But again, it's the people who are ordering the violence. The blame is on the people.
Different things I suppose. Insanity, lust for power, maybe they are just angry... Who knows? It would be different depending on the person.
Why would you say that? The religion may play a role in the violence being done in it's name in that if the religion did not exist, the violence wouldn't have been committed. I don't know if that's what you're getting at or not.
At any rate, if that is what you're saying, that does not make the religion responsible any more than a rape victim is responsible for a rape. After all, had she not existed, the rape wouldn't have happened.
The cases are minority. None of the bombers within Islam follow their religion. The Christian Crusade didn't follow the religion. The frequent killing in the middle-east doesn't follow religion.
The cases where it's asked of the religion to kill is a minority Most if not all the times you're asked to kill can be bypassed by quoting various sections of the book. The following aren't direct quotes but worth mentioning because they are true still. Granted, there are exceptions but they are minute.
There's for example the permitting of killing when a woman has preformed adultery within Islam, but in many of the cases the woman want it done to her because she feel she has failed Allah and want to be redeemed. I myself find it a little perverted but I'm not one to judge. I understand the love and devotion many feel towards their God and the ethics by which they live
Fundamental values in Islam:
- Don't take another life.
- Don't take your own life.
- Don't force religious values onto others.
Fundamental values in Christianity:
- Don't take another life.
- Love and pray for your enemies.
- If struck on the cheek, turn the other for him.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
The Christian Crusades very much followed the Catholic Religion, you can't pick and choose. For Catholics, the pope, the bible and everything around it is their religion not just the text, as such following the popes decrees is very much following the Religion.
Same with islam, to some following their Religion is following their Religious leaders.
You trying to distill some sort of universal "that's the religion everyone should follow to be called muslim/christian/etc." is silly and useless.
You guys are trying to make an argument like the Vietnam war is not "fault" of the US because their constitution didn't say to wage it.
Many religious leaders fail to follow their own religion because of bias or perverse priorities. "Excused killings" so to speak. A religious leader asking of you to kill doesn't change the writings in the book, which contain the fundamental values of both religions. Religious leaders are just breathing interpretations of the book. Humans, flawed, biased.
I'm pretty confident the many killers within the Christian Crusade has ended up in Hell. There's a very easy way to see if something is viewed right or wrong in the eyes of true Christianity: What would Jesus do?
Call me radical, but any religious leader that order something Jesus would never do is lost.
That is not the same at all. A better example is someone saying that the constitution is evil because some people waged a war in it's name, regardless of the fact that the constitution does not promote or demand such things at all.
no, its just that a lot of religious people seem more than willing to say religion plays no role in people behaving poorly, but will then say it is of pivotal importance in someone behaving well. I sort of assumed the same here, but was mistaken
so, even if God's representative on earth says, in no uncertain terms, that this is a war in God's name for Christian principles, you would say this representative is mistaken because the Bible emphasizes non-violence over violence?
Man is biased and flawed. I don't believe Jesus would ever condole in any Christian war. And I've come to understand he's a pretty important role in Christianity.
ok, so then, if a church or religious authority were to come out and say, "God wants you to kill X", X being a person or a nation or another religion, you would think that this is man speaking, not God?
I don't think most positions of authority know God better than minor figures within the religion. Their words carry little more value than the little man. They are falsely consider men of authority to me, because I've never thought religion to have a hierarchy beyond God and not-God
In short, yes. I'd believe it being man speaking and not God. I even know a priest of Christianity who doesn't believe in God.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Nah, you guys are still trying to equate certain holy texts with the Religion. You can validly attribute deaths and destructions to certain Religious sects (be it of Christianity or Islam or any other). If we were to attribute deaths to the Bible and the Qur'an, you guys might have a point, but we are talking about Religions, which are institutions, which can and should be blamed. Of course you can always try to semantically trace it back to just the people that did it, because there will always be people actually doing the deeds, but that's completely disregarding the bigger, valid, and important picture. Marx and Das Kapital may not be responsible for the deaths in Communist Russia, but Communism and specifically this implementation of Communism is (as are the people who actually did it, and the people who ordered it, like I said, enough blame to go around for everyone).
Well, like I said, I can see the religion plays a role in causing the violence. But I don't think you can fault the religion for the role it plays.
Well, personally, I'm not Catholic, and I don't have any religious leader that is suppose to tell me what God is saying. Outside, perhaps a Pastor, who only reads and teaches the Bible. He doesn't claim to be like a telephone relaying God's messages.
But if you look at a teaching that says: "Though shalt not kill" and then a "leader" stands up and says, "God says we should kill". I'm seeing a contradiction there.
So in short, yes. I would say he's either crazy, or simply wrong.
If a religion teaches that you are suppose to kill for it, yes. The religion can also be faulted. Christianity does not teach that you should kill people, thus, it cannot be faulted when people do for whatever reasons they concoct in their head.
Again, the only time you can fault a religion for being "evil" is if it genuinely demands it's followers be evil. And I'm pretty sure none of the mainstream religions do so.
Something like that happened with that dove church that burned the Quran. People can commit actions in the name of a religion but both the actions and the religion need to be examined to see if there is any truth to their claim or if they just interpreted the message incorrectly either by accident or by twisting the context on purpose.
If someone started burning churches in the name of atheism I don't think that you could say atheism is to blame.
KMC Community Forums
Apr 15th, 2011 12:40 AM
Most if not all the times you're asked to kill can be bypassed by quoting various sections of the book. The following aren't direct quotes but worth mentioning because they are true still. Granted, there are exceptions but they are minute.
