i laugh at you not the opposite

Submitted by susan (Italy), Jan 11, 2007 at 16:54

"My stomach hurts, I laughed so hard, when reading your comment. Thanks a bunch for that."

I bet your stomach hurts even more when you bow down so profusely to your muslim masters

"It wasn't about Ghandi or his wish to enter the Christian Paradise. I used him solely as an extreme example to ask our Christian Teachers, if any man, woman, or child, who lived an exemplary life and did nothing but good, but happened to believe in something else or nothing at all would be accepted by our GOD and allowed into his paradise (- for the sake of the argument, let's assume Gandhi absolutely wanted to enter our Paradise.) ..... are your with me so far?"

sorry , i am usually not with knee jerked people like yourself. Your assumption fails miserably because any high cleric of any religion will tell you that the people of other religions are not granted the same stuff. Either prove the opposite or shut up. As always you point the finger on christianity for some chip on your shoulder, but as noah pointed out, people like yourself are dangerous to our cause. We are not talking about a rampant christianization on the planet, with christianists forcing the law of the bible (if such a thing exists) on the rest of the world.

"Their answer was unisono No. I used that as a piece of evidence in our discussion here for the exclusive nature of Christianity, inasmuch as ISLAM is exclusive in nature - something you ( and I) adamantly condemn."

Are you english mother tongue? because I see you don't know the meaning of the words you are using.

Exclusive nature? That any religion grants a different kind of paradise is not being exclusive. That a religion forbids with death apostasy or conversion, THAT is exclusive and so far it's a characteristic of :

ISLAM

MAFIA CLANS

SCIENTOLOGY and similar

Secondly, I don't condemn that any religion has got its god-given right to decide the path for their people's salvation, you use the word exclusiveness in the wrong way.

Islam puts on 2 different grounds the "people of the book" = christians and jews because they feel annexed to our monotheism and all the rest, hindu, buddists, pagans etc. Christians and jews as "similar" are still treated like second class human beings but still better than the rest who are killed on the spot or forcely converted.

But that for you is not exclusiveness.

"I am sorry - but what you consider as a silly question is a fundamental dilemma for many Christians who consider a good person living a good life worthy of Paradise, wherever and whatever that may be. Being allowed to share in the blessings of a well deserved afterlife."

considering your deep ignorance of all things christian doctrine I wouldn't left out the option that the answer is not as easy and silly as you claim. Just recently the vatican released a statement, totally ignored, that granted paradise also to non christened children. It's not of my personal concern but to many people it was a huge step forward.

But of course this matter is of no interest to people like yourself all bend on saying "religions are all evil" and "christianity made the highest crimes of humanity".

All you do here is just find whatever worthless thing allegedly connected with christianity to slander it, while you are totally off topic. The problem with christianity, western countries and all the other religions except islam is that we have played too nicely against people who wants to enslave us.

"According to our religion, there is only Paradise or Hell. Our religion does not speak of Nirvana. Hence, logically deducted and so stated by some of my own spiritual leaders, even Gandhi has his PO Box currently in Hell. Do you see the logic?"

I fail to see logic in everything you write, but I already asked you which other religion grants the same stuff also to NON-ADHERENTS of that religion.

What is the meaning of choice in faith if all faith grants the same stuff to anybody? Oh, that's another gem of your relativism.

"Ask your priest, and see what he says."

brave relativist, why don't you ask a muslim cleric what's the punishment in hell for non muslims? add to that that muslims plague non-muslims even in real life

"Yes - it does not make sense to me, and I have yet to hear from any scholar of any Christian Church in a to me satisfactory manner. My "religion" is to be inclusive and values people by their deeds first and beliefs second. It is one of many reasons, why Christianity is losing followers."

actually it's the exact opposite, it's the moral relativists like yourself that fail to acknowledge the simple existence of good and evil that are leaving the church. I say good riddance, we already established you are a good dhimmi already on your knees.

"No matter what - I go with the Bible and invite us all to: " Remove the plank in your own eye, before you tackle the speck in someone elses" ...."

yes, michel remove the big plank in your eyes, before looking at me, noah, don, dhimmi no more.

Oh and buy a prayer rug, you will need it.

"Now I really go and have my drink. But for some strange reason I do no longer feel so sorry for myself anymore... I wonder why."

because to moral relativists like yourself it's enough to spit some ignorant statement on christianity to make you feel better. We have the world on fire because a mass psychosis called islam and you are pretending to have the moral higher ground by pointing out silly details of a non-threatening religion.

Then leave it. It's not that christianity has to adapt to the relativist view of michel zala. I personally don't want a 2000 year religion to adapt to the view of a muslim apologist already living on his knees

---

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".