Why did Obama compare Crusades to Islamic State at prayer breakfast?

[JohnR! 5,495]

No. That would be according to your logic. Muhammad no more advocated violence than Jesus did. They are both prophets from the one and same god.

My rationale is that those committing crimes in the name of Islam are no different than those who commit them in the name of Christianity.

Those who carried out violence in the name of Jeses didn't follow his teaching. Muhammad was in favor of violence, so according to your logic his radical followers are carrying out his teaching.

[GandD 5,966]

And yet so much violence was carried out in the name of Jesus by his followers....

Especially when it fits their narrative...

Speaking of narratives, I guess since Christians waged war in the name of their God a thousand years ago against Muslims waging war in the name of their God, they've lost the privilege of being able to comment on any other religion committing atrocities in the name of their God in perpetuity throughout the universe.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

No. That would be according to your logic. Muhammad no more advocated violence than Jesus did. They are both prophets from the one and same god.

My rationale is that those committing crimes in the name of Islam are no different than those who commit them in the name of Christianity.

Read up on it. Jesus didn't lead any wars.

[JohnR! 5,495]

It's the same god - Christian or Muslim - so there is no 'ours' and 'theirs' when it comes to the deity both faiths worship. However, many Christians would say that Jesus never advocated waging war, thereby exposing those who did wage wars in the name of Christ as impostors. Where do you stand on that one? Were certain wars justified and in accordance with the Christian doctrine or do you believe at some point an entire faith was highjacked for geopolitical purposes?

Regardless, IMHO history should not stifle the current discourse. Christians, of all people, should know how easy it is for a few to twist and manipulate the faithful and the zealots to commit atrocities in the name of their deity. It has happened to them throughout centuries and still continues to these days.

In the end, considering Islam, Christianity and Judaism worship the one and same god, it's no surprise they share so much in common. Same god. Same MO.

Speaking of narratives, I guess since Christians waged war in the name of their God a thousand years ago against Muslims waging war in the name of their God, they've lost the privilege of being able to comment on any other religion committing atrocities in the name of their God in perpetuity throughout the universe.

Then why would Christians have gone to war in the name of Jesus? Why would Christians have killed thousands when they took Jerusalem? Why would Christians use the bible to justify Jim Crow laws and slavery?

Read up on it. Jesus didn't lead any wars.

[GandD 5,966]

It's the same god - Christian or Muslim - so there is no 'ours' and 'theirs' when it comes to the deity both faiths worship. However, many Christians would say that Jesus never advocated waging war, thereby exposing those who did wage wars in the name of Christ as impostors. Where do you stand on that one? Were certain wars justified and in accordance with the Christian doctrine or do you believe at some point an entire faith was highjacked for geopolitical purposes?

Regardless, IMHO history should not stifle the current discourse. Christians, of all people, should know how easy it is for a few to twist and manipulate the faithful and the zealots to commit atrocities in the name of their deity. It has happened to them throughout centuries and still continues to these days.

In the end, considering Islam, Christianity and Judaism worship the one and same god, it's no surprise they share so much in common. Same god. Same MO.

Its the same God, yet different interpretations.

If " IMHO history should not stifle the current discourse" then stop bringing it up in a direct attempt to do so.

Same God yet two completely different religions. Weird huh?

Then why would Christians have gone to war in the name of Jesus? Why would Christians have killed thousands when they took Jerusalem? Why would Christians use the bible to justify Jim Crow laws and slavery?

Because they were not following the example of Jesus. They just said they were.

[JohnR! 5,495]

And yet Christians massacred and killed and waged wars in the name of Jesus. It seems both religions are not so different after all..

Its the same God, yet different interpretations.

If " IMHO history should not stifle the current discourse" then stop bringing it up in a direct attempt to do so.

Same God yet two completely different religions. Weird huh?

If Christians were following the example of Jesus to the letter they would all remain celibate and poor. However you do come to agree with the POTUS after all. His comments were that just like many who said to be following the teachings of Jesus when in fact they weren't, there are many who claim to be following the teachings of the Q'ran and Muhammed, who in fact, aren't.

Because they were not following the example of Jesus. They just said they were.

Edited February 9, 2015 by JohnR!

[GandD 5,966]

And yet Christians massacred and killed and waged wars in the name of Jesus. It seems both religions are not so different after all..

If Christians were following the example of Jesus to the letter they would all remain celibate and poor.

Deflection. And a ridiculous one at that. Jesus never said people had to be exactly like him. He advised lots of people how to live their life, not his life. And the celibate part is just dumb. Jesus was not against marriage for his followers. I guess in your world, two wrongs = a right.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Au contraire. Your attempt at deflection is poorly executed as is often the case when one resorts to moral relativism to justify different outcomes to one same situation.

Deflection. And a ridiculous one at that. Jesus never said people had to be exactly like him. He advised lots of people how to live their life, not his life. And the celibate part is just dumb. Jesus was not against marriage for his followers. I guess in your world, two wrongs = a right.

[GandD 5,966]

Au contraire. Your attempt at deflection is poorly executed as is often the case when one resorts to moral relativism to justify different outcomes to one same situation.

That doesn't make any sense. You can't just say things using "fancy" words and win an argument. You have to win the point/counter point portion of the discussion which you have failed to do. Something that is virtually impossible when instead of dealing with the point being made, you simply make other random observations and pat yourself on the back.

Why is the Islamic state like or not like the crusades?

[JohnR! 5,495]

There is no such thing as fancy words. They are all part of the English lexicon and found in the same dictionary. I'm not sure what makes a word fall into the 'fancy' category considering they are all available for use free of charge.

However, again, your attempt at deflection is poorly executed as you avoid the subject of the discussion.

To address your question, I'm not sure whether ISIS is like the Crusaders, white supremacists or segregationists, despite the many similarities between them. What I'm sure, as evidenced by history both ancient and current, is that in many instances Christianity was used to justify and validate atrocities. The same happened/happens to Islam.

p.s. In all fairness, there is no winning or losing an argument. We're just looking at the same object from different perspectives and points of view. I don't think you're wrong or right.

That doesn't make any sense. You can't just say things using "fancy" words and win an argument. You have to win the point/counter point portion of the discussion which you have failed to do. Something that is virtually impossible when instead of dealing with the point being made, you simply make other random observations and pat yourself on the back.

Why is the Islamic state like or not like the crusades?

Edited February 9, 2015 by JohnR!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Speaking of narratives, I guess since Christians waged war in the name of their God a thousand years ago against Muslims waging war in the name of their God, they've lost the privilege of being able to comment on any other religion committing atrocities in the name of their God in perpetuity throughout the universe.

Well it's no coincidence that all of this is going on in countries that have been hardened by war and decades of oppression. It's also no coincidence that Islam is being used as the driving ideology of this movement. No disagreement there. The disagreement is over why this is and what it means further afield.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

It's simple. Killing in the name of Jesus is contrary to what he taught. Those who did so were not doing what he taught.

[JohnR! 5,495]

The same is true for Islam and the teachings of Muhammad, which is no surprise since both prophets were commanded by the same deity.

It's simple. Killing in the name of Jesus is contrary to what he taught. Those who did so were not doing what he taught.

Edited February 9, 2015 by JohnR!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It's simple. Killing in the name of Jesus is contrary to what he taught. Those who did so were not doing what he taught.

What difference does that make?

[GandD 5,966]

Well it's no coincidence that all of this is going on in countries that have been hardened by war and decades of oppression. It's also no coincidence that Islam is being used as the driving ideology of this movement. No disagreement there. The disagreement is over why this is and what it means further afield.

In the years they were not under the thumb of the west, they were under the thumb of another power. Israel has been taken by nearly every major civilization ever. East and west. I'm not sure why the focus is nearly always on western conquest. What about the Saracens or the Ottomans? Its hard to blame everything on one of the conquerors. But yes, you're right, religion and its promise of an after life has a special appeal to the most disenfranchised of us. And as we see here, its easy to portray the "invaders" as immoral savages under the sway of a foreign religion.

There is no such thing as fancy words. They are all part of the English lexicon and found in the same dictionary. I'm not sure what makes a word fall into the 'fancy' category considering they are all available for use free of charge.

However, again, your attempt at deflection is poorly executed as you avoid the subject of the discussion.

To address your question, I'm not sure whether ISIS is like the Crusaders, white supremacists or segregationists, despite the many similarities between them. What I'm sure, as evidenced by history both ancient and current, is that in many instances Christianity was used to justify and validate atrocities. The same happened/happens to Islam.

p.s. In all fairness, there is no winning or losing an argument. We're just looking at the same object from different perspectives and points of view. I don't think you're wrong or right.

Ok man.