Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 99
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    I agree with the supposition that we should not cede the determination of right and wrong to another on our behalf. In doing so, though, I think it is appropriate to recognize that when people refernece the same source, they are likely to draw similar, if not identical, conclusions...............
    Really? How then do you account for the fact that so many who assert that the bible is the literal word of God are prepared to kill each other over differences in its meaning?
  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    Really? How then do you account for the fact that so many who assert that the bible is the literal word of God are prepared to kill each other over differences in its meaning?
    How much time to I have to answer?

    As I see it, there are actually two questions here: a) How do people disagree about the meaning of the same text? b) What prompts people to kill over interpretations.

    Question 'a' apparently challenges my assertion. However, when I see even the most heated disagreements, I find that the "differences" are more often variations on the same theme.

    Question 'b' speaks to a lack of understanding of God's grace. We often think that our "salvation" is based on our own"correct" interpretation when in fact it is derived from a total reliance on the debt paid on our behalf.
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    How much time to I have to answer?

    As I see it, there are actually two questions here: a) How do people disagree about the meaning of the same text? b) What prompts people to kill over interpretations.

    Question 'a' apparently challenges my assertion. However, when I see even the most heated disagreements, I find that the "differences" are more often variations on the same theme.

    Question 'b' speaks to a lack of understanding of God's grace. We often think that our "salvation" is based on our own"correct" interpretation when in fact it is derived from a total reliance on the debt paid on our behalf.
    Good answer. Dismisses the question but a good answer.
  4. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    Really? How then do you account for the fact that so many who assert that the bible is the literal word of God are prepared to kill each other over differences in its meaning?
    I'm not disagreeing (yet) but can you provide examples of the people who are prepared to kill each other?
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    Good answer. Dismisses the question but a good answer.
    Not sure why you consider it dismissive, but, as TxDot requested, perhaps some examples would help to focus the conversation.
  6. #66  
    Sunni and Shia Muslims certainly do not like each other much.
  7. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooose View Post
    Sunni and Shia Muslims certainly do not like each other much.
    AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK, $they$ $don$'$t$ $consider$ $the$ $Bible$ $to$ $be$ $the$ $literal$ $word$ $of$ $God$.
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  8. #68  
    Okay, well what about the Wahabi sect of Islam that considers all others to be heretical. They form the largest contingent of the terrorists and they include Osama Bin Laden among their members.
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    AFAIKAFAIKAFAIK, $they$ $don$'$t$ $consider$ $the$ $Bible$ $to$ $be$ $the$ $literal$ $word$ $of$ $God$.
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    I'm not disagreeing (yet) but can you provide examples of the people who are prepared to kill each other?
    What about all of those forced conversions back in the middle ages....the Crusades, where Popes led armies to convert the heathen Muslims in the Holy Land.
    Last edited by Brooose; 08/23/2006 at 08:46 AM.
  10. 4ster's Avatar
    Posts
    238 Posts
    Global Posts
    293 Global Posts
    #70  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooose View Post
    What about all of those forced conversions back in the middle ages....the Crusades, where Popes led armies to convert the heathen Muslims in the Holy Land.
    Not to in any way excuse the inexcusable brutality of the Crusades, but as a point of clarification, I am not sure the crusaders were interested in coverting anyone as much as they were interested in reclaiming quasi-historical sites that had been occupied or destroyed by the resident Muslims in the Holy Land.

    The Crusades also seem to have been compounded by the fact that many Christianized warrior groups (i.e. the Vikings) now had no one to fight, and the "reclaiming" of Jerusalem and the Holy Land gave an easy context (and for that matter, a justification) for a return to violence.
    Safety and happiness can only come from individuals, classes, and nations being honest and fair and kind to each other.
    - C.S. Lewis
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooose View Post
    Sunni and Shia Muslims certainly do not like each other much.
    Seemingly, the dispute between the two boils down to disagreement over the line of succession of spiritual leadership (Summary I came across via Google
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooose View Post
    What about all of those forced conversions back in the middle ages....the Crusades, where Popes led armies to convert the heathen Muslims in the Holy Land.
    It seems you may have missed whmurray's question. The question was why people of the same religion kill each other over differences of interpretation.
  13. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooose View Post
    What about all of those forced conversions back in the middle ages....the Crusades, where Popes led armies to convert the heathen Muslims in the Holy Land.
    The "christians" during the Crusades were not true Christians. They were Romans soldiers who were "christian" only by decree of Constantine. In other words (though there may have been some exceptions) they had not had a "conversion" experience. Unfortunately they did what they did under the sign of the cross and in the name of God. They certainly were not "christ-like" which is the general meaning of the term Christian.
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  14. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #74  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    It seems you may have missed whmurray's question. The question was why people of the same religion kill each other over differences of interpretation.
    Good point.
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    I'm not disagreeing (yet) but can you provide examples of the people who are prepared to kill each other?
    The answer seems to me to be so obvious that the request for examples strikes me as disingenous. One need only ask the refugees.

    The most current examples are Iraq (Suniis and Shia killing each other's women and children) and Lebanon (where Muslims, Christians, and Jews are killing one another, all in the name of the One True God). The Christian Germans slaughtered the Jews. Then there are the Serbs and the Croats, "Christians" both; three wars in one century. In the first one, the Catholic Germans sided with the Croats and Orthodox Russians with the Serbs. The result was the Great War.

    As recently as a decade ago, Irish Protestants and Catholics were killing each other. English Protestants and Catholics have a history as do French and German Protestants and Catholics. Catholics in Spain killed "heretics" and Jews indiscriminately. Catholics were driven out of Canada. Here the (at the time, predominately Protestant) government killed Mormons by the hundreds.

    While all of the wars in history have been to some degree or another economic, and while some have been over language or class, the rationale for the killing has been "God is on our side."

    One may argue that the divisions are not related to dogma but that the sides are chosen along religious lines seems indisputable.
  16. #76  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    The "christians" during the Crusades were not true Christians. They were Romans soldiers who were "christian" only by decree of Constantine. In other words (though there may have been some exceptions) they had not had a "conversion" experience. Unfortunately they did what they did under the sign of the cross and in the name of God. They certainly were not "christ-like" which is the general meaning of the term Christian.
    By your definition there would not be enough to be a problem. I count as Christian those who self-identify as Christians and certainly all of those who take up arms against their neighbors in His name.

    (One might read the sermons, not to say TV broadcasts, of those great Christian moral leaders, Ian Fleming, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson.)
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    The answer seems to me to be so obvious that the request for examples strikes me as disingenous. One need only ask the refugees.

    The most current examples are Iraq (Suniis and Shia killing each other's women and children) and Lebanon (where Muslims, Christians, and Jews are killing one another, all in the name of the One True God). The Christian Germans slaughtered the Jews. Then there are the Serbs and the Croats, "Christians" both; three wars in one century. In the first one, the Catholic Germans sided with the Croats and Orthodox Russians with the Serbs. The result was the Great War.

    As recently as a decade ago, Irish Protestants and Catholics were killing each other. English Protestants and Catholics have a history as do French and German Protestants and Catholics. Catholics in Spain killed "heretics" and Jews indiscriminately. Catholics were driven out of Canada. Here the (at the time, predominately Protestant) government killed Mormons by the hundreds.

    While all of the wars in history have been to some degree or another economic, and while some have been over language or class, the rationale for the killing has been "God is on our side."

    One may argue that the divisions are not related to dogma but that the sides are chosen along religious lines seems indisputable.
    I don't think your examples really answer your original question which, to me, seemed only to include Christians who believed the Bible is the "literal Word of God" killing each other over differences in it's meaning.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    .......they had not had a "conversion" experience.
    Does it strike you as interesting that most of us are "converted" to the religion of our parents and neighbors?

    I am reminded of The Peaceable Kingdom by Jan de Hartog. The epic points out the the religious, not to say "conversion," experience of the Founders of the Society of Friends became the religious tyranny of their grandchildren.
  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs View Post
    I don't think your examples really answer your original question which, to me, seemed only to include Christians who believed the Bible is the "literal Word of God" killing each other over differences in it's meaning.
    Perhaps. However, "Christian" is your word, not mine. Perhaps you project Christian on "so many who assert that the bible is the literal word of God." Perhaps you projected the King James Bible on my "bible." (I was discouraged from reading the King James Bible in favor of the Douay-Rheims on the basis that, even in the unlikely case that it did not contain heresy, it lacked the authority of the "One True Church.")

    Trust me when I tell you that Muslims believe no less fervently the Khoran to be "the bible" and the literal revealed Word of God. They are nonetheless divided over whether it justifies the killing of infidels and heretics and the right to define them. They are divided over who has the authority to issue a fatwah.
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray View Post
    shopharim wrote:
    I agree with the supposition that we should not cede the determination of right and wrong to another on our behalf. In doing so, though, I think it is appropriate to recognize that when people refernece the same source, they are likely to draw similar, if not identical, conclusions...............

    I responded:

    Really? How then do you account for the fact that so many who assert that the bible is the literal word of God are prepared to kill each other over differences in its meaning?
    My point was that the "same source" does not seem to lead to "similar...conclusions," that even those who consent to the absolute authority of a source may so differ over its interpretation that they are prepared to fight over the difference.
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions