Re: Re: Terror and its myths

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/7/2006 3:22:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes:

The only thing missing in these articles seems to be a realistic comparisment. What I mean - is it seems to be making other religions out as bloodthirsty, while conveniently forgetting that there are fundamental Christians who are just as blood thirsty. One may talk about the history of other religions been always blood thirsty, but also remember that Christianity has also had it's share of bloodshed in the past.

The article, which still has more to come, is focusing on today's world. Today Christianity is only the aggressor in Afghanistan and Iraq and then because a Christian nation was attacked.

Christians did have a bloody time up until fairly recently, ending maybe 100 years ago. Much is made of the Crusades, but that was a two way street with Christian and Muslim taking turns being the invader or defender. This Christian vs. Muslim fighting was not limited to the Middle East but also took place in Spain, France, and the Balkan states. If not for the Christian victory at the Battle of Tours in France in 732, Islam might well have been the religion of Europe rather than Christianity. That battle is counted by many as the high watermark of Islamic militaristic expansion in Europe. Still, it took another 700 years to reclaim Spain. In the East, the Turks made regular forays into the Balkans at times reaching Budapest before they were stopped and turned back. The constant fighting is what has resulted in such a mixed population and such long and bad memories between the sides.

Christian Europe also killed more of its own that it did Muslims. Many of the wars fought in Europe had at least a religious flavor to them. Usually though it was one ruler who favored a particular type of Christianity used that to inflame their people against another ruler who believed slightly differently. So in cases like that, the religion wasn't really to blame, it was just the excuse for war.

There were, however, wars over national religions, particularly after Protestantism began. Those too were some bloody wars, but again, many were merely the would-be leaders squabbling for power and used differences in religion to attract troops to their banner and make themselves different from the enemy.

The Christian fratricidal period ended at least 100 years ago when the nation-state replaced small kingdoms and many nations began to turn secular. Yes there were plenty of wars in that time and people did call on God's aid, however, the reason for going to war was not one over religious matters but secular ones, like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand which started WWI, or revenge for the Versailles Treaty for the Nazis.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/7/2006 3:22:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes:

The only thing missing in these articles seems to be a realistic comparisment. What I mean - is it seems to be making other religions out as bloodthirsty, while conveniently forgetting that there are fundamental Christians who are just as blood thirsty. One may talk about the history of other religions been always blood thirsty, but also remember that Christianity has also had it's share of bloodshed in the past.

The article, which still has more to come, is focusing on today's world. Today Christianity is only the aggressor in Afghanistan and Iraq and then because a Christian nation was attacked.

Christians did have a bloody time up until fairly recently, ending maybe 100 years ago. Much is made of the Crusades, but that was a two way street with Christian and Muslim taking turns being the invader or defender. This Christian vs. Muslim fighting was not limited to the Middle East but also took place in Spain, France, and the Balkan states. If not for the Christian victory at the Battle of Tours in France in 732, Islam might well have been the religion of Europe rather than Christianity. That battle is counted by many as the high watermark of Islamic militaristic expansion in Europe. Still, it took another 700 years to reclaim Spain. In the East, the Turks made regular forays into the Balkans at times reaching Budapest before they were stopped and turned back. The constant fighting is what has resulted in such a mixed population and such long and bad memories between the sides.

Christian Europe also killed more of its own that it did Muslims. Many of the wars fought in Europe had at least a religious flavor to them. Usually though it was one ruler who favored a particular type of Christianity used that to inflame their people against another ruler who believed slightly differently. So in cases like that, the religion wasn't really to blame, it was just the excuse for war.

There were, however, wars over national religions, particularly after Protestantism began. Those too were some bloody wars, but again, many were merely the would-be leaders squabbling for power and used differences in religion to attract troops to their banner and make themselves different from the enemy.

The Christian fratricidal period ended at least 100 years ago when the nation-state replaced small kingdoms and many nations began to turn secular. Yes there were plenty of wars in that time and people did call on God's aid, however, the reason for going to war was not one over religious matters but secular ones, like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand which started WWI, or revenge for the Versailles Treaty for the Nazis.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 3/7/2006 11:22:49 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, julie.stevenson16@... writes:

Is it just me or are there fundamentalists within Christianity and the Muslim faith?

Christian fundamentalists are usually the ones who believe in a very strict, literal interpretation of the Bible. They are usually the ones that give Christians a bad name by challenging evolution and so on.

Muslim Fundamentalists want the world to be under Sharia, or Islamic law, a code which is far stricter and more restrictive than even the Christian Fundamentalists. Many Islamic Fundamentalists also believe in spreading Islam through violence, forcing non-believers to convert.

Historically, Christianity remained small for about 400 years before Emperor Constantine converted and made it the official religion of the Roman Empire. Even then its inroads were slow. Islam spread from Meccah to Spain in well less than 100 years as it was spread by Arab raiders spreading Islam at the point of a sword.

Some might disagree with this, but it is the facts. At least at that time, the Muslims were a little more tolerant of other religions, though that didn't last too long.

[Guest guest]

Unfortunately there are fanatics in every group... convinced that they

have " inside information " and every one else is wrong... and

that is you don't believe the same thing they you are like than human...

I think that is very sad because probability and logic would suggest that

is likely that no one has it right... People are very imperfect data

transfer, storage and retrieval devices if there is a way to mess up a

message people WILL find a way to do it... If a supreme being

reveal some ultimate truth to Man I occurs to me that every one

would get the same message but because people are flawed the message will

be misunderstood and that the true message is likely to look more like

what all the garbled messages agree on and less like how they

differ...

Ender

At 11:19 AM 3/7/2006, you wrote:

" Much is made of the

Crusades, but that was a two way street with

Christian and Muslim taking turns being the invader or

defender. "

Is it just me or are there fundamentalists within Christianity and

the Muslim faith?

I also get some impressions that there are some similarities within

these faiths, i.e both sides believe there God is 'the God' and

everyone else should believe in thier God and if you don't well

you're (some bad word) and die :-( Maybe this is why the

fundamentalists of both these religions do not get on with one

another - too similair?

>

>

> In a message dated 3/7/2006 3:22:40 A.M. Eastern Standard

Time,

> julie.stevenson16@... writes:

>

> The only thing missing in these articles seems to be a

realistic

> comparisment. What I mean - is it seems to be making other

religions

> out as bloodthirsty, while conveniently forgetting that there

are

> fundamental Christians who are just as blood thirsty. One may

talk

> about the history of other religions been always blood

thirsty,

but

> also remember that Christianity has also had it's share of

bloodshed

> in the past.

>

>

>

> The article, which still has more to come, is focusing on today's

world.

> Today Christianity is only the aggressor in Afghanistan and Iraq

and then

> because a Christian nation was attacked.

>

> Christians did have a bloody time up until fairly recently, ending

maybe 100

> years ago. Much is made of the Crusades, but that was a two way

street with

> Christian and Muslim taking turns being the invader or defender.

This

> Christian vs. Muslim fighting was not limited to the Middle

East

but also took place

> in Spain, France, and the Balkan states. If not for the

Christian

victory at

> the Battle of Tours in France in 732, Islam might well have

been

the religion

> of Europe rather than Christianity. That battle is counted by

many

as the

> high watermark of Islamic militaristic expansion in Europe.

Still,

it took

> another 700 years to reclaim Spain. In the East, the Turks

made

regular forays

> into the Balkans at times reaching Budapest before they were

stopped and turned

> back. The constant fighting is what has resulted in such a

mixed

population

> and such long and bad memories between the sides.

>

> Christian Europe also killed more of its own that it did Muslims.

Many of

> the wars fought in Europe had at least a religious flavor to them.

Usually

> though it was one ruler who favored a particular type of

Christianity used that

> to inflame their people against another ruler who believed slightly

> differently. So in cases like that, the religion wasn't really

to

blame, it was just the

> excuse for war.

>

> There were, however, wars over national religions, particularly

after

> Protestantism began. Those too were some bloody wars, but again,

many were merely

> the would-be leaders squabbling for power and used differences

in

religion to

> attract troops to their banner and make themselves different

from

the enemy.

>

> The Christian fratricidal period ended at least 100 years ago

when

the

> nation-state replaced small kingdoms and many nations began to

turn secular. Yes

> there were plenty of wars in that time and people did call on

God's aid,

> however, the reason for going to war was not one over

religious

matters but

> secular ones, like the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand

which

started WWI, or

> revenge for the Versailles Treaty for the Nazis.

>

>

>

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship,

support and acceptance. Everyone is valued.

Don't forget, there are links to other FAM sites on the Links page in the

folder marked " Other FAM Sites. "