Fundamental Biblical Christianity and Fundamental Islam Fundamentally 180% Opposites

Garf wrote:
"Martin Luther (1483-1546): "On the Jews and Their Lies" - 1543 - According to the ninth child of a Roman Catholic primary school teacher who also became a school teacher in Nuremberg this was one of Hitler's inspirational sources."That's a very peculiar reference to say the least, the 9th child. What did the other children have to say?It might be true that he was influenced by it, but there's something particular about Luther's antisemitism in that book which is inconsistent with Nazism. Luther wrote all kinds of awful things about Jews in the book, to kill them, burn them, isolate them, etc. The thing is the reason he gave in the book for persecuting Jews was because in Luther's view, Jews didn't believe that all men are created equal. He wrote that Jews believed they were superior, by believing they are the chosen people, and this was the justification he gave for proposing the most cruel punishments against them.From reading parts of the book it appears he was in direct debate with some Jewish scholars. I speculate Luther couldn't really reconcile equality and unicity of people theologically, and it appears that some Jewisch scholars trounced him in direct debate on the question. Being trounced in debate appears to be a more realistic reason for Luther's enormous rage, in stead of the reason he gave.All men are created equal is not consistent with Nazism. I guess Hitler might still have reinterpreted the book. Used the hate against Jews, and discarded the message of equality, but it's not such a straightforward interpretation. Reasonably Luther would still be likewise critical about Nazi disbelief in equality, or else he would be entirely inconsistent.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

I don't understand why you don't mention it, but the prophet infamously once had 700 prisoners of war killed. Don't you know about it, or you thought this would not be of interest in this discussion?I think the question of content of beliefs is of secondary importance to the question how much influence the beliefs have over a person.Broadly I would guess the closer you get to any book or set of beliefs in determining your actions, the more depraved your emotional life becomes, which leads to violence and perversion. I think this is just a simple heart vs mind issue, and getting very close to beliefs would inevitably result in the mind getting all influence, and the heart nothing. The way that many people are complete slaves to their religion is too much obviously, likewise the way many people just dispense with religion altogether in favour of some simpleminded life's motto is too little.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

It took Christians about 1700 years for them to get inspired to create a country based on equality. I think one of the main reasons it took such a long time, eventhough teachings of equality are foundational in Christianity in regards to Adam and Eve, is because equality requires an understanding of religion as being generically the same with some variation, in stead of an exclusivist hierarchal understanding, as one being superior to another. Religion basicly being a part of human nature like arms and legs are, and so if you consider the one religion superior to another, then it becomes harder to consider people as equal.Christianity, Jesus, is largely incorporated into Islam, as are all the Jewish prophets. This is why Islamic countries have generally, over all the years, not just the last few, been comparitively tolerant of Christianity and Judaism. Of course comparitive tolerance is still apart from full tolerance.The terrorists didn't much destroy the great buildings, they killed several thousand people. How can you be so confused to mention the loss of some symbol of greatness, and forget to mention the loss of some thousands of lives? I think it's mistaken to view the killing as some kind of means to achieve an end, or collateral damage, the killing is the end meant to be achieved.I guess basicly these terrorists read every word in terms of whether or not it allows to kill or not to kill. If it would say love thy neighbour, then it would be interpreted as kill everyone who doesn't apparently love their neighbour. When Jesus says love your enemy, then it would be interpreted as kill your enemy so that they will be saved from sin. As before Jesus is incorporated into Islam, so the terrorists also read much the same words as you.It's a ridiculous myth that it's all the work of just a few powerful evil terrorists. A great share of the Muslim population takes parts in the sins of the terrorists with sympathy, because killing people like all sins, are tempting to take part in of course. I don't think it's Christianity which protects you from that sin much. If that's your only protection then you have very little protection to withstand the temptation to go out and kill every Muslim in a tit for tat frenzy.So to address your original hypothesis, fundamentalist religion is a high risk attitude toward religion which tends to enslave people to it. It's not right to say fundamentalist Islam is a direct opposite of fundamentalist Christianity, because obviously they belong to the same fundamentalist class of religion.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

I'm talking about the real effects of beliefs and not the apparently intended effects. It seems you are saying that apparently unintended effects of beliefs are not effects of the beliefs, which is a false line of argument.Again, my point was that the content of beliefs is secondary to the extent of influence the beliefs have in determining people's actions. So I have already refuted your (doubtful) point that the content is opposite, by trivializing the content in respect to the measure of influence. With fundamentalists the influence the beliefs have in determining people's action is very large, and this typifies them more then the content does.If some belief says love thy neighbour, and someone was overwhelmingly influenced by such a belief, then that does not mean this person would actually love their neighbour. On the contrary, it is terribly difficult to attach any meaningful emotion to a belief. To love your neighbour solely on account of a few words in a book which say so, is trying to squeeze a lot of emotion through a very small hole. It's emotional depravement which then might lead to physical and psychological violence. This is not to say that the content of beliefs are totally irrellevant of course, but people who have not been taught the commandment might very well love their neighbour more, then someone who is transfixed on the particular commandment.It's understood you regret the loss of life, but a symbol is like a word. Isn't it possible that you omitted to mention the people in favour of a symbol because you are yourself focused on words so much by your religion?As you know equality is in the US declaration of independence, hardly a communist nation. Is your disbelief in equality particularly linked to your belief in your religion as the best, like I said, or is it more linked to your belief in freedom?regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

You are just overestimating the power of a set of words to meaningfully influence anything. The mindset is to give all power to the beliefs, the violence is a result of the emotional depravement that ensues from giving all power to the beliefs, equivocating God with the word of God. Clearly it's ridiculous to entertain the notion that the Bible is the sole or main thing that causes Americans, who are mostly Christians, to love their neighbour.If you think you have the make people equal, then you don't believe they are equal, now do you. It seems that in socialism equality is more considered as an ideal, in stead of as a self-evident reality like it is in the declaration of independence.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu

Buzsaw wrote:
"1. Imo, the single most supernatural aspect of the Bible is its scores of fulfilled prophecy of future events from the time the prophecies were given."And what is the most supernatural aspect of the earth, the sun, animals, plants and people in your opinion? These are also all created by God, just like the Bible was.Just arguing again that you seem to place the Bible in a position of enormous importance almost equal to God, detached from the rest of creation.regards,
Mohammad Nor Syamsu