I think part of the recruitment process when a soldier joins the army is that they are asked this question: "Are you willing to kill a member of any racial group, religious group, women, or other identifiable group if ordered to by the U.S. army?" If you can not kill your own kind, then you can not serve in the Army.
The same could be said of Christianity until the Thirty Years War. Paul was all about organizing and building a unified hierarchical authoritarian structure to Christianity. In my mind, the fundamental issue is anger and confusion at the world, a sense of marginalization, a sense of injustice, and no vision for how things will improve. The words that they tie on afterwords are just window dressing. They probably these religious ideas as their true motive, but if the anger, confusion, etc. didn't exist in the first place, they wouldn't be "drawn to the dark side" to begin with. People who are well loved, well adjusted, and have a bright future don't do these things. Does anybody remember Obama's statement about the way people "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations"? IMO, it was true then, and it is more true with respect to this guy.
I'm with you Max. I applaud the efforts by posters to be understanding and non-judgmental of Islam, but people are minimizing the religious underpinnings to this guy's motivation.
I'm not doing a defense of Christianity here...or a "them v. us/Christianity v. Islam" kinda thing. I said in a bunch of my posts that there are people who use the Bible to justify all kinds of ridiculous crap. It's another thread entirely, but the early church ran counter to government. Suggested reading: Jesus for President.
Is this you? <a href="http://media.photobucket.com/image/hit by shovel/catch-all/blazing-saddles-shovel.jpg?o=1" target="_blank"><img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v453/catch-all/blazing-saddles-shovel.jpg" border="0"></a>
Charlemagne for Holy Roman Emperor, etc. etc. Paul was all about organizing and telling people what to do. If they ran counter to government it was because they wanted to take its place. It is the whole reason for the elevation of the Bishop of Rome to Pope. Maybe that wasn't what Jesus wanted, but it is certainly what every major figure in Christianity who followed wanted. It's been de rigueur for Christianity since well before Mohammad was born through the 18th Century. I'm sure you want to make clear the difference between real Christians and people who go to churches, but your fundamental point is that Islam doesn't get to split hairs like that, so the same conditions should apply to prevent practical Christianity from being separated from Platonic Christianity. "By their deeds ye shall know them" and all that. And your "Jesus for President" doesn't exactly seem to be a history text but rather it contains an idealized view of history that the authors conjure to show how they think the idealized Christian must have acted and how you should today.
1. My fundamental point is NOT "that Islam doesn't get to split hairs like that!!!!" are you sure you're reading my posts? I can not stress enough...THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING AND IS ENTIRELY CONTRARY TO WHAT I'VE POSTED HERE! I have said that this was the product of THIS GUY'S religion...which is not what I would call true Islam, as I read it in the Koran OR as I hear it from the folks I come into contact with who are Muslim. 2. I never said Jesus for President was a history text...I just suggested it was a good read on the topic. You certainly don't have to read it. 3. I disagree completely with your take about the early church...that's the subject of another thread, though.... or preferably, an email. I see no context for the elevation of Christianity into a state from the Bible...or at least from my reading of it....I see it in history, nonetheless...because, as I've said at least 3-4 times in this thread, people have different interpretations that lead to all kinds of wacky stuff.
uh, no. Christianity today, particularly in the United States, only looks like that in pockets. The dominant forces in Christianity today in the US, unfortunately, have completely made equation between the Cross and the flag. People hate Christianity not because of the message of Jesus...but because of the crap the Church has been pawning off as the message of Jesus for far too long.
Okay. I probabably misread one of your posts and thought you were putting some blame on Islam. Good we agree that Christianity/the Bible and Islam/the Koran by themselves are not the problem but the nuts who hijack them and use them as an excuse for their insane actions.
Too bad your sentence here makes no sense. There are many liberals who are Christians. Cornell West is one. Even on this board, I'm here. I'm a Christian and a liberal. MLK, Jesse Jackson, etc. were/are liberal Christians.
