Is the Butter Slipping off of Rosie's Biscuit?

[PepRock01]

Certainly there are degrees of evil and in no way did I intend to imply that Marx was as evil as some of the others that I listed. However, he was more than an academic discussing social philosophy. He actively advocated violent overthrow of the existing social order with the goal of replacing it with a social order based upon his flawed theories. His Communist Manifesto is a call-to-arms to workers, a call that was taken up by Lenin and others. That's enough to make him both a radical and someone who promoted evil. However, it doesn't raise him to the level of a Stalin who played an active role in killing millions.

 

 

 

I had thought about listing Stalin but I chose Lenin instead since Lenin played a bigger part in the Boleshevik Revolution and therefore better fits the desrciption of being a radical. I would characterize Stalin as more evil than Lenin since Stalin was guilty of killing many more people than Lenin but Lenin was capable of ruthlessness also. Lenin also played a key role in establishing the form of government which made Stalins crimes possible so he can not escape being tainted by Stalin.

 

Interesting way of looking at it. I happen to disagree on the part of Marx and somewhat on Lenin although I admit it is an interesting take on Lenin. :thumb:

[rockmom]

Forgot the first part of that Scripture, RM....

 

"Put your sword back in its place, Jesus said to him (Peter), for all who draw the sword will die by the sword."

 

So the message behind Matt 26:52 is not what you alluded it to be. Jesus was saying the way is NOT violence.

 

That's not my point, LBBC.

 

My point is that for every fanatic, even Christians, there are those who will take a passage out of context and build upon that to justify their actions.

[Fastbreak]

So what modern-day Christian "extremists" are we hearing about these days that Rosie might be referring to?

With all the skilled debaters we have on BGP, I’m a little disappointed that no one pointed out what I consider to be the most obvious point of this whole issue, that being: Rosie disproves her own assertion simply by stating it out loud on national television.

 

If indeed radical Christians are “just as threatening as radical Islam.” Ms. O’Donnell would be in genuine fear for her personal well-being.

 

The fact that she is so comfortable in making her absurd statements regarding Christianity indicates that she does not even remotely believe the propaganda she clearly hopes weaker minds will accept without too much questioning.

 

The counterpoint is that any one of the following facts would be enough to justify her extermination in many Islamic communities around the world: 1.) She’s a brash outspoken female. 2.) She’s an American. 3.) She’s openly lesbian. She clearly does not face that same threat from true Christians in America… or true Christians anywhere in the world.

 

It’s obvious that Rosie is hurting from the fact that the Bible (and by extension, people who believe the veracity of the Bible) clearly frowns upon homosexuality. The oft overlooked fact is that the Bible speaks out against all forms of sexual impurity and immorality. One is no better or worse than another. They all bear consequences that are better avoided (both here and in the hereafter.) The other key point frequently trampled by the overzealous, is that it is not the burden of Christians to judge and mete out retribution. Our job is simply to love, lead by example and to instruct the truth. Any judgment and penalty ultimately falls between every individual and God. If anything, truly radical Christians are deeply and genuinely praying for Rosie O’Donnell’s enlightenment.

 

Bottom line is that I have a hard time believing that Rosie actually believes her own drivel, or she wouldn’t have expressed it openly on national television.

 

She's very insulting to true Christians. There are many social wrongs in America, but hysteria and hostility are not the way to protest them.

 

I will confess (as one who prays that he has the stuff to be a truly radical Christian) that both radical Christians and radical Muslims want to see the world change. It should be very clear however, that the motives and the means of bringing about this change are “radically” different.

[ladiesbballcoach]

With all the skilled debaters we have on BGP, I’m a little disappointed that no one pointed out what I consider to be the most obvious point of this whole issue, that being: Rosie disproves her own assertion simply by stating it out loud on national television.

 

If indeed radical Christians are “just as threatening as radical Islam.” Ms. O’Donnell would be in genuine fear for her personal well-being.

 

The fact that she is so comfortable in making her absurd statements regarding Christianity indicates that she does not even remotely believe the propaganda she clearly hopes weaker minds will accept without too much questioning.

 

The counterpoint is that any one of the following facts would be enough to justify her extermination in many Islamic communities around the world: 1.) She’s a brash outspoken female. 2.) She’s an American. 3.) She’s openly lesbian. She clearly does not face that same threat from true Christians in America… or true Christians anywhere in the world.

 

It’s obvious that Rosie is hurting from the fact that the Bible (and by extension, people who believe the veracity of the Bible) clearly frowns upon homosexuality. The oft overlooked fact is that the Bible speaks out against all forms of sexual impurity and immorality. One is no better or worse than another. They all bear consequences that are better avoided (both here and in the hereafter.) The other key point frequently trampled by the overzealous, is that it is not the burden of Christians to judge and mete out retribution. Our job is simply to love, lead by example and to instruct the truth. Any judgment and penalty ultimately falls between every individual and God. If anything, truly radical Christians are deeply and genuinely praying for Rosie O’Donnell’s enlightenment.

 

Bottom line is that I have a hard time believing that Rosie actually believes her own drivel, or she wouldn’t have expressed it openly on national television.

 

She's very insulting to true Christians. There are many social wrongs in America, but hysteria and hostility are not the way to protest them.

 

I will confess (as one who prays that he has the stuff to be a truly radical Christian) that both radical Christians and radical Muslims want to see the world change. It should be very clear however, that the motives and the means of bringing about this change are “radically” different.

As always, good post and I concur.

[5wide]

I think her message was in reference to contemporary times, so I think she was off base in that sense. Certainly, throughout history, Christianity has had some dark moments.

 

One big difference, IMO, is that Muslims have a basis for their actions. They're basically commanded to do this stuff in the Koran. Christians, on the other hand, are commanded to share the Gospel, and the let the Holy Spirit do the work of speaking to people's hearts and converting them to Christ. Islam tells it's followers to force people to follow Allah. There's a big difference between sharing and forcing. At least by the definition I use.

 

Obviously, a fanatic can distort the words and use it to further their own agenda. The thing is, they don't really have to distort the Koran to reach this conclusion.

 

A comparison from the holy texts...

 

Jesus tells his followers, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation."

 

Mohammed says, "I was ordered to fight all men until they say, 'There is no god but Allah.'"

 

 

I think that's a major difference. Jesus tells His followers to preach the gospel and let the Spirit work in people. Those who don't accept it are condemned, but he clearly teaches that judgement and punishment is reserved until later and it will be carried out by Him. Our job is only to preach the gospel and leave the rest to Him.

 

Mohammed commands his followers to force people, by violence, if necessary, to follow Allah.

 

So, I certainly don't think fundamentalist Christians are innocent. There have been plenty of examples throughout history of them distorting the the truth for their own purpose. The difference, IMO, is that Muslims don't have to distort their word to reach their conclusion. That in itself makes it more likely. In any case, at this point in history, it would be ridiculous to deem Christians a bigger threat than Muslims. That's just my two cents.

[Fastbreak]

There are clear references to violence in the Bible, one of the most widely known:

 

"Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword" (Matt. 26:52).

With all due respect Mom, referring to violence as a poor choice versus endorsing violence as an instrument of change are vastly different philosophical extremes.

 

You cannot quote one verse attributed to the lips of Jesus Christ in which He instructs taking up the sword (the threat of violence) as a means of propagating His Gospel.

 

The fact that irrational minds distort the truth validates nothing… other than the fact that irrational minds are a problem in every human generation.

[HHSDad]

That's not my point, LBBC.

 

My point is that for every fanatic, even Christians, there are those who will take a passage out of context and build upon that to justify their actions.

And my point would be that for every modern day violent Christian fanatic, there are conservatively speaking, thousands of violent Muslim fanatics.

[rockmom]

With all due respect Mom, referring to violence as a poor choice versus endorsing violence as an instrument of change are vastly different philosophical extremes.

 

You cannot quote one verse attributed to the lips of Jesus Christ in which He instructs taking up the sword (the threat of violence) as a means of propagating His Gospel.

 

The fact that irrational minds distort the truth validates nothing… other than the fact that irrational minds are a problem in every human generation.

 

You're preachin' to the choir, FB. I'm merely stating what has and is done in the name of Christianity to justify intolerant behavior and actions. If you remember, I am one of the people here on BGP who do not believe the Bible is literal.

 

Anywho....

 

 

In any case, at this point in history, it would be ridiculous to deem Christians a bigger threat than Muslims.

 

I don't think anyone deems them a bigger threat, as much as they deem them as great a threat.

[rockmom]

And my point would be that for every modern day violent Christian fanatic, there are conservatively speaking, thousands of violent Muslim fanatics.

 

 

So, does the number of fanatical religious participants in one place at any given time determine the impact upon their religion their fanaticism inflicts?

[HHSDad]

So, does the number of fanatical religious participants in one place at any given time determine the impact upon their religion their fanaticism inflicts?

Absolutely.

[rockmom]

Absolutely.

 

Really? :confused:

[ladiesbballcoach]

You're preachin' to the choir, FB. I'm merely stating what has and is done in the name of Christianity to justify intolerant behavior and actions. If you remember, I am one of the people here on BGP who do not believe the Bible is literal.

 

Anywho....

 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone deems them a bigger threat, as much as they deem them as great a threat.

I disagree. And you will have to follow me to get to my final point and some will say I am splitting hairs.

 

I don't believe anyone has truly taken Christianity, the true Christianity represented in Scripture and did those things that Rosie has charged. Sure they have taken their warped sense of it, but you know what we were told that was going to happen. We were told to be leery of false preachers.

 

We are told to be leery of Satan who is like a lion on the hunt looking to prey on the weak, weary and the ones who have separated themselves from the pack.

 

In essence, via the warnings of false preachers, we were told that there would be people who would take the Christian message and warp it to fit their purposes. Does that mean that it is the Christian message? Absolutely, not.

 

The KKK's message IS NOT the Christian message. Jim Jones message IS NOT the Christian message. And so on and so on.

 

So to say that Christianity is a result of these actions would be no different than to say that the desire of this country to help people live in freedom have resulted in terrorists actions by us in Vietname, Korea, Iraq, etc.

 

You can warp or twist the message around to whatever you want but it does NOT mean that is the message.

[Fastbreak]

You're preachin' to the choir, FB. I'm merely stating what has and is done in the name of Christianity to justify intolerant behavior and actions. If you remember, I am one of the people here on BGP who do not believe the Bible is literal.

I do… and you won't find me or my family doing anything but loving and praying for our enemies and those deeply ensnared in sin. :thumb:

[Fastbreak]

I disagree. And you will have to follow me to get to my final point and some will say I am splitting hairs.

 

I don't believe anyone has truly taken Christianity, the true Christianity represented in Scripture and did those things that Rosie has charged. Sure they have taken their warped sense of it, but you know what we were told that was going to happen. We were told to be leery of false preachers.

 

We are told to be leery of Satan who is like a lion on the hunt looking to prey on the weak, weary and the ones who have separated themselves from the pack.

 

In essence, via the warnings of false preachers, we were told that there would be people who would take the Christian message and warp it to fit their purposes. Does that mean that it is the Christian message? Absolutely, not.

 

The KKK's message IS NOT the Christian message. Jim Jones message IS NOT the Christian message. And so on and so on.

 

So to say that Christianity is a result of these actions would be no different than to say that the desire of this country to help people live in freedom have resulted in terrorists actions by us in Vietname, Korea, Iraq, etc.

 

You can warp or twist the message around to whatever you want but it does NOT mean that is the message.

Well said.

[ladiesbballcoach]

So, does the number of fanatical religious participants in one place at any given time determine the impact upon their religion their fanaticism inflicts?

Of course. You put one fanatical in Iraq and you think we have the results that we have. No. But you put the 1,000 of fanaticals that are there and the results or impact they have is different.

 

You put only 1 KKK clown in the south 60 years ago and we see a much different south.