Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I stopped when you implied that Mormons were Christian.

And if you bothered to ever read or study the Koran you would know that it is even more violent and oppressive of woman than the Old Testament. According to the Koran the oh so glorious Mohammed wed a six year old and deflowered her at the age of nine.

The moderate and peaceful Islamic sects deviate considerably from Medieval Islam.

Amaya wrote:I stopped when you implied that Mormons were Christian.

How do you define a Christian?

And if you bothered to ever read or study the Koran you would know that it is even more violent and oppressive of woman than the Old Testament.

Have you read both? Because the Old Testament has more than a few horror stories that are justified in the writing.

According to the Koran the oh so glorious Mohammed wed a six year old and deflowered her at the age of nine.

The moderate and peaceful Islamic sects deviate considerably from Medieval Islam.

You could say exactly the same about Christianity, and I would be worried if you didn't.

I sometimes wonder what religon has to do with god

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Amaya wrote:I stopped when you implied that Mormons were Christian.

How do you define a Christian?

And if you bothered to ever read or study the Koran you would know that it is even more violent and oppressive of woman than the Old Testament.

Have you read both? Because the Old Testament has more than a few horror stories that are justified in the writing.

According to the Koran the oh so glorious Mohammed wed a six year old and deflowered her at the age of nine.

The moderate and peaceful Islamic sects deviate considerably from Medieval Islam.

You could say exactly the same about Christianity, and I would be worried if you didn't.

You don't know much about Mormons or Christians do you?

The Catholics, you know the ones who went around slaughtering people wholesale? They're not Christian. I don't know what the hell they are. They're more of a bizarre mash up of random pagan religions with a slight Christian than anything else. Orthodox does some pretty damn weird stuff also.

The Old Testament isn't really relevant to Christianity, but I think the concept of God making a new pact with humanity via Jesus escapes the people who choose to ignore the fact their saviour supped with untouchables in favour of mudering blacks and queers.

loki old fart wrote:I sometimes wonder what religon has to do with god

tax free donations.

Amaya wrote:I stopped when you implied that Mormons were Christian.

But that's exactly my point!

The Turk's Islam could as well be a totally different religion compared to the Ayatollah's.

Amaya wrote:
And if you bothered to ever read or study the Koran you would know that it is even more violent and oppressive of woman than the Old Testament. According to the Koran the oh so glorious Mohammed wed a six year old and deflowered her at the age of nine.

Yes, I know that story, bad PR for mohammed in the Modern Western World... not quite uncommon in that region at the time (but still bad), or actually, in the whole wide world at that time!

Amaya wrote:
The moderate and peaceful Islamic sects deviate considerably from Medieval Islam.

You could read a good history book about that of course, the Al-Andalus civilzation was a beacon of tolerance compared to the Spanish Christians, who genocided the jews and muslims they "liberated" from the Saracen joke. And the middle east wasn't a bad place for Christians and Jews either until the Seljuks took over. Up till that point, muslim, jew and christian happily coexisted in the Holy land... And when Saladin (muslim) kicked out the Crusaders (genociding b-tards) and Seljuks (intolerant slave raiders) he reintroduced religious tolerance. This even last for a while when the Ottomans took over in the end. In fact, most sub-sects of Islam where founded in the Dark Ages and medieval times, the world of Islam was, up until the European renaissance, the most advanced civilization in the Eurasian region and can't possibly compared to the ideologies of the Taliban or Saudi-Arabia.

Qu'ran also says: "the Jews and Christians are the people of the Book, and if a Muslim kills or abuses one of them, he is to be prosecuted as if he has killed a Muslim"

And, do you mean the "moderate and Peaceful Islamic sects of today" or "moderate and Peaceful Islamic sects of medieval times" or "muslims of this age in general" or "Moderate and Peaceful muslims are restricted to a few small sub-sects of Islam"?

Funny, I don't remember Jesus bedding 9 year olds or even condoning such an action.

Amaya wrote:The Catholics, you know the ones who went around slaughtering people wholesale? They're not Christian. I don't know what the hell they are. They're more of a bizarre mash up of random pagan religions with a slight Christian than anything else.

Amaya wrote:Funny, I don't remember Jesus bedding 9 year olds or even condoning such an action.

I didn't say that. Besides, Jesus lived about 300 years before Mohammed, in a different region with different customs. In addition, the Bible has been compiled by the Late Roman Empire, which had quite a good Editorial office. That means that things like "Jesus was married and had kids with Mary Magdalene" and "Jezus had three brothers and five sisters" got left out (these are examples of things the Roman Episcopals could have editted out if they find these things in the various text available at the time and found inappropriate).

I meant to say: "it was probably perfectly normal for Dark Ages Arabians to marry quite young". Yes, it is sick (didn't I say that?), but it's not unheard of in history for kids being pledged to a marriage at an age as young as six for politcal or economic reasons. Consuming it three years later is indeed freakish (and useless, and perverted).

Anyhoo, this does mean that Wilders is not slandering if he says that Mohammed married a six year old and had sex with her 3 years later, which makes him a Pedophile. It's the inconvenient, uncomfortable truth... So that's a point for him. A lot of other things he says are utter groxgak.

Amaya wrote:Funny, I don't remember Jesus bedding 9 year olds or even condoning such an action.

Then you missed last Wednesday's episode of To Catch a Predator.

Herohammernostalgia wrote:

Amaya wrote:Funny, I don't remember Jesus bedding 9 year olds or even condoning such an action.

I didn't say that. Besides, Jesus lived about 300 years before Mohammed, in a different region with different customs. In addition, the Bible has been compiled by the Late Roman Empire, which had quite a good Editorial office. That means that things like "Jesus was married and had kids with Mary Magdalene" and "Jezus had three brothers and five sisters" got left out (these are examples of things the Roman Episcopals could have editted out if they find these things in the various text available at the time and found inappropriate).

I meant to say: "it was probably perfectly normal for Dark Ages Arabians to marry quite young". Yes, it is sick (didn't I say that?), but it's not unheard of in history for kids being pledged to a marriage at an age as young as six for politcal or economic reasons. Consuming it three years later is indeed freakish (and useless, and perverted).

Anyhoo, this does mean that Wilders is not slandering if he says that Mohammed married a six year old and had sex with her 3 years later, which makes him a Pedophile. It's the inconvenient, uncomfortable truth... So that's a point for him. A lot of other things he says are utter groxgak.

I really doubt that Jesus had any sexual relations.

Don't get me wrong, I do respect Muslims (even the terrorists to an extent, at least they believe), and both the Bible and the Koran have positive messages once you get passed the mysogony and kill! kill! kill! the heretic.

I just think it's silly to pretend that there isn't messed up crap in any of those 'holy' books. Personally, the only parts I give a crap about in the Bible are the things Jesus is actually attributed to have said.

Didn't we lynch little girls for being witches here in America. Were women burned as witches for knowing math. That's at least as bad as getting married to one. Don't sects here in America still get in trouble for giving 4 or 5 little girls to one man in those crazy compunds they keep out west?

To hate is easy though so whatever....

Amaya wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I do respect Muslims (even the terrorists to an extent, at least they believe), and both the Bible and the Koran have positive messages once you get passed the mysogony and kill! kill! kill! the heretic.

Is it okay if I'm wierded out by this?

I just think it's silly to pretend that there isn't messed up crap in any of those 'holy' books. Personally, the only parts I give a crap about in the Bible are the things Jesus is actually attributed to have said.

And yet you don't think Mormons and/or Catholics are Christian?

Emperors Faithful wrote:

Amaya wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I do respect Muslims (even the terrorists to an extent, at least they believe), and both the Bible and the Koran have positive messages once you get passed the mysogony and kill! kill! kill! the heretic.

Is it okay if I'm wierded out by this?

I just think it's silly to pretend that there isn't messed up crap in any of those 'holy' books. Personally, the only parts I give a crap about in the Bible are the things Jesus is actually attributed to have said.

And yet you don't think Mormons and/or Catholics are Christian?

Spoiler:

Ohhh, you're one of them newfangled Pentacostal/Hillsong sorts then?

No. I don't even go to church. The whole thing is a crock.

Mormons are most definetly not Christian and neither are Catholics. Since when do Christians play to little idols of Saints?

Nazis were anti-religious. That's my only real problem with the Dutch fella's argument.

Amaya wrote:Mormons are most definetly not Christian and neither are Catholics. Since when do Christians play to little idols of Saints?

Since about 300 AD or so. Not our fault that y'all protestants fethed up.

Laughing Man wrote:

Amaya wrote:Mormons are most definetly not Christian and neither are Catholics. Since when do Christians play to little idols of Saints?

Since about 300 AD or so. Not our fault that y'all protestants fethed up.

Since when are Catholics protestants?

Wilders talks a whole lot of racist bile, but I’m not sure he should be facing court time for it. It’s a tough issue, where speech ends and where incitement to violence begins but personally I think there should be a real and pressing push towards violence for it to count as a incitement. “People with blue eyes are evil” needs to be protected, whereas “people with blue eyes are evil and we need to go to that guys house and set it on fire right now” doesn’t.

filbert wrote:You can say what you want but that doesn't make you exempt from the consequences as Arctik_Firangi points out.

No, that’s not what free speech means. Free speech is quite simply the freedom to speak without facing government sanction.

Deadshane1 wrote:I'm not coming to the aid of Islam here, because myself I think the religion is full of a bunch of fat spankers. Too much violent "smoke" involved in that religion for it to be entirely benign in my opinion.

There’s a billion people in the faith. It’s 1/6 of the world’s population. If even a small minority had violent intent towards the rest of the world we’d be seeing a whole lot more than a handful of bombs a year.

Course, from what I've seen...pretty much all religions get pretty hateful. Christianity is safe right now only because its so huge...they GOT the power and dont need to be beligerant. Make Christianity a 'niche' religion in the States like Islam is and you've got plenty of Christian "hate" flowing.

That’s not just religions. Any group gets more violent when it lacks power, and more placid when it has power. But that’s always on the fringes, 99% of us, whether in a powerful group or not, just want to work a job that pays enough, get hitched and raise kids.

Amaya wrote:You don't know much about Mormons or Christians do you?

The Catholics, you know the ones who went around slaughtering people wholesale? They're not Christian. I don't know what the hell they are. They're more of a bizarre mash up of random pagan religions with a slight Christian than anything else. Orthodox does some pretty damn weird stuff also.

No. Christianity isn’t defined by who you personally like. You follow Jesus, you’re a Christian.

Meanwhile, are you thinking no Protestants ever engaged in slaughter of their own? Seriously?

Shadowbrand wrote:Nazis were anti-religious. That's my only real problem with the Dutch fella's argument.

No, they weren’t. And no, it’s not even close to what’s wrong with his argument. You should try reading.

Amaya....ohhhhh Amaya.... Rarely do I see so much right and wrong in the same post.

@Sebster...one of the things that Amaya was right about, was that most protestants do not believe that Mormons are Christians and that they are indeed a cult. Your secular view that anyone that claims Jesus is all of a sudden a Christian is entirely false and shows your secularist slant.

GG

generalgrog wrote:Amaya....ohhhhh Amaya.... Rarely do I see so much right and wrong in the same post.

@Sebster...one of the things that Amaya was right about, was that most protestants do not believe that Mormons are Christians and that they are indeed a cult. Your secular view that anyone that claims Jesus is all of a sudden a Christian is entirely false and shows your secularist slant.

GG

I know lots of Christians do believe they’re a cult. They’re not a cult (because that word has a real and specific meaning) but it’s certainly fair to say they’re very different from other Christian groups.

Thing is, the point at which you start defining Christianity as something other than people who see Jesus as their Lord and Saviour is the point where you start getting into long and very pointless arguments that achieve nothing. Instead, call them all Christians and start talking about what each really is, not whether they fit the definition of some guy like amaya.

FFS, the founders of Mormonism explicitly stated that they are not Christian and that Christians are wrong. The whole Mormons are Christians crap got started in order to make Mormonism more mainstream.

If you don't know crap about it, just shut up.

sebster wrote:
Thing is, the point at which you start defining Christianity as something other than people who see Jesus as their Lord and Saviour is the point where you start getting into long and very pointless arguments that achieve nothing. Instead, call them all Christians and start talking about what each really is, not whether they fit the definition of some guy like amaya.

If you would like to continue this in PM I'm willing to do that, because I don't want to derail this thread with a lesson on cults, and how they are damaging to people, and how helping people get out of cults is hardly pointless.

GG

Amaya wrote:
And if you bothered to ever read or study the Koran you would know that it is even more violent and oppressive of woman than the Old Testament. According to the Koran the oh so glorious Mohammed wed a six year old and deflowered her at the age of nine.

The text you're referring to is the Hadith, not the Koran. Moreover, there is quite a bit of controversy surrounding Ayesha's age; notably regarding the incentive to misreport her age in order to solidify her as Muhammad's only virgin wife; something very important given the critical role of Abu Bakr in Muslim history.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:
Mormons are most definetly not Christian and neither are Catholics.

I'll give you Mormons, but not Catholics. To state that Catholics aren't Christian is controversial enough that you should expect people to balk by default.

Amaya wrote:
Since when do Christians play to little idols of Saints?

Since about 1600 years ago. Its important to distinguish between worship in the sense of honor, and worship in the sense kneeling before the divine. The former applies to saints, the latter to God.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:FFS, the founders of Mormonism explicitly stated that they are not Christian and that Christians are wrong. The whole Mormons are Christians crap got started in order to make Mormonism more mainstream.

No, the founders of Mormonism explicitly stated that they are not members of the Christian Church. This is not the same thing as not being Christian. They saw themselves as a restoration of primitive Christianity.

Amaya wrote:
If you don't know crap about it, just shut up.

Indeed.

dogma wrote:

Amaya wrote:
And if you bothered to ever read or study the Koran you would know that it is even more violent and oppressive of woman than the Old Testament. According to the Koran the oh so glorious Mohammed wed a six year old and deflowered her at the age of nine.

The text you're referring to is the Hadith, not the Koran. Moreover, there is quite a bit of controversy surrounding Ayesha's age; notably regarding the incentive to misreport her age in order to solidify her as Muhammad's only virgin wife; something very important given the critical role of Abu Bakr in Muslim history.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:
Mormons are most definetly not Christian and neither are Catholics.

I'll give you Mormons, but not Catholics. To state that Catholics aren't Christian is controversial enough that you should expect people to balk by default.

Amaya wrote:
Since when do Christians play to little idols of Saints?

Since about 1600 years ago. Its important to distinguish between worship in the sense of honor, and worship in the sense kneeling before the divine. The former applies to saints, the latter to God.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:FFS, the founders of Mormonism explicitly stated that they are not Christian and that Christians are wrong. The whole Mormons are Christians crap got started in order to make Mormonism more mainstream.

No, the founders of Mormonism explicitly stated that they are not members of the Christian Church. This is not the same thing as not being Christian. They saw themselves as a restoration of primitive Christianity.

Amaya wrote:
If you don't know crap about it, just shut up.

Indeed.

Wasn't she originally thought to be about 15-16 when she bedded Mohammed

generalgrog wrote:
@Sebster...one of the things that Amaya was right about, was that most protestants do not believe that Mormons are Christians and that they are indeed a cult. Your secular view that anyone that claims Jesus is all of a sudden a Christian is entirely false and shows your secularist slant.

Its not really false, so much as unconcerned with the specific beliefs of any faith that claims to worship Jesus. Its a sort of categorical view, not one related to what any particular person believes to be true.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

youbedead wrote:
Wasn't she originally thought to be about 15-16 when she bedded Mohammed

Nine is the original number, but it wasn't written down until after Muhammad's death. At which point Abu Bakr, being in line to inherit the Caliphate, would have extensive reason to bolster his claim by 'enhancing' the case for his daughter's virginity being taken by Muhammad.

Now, its certainly possible that Ayesha really was 9 when Muhammad consummated their marriage, but its far from being a certainty; especially given that the Hadith is not usually thought to be inerrant.

Shadowbrand wrote:Nazis were anti-religious. That's my only real problem with the Dutch fella's argument.

Fuhrer, mein Fuhrer, von Gott mir gegeben, beschutz und erhalte noch lange mein Leben
Du hast Deutschland errettet aus tiefster Not, Dir verdank ich mein tagliches Brot
Fuhrer, mein Fuhrer, mein Glaube, mein Licht
Fuhrer mein Fuhrer, verlasse mich nicht

cult = religion

Amaya wrote:Mormons are most definetly not Christian

That depends on your definition of christian. If by christian you mean people who believe in jesus christ as their savior, then mormons are christian. If by christian you mean people who believe in the trinity, then mormons are not christian.

generalgrog wrote:If you would like to continue this in PM I'm willing to do that, because I don't want to derail this thread with a lesson on cults,

It's called off topic - let's go off topic

I always forget to respond to PMs, anyway, in fact this just reminded I forgot to reply to one from before the weekend.

and how they are damaging to people, and how helping people get out of cults is hardly pointless.

GG

I'm not going to argue there aren't seriously unhealthy elements within Mormonism, and that some of these elements are cults. I'm just arguing that the things that make something a cult (direct control over the lives of members, removal from greater society, the requirement to completely accept the worldview of the leaders) doesn't apply to Mormonism as a whole.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:FFS, the founders of Mormonism explicitly stated that they are not Christian and that Christians are wrong. The whole Mormons are Christians crap got started in order to make Mormonism more mainstream.

They moved away from Christianity out of a belief that it had fallen into spiritual decay. Like more or less every other Christian splinter group. By your logic the protestants wouldn't be Christian either.

If you don't know crap about it, just shut up.

Settle down.

sebster wrote:

filbert wrote:You can say what you want but that doesn't make you exempt from the consequences as Arctik_Firangi points out.

No, that’s not what free speech means. Free speech is quite simply the freedom to speak without facing government sanction.

I wasn't referring to the concept of free speech, as you have quite correctly defined here, more the reality of free speech as is enshrined in law here in the UK and what Frazzled was asking about. We here in the UK like to think we have free speech and freedom from prosecution but we do not (at least for certain things).

"Catholics are no Christians"

...





If it weren't for the Roman Catholics, there wouldn't even be a Bible!

Nor would there be anything like Protestantism, Evangelicalism and all othe christian subsects.