Roy Moore accused of sexual contact with 14-year old

[rogue06]

The Bible and the Koran both have a history of being made to say whatever people want them to say. And just as the Koran is read by some as a command to subdue and convert non Muslim nations so has the Bible. E.g. Pope Nicolas V instructed European Christian nations to "invade, capture, vanquish" and "subdue" indigenous peoples and "subjugate" them. The Christian Church endorsed slavery, racism & subordination of women...and justified it all with biblical texts.

Once again, you keep overlooking one crucial point.

For a Christian to go out conquering in Jesus' name means that he is going directly against the teachings of Christ (Matthew 5:9; Luke 6:35; John 14:27; 16:33; Acts 10:36... to name a few).

But in contrast, for a Muslim to go out conquering in Allah's name is following directly what it's prophet Muhammad both did and taught.

This is a irrefutable fact.

[JimL]

Once again, you keep overlooking one crucial point.

For a Christian to go out conquering in Jesus' name means that he is going directly against the teachings of Christ (Matthew 5:9; Luke 6:35; John 14:27; 16:33; Acts 10:36... to name a few).

But in contrast, for a Muslim to go out conquering in Allah's name is following directly what it's prophet Muhammad both did and taught.

This is a irrefutable fact.

You're overlooking one crucial point, Jesus and Yahway are one and the same god so if you're saying that Jesus, unlike Allah, was good, then you are saying that Yahway just like Allah was evil.

[JimL]

You apparently need to read it again. I think you have it confused with the Lord of the Rings.

Nope, read it and know it pretty well, I think you have it confused with reality.

[Tassman]

Once again, you keep overlooking one crucial point.

For a Christian to go out conquering in Jesus' name means that he is going directly against the teachings of Christ (Matthew 5:9; Luke 6:35; John 14:27; 16:33; Acts 10:36... to name a few).

But in contrast, for a Muslim to go out conquering in Allah's name is following directly what it's prophet Muhammad both did and taught.

This is a irrefutable fact.

[lilpixieofterror]

If you go further back into history you find most of Christendom not only applauding the actions of those massacring Muslims and Jews during the first crusade and the siege of Jerusalem, but excommunicating those knights who did not take part.

Why did Christians invade the holy land Roy?

[rogue06]

I'm not denying for a second that many Christians have gone expressly against Jesus' explicit teachings. But that is the point. Unlike Islam.

[Roy]

Why did Christians invade the holy land Roy?

Because it was considered holy.

I don't think it's possible to be certain since historical records are scarce, inconsistent and often tainted by the biases of the authors, and because there were many different forces involved in the first crusade who were not acting entirely in unison. However, the overall picture seems to be that Byzantium appealed to the pope for assistance against incursions by Seljuk forces into Anatolia, various European forces travelled to Constantinople to repel them, and when they were successful in not just reversing recent Seljuk incursions but in making incursions of their own against the various remnant Seljuk states, including capturing Antioch, they continued southwards towards Jerusalem and captured it from the Fatimids who had just themselves recaptured it from the Seljuks who had ended four centuries of Fatimid occupation of Jerusalem when they took it twenty years earlier.

Effectively the crusaders used Seljuk (Sunni) incursions into Anatolia as an excuse to wrest Jerusalem from the control of the (Shi'ite) Fatimids who had nothing to do with either the Seljuk incursions or increasing hostility to Xtian pilgrimages to Jerusalem.

Do you disagree?

[Roy]

I'm not denying for a second that many Christians have gone expressly against Jesus' explicit teachings. But that is the point. Unlike Islam.

Devils advocate mode:

So Muslims are capable of being peaceful despite the warlike nature of their religion, yet Xtians are incapable of being peaceful even though their religion commands it?

[Mountain Man]

You're overlooking one crucial point, Jesus and Yahway are one and the same god so if you're saying that Jesus, unlike Allah, was good, then you are saying that Yahway just like Allah was evil.

You really don't get the fact that God's commands to the nation of Israel were very limited in scope and included a number of checks to prevent the Israelites from acquiring a taste for war, such as limiting the spoils they were allowed to take - in some cases, it was none - and they were never given open-ended permission to declare war whenever they felt like it. The Bible records several instances when Israel tried to go to war without God commanding it and suffering brutal defeat. Basically, God used Israel as his instrument of judgment against select nation groups that defied him. But these commands were ONLY for Israel and ONLY in those specific circumstances. These commands did not apply outside of those circumstances, to later generations of Jews, and certainly not to Christians born thousands of years later under the New Covenant.

In contrast, the Koran teaches that all Muslims are always at war with all non-Muslims and gives open-ended commands to subjugate and murder "infidels" whenever and wherever they're found.

There's simply no parallel here.

[shunyadragon]

Actually, she's not a typical conservative Republican. She's a pro-amnesty globalist. And her views on Moore are especially ignorant.

As I said, denigrate and abuse anyone who disagrees with you.

[shunyadragon]

(The "eight", of course, is in dispute, there being more like "two", but let's leave that alone for now)

Not going to leave it alone. There are eight accusers.

[Cow Poke]

Not going to leave it alone. There are eight accusers.

Accusers of what, exactly?

[Mountain Man]

Devils advocate mode:

So Muslims are capable of being peaceful despite the warlike nature of their religion, yet Xtians are incapable of being peaceful even though their religion commands it?

Looks like the devil picked a fool for a lawyer.

The point, of course, is that a devout Christian will be peaceful while a devout Muslim will be violent, and some people are better at following their religion than others. It's why I say that Muslim terrorists are not extremist, they're orthodox. In some parts of the world, a peaceful Muslim is decried as a heretic. I can't think of any situation where the same holds true for a peaceful Christian.

[Mountain Man]

Not going to leave it alone. There are eight accusers.

Only two that matter, and neither of them are credible. The rest accuse him of asking them out on dates and behaving like a gentleman. Big deal.

[Mountain Man]

As I said, denigrate and abuse anyone who disagrees with you.

As I said, and not just because they happen to disagree with me.