Constructive engagement

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus,

"The Two Great Commandments" are actually fairly well known, though certainly not as well known as "The Ten Commandments".

For Christians, the New Testament both builds upon, and supersedes, the Old Testament.

Christianity's teachings are indeed far more benevolent than the teachings of Islam.

The New Testament does not contain over 100 injunctions to slay or otherwise harm unbelievers. I would also seriously doubt the Old Testament contains anywhere near that many. The Koran does, however.

The teachings of Jesus do not call for forcing the world to conform to God's will. The Koran does.

Jesus called for Christians to not resist evil, to turn the other cheek, to love one's neighbor as one's self. Jesus did not even resist his own execution. Muhammad however led his followers in violent conquest after violent conquest, by promising them booty in this world and sensual rewards in the hereafter.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
"The Two Great Commandments" are actually fairly well known, though certainly not as well known as "The Ten Commandments".

[/ QUOTE ] So they're sort of cult, right? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

This is a first. Christians obeying "not well known" commands by the Almighty. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
New Testament ... Islam ... Old Testament ... Koran ... Jesus ... Koran ... Christians ... Jesus ... Muhammad

[/ QUOTE ]Why have you derailed this into comparative study of religions?

You originally claimed that Christianity does not command its faithful to do "bad things" against the "infidels" - but, as I pointed out, the Old Testament most certainly does! And that the Old Testament is as part of Christian dogma as is the New Testament.

You choose to dispute all this and to put up chaff, such as New vs Old, "The Jesus Commandments (The Not Well Known Ones!)", etc. Far too pathetic to be taken seriously.

So, tell us another one.

[MMMMMM]

Sorry Cyrus, but you either seem to be missing the point or else you just don't believe it. I doubt if I can help you further with this.

[ACPlayer]

I consider it my civic duty, so here goes ..


Dear Cyrus, you lovable dolt, dont you know that by picking the appropriate parts of the writings and then interpreting the christian writings the way they should be (as defined by the high IQ MMMMMM with appropriate links from like minded high IQers) and then interpreting the Quran the way they should be (again as defined by ....) one can conclude that Christianity is the way and the light and Islam is an ignorant backward religion that is best extinguished, preferably by force so we can all enjoy the spectacle on TV.

It is also utter nonsense that something as wonderful as Christianity can be misused by politicians or church leaders to advocate killings or conversions of non-believers or slavery or the role of women. The evidence of history not withstanding as those were simply distasteful distortions of an otherwise great religion.

Now please genuflect to the great mind!

If you still dont get it, we are done with you, sir!
[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[MMMMMM]

Thank you, ACPlayer. Most of that is actually not too far off.

It can be strongly argued that true fundamental Christianity requires pacifism--and, the early Christians were pacifists. Indeed it is hard to see how Jesus' words as reported in the Gospels can be construed any other way.

Muhammad's words, however, frequently call for violence and fighting--especially against non-believers.

It should be starkly obvious to anyone familiar with the texts of both religions, which religion derives from a higher spiritual plane, and which from a lower. As too of course Jesus' actions throughout his life show a more spiritually advanced being than Mohammed's actions and continual exhortations to war, conquest and subjugation of non-believers.

One religion is clearly more in keeping with higher spiritual values such as love and forgiveness. The other frequently appeals to baser motives such as gain from conquest, and domination or subjugation of outsiders.

Why are these basic differences so hard to fathopm or accept? It is clear to me, and I am not even a Christian (at least not in the typical sense).

It is of course true that many so-called "fundamentalist" Christians, have, throughout the ages, convoluted and perverted the teachings of Jesus to fit their own agendas of greed and hatred. However they cannot truly be called "fundamentalist"--definitely not in the sense of following Jesus' fundamental teachings and instructions. It is these base characters who have given Christianity a bad name.

All you really have to do is look at the fundamental teachings of both religions and compare them side by side.

And speaking of comparative religion, it should be noted that Buddhism is probably the most intellectually viable religion of all--especially the original or "Theravada" Buddhism, which was just what the Buddha taught (an excellent summary of which can be found in the book, What The Buddha Taught, by Walpola Rahula). By "most intellectually viable religion", I mean the least subject to potential logical contradictions or other analytical criticisms, which can more often and easily be applied to other religions, including Christianity.

[ACPlayer]

The path to great thinking per MMMMMM: form a conclusion then go looking for the clues to prove the conclusion, ignore all else.

Well done sir!!

[MMMMMM]

The majority of clues support the conclusion, and the conclusion was formed from clues and logic--not in reverse.

Also, a critical look at the philosophical foundations of the religions supports what I am saying.