Muslims outpace Anglicans in the UK

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Graham

No, I am going by the implications in what you *said*!

Let me remind you (and others):



Now you firstly state that a person who uses violence in the name of Christianity is not a "True Christian", you then go on to name a *specific* act committed by Muslims *without* suggesting or even *hinting* that just because they "used violence in the name of Islam" they weren't "True Muslims".

Hmm, I fail to see that Graham.
Russ didn't say the hijackers were muslim. They may consider themselves to be muslim, you (if inferred from what you just said) consider them to be muslim ("a *specific* act committed by Muslims").
You therefore (using your arguments against Russ) consider muslims to be terrorists.

But I know you don't. Using a bit of common sense, I can see that even though you refered to the people who flew the planes into the twin towers as muslim, you know that they were not following true islam, but some warped version of it.
Just the same, Russ chose to only deal with the fact that christianity does not teach hatred nor violence, as that is something he knows about for sure.
If he were to extend that to an unknown religion such as islam, then he would be making claims which although he may be pretty sure are true, he would not be able to back up.

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Did her words spur christian suicide bombers into action? Did she hijack anything and kill muslims with it? No. She was just another Kilroy-Silk mouthing off, nothing more.

Irrelevant.

What have Christian anti-abortionists got to do with all this. We are discussing the fact that we get some muslims trying to kill us because we are not muslims and you provide evidence that christians are violent towards abortionists

The abortionists may well be Christians, however the anti-abortionists attack them because they don't hold to the same beliefs.

You have shown us a load of extremist christians but I don't see any christian 727 hijackers or suicide bombers mentioned there.
Try harder

No, Ramrod, *you* try harder to remember what the subject actually is.

Let me quote your words again to jog your memory:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions.

I have just given examples of *exactly* what you asked for, Christians who use hatred and acts of violence and terrorism against those who are either members of other religions or even their *own* religion if those people don't hold to the same extremist views.

Try harder.

......anyhoo...even if you find one christian who has actually killed muslims for religious reasons you still have to balance that against the daily atrocities meted out by some muslims against others because they aren't muslim.

Oh! They've killed loads, so that justifies us killing *ONE*? Ye gods...

So what? You said that we create bogeymen where there are none. I merely pointed out that some of those are real, not imagined.

Again you fail to read what I have written <sigh>

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Russ didn't say the hijackers were muslim. They may consider themselves to be muslim, you (if inferred from what you just said) consider them to be muslim ("a *specific* act committed by Muslims").
You therefore (using your arguments against Russ) consider muslims to be terrorists.But I know you don't.

Good, because that would have been utter nonsense.

Using a bit of common sense, I can see that even though you refered to the people who flew the planes into the twin towers as muslim, you know that they were not following true islam, but some warped version of it.

In exactly the same way the extremists whose views I posted in that reply to Ramrod *call* themselves Christian.

Now as to what a "true" Christian, Muslim or whatever is, is down to those who believe in the theology, but that's another discussion entirely.

Just the same, Russ chose to only deal with the fact that christianity does not teach hatred nor violence, as that is something he knows about for sure.

Ahem! "Does not"?

I think you mean "Should not"!!

If he were to extend that to an unknown religion such as islam, then he would be making claims which although he may be pretty sure are true, he would not be able to back up.

Doubts benefit does not require facts to back it up. That's the whole *point* about it!!

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Russ D

So what's wrong with that?

You aren't being serious are you Russ?????


If you are then your not the sort of guy I imaged you to be

[Russ]

Now you firstly state that a person who uses violence in the name of Christianity is not a "True Christian", you then go on to name a *specific* act committed by Muslims *without* suggesting or even *hinting* that just because they "used violence in the name of Islam" they weren't "True Muslims".

Graham you really are jumping to conclusions which simply don't exist. Those who the caused 9/11, I don't know WHAT faith they professed to be but whatever it was, I don't know enough to make a comment on it. I might question it, which is the way I learn about such things, but when it comes to a subject as deep and wide-spread as a religion, I won't comment until I have competant knowledge of it. I just wish certain people would do the same on here.

This is precisely why I called it Special Pleading because your implication is "in this case (ie Christianity) it's different", when there is in reality no such difference.

Yes - to me there IS a difference. I know a lot more about Christianity than I do about the Muslim faith.

But I'm sure that *they* consider themselves to be "True Christians"!

*They* probably do but if they could show me anything in the NT which promotes their views and ideas I'll admit I'm wrong.

If someone uses the fallacy of Special Pleading to claim that "it's different in this case", I'm going to call them on it. If he didn't think it, he wouldn't have said it.

I'm 99% sure you're the only person who thinks I said that.

I think you mean "Should not"!!

Nope, Xac was right first time.

You aren't being serious are you Russ?????

Too right I was serious. What's wrong with someone preaching what we believe to be the Good News? If you don't want to hear it, walk away.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Graham

Irrelevant.

I said:"I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions." Did she kill anyone? No. Did any christian kill a muslim because of her words? No.
Therefore, not irrelevant

The abortionists may well be Christians, however the anti-abortionists attack them because they don't hold to the same beliefs.

I said:"I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions. " We are talking religion here, not abortion.

I have just given examples of *exactly* what you asked for, Christians who use hatred and acts of violence and terrorism against those who are either members of other religions or even their *own* religion if those people don't hold to the same extremist views.

Try harder.

I actually said: "I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions. " You seem to be answering points that you have added to my origional statement. I suggest that you remember what I actually wrote!
I have highlited the extra words that you have added in your statement above to make it easy for you to see where you have gone wrong.
My original comment refered to acts of voilence or terrorism against people of other religions.

Oh! They've killed loads, so that justifies us killing *ONE*? Ye gods...

Don't put words into my mouth. I didn't say or even imply that.

Again you fail to read what I have written <sigh>

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

You seem to be answering points that you have added to my origional statement.

You get used to that with Graham after a while....

[Stuartbe]

I find this all a bit silly......

Correct me if I am wrong but EVERY religon in the world states something like " love your brother or fellow man " and forbids killing....

Kind of ironic that millions have died fighting for there religeon !!!

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Too right I was serious. What's wrong with someone preaching what we believe to be the Good News? If you don't want to hear it, walk away.

But I didn't think you went in for preaching at people who aren't interested, which is what Graham said.

Hardly "good news" that I'm going to hell, is it?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by dellwear

But I didn't think you went in for preaching at people who aren't interested, which is what Graham said.

Well I don't, but for the people who do, how are they to know if someone isn't interested?

Originally Posted by dellwear

Hardly "good news" that I'm going to hell, is it?

I'm pretty sure they preach a little bit more than that.....

Originally Posted by Russ D

Graham you really are jumping to conclusions which simply don't exist. Those who the caused 9/11, I don't know WHAT faith they professed to be

Then you are deliberately blinding yourself to the facts. Whatever your opinions of my beliefs are, I do my damndest to be objective and extend the benefit of the doubt, however I can find nothing that gives any reasonable or credible doubt to the claims that the September 11th terrorists called themselves and believed themselves to be Muslims. If you have, please, cite it here.

Oh, BTW, is that a splinter in my eye??

but whatever it was, I don't know enough to make a comment on it. I might question it, which is the way I learn about such things, but when it comes to a subject as deep and wide-spread as a religion, I won't comment until I have competant knowledge of it.

And *how* exactly will you learn or gain "competant knowledge" when you keep dodging the issue?

I just wish certain people would do the same on here.

Russ, I have just negative repped you for this sort of childish sniping and now you make another petty dig without having the guts or the good grace to use anyone's name. If you mean me, *say* it is me you mean. If it is someone else use *their* name. Don't just sling mud around and hope it sticks because it does your credibility no good at all.

Yes - to me there IS a difference. I know a lot more about Christianity than I do about the Muslim faith.

And so, because you lack knowledge, you should give them the benefit of the doubt, rather than implictly apply guilt by association.

*They* probably do but if they could show me anything in the NT which promotes their views and ideas I'll admit I'm wrong.

You will have to take that up with them, not me.

I'm 99% sure you're the only person who thinks I said that.

Ah, now we have the fallacy of Appeal to Popularity...!

Nope, Xac was right first time.

Now we're back to the distinction between "True Christians", ie the ones that Russ agrees with, and those who he disagrees with who are, therefore, not "True Christians"...

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I said:"I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions." Did she kill anyone? No. Did any christian kill a muslim because of her words? No.
Therefore, not irrelevant

Quoting you from post#40: The christian promises hellfire in the next life whilst the muslim (if the quotes on this thread are to be accepted) promises to do nasty things to non-believers in this life.

I have given examples of *Christians* doing the things that you say *Muslims* "promise to do... in this life".

I said:"I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions. " We are talking religion here, not abortion.

Oh good grief, Ramrod, are you *seriously* trying to suggest that many people's opinions on abortion are *NOT* influenced by religion?!?!

I actually said: "I am not aware of any Christians who use that approach in their dealings with members of other religions. " You seem to be answering points that you have added to my origional statement. I suggest that you remember what I actually wrote!

I do remember what you wrote, I've quoted it and now quoted your previous remarks to ensure that the context is clear!

I have highlited the extra words that you have added in your statement above to make it easy for you to see where you have gone wrong.
My original comment refered to acts of voilence or terrorism against people of other religions.

Ramrod, I have "added" those words because they are entirely relevant and apposite in the context of the discussion in this thread. And trying to narrow the goalposts to just "people of other religions" ignores the behaviour of groups such as the Taliban against other Muslims who they considered to be "insufficiently (or incorrectly) devout" and this can easily be compared to the behaviour of some extremist Christian groups against *other* Christians.

Originally Posted by Russ D

You get used to that with Graham after a while....

Well at least this time you had the courage to name me.

Of course despite the smiley it's just a pathetic attempt to smear me without backing it up with anything because there *is* nothing to back it up with.

[Russ]

Graham, if I am going tomake a comment about you or anyone you can be as sure as s*** that I would name you, as I did above.

In the case of the comment you neg repped me for, I actually was NOT referring to you but if you want to think I was then that's all that matters.

The thing is I and a few others find it very difficult to have a decent discussion with you on certain matters as you constantly take (IMO) rather odd points of view to my and other's comments on the Bible. You are perfectly entitled to disagree with my views but when you start reading things in to matters which aren't there and acting on comments which you "think" I'm trying to make when I've never made or implied them, I'm sorry but I'm going to respond.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Graham

Quoting you from post#40: The christian promises hellfire in the next life whilst the muslim (if the quotes on this thread are to be accepted) promises to do nasty things to non-believers in this life.

I have given examples of *Christians* doing the things that you say *Muslims* "promise to do... in this life".

Have you given examples of christian suicide bombers? No. Have you given examples of christians flying planes into buildings? No.
You have given examples of christians saying things but not of christians doing things.

Oh good grief, Ramrod, are you *seriously* trying to suggest that many people's opinions on abortion are *NOT* influenced by religion?!?!

Of course they are but we aren't talking about them and abortion, we are talking about 'muslims v christians' in the 'terrorism stakes'

Ramrod, I have "added" those words because they are entirely relevant and apposite in the context of the discussion in this thread.

that may well be but they aren't relevant when you are disputing a remark that I made and the context that I made it in.

And trying to narrow the goalposts to just "people of other religions" ignores the behaviour of groups such as the Taliban against other Muslims who they considered to be "insufficiently (or incorrectly) devout" and this can easily be compared to the behaviour of some extremist Christian groups against *other* Christians.

I didn't narrow the goalposts, you widened them to try to disprove a statement that I made.


*edit* Ah! I see where the confusion is arising here, It hinges on my use of the word 'promise' You think I meant that christians say hateful things as well as muslims (of course they bloody do! ).
I meant that christians promise hellfire in the afterlife (and leave it to God to deliver) but (some) muslims promise hellfire in this life...and deliver it themselves.
I'm sorry about the confusion