Political Crossfire Forums

[Darth Tiberius]

perdidochas wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote:
We not only have the problems with the crimes of the Catholic church. We have Christian churches making their crusades to push their dogma on others. Most who don't want to hear it. Churches have the right to say what they think is wrong to themselves but to try and push that nationwide is another problem. Chruches often attack Islam, homosexuals, Jes and others constantly. I attended church most of my life and that was what was mostly preached. While in turn you have other religions who might occasionally say that they disagree but in the end ackowledge the need to be civil and to not judge. Many fundamentalist churches push that certain races are more "barbaric" because they subsribe to a different viewpoint. That's racism right there. Need I go on?

Not certain about your denomination, but in my 40 yrs of life, with weekly Mass attendance, I have NEVER heard a sermon that included an attack on Islam, homosexuals, Jews or any others. I have never heard any sermon that preached anything but total racial equality and justice (I have heard some that preached against racism and antisemitism). Yes, the Catholic Church had problems in the 'bad old days.' I won't deny that. The Catholic Church is made up of humans who mess up. That's inherent in humanity. However, we are doing our best to make up for it. In case you hadn't read, Pope John Paul II asked for forgiveness from almost any group the Catholic Church has ever harmed purposefully or inadvertently.

To also push through aggressive missionary efforts in order to "convert others" even if they don't wanna be converted, I still find that to be an invasion of the right of others to personnal belief. and my experiences seem to be very different from yours.

If Pope John Paul was really sorry he'd cancel also (when he was living) any abstience promotion in Africa and his call to overthrow socialist powers in South America.

LDS Patriot wrote: Darth, you are wrong about the crusades. It was a delayed defensive move due to several centuries of Muslim's taking by force Christian lands. Overall, the crusades were a good thing too, otherwise all of Europe would have come under the rule of Islam by sword or conversion. The crusades were no more an attack than D-Day was.

wrong. It was a unprovoked attack in order to convert the Islamic empires in that region. The Saracens were very very peaceful and refused to attack unless attacked. Like it says in the Koran. Unlike what it says in the Bible which gives an open check to attack any ntion they see fit as long as it is under the name of God, a.k.a. Iraq War. The crusades were a very evil evil thing and resulted in bitter strife between the two religions and even during that war the Muslims treated prisonners well unlike the Catholics who killed any prisonner that wouldn't "convert". It caused the death of many. I don't know where you get your facts from but propoganda cannot be listened to. Try reading what history really says.

carlosox wrote: Will a new Martin Luther arise to clean up the church ?

I hope not. Martin Luther (the Martin Luther who founded the Lutheran church and brought the reformation) was a very bad man. He preached the desire to alienate Jews and seize their property and make them second class citizens. He was violent and was generally a really bad man.

[Rankor and Pissing]

Darth Tiberius wrote: perdidochas wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: carlosox wrote: We fool ourselves into thinking that peace will one day exist between these two religions. It simply cannot happen, because each is committed to the idea that world peace will eventuate only when the whole world is converted to either Christianity or Islam, as the case may be. All talk of religious tolerance is mere hypocrisy. Each is just waiting to destroy the other. Prove me wrong, someone.

Regards

Once Christianity lays down trends of bigotry and imposing ideas and realise we are all human beings then we can go forward.

I would generalize that to once humanity lays down trends of bigotry and imposing ideas and realize we are all human beings then we can go forward. Why is Christianity blamed for this? I don't see Christian churches advocating that Christians buckle on suicide belts and go into Muslim or Jewish crowds.

Then you haven't seen the crimes of the Catholic church or Bush saying that "god is on his side" and going to war under the name of "god". Suicide bombers are extreme and there are extremists everywhere. I'm saying that even the most moderate churches still operate with a degree of bigotry.

Your attitude and demenor shows you are not ready for peace. Shifting blame without taking some accountability is inflexible as is demanding the other side capitulate. Sorry, Bush doesn't speak for the Catholic Church or any church or religion - did you know that? I'd avoid churches that advocate bigotry - bigots aren't very "Christian". Now to sidestep the hijack of the thread -

On the Muslim side of the house, I'd suggest it's more than a little bigotry to want to strap on semtex and take out 10 women and kids at a market huh? So the West works on the "bigotry" in the Churches - what's the plan to work on the Muslims? They don't seem to be open to much except killing the Zionists and cutting their throats on video. Any ideas?

[Gilbert1908]

The idea that Christianity is bigoted is simply foolish.

Are some Christians bigoted absolutley as are people everywhere.

Islam and Christianity are no more the problem with the world than metal is the reason bullets kill people.


The problem with the people who use religion as an excuse to SIN is not that they have too much religion but that they do not have ENOUGH.

There are billions of Muslims and Christians, what percentage are engaged in violence specifically in the name of religion? And what percentage of the religious ACCEPT their claims.

If you think the problem in the middle east is strictly a RELIGIOUS one then you simply haven't got a clue. As it became in Northern Ireland in the 60s-80s the problem is economics and power(land) and always has been.

I work with Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and even Epicopalians believe it or not every day. We have far more values in common BECAUSE of our beliefs than we do because of the differences in our theologies/beliefs.

It is convenient for the simple minded or those who seek to create conflict to believe the problems today are out of religious differences and NOT what they acutally are which are CULTURAL, ECONOMIC and POWER issues. But to deal with the truth just doesn't fit the program for them.

[sparsely]

The solution is simple. Everyone must realize that all belief systems with respect to known unknowns and intangibilities (origin,afterlife,good,evil,etc) are, in the end, theoretical and therefore equal. Many religious people, however, seem to opposed to this type of viewpoint.
To allow for other possibilites is spiritual doubt or blasphemy, and is generally discouraged.
In other words, religions are largely anti-intellectual organizations.
Christianity, as such, is not really a religion though. Problem is, most of those serpents don't know it.

[perdidochas]

Gilbert1908 wrote: The idea that Christianity is bigoted is simply foolish.

Are some Christians bigoted absolutley as are people everywhere.

Islam and Christianity are no more the problem with the world than metal is the reason bullets kill people.


The problem with the people who use religion as an excuse to SIN is not that they have too much religion but that they do not have ENOUGH.

There are billions of Muslims and Christians, what percentage are engaged in violence specifically in the name of religion? And what percentage of the religious ACCEPT their claims.

If you think the problem in the middle east is strictly a RELIGIOUS one then you simply haven't got a clue. As it became in Northern Ireland in the 60s-80s the problem is economics and power(land) and always has been.

I work with Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and even Epicopalians believe it or not every day. We have far more values in common BECAUSE of our beliefs than we do because of the differences in our theologies/beliefs.

It is convenient for the simple minded or those who seek to create conflict to believe the problems today are out of religious differences and NOT what they acutally are which are CULTURAL, ECONOMIC and POWER issues. But to deal with the truth just doesn't fit the program for them.

Great post!

[JayDubya]

Certainly peace can exist, as long as states do not hold state religions, and allow people to practice as they will.

[toddytodd]

As Gilbert mentioned, many times religion is used as a smoke screen for violence, when there are other causes. I wonder how many suicide bombers actually believe in what they are doing or just doing it because they are expected and only half believe. Religious belief is a powerful and a potentially dangerous thing, especially when left unchecked. The middle east is a good example. As is the US, even though it is suppose to be a place of freedom of religious belief.
Religions become dangerous when power hungry people get high ranking positions and try to make others accept their views as universal fact - I am sure we all could name a couple from many different religions.
What is most unfortunate is the hatred and basic misunderstanding between christians and muslims.

[carlosox]

And why is there hatred between the Muslims and the Christians? Is it not because each believes that his religion is the only true one and that everyone else prays to the devil ? Does religion exist because of poverty ? Let's imagine for once that there is no poverty anywhere in the world. Everyone everywhere is completely self sufficient and all his/ her material needs are completely satisfied. Will religion matter then ? Probably not. Historians have always maintained that only the poor embrace religion. As a nation gets wealthier, religion goes out of the window, or is just a fashion statement as is in the West. The fact remains for now that the majority of humanity is divided into two opposing camps- each wishing the elimination of the other- and this is not good for the world. Should this enimity be reduced sufficiently so that it will only be a minor irritation by improving the economic status of all and sundry? Here again I run into a brick wall. Just look at what globalisation has done. The concept was initiated so that there will be an even distribution of wealth etc., but look at what it has done now? The poor nations have been driven into deeper poverty by the richer nations. There is no end to greed. Perhaps the results of enviromental destruction in pursuit of wealth will bring the richer nations to their senses. Only when mega tsunamis, hurricanes and tonardoes hit the earth will humanity learn.

[Darth Tiberius]

Rankor and Pissing wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: perdidochas wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: carlosox wrote: We fool ourselves into thinking that peace will one day exist between these two religions. It simply cannot happen, because each is committed to the idea that world peace will eventuate only when the whole world is converted to either Christianity or Islam, as the case may be. All talk of religious tolerance is mere hypocrisy. Each is just waiting to destroy the other. Prove me wrong, someone.

Regards

Once Christianity lays down trends of bigotry and imposing ideas and realise we are all human beings then we can go forward.

I would generalize that to once humanity lays down trends of bigotry and imposing ideas and realize we are all human beings then we can go forward. Why is Christianity blamed for this? I don't see Christian churches advocating that Christians buckle on suicide belts and go into Muslim or Jewish crowds.

Then you haven't seen the crimes of the Catholic church or Bush saying that "god is on his side" and going to war under the name of "god". Suicide bombers are extreme and there are extremists everywhere. I'm saying that even the most moderate churches still operate with a degree of bigotry.

Your attitude and demenor shows you are not ready for peace. Shifting blame without taking some accountability is inflexible as is demanding the other side capitulate. Sorry, Bush doesn't speak for the Catholic Church or any church or religion - did you know that? I'd avoid churches that advocate bigotry - bigots aren't very "Christian". Now to sidestep the hijack of the thread -

On the Muslim side of the house, I'd suggest it's more than a little bigotry to want to strap on semtex and take out 10 women and kids at a market huh? So the West works on the "bigotry" in the Churches - what's the plan to work on the Muslims? They don't seem to be open to much except killing the Zionists and cutting their throats on video. Any ideas?

How little you know about me then. i've never been the one to judge anyone. I'm simply making observations that it is the Christians who have been throughout history the fight starters. The Zionist crusaders in a manner of speaking but maybe not Zionistic. Try telling all this Christian love to Muslims who've had nothing but death and hatred and prejudice from the Christian world. If I met anyone on the street I'd treat them all equally. No matter who they are. this is not something Christians do though. They meet a gay person on the street or an athiest and you have the judging happening. You have the looks of either disguist for their "sin" or they look on you like you have a disease and so you must be cured and saved. On many Christian networks on TVs and throughout the Christian world you have the people portraying Islam as barbaric. They may not say this in many denominations during the sermon but together in their groups and behind closed doors you have the snide attacks on Islam. They are portrayed as potential suicide bombers which is not true in the slightest.

The extermist Musims are VERY VERY small part of the population. Very small. The vast majority of Mosques says and stresses that Allah doesn't permit this type of blooshed.

Gilbert1908 wrote: The idea that Christianity is bigoted is simply foolish.

Are some Christians bigoted absolutley as are people everywhere.

Islam and Christianity are no more the problem with the world than metal is the reason bullets kill people.


The problem with the people who use religion as an excuse to SIN is not that they have too much religion but that they do not have ENOUGH.

There are billions of Muslims and Christians, what percentage are engaged in violence specifically in the name of religion? And what percentage of the religious ACCEPT their claims.

If you think the problem in the middle east is strictly a RELIGIOUS one then you simply haven't got a clue. As it became in Northern Ireland in the 60s-80s the problem is economics and power(land) and always has been.

I work with Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and even Epicopalians believe it or not every day. We have far more values in common BECAUSE of our beliefs than we do because of the differences in our theologies/beliefs.

It is convenient for the simple minded or those who seek to create conflict to believe the problems today are out of religious differences and NOT what they acutally are which are CULTURAL, ECONOMIC and POWER issues. But to deal with the truth just doesn't fit the program for them.

For the reasons I said above I believe Christianity is highly bigoted. I say again, on many Christian networks on TVs and throughout the Christian world you have the people portraying Islam as barbaric. They may not say this in many denominations during the sermon but together in their groups and behind closed doors you have the snide attacks on Islam. They are portrayed as potential suicide bombers which is not true in the slightest.

Because of the religious fanatical fundamentalism of Christianity throughout history you've had two groups of people. First the one who do believe they are doing all this for a "god". They are the ones that preach that God tells them to wage their crusades on others and they are extremely dangerous. The second type is the one you indentified. The ones who perform lip service to get what they want. They are equally as dangerous. But under Christianity the Bible is so vague when it speaks on when violence is necessary that is provides a blank check for governments to start wars and crusades whether it is by people who really think they are doing this for god or doing it for themselves. That is FAR different to when the Koran forbids this type of action. The Koran demands respect and that everyone should live their life. The bible on the other hand talks about the need to assimilate. Two very different religions. It can be used as a smoke screen yes but the Bible allows the smoke screen to be created too often.

[Darth Tiberius]

Gilbert1908 wrote: The idea that Christianity is bigoted is simply foolish.

Are some Christians bigoted absolutley as are people everywhere.

Islam and Christianity are no more the problem with the world than metal is the reason bullets kill people.


The problem with the people who use religion as an excuse to SIN is not that they have too much religion but that they do not have ENOUGH.

There are billions of Muslims and Christians, what percentage are engaged in violence specifically in the name of religion? And what percentage of the religious ACCEPT their claims.

If you think the problem in the middle east is strictly a RELIGIOUS one then you simply haven't got a clue. As it became in Northern Ireland in the 60s-80s the problem is economics and power(land) and always has been.

I work with Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and even Epicopalians believe it or not every day. We have far more values in common BECAUSE of our beliefs than we do because of the differences in our theologies/beliefs.

It is convenient for the simple minded or those who seek to create conflict to believe the problems today are out of religious differences and NOT what they acutally are which are CULTURAL, ECONOMIC and POWER issues. But to deal with the truth just doesn't fit the program for them.

For the reasons I said above I believe Christianity is highly bigoted. I say again, on many Christian networks on TVs and throughout the Christian world you have the people portraying Islam as barbaric. They may not say this in many denominations during the sermon but together in their groups and behind closed doors you have the snide attacks on Islam. They are portrayed as potential suicide bombers which is not true in the slightest.

Because of the religious fanatical fundamentalism of Christianity throughout history you've had two groups of people. First the one who do believe they are doing all this for a "god". They are the ones that preach that God tells them to wage their crusades on others and they are extremely dangerous. The second type is the one you indentified. The ones who perform lip service to get what they want. They are equally as dangerous. But under Christianity the Bible is so vague when it speaks on when violence is necessary that is provides a blank check for governments to start wars and crusades whether it is by people who really think they are doing this for god or doing it for themselves. That is FAR different to when the Koran forbids this type of action. The Koran demands respect and that everyone should live their life. The bible on the other hand talks about the need to assimilate. Two very different religions. It can be used as a smoke screen yes but the Bible allows the smoke screen to be created too often.

[Gilbert1908]

Again I repeat for the simple minded and those who seek to create greater controversy, primarily out of the need to build their own flaccid egos, the complexity of the cultural issues are too difficult to grasp and the reality of the economic and historical power conflict does not fit their limited agenda.

[Darth Tiberius]

Gilbert1908 wrote: Again I repeat for the simple minded and those who seek to create greater controversy, primarily out of the need to build their own flaccid egos, the complexity of the cultural issues are too difficult to grasp and the reality of the economic and historical power conflict does not fit their limited agenda.

I don't have a simple mind and have no 'falccid ego' to build. The cultural issues are deep but the general trend and the basic dogma of the two religions allows Christianity to creat more of the problems whether by the smoke screen or by fundamentalism. Their agenda is linked to this. You haven't replied to the point I made above by the way.

[Gilbert1908]

Darth Tiberius wrote: Gilbert1908 wrote: Again I repeat for the simple minded and those who seek to create greater controversy, primarily out of the need to build their own flaccid egos, the complexity of the cultural issues are too difficult to grasp and the reality of the economic and historical power conflict does not fit their limited agenda.

I don't have a simple mind and have no 'falccid ego' to build. The cultural issues are deep but the general trend and the basic dogma of the two religions allows Christianity to creat more of the problems whether by the smoke screen or by fundamentalism. Their agenda is linked to this. You haven't replied to the point I made above by the way.

If you felt I was referring to you by my reiteration of the point I made earlier I can not help that.

[Darth Tiberius]

Gilbert1908 wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: Gilbert1908 wrote: Again I repeat for the simple minded and those who seek to create greater controversy, primarily out of the need to build their own flaccid egos, the complexity of the cultural issues are too difficult to grasp and the reality of the economic and historical power conflict does not fit their limited agenda.

I don't have a simple mind and have no 'falccid ego' to build. The cultural issues are deep but the general trend and the basic dogma of the two religions allows Christianity to creat more of the problems whether by the smoke screen or by fundamentalism. Their agenda is linked to this. You haven't replied to the point I made above by the way.

If you felt I was referring to you by my reiteration of the point I made earlier I can not help that.

But do you have to say of the distinction I made earlier?? I repeat;

Because of the religious fanatical fundamentalism of Christianity throughout history you've had two groups of people. First the one who do believe they are doing all this for a "god". They are the ones that preach that God tells them to wage their crusades on others and they are extremely dangerous. The second type is the one you indentified. The ones who perform lip service to get what they want. They are equally as dangerous. But under Christianity the Bible is so vague when it speaks on when violence is necessary that is provides a blank check for governments to start wars and crusades whether it is by people who really think they are doing this for god or doing it for themselves. That is FAR different to when the Koran forbids this type of action. The Koran demands respect and that everyone should live their life. The bible on the other hand talks about the need to assimilate. Two very different religions. It can be used as a smoke screen yes but the Bible allows the smoke screen to be created too often.

[Gilbert1908]

Darth Tiberius wrote: Gilbert1908 wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: Gilbert1908 wrote: Again I repeat for the simple minded and those who seek to create greater controversy, primarily out of the need to build their own flaccid egos, the complexity of the cultural issues are too difficult to grasp and the reality of the economic and historical power conflict does not fit their limited agenda.

I don't have a simple mind and have no 'falccid ego' to build. The cultural issues are deep but the general trend and the basic dogma of the two religions allows Christianity to creat more of the problems whether by the smoke screen or by fundamentalism. Their agenda is linked to this. You haven't replied to the point I made above by the way.

If you felt I was referring to you by my reiteration of the point I made earlier I can not help that.

But do you have to say of the distinction I made earlier?? I repeat;

Because of the religious fanatical fundamentalism of Christianity throughout history you've had two groups of people. First the one who do believe they are doing all this for a "god". They are the ones that preach that God tells them to wage their crusades on others and they are extremely dangerous. The second type is the one you indentified. The ones who perform lip service to get what they want. They are equally as dangerous. But under Christianity the Bible is so vague when it speaks on when violence is necessary that is provides a blank check for governments to start wars and crusades whether it is by people who really think they are doing this for god or doing it for themselves. That is FAR different to when the Koran forbids this type of action. The Koran demands respect and that everyone should live their life. The bible on the other hand talks about the need to assimilate. Two very different religions. It can be used as a smoke screen yes but the Bible allows the smoke screen to be created too often.

You do not include the third and most numerous of all of the religious, those that lead their lives hurting NO ONE and trying as best they can to be a "good" Jew, Muslim, Christian, Hindu etc. etc..

The evil in this world is NOT caused by too much religion but by none or not enough religion. Evil is caused by ANYONE who believes that THEY ALONE determine what is right and wrong, good and bad, just and unjust. Those are the people who we must fear most no matter what they claim as a RELIGION, because they have only ONE god and that god is themselves and their "cause", which when you peal back the onion is usually themselves too.

[David Kelly]

I really don't like having my religion put down. Christianity is not evil any more then my Muslim brothers are. Mohammad himself stated that Jesus was a true and just prophet. Can peace be had? Only when extremist like Osman Bin Laden and Gorge W. Bush are out of power.

[Darth Tiberius]

Gilbert1908 wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: Gilbert1908 wrote: Darth Tiberius wrote: Gilbert1908 wrote: Again I repeat for the simple minded and those who seek to create greater controversy, primarily out of the need to build their own flaccid egos, the complexity of the cultural issues are too difficult to grasp and the reality of the economic and historical power conflict does not fit their limited agenda.

I don't have a simple mind and have no 'falccid ego' to build. The cultural issues are deep but the general trend and the basic dogma of the two religions allows Christianity to creat more of the problems whether by the smoke screen or by fundamentalism. Their agenda is linked to this. You haven't replied to the point I made above by the way.

If you felt I was referring to you by my reiteration of the point I made earlier I can not help that.

But do you have to say of the distinction I made earlier?? I repeat;

Because of the religious fanatical fundamentalism of Christianity throughout history you've had two groups of people. First the one who do believe they are doing all this for a "god". They are the ones that preach that God tells them to wage their crusades on others and they are extremely dangerous. The second type is the one you indentified. The ones who perform lip service to get what they want. They are equally as dangerous. But under Christianity the Bible is so vague when it speaks on when violence is necessary that is provides a blank check for governments to start wars and crusades whether it is by people who really think they are doing this for god or doing it for themselves. That is FAR different to when the Koran forbids this type of action. The Koran demands respect and that everyone should live their life. The bible on the other hand talks about the need to assimilate. Two very different religions. It can be used as a smoke screen yes but the Bible allows the smoke screen to be created too often.

You do not include the third and most numerous of all of the religious, those that lead their lives hurting NO ONE and trying as best they can to be a "good" Jew, Muslim, Christian, Hindu etc. etc..

The evil in this world is NOT caused by too much religion but by none or not enough religion. Evil is caused by ANYONE who believes that THEY ALONE determine what is right and wrong, good and bad, just and unjust. Those are the people who we must fear most no matter what they claim as a RELIGION, because they have only ONE god and that god is themselves and their "cause", which when you peal back the onion is usually themselves too.

The third is an area but I was examining the negatives. True there are those (a small amount in some religions IMO and a larger amount in others IMO) that benefit positively but I was examining those that cause the trouble. Even then if I was to go further I would say that religion in itself is the problem but that may be diverging from the topic subject.

Caused by no religion? Surely that is meaning athiests by what I interpret you saying. are you saying that you have to be religious to be truly moral? If you do mean this then you are deeply mistaken and that is quite arrogant. Athiests hold to each their own code beyond the confounds of religion. It is their own personal way to live within the law. Athiests are not to blame at all. I'm an athiest and I have my own code by which I do good. It is to treat others right, not to judge someone entirely, treat others as you'd like to be treated and etc...... Any wrong that is being done in the world is caused by human nature. But as anyone knows human nature can be influenced. And that leads me to discuss your last point.

I do admit that there are those that use religion and a god to do what they want in life and commit evil deeds. They are not religious and using religion, yes, like a smoke screen. BUT there are those that do evil deeds thinking that they are doing right. Those that go into religious fundamentalism and become void of what's right and wrong. This is sometimes caused by religion in different scales. Some go off the deep end and become very wrong because they really think that they are doing it for their god and their belief. And there are those that allow it to affect their everyday life and the way they treat others. That is the distinction I'm trying to make. And tha't's why I'd disagree with you that it is sometimes faith that's the problem. The crusdaes for example. And these crusades still go on under the guise of the Iraq War. Yes the president may be doing this for lip service and for his own selfish desires. And it is apparent that the buisnessmen who make profit from the war are doing this but there are those that believe that they are doing this for their god. And even at home people discriminate against gays and Jews and every other minority they find to be sinful since it "angers their god". And that's what the problem really is.

[Enoch]

David Kelly wrote: I really don't like having my religion put down. Christianity is not evil any more then my Muslim brothers are. Mohammad himself stated that Jesus was a true and just prophet. Can peace be had? Only when extremist like Osman Bin Laden and Gorge W. Bush are out of power. I wouldn't consider President Bush an extremist. His view are echoed by many in this country. I don't believe everything he does, but he is hardly an extremist.

[eynon]

Darth Tiberius wrote: carlosox wrote: We fool ourselves into thinking that peace will one day exist between these two religions. It simply cannot happen, because each is committed to the idea that world peace will eventuate only when the whole world is converted to either Christianity or Islam, as the case may be. All talk of religious tolerance is mere hypocrisy. Each is just waiting to destroy the other. Prove me wrong, someone.

Regards

Once Christianity lays down trends of bigotry and imposing ideas and realise we are all human beings then we can go forward.

:lol: isn't that a bigoted statement :lol:

[eynon]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: Your understanding of the history of relgious freedom (which was chapioned by protestant christians) and of theology of salvation in general, is phew..

You know your stuff......."Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 to answer a letter from them written in October 1801. A copy of the Danbury letter is available here. The Danbury Baptists were a religious minority in Connecticut, and they complained that in their state, the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature - as "favors granted." Jefferson's reply did not address their concerns about problems with state establishment of religion - only that on the national level. The letter contains the phrase "wall of separation between church and state," which led to the short-hand for the Establishment Clause that we use today: "Separation of church and state."
http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html

tee-hee...Baptists helped created the speration of church and state....I do so love history :)



as to the topic of this thread............em......look at the record Muslims and Christians have been at peace through-out most of their histories. Both civilizations have interacted far more peacefully with each other then within their own groups.