woman who does not marry as a virgin should be dragged to her father's door and stoned to death?

That's in Deuteronomy."

That's not in Deuteronomy. At least not nearly in the manner above - he's waayyyy out of context. The passage involved is Deut. 22:13-21, and involves a non-virgin given to a man (arranged marriages in that culture) as a wife when presented as if a virgin. God set out very strict rules for sexual sins, and this one involves a promiscuous daughter -- certainly not the innocent portrayed by Thomas).

Suggestion: Mr. Thomas should not write about things in which he possesses no knowledge. In fact, a bit of basic research would have cleared up a bunch of his bad ideas about religion AND history.

Regarding whether I as a Christian believe and follow that is irrelevant: the Mosaic Law was given to ancient Israel as part of being God's chosen people. That law was never given to the gentile Christians -- and Israel itself turned their back on it long before Christ. There are other factors, too, but if he's trying to draw a parallel here by calling God's Law "terrorism" - I don't bite: if I had God's instructions to do a certain thing like this, I would be obligated to obey. The Creator of the Universe certainly knows better than I.

I will concede but one point, however: having Jimmy Swaggert call anybody a sexual deviant (did he really?) would be a bit odd -- coming from him.

[Jael]

I wrote the editor!

[Jael]

You have a very good understanding of the issues.