What makes you unbelieve Crash ?

Sorry Schraf, pedantic point, but worth knowing: Actually, they (911 bombers) believed in ALL of Christ's teachings. (They just think that Christians have a fatally corrupted version of what those teachings actually were, and that they knew the REAL teachings).Only further illustrates your point really.PE

Soz Mike - I still stand by what I said.I'm absolutely certain that if you were to speak to one of the 911 hijackers they would say that they loved Christ as much, if not more than Christians do. I know that must rankle with you, but I don't think this can be denied.I've no doubt that they could have come up with some concoction of scripture and authority to suggest that Jesus sanctioned fighting in self-defence and 911 was an act of self-defence. This is standard fundie logic.Take a look at this for example: No offence, but Muslims love Jesus as much as Christians doAnd let's not forget that there are many self-professed Christians out there who don't go around loving their enemy. You know how these religious types will make anything fit into their pre-conceived worldview.To answer your points directly: Only if a Christian is defined as a "follower of Christ". All Muslims by definition are followers of Christ. As they are of Moses and David and Abraham etcI wouldn't call any muslims "christians" though, as christians further believe in Christ's divinity. So the answer to your question is "no".Incidentally Mike, did you know that Muslims believe that Christ, not Muhammed, will be sent down to Earth for the second coming? I missed this point of yours, and I don't blame Christians for 9.11. Not even secretly. I've no idea where you got this from. Red mist? No. No muslim believes that Christ is the Son of God. They all follow Christ though...Muslims do not believe Christ ever taught that he was the Son of God. They believe the Christians have got this part wrong.Honestly Mike, I thought coming from Coventry you'd know a lot more about Islam by now. Well I could say the same about Crusaders, or anyone else who has used religion as a pretext for doing something abominable. There are many who will claim to follow Christ or Muhammed or Moses or whoever and still commit atrocities in their' name.Its all in the interpretation as you well know. They just have a different view of what the actual teachings were.Don't expect me to justify what Muslims believe - you're better off asking a muslim for that. I'm just telling you what muslims believe and clearing up the popular misconception that muslims only follow some of Christ's teachings.In the eyes of a muslim, they are following ALL of Christ's teachings. That was my point - nothing more. Can you tell me what my true motives are here please? I'd love to know.PEOT: Who painted your avatar? I've sure I've seen it for real somewhere, but I can't quite place where.

Well, I can't disagree with you that most right-minded people think religious extremists to be insane (else they wouldn't be extremists). Not in the way that you or I would understand Jesus's teachings, no. But in their own warped little minds they've found some way to marry Jesus's teachings about peace with their own beliefs about jihad. It would be impossible for them to remain Muslim and reject what they see as the teachings of Jesus. I've no idea how they've done this, and I don't really care, to be honest (if you're interested, I suggest you read one of Osama Bin Laden's sermons).You say the Crusaders went against the teachings of Christ, but if you spoke to a Crusader, I bet they'd come up with some weird and wonderful apologetics about how Crusading and pillaging is exactly in accordance with the teachings of Christ which the likes of us would find nauseating.The point is that both Muslims and Christians both agree that they should listen to whatever it was that Jesus had said. They disagree on what the actual message of what it was that he said, and this applies to extremists as much as it applies to moderates. OK, I think I see what you're getting at. When I say "teachings", I'm talking about something that is disputed between Muslims and Christians. Muslims believe that Christ never called himself the Son of God, for example. Christians believe that he did.When you use "teachings" you're using Christian scripture only, of which you have no (or little) doubt. That's fair enough, but you have to remember that there are at least 1 billion people on this planet who disagree with you. This doesn't mean you're wrong, after all, there are even more Christians than Muslims, but it does at least expose the fact that there is some genuine controversy as to what the teachings actually were.Remember, a muslim thinks that the Bible is corrupted and cannot be trusted. Scripture in this sense means nothing to a muslim, rather they would trust what is written about Jesus in the Quran and the Hadith. Note that as far as I can make out, this is overwhelmingly positive, and supports a peaceful loving Jesus, but it never fails to amaze me how religious fundies can completely contort the meaning of something pretty clear and turn it to suit their manaical agenda.When the Bible says "Jesus said....." a muslim extremist would probably say it was fake and added later. Sad to say, that even the 911 bombers would have had to have been able to reconcile a belief in the teachings of Christ with the callous premeditated murder of civilians.And they do this without even considering the possibility that they might be wrong. Religious fervour + intolerance is a very nasty mixture indeed.What I was saying was a very minor matter indeed - Muslims and Christians would both say that they followed ALL of Christ's teachings (even Muslim and Christian extremists). They would disagree as to what those teachings were and how to interpret them.PE edit: fixed tenses "would have had to have been" ugh!This message has been edited by Primordial Egg, 05-07-2004 09:27 AM

---

404 Not Found