Anyone notice how the press is lifting up Islam while smearing Christianity?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

it's ironic how they're lifting up a religion that at its core, doesn't believe in religious freedom (which also means they don't believe in freedom of speech or freedom of the press).  guess it is a sign of how much they're offended by the New Testament.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No.

then you need to start paying attention, example:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/25/a-change-of-faith/?hpt=C1

The media (along with Obama), attempts to portray Muslims as thoughtful and knowledgeable, while portraying Christians of lacking thought and knowing nothing.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No.

Especially if one considers Fox press.

Look, you don’t choose such a straw-man of a story and post it as the top story on your web-site unless you’re slanted.  And even with the opposite slant of FoxNews, they’re a small voice when considering the media as a whole.  Basically, just on TV, there is ABC/NBC/CBS/MSNBC/CNN on one side and FoxNews on the other side.  Then you have all the print media, which is not only mostly liberal, it is also dominated by liberal papers like the Times and the Post.

So, pay attention.  Heck, even on this forum, you’ll see the same thing: Liberals embracing the thought of having Muslim neighbors over Christian neighbors.  And the liberals on this board attempt to smear and distort the Christian scriptures, while us Christians pretty much have kept their powder dry when it comes to mentioning verses from the Koran.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I happen to agree.
The multicultural part of the far left seems to have more patience with Islam than they do Christianity.

That's, to a large extent, because the 'far left' tends to be a reaction against what they see as the (to a great extent nominally) dominant moral hegemony, which happens in this country to be Christianity. Any support that they have for Islam tends to come, at least at a visceral level, from the same reactionary source. Truthfully, Islam and Christianity aren't that different; if we were a predominantly Muslim country, I expect the social/cultural left would react in the same way against Islam in favor of Christianity.

Really?  Even I am judicial to label any Christian a heretic that attempts to spread the Gospel by sword, whether it be a Catholic like a past Pope or a Protestant like John Calvin.  I don’t play favorites.

And the press isn’t simply fighting the majority of any given country, else it would report on the violence against Christians throughout the Muslim world.  Instead, we Christians  have to follow such news through other sources.

Even on this forum, liberals mock the meaning of the picture in my sig, not understanding that it is through fear of death at the hands of the mob that 100.0% of the people in that picture are praying.  Nothing wins the hearts of 100.0% of the people, that’s just not human nature.  And obviously 100.0% percent of those people don’t have pure hearts because of the reports of violence and rape done by members of that mob, so its not like Islam won 100.0% of those people over to peace.

It is Christianity that brought freedom of religion/speech/press to this country.  Jesus and the Apostles didn’t spread the Gospel by sword, but rather by word of mouth under the assumption of freedom of religion/speech/press and in spite of opposition to freedom of religion/speech/press.  The opposite is true of Islam’s Mohammad.  When Christians attempt to use the sword to win converts, Christians like me label that heresy.  But such heresy is accepted as the norm within Muslim societies.

So, basically, the left is embracing a Muslim movement that if successful, will bring literal death to the freedom of religion/speech/press.  Democracy (rule of the people) without the freedom of religion/speech/press is not freedom, therefore we need to understand that democracy and freedom are not necessary one and the same.

Do I like the dictators?  No, I believe they are mass murderers.  But don’t think that mob has freedom of religion/speech/press in mind, for they do not.  The Koran, point blank, has taught them they have to the right to kill non-Muslims.  This isn’t some old covenant Islamic law that I am attempting to hang on modern Muslims, rather that is what their current covenant teaches.  It would be like the New Testament teaching Christians had the right to kill those who disbelieved, instead of teaching to love their enemies.

But this is what the left is embracing in order to counter the message of Christianity, for somehow Christ bothers them more than Allah.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No.

Mizaru, Kikazaru, Iwazaru, Shizaru, and …Badger?!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

howdy, howdy, howdy

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

ernest...my treatment of islam is based on what is stated n the koran

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I am not on a cross, I am in a box and no one wants to be my friend

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I must say I like the well-reasoned case brought against jmf's assertion here. Well done, defenders of tolerance.

well, your well-reasonedness, I hate to shake you up, but today is not the day I started this thread - that would be yesterday.  Today is a new day, and to celebrate this new day, CNN, in its majestic charity, has deigned this new day to educate my fellow ignorant citizens; headlining, once again, its very own webpage with a new article on the virtues of Islam.

…But, before the article begins, CNN’s editor would like to remind you that, CNN’s Soledad O’Brien chronicles the dramatic fight over the construction of a mosque in the heart of the Bible belt. “Unwelcome: The Muslims Next Door” airs Sunday, March 27 at 8 p.m. ET on CNN…

But, on this day and in this article, CNN presents to us the story of Islam’s struggle against hateful alarmist Christians:  In the backdrop of the controversial congressional hearings on the radicalization of Muslim Americans, convened by U.S. Rep. Peter King who is obviously leading the invincible armies of the barbarian Christian horde up the barren mound of Capital Hill…there stands a righteous and meek Muslim rapper who has been transformed by Islam into a model of society…

Enjoy:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/26/how-islam-shaped-one-rap-artist/?hpt=C1

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

ernest...my treatment of islam is based on what is stated n the koran

If you think Muslims agree on how to interpret the Quran any better than Christians agree on how to interpret the Bible, you are sadly mistaken.

Well, since it has been shown innumerable times on this board that nonbelievers are more capable of honestly interpreting the bible than most Christian, who the vast majority are simply playing games, let’s throw the verses out there and let the chips fall where they may.

And since you and I, both professing Christians, are in disagreement over this matter, let’s think about that for a moment, shall we?  What could one of us be missing?  Let’s retrace the statements of the Muslim scriptures and let’s see if we can put our finger on the detail we may have overlooked.  One of us may have his head buried in the sand hoping we’re all going to get along together happily for ever after, one of us may have decided that ignoring truth would increase our happiness in life and make the world a better place….

“Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.” Sura 9:73

“Mohammed is Allah’s apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.” Sura 48:29

“Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what Allah and His apostle have forbidden and do not embrace the true faith until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.” Sura 9:29

“The Day of Resurrection will not arrive until the Muslims make war against the Jews and kill them, and until a Jew hiding behind a rock and tree, and the rock and tree will say: ‘Oh Muslim, Oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him!’” (The Hadith)

Of course, this is in sharp contrast to teachings of the NT: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you only love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” Matthew 5:43-48

And for all those Christians who deny the supremacy of Christ and accept Muslims as fellow believers, here is what the Koran says in regard to those who accept the Deity of Christ:

“Those who say, 'God is the Messiah, son of Mary,' have defied God. The Messiah himself said, 'Children of Israel, worship God, my Lord and your Lord.' If anyone associates others with God, God will forbid him from the Garden, and Hell will be his home. No one will help such evildoers…. Those people who say that God is the third of three are defying [the truth]: there is only One God. If they persist in what they are saying, a painful punishment will afflict those of them who persist. Why do they not turn to God and ask his forgiveness, when God is most forgiving, most merciful? The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a messenger; other messengers had come and gone before him; his mother was a virtuous woman; both ate food. See how clear We make these signs for them; see how deluded they are.” 5:72

So, Christians, the Koran salvational advice for you is to not think that Jesus Christ was any more than a man, else you’ll be condemned.  So we better forget that Jesus is the Son of God, for as the Koran says:

“People of the Book, do not go to excess in your religion, and do not say anything about God except the truth: the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was nothing more than a messenger of God, His word, directed to Mary, a spirit from Him. So believe in God and His messengers and do not speak of a 'Trinity'—stop, that is better for you—God is only one God, He is far above having a son, everything in the heavens and earth belongs to Him and He is the best one to trust”  4:171

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I'd hardly say that it's rooted in nothing. Several people were actually able to intelligently disagree with it, after all. In an increasingly global world these kind of issues will become more and more important to deal with and I would think disagreeing would be more appropriate than dismissing in this case.

Besides, if you really think it's better not to respond then not responding would seem better than just displaying some kind of mob behaviour by quoting a post that had no content to begin with. At least in my opinion.

If you read my post correctly, I just stated why the responses were like they were and that some people shouldn't have responded, I didn't attack the OP. That aside, I do think that it's incorrect to assert that Christianity is more attacked than Islam.

Making analogies between American religious conservatives and Islamic religious conservatives is one reason that the hypocrisy of white “enlightened” liberals is rather galling to many.  Sayyid al-Qutib found 1950s America to be a culturally liberal cesspool, there is no comparison. Especially because nearly all people on the Left would prefer to live in a standard Western Judeo-Christian/secular country as opposed to a Muslim country.

The reality is that Muslims Americans have views, which if they were white Protestant Christians would get them labeled as slack-jawed inbred cretins. Here's something that will blow your mind: The average US Muslim is probably around where jmfcst is with more melanin.

They are “people of color” so their beliefs get a pass.

I can see people on the Left holding criticisms of some Islamic views but fear being considered “Islamophobic,” at best or "racist" at worst. This going on while defending criticism of Christian conservatives as Gustaf's example illustrated earlier.

For example I made a thread about US doctors here:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=133714.0
Nearly 3 out of 4 Muslim doctors believe in ID over Evolution, nearly 40% higher than the highest Christian group. I want a liberal to come forward and say that they are the most backward on this issue. But all debate on the ID/Evolution debate is concentrated on Christianity and less so on any other religion.

I'am a strongly against against racially-driven bigotry against Muslims and support equal rights for all. But defending the rights of religious freedom of a minority does not mean that you need to pretend they are not objectionable. Yet I agree Muslims can positively contribute to reducing many social ills in urban communities such as out-of-wedlock births, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, etc. Maybe if 9/11 hadn't occurred it would have been a "colored" people's Mormonism.

I don’t think this has anything to do with race, for the media will gleefully lift up white “Christians” who don’t adhere to the NT, while any Christian, regardless of race, who adheres to the teachings of the NT is ridiculed without exception.

If any Christian proclaims the supremacy of Christ and preaches according to the NT, the media tars and feathers them.  The media, once again, is making a deliberate choice to advocate anything that stands against the NT.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

First off, strike the hadith cite immediately in any discussion of what all Muslims agree upon.  Not only do not all branches of Islam use the hadith, those that do don't agree on which hadith are valid.

"And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better than mere disputation, unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong and injury: but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow in submission."  Sura 29:46

This is a clear statement in the Quran against the forcible conversion of other Peoples of the Book to Islam.  Nor did the Arab conquest of the seventh century result in such forcible conversions.  I'll grant that one significant difference between Islam and Christianity is that Islam calls for its followers to establish political control, which Christianity does not (or at least did not until Constantine came along three centuries after Christ).  Now in practice, some Muslims have an overly broad definition of wrong and injury.

"Those who believe in the Quran, and those who follow the Torah, and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve."  Sura 2:62

So despite what you stated earlier, the Quran does not make the claim that one must be a Muslim to be saved.  While not all who profess to be Muslim are ecumenical in their approach, the Quran most decidedly is.

Federalist,

It’s clear to anyone knowing the history that Mohammad started off trying to make friends with the Jews and Christians, then later, after the Jews and Christians rejected him, turned against them…hence the contradictions with how to deal with Jews and Christians.

You won’t find any contradictions in the NT with how to deal with nonbelievers.

And as far as the point about Islam attempting to establish political control while the NT doesn’t (notwithstanding heretical Christians who attempted it, both Catholic and Protestant), I completely agree with you.  And, of course, that means that at its core, since it does attempt to establish political control, the Koran is NOT tolerant of religious freedom…so you’ve just made my point.

But, sticking with the idea of pushing for a state established religion, has it ever tickled your curiosity that the bible paints a picture of during the endtimes a religion will arise that is mandated by the state, and that this state-religion attempts to wipe out both Jews and Christians?  So what current religion in the world aims at state control and also views Jews and Christians as its chief enemy?  Islam.

Now, that doesn’t mean Islam has to be that endtime religion, for another religion can arise given enough time.  But do you know that many of the European nations have already calculated what year they will become a Muslim majority nation?  “In France, 30% of children age 20 years and below are Muslims. The ratio in Paris and Marseille has soared to 45%. In southern France, there are more mosques than churches…The situation within the United Kingdom is not much different. In the last 30 years, the Muslim population there has climbed from 82,000 to 2.5 million. Presently, there are over 1000 mosques throughout Great Britain - - many of which were converted from churches…In Belgium, 50% of the newborns are Muslims and reportedly its Islamic population hovers around 25%.”

I’ve already laid out the case that if Christ comes back in the next 50 years, the US fits perfectly with the description of Mystery Babylon.  And if Christ does come back this century, Islam fits the prophesied endtime religion that merges political control and religious belief, this is both antiJewish and antiChristian.  And Islam is focused on, like no other religion, getting back the Promised Land from the Jews.

So, maybe in time, another nation will arise that will fit the description for Mystery Babylon, and maybe another religion will arise that will fit the description of the endtime religion that practices beheading and is focused on Jerusalem and wants to make war against Jews and Christians.  Or maybe the antiChrist will quickly bring forth his own religion by merging different religions or simply inventing it out of wholeclothe.  I am not sure.  But one thing I am sure of – the United States and Islam both currently fit the descriptions of Mystery Babylon and the endtime religion, respectively.  And some of the things mentioned in Revelation that I take as symbolism may not be so symbolic after all:

Rev 20:4 “I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

jmf, what is up with the gore bro? 

sorry if I duplicated any pics, I couldnt see them on the first post where I referred to beheading, so I created another post for the pics.

I just wanted to make it clear that the "radical" portions of Islam are NOT isolated, but rather follow Islam wherever it goes.  Because, just as Ernest pointed out, and just as I have been pointing out, Islam does NOT believe in freedom of religion, rather its goal is to force Islamic law on the entire world through state control.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

so, you're saying there are segments of the Koran that don't apply to modern day Muslims, just like the Law of Moses doesn't apply to Christians?!

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

sorry, but the context of those verses I quoted out of the Koran isn't an historical account, but rather is a continuing command.

...which is unlike the verses of slaughter in the OT that not only do not apply to Christians, but also only applied during the time of conquest of the promised land (it wasn't a command that even the Jews continually had to obey)...and we know that because it explicitly says "when you enter the land"

And as far as Jesus calling some of the Jews children of the devil in John 8:44, that is not limited to the Jews for the NT says that against anyone who rejects truth (see 1John 3:7-10)...so I have no idea why you would bring that verse up other than the fact you dont know the new testament

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

pls don't post pictures of decapitation on this board, very obviously not allowed

I understand, but is it stated somewhere we cant post pictures of killings?  I remember someone posted JFK's autopsy pics once, which I found distasteful because it was totally unnecessary to post pics of what should be a private moment, but I wouldn't have a problem with someone posting the frames that show his head exploding or pics of the Jews being killed in the holocaust.  As graphic as they may be, we can't can't turn our eyes away from evil acts.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

But, having said all that, there are lots of examples from Islamic history, and from today, of Muslims using Qur'anic verses to justify violence in the name of their political causes; just as there are some examples of such behavior from Christian history.

I am not denying some Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, have attempted to justify killing of those who disagreed with their doctrine, but they don’t have one single passage in the NT to stand on.  Instead, they have the entire NT condemning their actions.

It is plain heresy for any Christian to attempt to harm another person on account of what the other person believes.  When encountering nonbelievers who don’t accept the message, Christians are simply instructed by the NT to shake the dust off their shoes and move on to preach to others.  If the heresy occurs in the church, Christians are merely instructed by the NT not to associate at all with false brothers.  And when the disciples wanted to kill everyone in a town for not accepting them, Jesus rebuked them and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of Man came not to destroy people's lives but to save.”  (Luke 9:55)

So, whether it be a heretic former Pope or the heretic John Calvin, any Christian who believes he has a right to kill people because of their beliefs is a complete and utter idiot.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

It has to do with how graphic it is, not the general concept of a death.  Severed heads counts as graphic.  The specific rule that you violated in the Terms Of Service is my interpretation of the prohibition against "obscene" postings.  This board is not the right place to discuss moderation policies, however.  If you have questions regarding this, please take it elsewhere.

dude, I was just asking a general question, I wasnt planning to take you to forum court.  I understand the images of beheadings are disturbing and the acts themselves are obscene, but those images are revealant to the topic being discussed.  What are we going to do, burn all the holocaust films and pretend it never happened?  Are you aware that that is precisely why the American generals ordered that those pictures be taken, even though the acts were hideous?  Those generals understood the danger of NOT showing the pics, that the world would brush it under the rug and allow it to happen again

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

jmf, let me leave aside the whole issue of Islam, since I don't think your preconceptions there are going to be changed by any argument I might bring.  (How you link a desire for political control to an inevitable desire for decapitation is beyond me, so I have no idea how to counter that notion.)

you do understand that beheadings are a part of sharia law, right?

====

 However, in your identification of Mystery Babylon with the United States, how do you square that with the explicit identification of Mystery Babylon as a city that is repeatedly made in Revelation 17-18.  I could possibly see an identification being made between Mystery Babylon and New York City, but not with the United States or any other country.

cities are often used to symbolize countries in the bible

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

johanus, ur making it sound like islam is a threat only to christianty, when in reality it is a threat to anyone not muslim, including those at CNN who r lifting it up

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

yeah, I also think his numbers are way way off

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

what happened on 4/20/99?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

columbine?!  lets try to stay in our swimlanes

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

And I know that there are billions of Muslims around the world, and only a considerable minority among them believe that the whole world should be converted to Islam and forced to obey sharia everywhere.  The ones who claim that it should, and take up arms to try to achieve that goal, are going to be a problem for us and everyone else who isn't Muslim.  Those who don't believe such a thing shouldn't be treated like they do.  That's all I'm saying.

I disagree with your interpretation of the Koran, but this is not the place for that, if you want we can start a new thread in on the religion board (i don't want to give the moderators reason to shut down this thread)

...BUT, I will take to task your claim I quoted above, because:

Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

and the majority of Muslims in Muslim countries want sharia law:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/features/news/poll-most-muslim-countries-want-sharia-law/

and the stronger the Muslim majority, the stronger the acceptance among Muslims of Sharia law...so, expect the percentage of Muslims who want sharia law to grow as the percent of Muslims grow - maybe "only" 40% of UK Muslims want Sharia law now, but as they become a bigger proportion and the possibility of sharia law becomes within their grasps, expect a higher percentage of Muslims to want it.


but, hey, you're arguing yesterday's comments.  Today is a new day, and on this 27th day of March, we can celebrate the third day of this thread by reading yet another new story from CNN of how Muslims are mistreated by nasty Christians:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/27/in-key-american-muslim-enclave-alienation-is-growing/?hpt=C2

once again, it doesn't matter if a group is advocating homosexuality or advocating sharia law that would kill homosexuals, as long as it is against the New Testament, CNN is going to uplift it while at the same time making Christianity out to be the bad guy.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

 However, in your identification of Mystery Babylon with the United States, how do you square that with the explicit identification of Mystery Babylon as a city that is repeatedly made in Revelation 17-18.  I could possibly see an identification being made between Mystery Babylon and New York City, but not with the United States or any other country.

cities are often used to symbolize countries in the bible

That symbolism is used when those cities serve as the political, cultural, and economic center of said country.  There is no city that can be said to be that of the United States.  New York City, because of the UN, could be said to be the center of the world in those three areas.

In any case, Rev 17:9-10, argues strongly against identifying Mystery Babylon with the United States.  There could not have been at the time Revelation was written five prior and one current ruler of the United States.  If one wants to get abstract, Mystery Babylon as a personification of the center of world power is a possible interpretation.  However, that too argues against an identification with the United States.  The seventh king is identified as reigning but a brief time, and the United States has been the preeminent power in the world for too long now.  A United Nations that gains real power could fit the bill as the seventh king.

the woman (babylon) sits on a beast which has seven heads and ten horns (17:3)

The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. The hills also represent seven kings (17:9-10)

the woman also sits on many waters (17:1)...

the sitting, whether it be over many waters, many lands (hills), or many kings, is simply symbolic of having dominance over, it displays her dominance of being the lone superpower...
...she has power over kings and thus the lands (hills) that the kings represent, and power over the seas (the waters, or if you want the waters to represent the masses of the people, that works also)...
the meaning of the imagery is simply that her influence straddles the earth

...it does NOT symbolize that the those kings she is sitting on have originated from her, so I really don't know how you're claiming the kings have to arise out of her.

...but, if you want to continue this, then you should make a thread on the religion board, because really this thread was only intended to:
1) show that CNN is taking up the Muslim cause and portraying them as victims of Christians
2) to explore the possible motives for CNN doing so (mainly, their outright hatred of New Testament Christianity)
3) to explore the political implications of Muslim ideology on the future of religious freedom in the West