Obama upsets US Christians....again

[Aureus]

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

CHRIST (the founder of Christianity) never advocated violence.

I think you could do with reading this article. Jesus as the ultra pacifist advocate of non-violence has never been the view of theologians.

 

[Aureus]

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.

Jesus also advocated for Moses, David and Solomon, accepted all of the old testament and said that he came not to cast it away. All of those men are integral figures of Christianity.

Or a quote from the article I linked above

"While some people argue for a non-violent Jesus, no one would make such a claim about the God of the Hebrew Bible. In traditional Christianity, Jesus is the Incarnate second person of the Trinity. He is divine, co-equal with the Father. As such, Jesus in the New Testament cannot hold a respectful disagreement with Yahweh of the Old Testament."

Jesus is the Old Testament, he was and is God and is present for and a part of everything God did in the Old Testament.

You're doing a very good job of presenting righteous indignation, but the ground for your indignation is incredibly shallow.

 

[Inkfingers]

Jesus also advocated for Moses, David and Solomon, accepted all of the old testament and said that he came not to cast it away. All of those men are integral figures of Christianity.

None of them are the founders, nor set the standard, for Christianity.

Mohammed set the standard for Islam, and ISIS follow it to the hilt (literally, when decapitating captives).

If you want to criticise Moses etc, lets see you criticise the Jews on television (as they are who follow those men), and lets see your cowardly President do the same. But he won't, because he would be ripped apart for doing so.

 

[Inkfingers]

You're doing a very good job of presenting righteous indignation, but the ground for your indignation is incredibly shallow.

And you are doing a good one of ignoring how:

* Muslims who behave as ISIS do are in-keeping with what Mohammed did and taught

* Christians who engaged in the crusades and inquisition were going against what Christ taught

 

[Aureus]

* Christians who engaged in the crusades and inquisition were going against what Christ taught

Jesus did not teach non-violence.

 

[kellhus]

US Christians are far too precious if they get so offended by their president telling the truth.

 

[Inkfingers]

Jesus did not teach non-violence.

He never taught violence.
He never raided caravans.
He never was a warlord leading an army sacking cities.
He never executed prisoners of war.
He never enabled his men to commit mass-rape of war-widows.
He never wrote a book in which rocks said "hey, there's a Jew here, come and kill him".
He never married a young girl.
He never changed his scripture to allow him unlimited wives.
He never wrote a scripture in which "paradise" is a carnal place where the women are sex slaves to the men.

Mohammed did ALL of those things.

ISIS are completely in-line with Mohammed.

Crusades and Inquisition are nowhere called for in Christianity.

A little honesty goes a long way.

 

[Aureus]

None of them are the founders, nor set the standard, for Christianity.

He never taught violence.

Let us pretend Jesus was not part of the Trinity or part of anything to do with the Old Testament, since that is what it takes for you to even begin to hold the view that you do.

Jesus in the Gospels as the incarnate part of the Trinity overturned tables, assaulted people, made a whip and then used it to drive them out of the Temple. Jesus participated directly in violent actions.

I frankly don't care at all about your blathering comparisons to Islam. I am taking issue with your gross misrepresentations of Jesus while you do so.

 

[Inkfingers]

Let us pretend Jesus was not part of the Trinity or part of anything to do with the Old Testament, since that is what it takes for you to even begin to hold the view that you do.

Jesus in the Gospels as the incarnate part of the Trinity overturned tables, assaulted people, made a whip and then used it to drive them out of the Temple. Jesus participated directly in violent actions.

Christianity is not Judaism.

If you want to go on television and say that Jews who criticise Islam are hypocrites, do so. But you won't, because you are scared to do so. The same is true of your President - he's a coward who targets Christians because he could never get away with it against anyone else.

 

[Inkfingers]

I frankly don't care at all about your blathering comparisons to Islam. I am taking issue with your gross misrepresentations of Jesus while you do so.

Keep it up.

Your dishonesty only proves my point that ISIS are like Muhammed but the Inquisition are nothing like Christ.

 

[Aureus]

Christianity is not Judaism.

The Gospels and Jesus participating directly in violent actions has nothing to do with Judaism.

I am also aware that Christianity considers the entirety of the Old Testament God's Word, that it forms the basis for a great deal of Christianity's moral and ethical teachings and is used frequently as justification for Christian Actions.

If you want to go on television and say that Jews who criticise Islam are hypocrites, do so. But you won't, because you are scared to do so. The same is true of your President - he's a coward who targets Christians because he could never get away with it against anyone else.

I don't have much of a reason to go on Television and say such things, but I wouldn't much care about doing so nor would I be scared of doing so. And what is with this 'your President', stuff, is he not the President of the United States?

 

[Inkfingers]

The Gospels and Jesus participating directly in violent actions has nothing to do with Judaism.

If you want to criticise Moses etc, criticise the religion based on them; Judaism. But you won't.

You want to criticise Christianity as based on Moses etc when it is not. It is based on Christ.

Can you be honest about this, or are you just attention-seeking?

 

[Aureus]

If you want to criticise Moses etc, criticise the religion based on them; Judaism. But you won't.

There's no point to criticizing Judaism in this thread. I've already criticized them by bring up Moses etc... just as it also criticizes Christianity who also considers those people to be integral figures and prophets of their religion.

You want to criticise Christianity as based on Moses etc when it is not. It is based on Christ.

Christianity certainly is based in no small part on Moses and the rest of the Old Testament Prophets. Jesus is also a central figure and the most important figure in Christianity, yet the prophets of the Old Testament remain important figures.

Can you be honest about this, or are you just attention-seeking?

Can you be honest enough to actually address the post you quote, here I'll give you the relevant parts again.

"Jesus in the Gospels as the incarnate part of the Trinity overturned tables, assaulted people, made a whip and then used it to drive them out of the Temple. Jesus participated directly in violent actions."

"The Gospels and Jesus participating directly in violent actions has nothing to do with Judaism."

 

[Inkfingers]

Christianity certainly is based in no small part on Moses and the rest of the Old Testament Prophets. Jesus is also a central figure and the most important figure in Christianity, yet the prophets of the Old Testament remain important figures.

It's Christianity, not Mosianity. Christ sets the standard. In Islam, Mohammed sets the standard.

"Jesus in the Gospels as the incarnate part of the Trinity overturned tables, assaulted people, made a whip and then used it to drive them out of the Temple. Jesus participated directly in violent actions."

To compare chasing people out of the temple with Islam, or to equate it with the Inquisition is laughable and you need no further feeding.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

The country has done plenty to turn the sins/errors of the past around, and so he needs to mention that too.

Its not perfect, and we aren't done. We have come a long way.

If that was true the Indians would own this land.

 

[Aureus]

To compare chasing people out of the temple with Islam, or to equate it with the Inquisition is laughable and you need no further feeding.

Its a good thing I'm not making any comparisons to Islam or the Inquisition. I am simply taking issue with you claiming that Jesus advocated Non-Violence and that you claim that Jesus never advocated Violence, when he most definitely did do so. Whether you like it or not.

 

[Senator Cheese]

If that was true the Indians would own this land.

I think the only ones that actually care about race in 2015 are the ones trying to make everything an issue of race.

Native Americans of today have not been wronged.
Referring to ancestorial wrongdoings means demanding special treatment based on ethnicity, which is profoundly racist.

Noone is saying the genocide (yes, it was a genocide) of Native Americans is justified. But to demand that Native American descendents now be given special treatment while at the same time calling for an end to racism is inherently hypocritical.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Native Americans of today have not been wronged.

This is their land, that was stolen from their ancestors. So they are being wronged, since they cant collect their money from all their properties that were stolen from them. Also every thing in America. Don't represent them, it represents the thieves that stole it.

 

[Inkfingers]

Its a good thing I'm not making any comparisons to Islam or the Inquisition. I am simply taking issue with you claiming that Jesus advocated Non-Violence and that you claim that Jesus never advocated Violence, when he most definitely did do so. Whether you like it or not.

To characterise chasing money lenders out of the temple as "violence", and then use that as an attempt to counter how the Crusades and Inquisition were un-Christ-like where ISIS is very much Mohammed-like, is quite staggeringly laughable.

 

[Aureus]

To characterise chasing money lenders out of the temple as "violence",

Yes, fashioning a whip and then *whipping people* is violent.

and then use that as an attempt to counter how the Crusades and Inquisition were un-Christ-like where ISIS is very much Mohammed-like, is quite staggeringly laughable.

Good thing I didn't do that.