cafcnick has amended his original post, and whatever we all think and whether we think he needed to do it, it is time to move on. He certainly has so fair play.
Lets just focus on praying / hoping for a lucky break in random chance* (*delete as appropriate) that this comes to a close soon.
Sorry QA but that is just not true of main stream churches such as the catholic church, the Church of England and most evengelical churches.
The bible is BOTH the old and new testament for them.
The Church of England and the Roman Catholic church believe in and preach the 10 commandments (old testament).
The believe that God created the earth (old), moses saved the isrealites (old), etc etc. The push of science means that many no longer believe that God created the world in seven days.
However the very large and increasingly powerful evangelical Christian in the US and elsewhere do follow the old testement, do believe the creation story, do beleive that homosexuality is a sin because it says so in the old testament.
This is certainly a very complicated issue with definitive answers hard to come by. One thing that is beyond dispute is that an attempt was made to update the Bible with the New Testament. But that will never be the case with the Koran, as anyone who attempts to do so, will lose their head. Neither is anyone allowed to renounce their religion without suffering a similar fate. The Koran can never change, therefore barbaric practices such as beheadings and public stonings will always continue. The really frightening thing is that to be considered a "true" muslim, the Koran has to be followed to the word. In their warped minds, these guys are simply being good Muslims, and the indoctrination of most Muslims begins at a very early age.
Hang on a second... why the outrage on cafcnick's post?
There have been untold posts over the years with a lot of posters openly mocking the Christian faith and taking the piss out of people believing in God, whichever god it may be. No one piped up then to say you shouldnt be so ignorant/offensive about someone's beliefs. Im a non practicing catholic and found some of the views a bit offensive but didnt say anything as its people's right to say what they think.
Some of you need to get down off your high horses.
Couldnt agree more. All those that go on about free speech then get all pissy about someone saying what nick said... seems a bit hypocritical tbh
You can have free speech, but being wrong is just being wrong.
Most people were getting annoyed at the "Muhammad didn't exist" comment, which as we know, is incorrect.
It's like defending someone for saying "Chris Powell is still the manager of Charlton" when he is not, it's not an issue of free speech, but ignorance.
All for what, some stupid prophet who didn't exist. Wtf
One of the most stupid comments I've ever seen on here.
Insulting their religion is not exactly going to help is it.
I tend to agree that it is an unhelpful comment but herein lies part of the problem. Being offended does not and should not provoke rage enough for violence let alone these sick killings. Until Islam can look at and change itself from within to accept that being offended is not licence to commit crimes, issue fatwa's and especially not commit murder.
Islam doesnt need to change. These nutjobs dont act on behalf of millions of Muslims round the world.
The only thing that needs to be done is to stamp out evil bastards who want to kill innocent people.
Sorry but it does need to change. By way of an example i yesterday listened to an imam who was shocked and as horrified at the killings as anyone else but still was not able to accept that freedom of speech and the written word should allow the publishing of those cartoons and what was written by Salmon Rushdie all those years ago. He was tolerant up to the point where he wanted sanction and control over what he found offensive. his stance is I believe a very fair representation of even the tolerant 99% of the Muslim world.
If that doesn't change they cannot live within the culture, freedoms and practices of the west.
I respect their right to take offence but there is where it stops.
I think more importantly we should be praying (wether or wether not you believe in it) that there are no more innocent lifes being taken.
Then debate and score points of each other after.
God only knows what the hostages and there family's are going through right now. Sickening.
No - we shouldn't. I won't pray because I don't believe in god - any god. As soon as you start saying 'we' should be praying, you give credence to the arguments that these nutnuts are trying to make.
I think more importantly we should be praying (wether or wether not you believe in it) that there are no more innocent lifes being taken.
Then debate and score points of each other after.
God only knows what the hostages and there family's are going through right now. Sickening.
No - we shouldn't. I won't pray because I don't believe in god - any god. As soon as you start saying 'we' should be praying, you give credence to the arguments that these nutnuts are trying to make.
Hang on a second... why the outrage on cafcnick's post?
There have been untold posts over the years with a lot of posters openly mocking the Christian faith and taking the piss out of people believing in God, whichever god it may be. No one piped up then to say you shouldnt be so ignorant/offensive about someone's beliefs. Im a non practicing catholic and found some of the views a bit offensive but didnt say anything as its people's right to say what they think.
Some of you need to get down off your high horses.
Couldnt agree more. All those that go on about free speech then get all pissy about someone saying what nick said... seems a bit hypocritical tbh
What Nick said was that Muhammad never existed. Which is wrong. You can be a Christian, a Hindu, a Buddhist, an atheist, whatever. That statement is wrong. That's why a few have reacted in the way they have.
He might have been factually incorrect (apparently) but the backlash was hardly because he got the details wrong was it? And if it was it was pretty disproportionate.
being condescending all whilst being completely wrong irritates, don't you agree? If some one said the same about Jesus (although there's less evidence to suggest he exists, but whatever) i'd still have reacted in the same way.
but i agree, lets move on and bring the thread back to whats going on in paris.
I hope this calms down, for the sake of the innocent people held hostage and for the sake of moderate Muslims. Also because I'm going there in three weeks but that's not so important right now
Sorry but the bible was not "updated" with the new testament.
It was added to.
The old testament is still there and as much a part of the bible as the old testament which is why you know the story of David and Goliath and most likely lots of other old testament stories and phrases such as moses, parting the red sea, genesis, sodom and gomorrah, etc etc.
The definitive answer you are looking for it that the bible as we have it today ie old and new was agreed at the council of Nicaea in AD 325.
So centuries before the Koran which was put together in AD 653-656. The Koran drew on the bible and some of its teachings
Jesus, who lived and died a devout Jew remember and was seen as a fulfilment of prophesies linked to the old testament ie he came from the house of King David, is a prophet of Islam and a divine figure for Christians. Hence some attempts to bring the three religions closer as the "Children of Abraham".
It is true that many modern Christians now look more to the peace and love of the teachings of Jesus than to the fire and brimstone of the old testament but old book is still there, still part of the cannon of the bible as a whole.
in my opinion more of Christianity is now more liberal (certainly in the UK and I would guess Oz) and has a less literal and dogmatic approach to its holy book than do many Muslims. But in both religions (and others such as Judaism) there are both liberal and fundamentalist arms. ISIS v the Lords Resistance army would be a close fight for most depraved and barbaric group hiding behind religious belief IMO
I'm no more defending the Koran than I am the Bible. I believe neither has any divine inspiration or any unique perspective not available in other religions or those of no religion. Both contain ideas that I find abhorrent. The justification of slavery in the bible is one, the 2nd class status of women in both is another (ask Gavin Peacock),
I just don't think we can say "here's proof that the Koran encourages terrorism" and then dismiss similar calls for death and destruction in the Bible currently used, and often abused, by the vast majority of the major Christian churches.
Comments
Lets just focus on praying / hoping for a lucky break in random chance* (*delete as appropriate) that this comes to a close soon.
Sorry QA but that is just not true of main stream churches such as the catholic church, the Church of England and most evengelical churches.
The bible is BOTH the old and new testament for them.
The Church of England and the Roman Catholic church believe in and preach the 10 commandments (old testament).
The believe that God created the earth (old), moses saved the isrealites (old), etc etc. The push of science means that many no longer believe that God created the world in seven days.
However the very large and increasingly powerful evangelical Christian in the US and elsewhere do follow the old testement, do believe the creation story, do beleive that homosexuality is a sin because it says so in the old testament.
This is certainly a very complicated issue with definitive answers hard to come by.
One thing that is beyond dispute is that an attempt was made to update the Bible with the New Testament. But that will never be the case with the Koran, as anyone who attempts to do so, will lose their head. Neither is anyone allowed to renounce their religion without suffering a similar fate. The Koran can never change, therefore barbaric practices such as beheadings and public stonings will always continue. The really frightening thing is that to be considered a "true" muslim, the Koran has to be followed to the word. In their warped minds, these guys are simply being good Muslims, and the indoctrination of most Muslims begins at a very early age.
Most people were getting annoyed at the "Muhammad didn't exist" comment, which as we know, is incorrect.
It's like defending someone for saying "Chris Powell is still the manager of Charlton" when he is not, it's not an issue of free speech, but ignorance.
Sounds like the siege is underway.
If that doesn't change they cannot live within the culture, freedoms and practices of the west.
I respect their right to take offence but there is where it stops.
Hoping for good news.
but i agree, lets move on and bring the thread back to whats going on in paris.
Hostage survived
It was added to.
The old testament is still there and as much a part of the bible as the old testament which is why you know the story of David and Goliath and most likely lots of other old testament stories and phrases such as moses, parting the red sea, genesis, sodom and gomorrah, etc etc.
The definitive answer you are looking for it that the bible as we have it today ie old and new was agreed at the council of Nicaea in AD 325.
So centuries before the Koran which was put together in AD 653-656. The Koran drew on the bible and some of its teachings
Jesus, who lived and died a devout Jew remember and was seen as a fulfilment of prophesies linked to the old testament ie he came from the house of King David, is a prophet of Islam and a divine figure for Christians. Hence some attempts to bring the three religions closer as the "Children of Abraham".
It is true that many modern Christians now look more to the peace and love of the teachings of Jesus than to
the fire and brimstone of the old testament but old book is still there, still part of the cannon of the bible as a whole.
in my opinion more of Christianity is now more liberal (certainly in the UK and I would guess Oz) and has a less literal and dogmatic approach to its holy book than do many Muslims. But in both religions (and others such as Judaism) there are both liberal and fundamentalist arms. ISIS v the Lords Resistance army would be a close fight for most depraved and barbaric group hiding behind religious belief IMO
I'm no more defending the Koran than I am the Bible. I believe neither has any divine inspiration or any unique perspective not available in other religions or those of no religion. Both contain ideas that I find abhorrent. The justification of slavery in the bible is one, the 2nd class status of women in both is another (ask Gavin Peacock),
I just don't think we can say "here's proof that the Koran encourages terrorism" and then dismiss similar calls for death and destruction in the Bible currently used, and often abused, by the vast majority of the major Christian churches.