Jesus wept
but he did NOT tell ANYONE TO KILL ANYONE ELSE, EVER.
Mr Porretto in his inimitable style discusses, this morning, the tired and ignorant aphorage that the Bible somehow invites Christians to kill.
Look: in case anyone out there has still gotten this ignorance stuck in their heads, here’s a little challenge:
Open a Bible. Pretty much any bible will do,I like this one but evenm a Gideon will work fine. Go to the new testament. Look at the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In those gospels lie the core messages of Christianity. Read them. Use a pencil to underline the places where Jesus tells his followers to kill someone. (or for that matter do harm to someone, or do anything but love them) You won’t NEED a pencil, because he never does. But go ahead and search anyway.
Now. Get a Koran. What’s best is to find one that is a direct translation of the original, but again, any one will do. Find the places where Mahomet tells his followers to kill someone or enslave them or do harm to them or force them to submission. There are plenty. Then try to put them into any good context. Go ahead, try.
We’re not talking about the things so called christians have done in the past, and I will brook no discussion on that subject. Period. I want to see a gospel passage where Christ told someone to kill someone, and I want an explanation of why when Mahomet said to, it’s ok. Don’t come here with anything else. If you haven’t read both texts, or if you are unwilling to do so, shut the fuck up. If you want to talk about what has been done in the “name” of christianity, shut the fuck up. Christians- real ones- are peaceful decent people by definition. No real christian has ever harmed anyone intentionally, or at all except out of self-defense. Period. Jesus, what does it take to get through to people?
22 comments Og | Uncategorized
Off topic a bit (ok, a LOT), but it just occured to me how much fun it would be if time travel were possible to go back and do some editing to the bible. Instead of “Love thy enemy” I think it would be fun to change that to “Serve thy ememies pastries”. Fast forward a couple thousand years and laugh my ass off as people say things like “I hate you! Here’s an eclair…” Love is all well and good, but sugary baked goods are tangible and instantly gratifying.
Then again, knowing human nature, the Spanish Inquisition would have tortured thousands by dunking them in boiling bavarian cream and pelting them to death with rock hard, stale coffee cake.
[/OddBlasphemy]
I think I should keep my interaction with other human beings at a minimum today. My brain isn’t working properly again….
Og-
I think your last line begs the question.
“Jesus, what does it take to get through to people?”
IOW, Yes: Jesus is what it takes to get through to people.
Double, exactly. Grau? I like the way you think.
I was going to answer your (seemingly rethorical) question at the end of your post by saying “An act of God”. But Double beat me to it. Great Post!!
Christians by definition hew to the New Testament. All turn the other cheek in the Gospels. Some fire and brimstone in the Old Testament, but the Jews own that, and they are, by nature, quite placid.
I’m tired of according Islam a seat at the table. They don’t exhibit decency. Might as well have rabid dogs there. And I shoot those.
Vman, it is because you have a civilized table, one which I hope to earn a seat at someday.
Comment removed because of the abject ignorance it displayed.
Tyger, I’m not sure what you are talking about when you say that the “purist” word of God is in the Old Testament. This doesn’t even truly hold water in the Jewish faith, where the Talmud is also considered to be to a degree divinely inspired. If you take some time and learn even a smidgen about Christianity, you will find that at least in the Catholic faith, we believe that Jesus is God. The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are all one; all aspects of God. To say that the New Testament is less God’s word than the Old Testament reveals a fundamental ignorance of Christian thought.
I think Og made it abundantly clear that he was considering the source books of each religion alone and apart from the interpretation by their followers. I guess in your haste to comment you missed that whole part of the post.
As far as your biased and bigoted comment about us intolerant Christian fascists in the South, spend some time in a blue state and see how “open minded” and “tolerant” the secularists are when you try to make a point that contradicts any of their liberal dogma. Try this next time you’re at one of those “oh so hip” cocktail parties; walk up to a group of black clad, fabulously coiffed, intellectually superior individuals and tell them you’ve been thinking about it alot, and have decided that the fetus becomes human at five months. See how tolerant they are, and see if you even have a chance to explain your position.
Finally, ask yourself why we have a culturally secular and tolerant culture? Would the same values of secularism and tolerance have emerged had the framers of our government been Muslim instead of Christian?
Tyger? I have NOTHING to hide. Go back, reread the post, and come back when you’ve developed a clue. I’m not going to ban you off hand, but if you come back without learning some reading comprehension, you are out of here. Meanwhile I welcome any discussion you can have once you understand the post. Which at present, you do not.
Ill say that the new testament, as I read it, is far superior to Islam. The practice of it might not be but I don’t think thats all that much of a bad thing. Islam wouldn’t be that bad if it wasn’t practiced as well as it is.
Riprip, you need to READ the koran. If you haven’t, you have no idea what kind of nastiness it contains.
I think you miss my point if they didn’t practice all the “nastiness it contains” it wouldn’t be so bad. Most Christian don’t exactly practice what they preach, seems most Islamist do.
Ah, sorry, riprip, I misunderstood. You are corret, of course, but how do you tell people to ignore the core document of their religion?
Ban me? What a great idea! Especially since I consider ‘moonbattery” to be dissent.
Go ahead – I will go back to typing insults from my mom’s basement.
Mack,
I’m an idiot whose IP is 88.104.229.170, in case anyone would like to ban me preemptively, which you should, because I’m incapable of having a discussion; I’m merely a troll, jumping into a discussion I don’t understand and hurling ignorance around like a feces flinging monkey, and whining that it’s “dissent”. I am a fucktard of the highest aroma. My email is aaronsheath@gmail.com
Please spam me crazy, and do so asap.
Og, I’m sorry, I cut and paste your stuff from time to time on a British forum where it is met with shrieks of approval or disgust from the various gibbons and monkeys that live there. In spite of his horrible political opinions, and the foolishness of youth, Tyger is a good sort. All he needs is a good beating to improve his attitude.
I hope you don’t mind me borrowing your stuff from time to time, I always make a point of crediting the source and posting a link to the Og Blog. I should have asked permission first, I hope you don’t mind?
Keep up the good work, Og!
:)
No problem, Jim, but take a shower before you come back here, huh? some parasites seem to be following you back. LOL! When YOU gonna start a blog?
Banned tygrr. He is free to dissent on his own bandwith. This is my website, and I have ultimate control of it’s content.
Tyger, Eastern Orthodox Christian and intellectually bigoted liberal are not mutually exclusive labels. Neither are, as in my case, “pot-bellied Southern US natural enemy of individual liberty and tolerance” and “sauve and deboner philosopher and man-o-the-world”.
Judging by the fact that you seem to believe that the Old Testament is more the word of God than the New Testament, if you had to go to the former Soviet Union, my guess is that you probably would have gotten far more out of a month snacking on real Beluga cavier and drinking icy cold Russian vodka and robust baltic peeva at an all-inclusive Black Sea resort; although I do respect your choice in that Siberian women are h-o-t. Next month-long getaway, you might try going to St. Petersburg, where you get those very nice Asian features blended with the indigenous Scandanavian. Yowza.
As far as your belief that the US is a tolerant secular society in spite of Christian philosophy rather than because of it; well, you can just go on believing that, junior. Everybody’s got to believe in something.
Whatever the case, the discussion is not about what is the “true word of god” (guess what? anyone tells you they know that is an idiot) but about the teachings of Christ, which are what Christians follow. The post specifically says ‘read the gour gospels’ and not “discuss what is the true word of god”. Tyger, too ignorant to follow the simplest of instructions, is banned. His website is still linked to his signature, so you can go abuse him there if you like, but I’d like to have a discussion about the subject at hand.
nicely done, Mack, by the way. Welcome to the blogroll.
Ok, here’s my take on the whole Jesus vs Mohammed thing. What each of them taught all comes down to the different times and different political-economic circumstances they were living in. What does that mean in practise? Starting with Jesus, his rather passive and reflective philosophy was suited to Jews living under the Romans, because Roman political and military might at the time was so all-powerful that a more assertive and belligerent philosophy would have been doomed to instant failure. To put that another way, if he’d tried to start some kind of loud-mouthed, stir-it-up movement instead, he would have got his ass seriously kicked, and got nowhere seriously fast. Mohammed on the other hand lived in an era when there was no equivalent all-powerful political-military entity such as the Romans, when virtually all of the known world of Europe and the Middle-East was far less politically stable, so it was a totally feasible option for him to go with a major in-your-face, stir-it-up attitude.
So basically Jesus and Mohammed were just doing whatever fitted in best with their own time, and the best proof of that is the fact that if they hadn’t, the stuff they were saying would never have caught on and they wouldn’t have been remembered by so many people for so long.
Am I saying there’s any comparison in which of the two had a better philosophy to follow now, in the 21st Century? No way. I just think if you try to understand them as the logical product of their time, it makes it a lot easier to see why they said the things they did. But it also means you have to accept they were just ordinary men – smart enough to figure out the mood of their times, and spin-off a philosophy from them that people at the time would be able to relate to, but ordinary men all the same.
I came here spouting ignorance and filth, and even posted stupidity as “og” to be a wiseass, and now I want my email removed from this site, because I’m a retard.
I never deserved the smallest goodwill, but I may yet find another fool greater than I to allow me to use their IP and post some more ignorance soon. Watch this space!
Thank you.
you did NOT enter into a debate. You FAILED TO READ THE POST. You could not follow the simplest instructions. You brought your own agenda and tried to jam it into my blog, my bandwidth, and utterly ignored the questions I posed while accusing me of “having something to hide”. This is not debate, this is trolling. Period. Don’t like the fact that you are a troll? well, start not being one. You think you can HAVE a discussion? come back from yet another IP and try, and maybe then I’ll consider deleting your posts.