You raise some good points, however, the Muslim extremists are taught from an early age to hate us. Why is it our faults? Please give me examples outside of this idiot, "Pastor" Terry Jones. I'm not trying to be combative here, I seriously would like to see the type of things that others feel is our fault so I can base an opinion on it.

 

In answer, I would think that we could/should consider a couple of things, historic Christian/Muslim conflicts first and foremost. For centruies Christians invaded and tried to eliminate Islam, as well as Judaism. Historically, we have not been examples of Christ's NT teachings.

 

Secondly, that the culture in the Middle East is so far outside our understanding that we are naive to think we can understand it. Living as we do in America, as most of us Christians, we simply can't fathom either the religious/political/economic/sociological/combination of the previous, culture.

 

I guess my question to you is, why does it have to be our fault or not?

 

I think the best example of what attitude we should use to approach our relations can be found in the religiously based orgainzations that are in Afghanistan (for example) doiing what they feel is Christ's compulsion. An example is the organization that recently lost several members in Afghanistan, yet have vowed to continue their work there. They aren't trying to "convert". They're there trying to minister through medicine, improving living conditions, teaching methods of improving daily lives, and improving literacy. THAT is what I feel will ultimately change the misconceptions about Christianity.

In answer, I would think that we could/should consider a couple of things, historic Christian/Muslim conflicts first and foremost. For centruies Christians invaded and tried to eliminate Islam, as well as Judaism. Historically, we have not been examples of Christ's NT teachings.

 

Secondly, that the culture in the Middle East is so far outside our understanding that we are naive to think we can understand it. Living as we do in America, as most of us Christians, we simply can't fathom either the religious/political/economic/sociological/combination of the previous, culture.

 

I guess my question to you is, why does it have to be our fault or not?

 

I think the best example of what attitude we should use to approach our relations can be found in the religiously based orgainzations that are in Afghanistan (for example) doiing what they feel is Christ's compulsion. An example is the organization that recently lost several members in Afghanistan, yet have vowed to continue their work there. They aren't trying to "convert". They're there trying to minister through medicine, improving living conditions, teaching methods of improving daily lives, and improving literacy. THAT is what I feel will ultimately change the misconceptions about Christianity.

 

 

The ironic thing is that until the uncultured Turks and other nomads were converted to Islam by the followers of Mohamed, Islam was a religion of tolerance in regards to Jews and Christians. I know that many here will flat out not believe me when I say this, but the followers of Islam were taught by their prophet that "People of the Book" as he referred to Jews and Christians were also followers of the one true God. While we may have been misguided in our worship of God, we were not to be forcibly converted as we were not following false gods.

 

This became a problem though when the Arabs conquered the Persian Empire and inherited the Mazdaist intolerance of other religions (worshipers of Ahura Mazda were notorious for their intolerance of other faiths). Then once this seed of intolerance had been planted it fully matured in the conversion of the nomadic Turks who never could understand why the Prophet would make exceptions for "People of the Book." It is these two events in the history of Islam that propagated the eventual intolerance that we see today. That said, in its original form and in the form that the majority of Muslims follow, Islam is not as intolerant as Christianity has been. Especially when you look at a few Christian conflicts that used their faith as an excuse(note however I say excuse because there were other underlying factors in some cases) such as: The Crusades, The Inquisition, The Thirty Years War, The English Civil War and the conflict that has plagued Ireland for years.

 

Let's face it, Christianity is not populated with saints in its entirety nor is Islam nothing but a hate filled religion. The knee-jerk reactionism that has become common place among the masses here in the States is causing the exact reaction that those trying to incite Muslims against us say we have had all along.

I thought that we were talking about the burning of the Koran at a church in the United States. Again, have there been any threats against the church planning on this event?

 

No, the article mentioned threats to Americans in Pakistan. We were not talking about a specific area that I am aware of. I thought we were talking about tolerance and how the two religons handle insults in general to their holy books.

IMO, you're looking at this the wrong way. This isn't about what others may do in the name of their religion, but about what we are called to do in the name of Christ. He commanded us to "turn the other cheek". He forgave Judas for his betrayal of Him. He forgave those who crucified Him. Christ commands us to love one another. He doesn't mention anywhere that we should repress or condemn those who do not believe.

 

And how can Christians hope to show those of other religions that The Way is through love of one's neighbor and the forgiveness of Christ if we are intolerant and ready to disrespect their holiest book?

 

How can we hope to combat what Al Qaeda and the Taliban tout as our intent to destroy Muslims and the Islamic religion if we are, in fact, displaying the very same attitude that they say we hold?

 

Most Muslims, follwers of Islam, do NOT use violence in the name of their religion, no more than most Christians do. The issue, as I see it, is the assignation to a group of people the extreme behavior of a faction within. We feed the assertions of the extremists. We prove their rhetoric is true.

 

In my opinion, and I'll surely be blasted for this, if this Quaran burning leads to the deaths of Christians, the blood is on the hands of those who sought to provoke those who practice Islam. Although it will most likely be terrorists using the incident to further their agenda, the blame will lie on Christians NOT following the teachings of Christ.

 

I don't know when I've disagreed more with a post. I'm still waiting for an answer to my question.

I can't let this go without responding. "Provacative schtick", as you term it, isn't just a right of one side or another. You find it to be "provacative" because you happen to disagree with you. However, much as you believe and wholeheartedly agree with many of the topics introduced in this forum that I don't, because you don't like what someone says doesn't mean it's tiresome.

 

Here's the thing, without "provacative schtick" (again your term) there is no discussion. There is no attempt to undrestand. "Provacative schtick" was what freed slaves, gave women the right to vote and later gave us civil rights legislation. Heck, "provacative schtick" brought peoples of different religion together to form a country that allows each to worship as they please....where would we be if the British Patriots had succeeded in convincing all the people listening to "Provocative schtick"?

 

I'm sorry, maybe many on this board would agree with your statement. And I'm sure it's no surprise to you that I don't. But, just as I find "provacative schtick" interesting when I agree, I've learned an enormous amount about why people believe things I don't, why they don't believe things I do. I wouldn't consider that tiresome, no matter how irksome I find the topic.

 

Sure about that?

Don't read my posts if they tire you so. Or would you have me silenced?

Have you silenced? You should really get over yourself.

I would say you must know what I would respond. But surely you are not saying that the only threats of harm that are to be considered legitimate are physical? Surely you don't find pervasive bias, bigotry, and prejudice to be tolerable?

If someone wants to burn my bible, I don't really care. They won't have to answer to me. If someone wants to harm me or my family, I won't be having a debate with them, I will defend myself/family/property.

In answer, I would think that we could/should consider a couple of things, historic Christian/Muslim conflicts first and foremost. For centruies Christians invaded and tried to eliminate Islam, as well as Judaism. Historically, we have not been examples of Christ's NT teachings.

 

Secondly, that the culture in the Middle East is so far outside our understanding that we are naive to think we can understand it. Living as we do in America, as most of us Christians, we simply can't fathom either the religious/political/economic/sociological/combination of the previous, culture.

 

I guess my question to you is, why does it have to be our fault or not?

 

I think the best example of what attitude we should use to approach our relations can be found in the religiously based orgainzations that are in Afghanistan (for example) doiing what they feel is Christ's compulsion. An example is the organization that recently lost several members in Afghanistan, yet have vowed to continue their work there. They aren't trying to "convert". They're there trying to minister through medicine, improving living conditions, teaching methods of improving daily lives, and improving literacy. THAT is what I feel will ultimately change the misconceptions about Christianity.

 

Muslim vs. believer issues go back much further than Christ. Of course then there were no Christians, there were Jews.

Muslim vs. believer issues go back much further than Christ. Of course then there were no Christians, there were Jews.

 

How is that? :confused:

 

Muhammad was born 500 years AFTER Jesus. :walk:

If someone wants to burn my bible, I don't really care. They won't have to answer to me. If someone wants to harm me or my family, I won't be having a debate with them, I will defend myself/family/property.

 

How does that Jive with your Bible? Not saying it doesn't, just looking for clarification.

How does that Jive with your Bible? Not saying it doesn't, just looking for clarification.

 

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, nail for a nail. Being a Christian doesn't mean you only abide by the principles established in the new testament IMO.

How is that? :confused:

 

Muhammad was born 500 years AFTER Jesus. :walk:

 

Seems my church has taught that the ancestors of the people who started the Muslim faith were the spawn of the illegitimate child of Abraham and Sarah's hand maiden, at least in early biblical history. Of course, the people that lived in these areas had a deep seeded hate for the Hebrews and were know by many different names throughout history. My point was that the hate goes back much further than both the Muslim and Christian religions.

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, nail for a nail. Being a Christian doesn't mean you only abide by the principles established in the new testament IMO.

 

So you ignore where Jesus said "You have heard it said and eye for and eye and tooth for tooth, BUT I say to you . . ." I certainly thought being a Christian meant following the teachings of Christ.

Seems my church has taught that the ancestors of the people who started the Muslim faith were the spawn of the illegitimate child of Abraham and Sarah's hand maiden, at least in early biblical history. Of course, the people that lived in these areas had a deep seeded hate for the Hebrews and were know by many different names throughout history. My point was that the hate goes back much further than both the Muslim and Christian religions.

 

The child was not illegitimate. That was often the practice of that culture when the wife was barren. The child was certainly legitimate in the eyes of that culture, and even in the eyes of Sarah until she had her own. It was her jealousy that sent that child away.

Seems my church has taught that the ancestors of the people who started the Muslim faith were the spawn of the illegitimate child of Abraham and Sarah's hand maiden, at least in early biblical history. Of course, the people that lived in these areas had a deep seeded hate for the Hebrews and were know by many different names throughout history. My point was that the hate goes back much further than both the Muslim and Christian religions.

 

Islam and the Middle Eastern descendents you describe are not exclusively the same. One is a genetic lineage and the other is a faith system. You used the term Muslim.