Continue to iasius

Submitted by Allonehhob (Canada), Nov 5, 2005 at 22:23

I can see how determined you are to link Christ with violence. You have made it very clear that you reject the teachings of Christ.

But I am wondering, do you need to have this strong attitude and sarcastic notes in your statements to deliver your message?

I can see that both of us may continue with this argument forever. But what is the use of it. If you want to accuse Christianity of violence then suite yourself, but how about that you be a bigger person and try to be civilized in expressing yourself.

When you said "It isn't ‘who' says it but ‘what' is said that is of moment. So how does it matter if I used this or that source as reference?"

It does matter, if you reject the authenticity of the Bibles then simply do not quote from it, quote from a source that provided you with a clear proof that links violence with Christ.

You said "But unfortunately, early and complete indoctrination in a certain monopolistic worldview precludes some of us from even appreciating this openness found in others, which is a great pity indeed."

No one denies that the church went to dark ages, but who in the church today precludes you or some of you from being openness. Have you seen people persecuted for insulting Christ or insulting Christians?, on the other hand, why don't you try to go to Saudi Arabia and use the same strategy you are using here against Islam? Let me see how brave you will be there.

Whether you want to believe this or not, if you read the new testimony, you will see how open Christ was to opponents, never in his teachings nor in his life used violence to preach his words.

You said, "If only the Bible had used the word "probably", like me, more often than it used the word "verily", the world might have been an immeasurably happier place to inhabit, don't you think? "

PROBABLY you are right, are you HAPPIER now?

You said " Every such unreasonable belief needs strictly to be kept personal in order that at least the semblance of sanity, reasonableness and rationality is presented, unless of course one wishes to attract undue pity and public attention, or in severe and extreme cases, be ‘certified'."

Doesn't this apply to you? Reading your replies to people on this board, aren't you trying to certify yourself as rational, logical and reasonable by accusing others of lacking such qualities?

Peace of Christ be with you

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".