Obama upsets US Christians....again

[katherine2001]

Those would be Muslims who are turning their backs on Mohammed; which is a good thing, but lets see spineless politicians say that instead of throwing mud at Christians because he's a coward who knows that where Muslims would kill him for that Christians put up with it.

I bet Christ Himself will have much worse things to say about what was done in His name than President Obama said in this speech. He was entirely right. Christ could get quite angry about things done in God's name--remember Him driving the money changers out of the temple?

 

[SuperCloud]

I'm a big supporter of the Crusades.

The actual Crusades lasted a lot longer than most historians admit to. The Battle of Vienna and the Battle of Lepanto were all part of the Crusades.

Those fighting these wars never called it the Crusades though. Unlike the Conquistadors ("Conquers") who actually called themselves that in more celebration than they were due (without Amerindian support fighting their Amerindian rivals the Spanish would never have become "conquerors").

I think the Crusades are more analogous to the so-called "War on Terrorism" or even WWII which was filled with a lot of war crimes (Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dreseden Tokyo, and the fire bombing of half of Japan is the equivalent of the slaughter of Jerusalem).

At some point the Christian world was as bound to crash into the Islamic world with arms as modern day secular democracies deem it necessary to call for their own Holy Crusade.

The Inquisition was more or less like living in Texas as opposed to Wisconsin. The former has the death penalty and the latter doesn't. These were not extra-judicial (lynchings) executions. Rather, they were judicial cases that could (but often didn't) lead to the death penalty. Under the culture of Inquisition--at least in the Americas--arose religions like Santeria, evidencing it was rather a velvet glove affair in terms of any ideas of being "Puritanical." It was harsh on heresy. But heresy back then was pretty much like committing treason. For right or wrong it still remained a judicial affair, like modern day Americans bring to court and incarcerate 18 year-old boys accused of having sex with their 17 year-old girlfriends.

The death penalty under the Inquisition could only be given by the state. The Church was only the state in the Papal States. So, outside the Papal States the Church did not impose the death penalty. It was reflective many ways of the trial of Christ and although the Jewish leaders tried Jesus for heresy He was turned over to the Roman state for the death penalty.

But here is the irony with Obama's warning. In one day in one town Stalin is said to have put more people to death than 300 years of Inquisition throughout the whole of Latin America ever put to death.

The most notorious of the Inquisitions was in Spain. And the ethnic Jewish historian Henry Kamen places the likely number of those executed over several hundred years at roughly 5,000 souls. Okay, modern day Iran executed through the death penalty that number of gay men over the course of something like 30 years. So, the "Inquisition" in the minds of people (who never actually saw it or know any one that lived through it) comes from movies like vampire movies and movies like the Scorpion King. It's an image placed in their heads that has little resemblance to what went on. So, the irony is that Obama did not warn atheists of not getting on their high horses in light of the atheist run Cambodian (genocide) Killing Fields or Stalin starving 6 million Ukrainians to death. (Which is partly why the West leaning Ukrainians--who also tended to be Nazi supporters--have animosity against Russia and Moscow to this day.)

I would say the USA was better at suppressing Afro mixed religions like Santeria and Voodoo than the Catholic colonies with it's Inquisitions were. Why is that if the Inquisitions was murdering people left and right? The Brazilian Inquisition records that still survive provide historical commentary about Inquisition investigators being fully aware of black voodoo women that priests and laity alike feared, of white slave owners rumored to be sodomizing their black male slaves, of gay priests and so on.

I would not have liked to live under the Inquisition but then I don't much like living under some of the laws and spying on citizens today in the USA.

The Crusader Kingdoms for their time period were not that bad either. Many Muslims remained and preferred to live under Crusader laws than under kingdoms controlled by the Muslims.

The Crusaders were pretty barbaric though, even for their time period. But that was largely white Western Europeans then. With Byzantium being the refined and cultured part of the white world. Middle Eastern Christians, Muslims, and Jews were more refined and generally more learned than the Western Crusaders then.

 

[SuperCloud]

We are all aware of that.

The point is that Christ never advocated those things. Mohammed has advocated and practiced all manner of violence.

The Inquisition and Crusades were un-Christ-like.

The behaviour of ISIS is spot on with what Mohammed himself practiced.

I've noticed that people do this a lot. When accused of doing something wrong they turn around and say "well others do it", as if to direct attention from themselves.

Lets see this hypocrite of a President point to the activities of the CIA in Central America shall we?

Based on what?

I served in the First Gulf War. I was reared Catholic and American. Can someone tell me when Iraq or Muslim armies invaded the USA? Not never.

Before the so-called "Crusades" ever began about 30,000 horseman (according to Muslim sources--but even their own sources may have exaggerated the numbers, as was common back then) marched down on what is now Tours, France. The Germanic Franks under Charles "The Hammer" Martel drove them back. And the Muslim forces slaughtered non-combatants in villages as they were driven out over time.

What happened to the Christian world before the Crusades were launched makes what happened during 9-11 and to the Western secular democracies look like a pimple on a fat woman's behind.

To be equivalent to the Christian world London (Jerusalem), Berlin (Antioch), New York City (Alexandria), Toronto (Constantinople) would all have to fallen, be conquered by Islamic forces with Paris (Rome) the only great secular See left standing. And Paris would have to call upon the secular barbarian world riding on their Harley Davidson, with long hair, missing teeth, barely literate, and rarely bathing to wage a "holy war" for secularism.

The Crusaders were not even a professional military force. Especially not compared to the Islamic Turks. Even Byzantium had a more professionally trained military force (but Crusaders accused the men of Byzantium of being essentially metro-sexuals--and Byzantium aside from its well trained soldiers, could not inspire most its civilian men to fight).

The USA with it's secular Western democratic allies is in a much different situation in that they have the most well trained, well equipped military forces.

If it were not for the "Crusaders" at the Battle of Lepanto and the Battle of Vienna the West would have been conquered by the Islamic Turks.

That's not to say the Crusaders did not commit war crimes. They did. And for whatever reason they were evil towards the Eastern Orthodox too.

 

[kiwimac]

What seems to annoy people is that Obama is right, that alone seems to be unforgivable to some.

 

[JustMeSee]

True christians don't do horrible things. .. and if they did, it was long ago and should not be considered.

I love the parallel of treatment of blacks by da fake christians. *shrug* It was so long ago. *insert image of lynched and burned hanged man that will get me banned again*.

It is so very difficult to separate Muslim terrorists from citizens. It is too difficult to understand the turmoil and vacuum filled by extremely violent people seeking control. As citizens of reasonably safe and stable countries, it is difficult to understand.

 

[imind]

Mohammed actually murderer people, and he was also a pedophile. What a perfect example for the Muslims to follow. I see why the Middle East is so peaceful

pretending that our own god didn't command the killings of thousands (read the old testament and remember that "god doesn't change") and that pedophilia wasn't common during that time won't make those facts go away.

 

[SuperCloud]

True christians don't do horrible things. .. and if they did, it was long ago and should not be considered.

I love the parallel of treatment of blacks by da fake christians. *shrug* It was so long ago. *insert image of lynched and burned hanged man that will get me banned again*.

It is so very difficult to separate Muslim terrorists from citizens. It is too difficult to understand the turmoil and vacuum filled by extremely violent people seeking control. As citizens of reasonably safe and stable countries, it is difficult to understand.

That would be a No True Scotsman fallacy.

You can be perfectly Christian and perfectly wicked. Just like you can be perfectly atheist or agnostic and be perfectly wicked.

Or... as is often the case... you can have your virtues and vices. You can commit grave sins and still be very charitable towards others on separate occasions.

Even though I'm sympathetic of the historical Crusades (as I do the allied side of WWII), I still will acknowledge that some of the Crusaders acted with such malice and cruelty that they appear to have had no fear of hell.

Christians have done some pretty wicked things throughout history. I know the "Inquisition" is popular in peoples imaginations due to the images and suggestions they have received. However, I think some of the mass lynchings carried out by Catholic Europeans against whole Jewish communities in Europe were far worse.

Even into the 20th Century in the USA with the Protestant KKK in the South and Catholic Sicilian mobsters in the Midwest ethnic Jewish people were belittled something horrible.

Not that every single Jewish person was an angel, they produced some of their own mean people. Probably mostly targeting other Jewish immigrants. Unless they were part of the upper-class conversos in Catholic Spanish America. Then they were deeply enmeshed in the slave trade of blacks and disenfranchising Amerindians. The irony--by "karma" or not--is a number of them got put to death by the Inquisition in Latin America. The Inquisition could only try baptized people (ergo, Jewish "conversos").

 

[createdtoworship]

Obama draws ire for comparing Isil to Spanish Inquisition and Ku Klux Klan - Telegraph

The difference of course is that whilst Christ never practiced or advocated the inquisition or slavery, Mohammed was a warlord who robbed caravans and executed prisoners in order that his men could rape their wives.

Has America ever had a president that was more mocking of, and hostile to, Christianity? I can see why some think him a Muslim, I really can.

Tony Perkins in a Fox interview, states correctly that Abolition of slavery was trailblazed by Christians:

Family Research Council

“In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ

Matthew 7:22-23New King James Version (NKJV)

22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

apparently Christ, knowing that He would be the most popular man in world history, would have nasayers that claimed falsly to know Him, and do deeds in His name, again falsly.

 

[Red Fox]

What seems to annoy people is that Obama is right, that alone seems to be unforgivable to some.

Now that is true.

 

[Red Fox]

pretending that our own god didn't command the killings of thousands (read the old testament and remember that "god doesn't change") and that pedophilia wasn't common during that time won't make those facts go away.

And that is true as well.

 

[IceJad]

Obama draws ire for comparing Isil to Spanish Inquisition and Ku Klux Klan - Telegraph

The difference of course is that whilst Christ never practiced or advocated the inquisition or slavery, Mohammed was a warlord who robbed caravans and executed prisoners in order that his men could rape their wives.

Has America ever had a president that was more mocking of, and hostile to, Christianity? I can see why some think him a Muslim, I really can.

Obama was trying to look neutral and politically correct. He tried very hard to dig dirt at Christians' dark history (let's all acknowledge they happened) to make comparison with Islam today. To make us feel we are not that different you and me. But again failed miserably. He pleased no moderate Muslims and angered moderate Christians. Because you know both moderate Christians & Muslims are not idiots they have read up on the subjects long before Obama make light of it.

No fan of Georgie but I can honestly say he has better PR not too off tangent but not missing his points either.

 

[kiwimac]

Actually Obama is a good president.

 

[IceJad]

Actually Obama is a good president.

Let's agree to disagree on this point.

 

[nightflight]

Actually Obama is a good president.

In an alternate universe where Kirk wears a sash and Spock a beard.

 

[IceJad]

In an alternate universe where Kirk wears a sash and Spock a beard.

I'll buy that for a dollar

 

[nightflight]

"The Medieval Christian threat is under control, Mr. President. Please deal with the Radical Islamic threat today.”- Gov. Bobby Jindal

 

[rambot]

Those would be Muslims who are turning their backs on Mohammed; which is a good thing, but lets see spineless politicians say that instead of throwing mud at Christians because he's a coward who knows that where Muslims would kill him for that Christians put up with it.

My moderate muslim friends would guffaw at that. And then they'd be offended that someone who, undoubtedly has a fraction of a fraction of their knoweldge of the Qu'ran and their spiritual head has the unmitigated gall to make a claim like that; BAsically calling them nonmuslims.

That's like saying, you can only be a Christian if you agree with my version of Christianity.

 

[Inkfingers]

Why is the internet full of people who could make an olympic sport of point-missing?

CHRIST (the founder of Christianity) never advocated violence.

MOHAMMED (The founder of Islam) advocated and practiced it.

So violence done in Christ's name is out of keeping.

But violence done in Mohammed's name is comepletely in-keeping.

Based on what?

Based on what Christ taught.

Before the so-called "Crusades" ever began about 30,000 horseman (according to Muslim sources--but even their own sources may have exaggerated the numbers, as was common back then) marched down on what is now Tours, France. The Germanic Franks under Charles "The Hammer" Martel drove them back. And the Muslim forces slaughtered non-combatants in villages as they were driven out over time.

That was a rightful defence by Martel, not a Crusade.

Tony Perkins in a Fox interview, states correctly that Abolition of slavery was trailblazed by Christians

Indeed.

My moderate muslim friends would guffaw at that. And then they'd be offended that someone who, undoubtedly has a fraction of a fraction of their knoweldge of the Qu'ran and their spiritual head has the unmitigated gall to make a claim like that; BAsically calling them nonmuslims.

That's like saying, you can only be a Christian if you agree with my version of Christianity.

Mohammed was a violent warlord, having more in common with Barabbas than Christ.

A Muslim who turns away from violence turns away from Mohammed (and it is good that they do so).

 

[Aureus]

Obama draws ire for comparing Isil to Spanish Inquisition and Ku Klux Klan - Telegraph

The difference of course is that whilst Christ never practiced or advocated the inquisition or slavery, Mohammed was a warlord who robbed caravans and executed prisoners in order that his men could rape their wives.

So I take it you don't recognize Moses, David or Solomon?

 

[Inkfingers]

So I take it you don't recognize Moses, David or Solomon?

Which part of "Christ" are people having difficulty understanding?

Christianity is founded by Christ. Not Moses, not David, not Solomon, not Joshua. Christ.

Compare the FOUNDERS - Christ, and Mohammed.

Obama is comparing Christians with Muslims. If he wants to make a point about the other men, lets see the spineless little oik criticise Judaism instead shall we? But he's not going to do that, is he; because like all bullies he is gutless. He won't target Islam or Judaism, because they fight back, but Christianity is open season.

Spineless, hypocritical, anti-Christian. America, you chose a poor president in this one.