Teacher Beheaded in France for Showing Class Picture of Muhammad (2 Viewers)

More like an act of religion.
More like animalistic. I don’t care what you religion is condoning this type of behavior is inhuman. I really don’t want ti insult anyone but if you feel this is ok then please explain it to me.
 
You may want to look into that agreement even among agnostic scholars as to who wrote it. So, no, you don't know who the writer was, and after the many translations and interpretations, considering how long ago it was allegedly written, I can say that you don't know what the writer's intentions were.

As for a Pope misusing the text, can you say for certain he misused the texts, or that he believed them as he read them and understood them? We have gone from believing the Bible a literal, 100% factual text, to a number of interpretations depending on scientific advances and cultural evolution. There is a reason why there are so many denominations out there.
In the world we live in today you can take the simple text “run spot run” and find 5 different people who have 5 different interpretations of it. But when Jesus said “I am the way the truth and the and the life and no one comes to the father except through me” John 14:6 that was pretty straightforward.
 
Your point about a Pope misusing a text for his own agenda definitely is valid, especially considering the priests would not allow common people to read the texts for themselves in those days. Certainly, many words were used out of context to mean something they do not (not to mention words being made up completely).
However, you are incorrect in saying we don't know the writer's intention. All one has to do is read the entire chapter to understand his intention (better to read the entire letter, of course, which makes it even more obvious).
You also are incorrect entirely in saying we do not know who wrote the letter. Even antagonistic scholars agree that Ephesians was written by Paul (around AD 62). You have a better argument about the Gospels because there is barely any historical evidence to directly tie the traditional authors to those texts, but you have no defensible argument about Paul's letter because historian scholarship going all the way back to the late first century AD (and some of those documents were written by men who knew Paul personally) says he is the author.
As a corresponding statement to the some of the points made in this reply is that even most historians, Biblical scholars, theologians agree that Paul wrote or co-wrote half of the books in the New Testament, reportedly even a few Christian Aprocryphal Gospels the Council of Nicea argued strenuously against and agreed not to include them.

Most historians also agree that Paul was executed via decapitation in a barely-used rock quarry outside city of Rome in 66-67 CE. Inheriting his Roman citizenship from his father being a major tent merchant could choose his form of execution.
 
There is no distinction. Your individual or cultural spirituality could very well be achieving something against other people. See crusades. Even today Jerusalem is considered a holy land, and people see it a righteous enterprise to take it over, give it to the Jews, and defend it from the Muslims, because prophesy.

As far as the crusades go, you have to realize that there was a war between two empires going on. An old Christian one versus an upstart Muslim one. The Holy Land also happened to be the gateway of the most important trade routes linking Europe and North Africa to Asia. It was more about $$$$ than prophecy.
 
As far as the crusades go, you have to realize that there was a war between two empires going on. An old Christian one versus an upstart Muslim one. The Holy Land also happened to be the gateway of the most important trade routes linking Europe and North Africa to Asia. It was more about $$$$ than prophecy.

I don't doubt there was money involved, but that was not the main motivator. Even today, it is clear what Jerusalem means to Christians. No Jerusalem in the hands of the Jews, no prophesy fulfilled.
 
More like animalistic. I don’t care what you religion is condoning this type of behavior is inhuman. I really don’t want ti insult anyone but if you feel this is ok then please explain it to me.
Are you asking me if I think it is ok? No, don't.

In the world we live in today you can take the simple text “run spot run” and find 5 different people who have 5 different interpretations of it. But when Jesus said “I am the way the truth and the and the life and no one comes to the father except through me” John 14:6 that was pretty straightforward.

Another thing that is straight forward is that, when Jesus allegedly said that, he was in direct violation of the 2nd commandment: thou shalt have no other gods before me, which prompted to later develop concept of the holy trinity to get around that.
 
You may want to look into that agreement even among agnostic scholars as to who wrote it. So, no, you don't know who the writer was, and after the many translations and interpretations, considering how long ago it was allegedly written, I can say that you don't know what the writer's intentions were.

As for a Pope misusing the text, can you say for certain he misused the texts, or that he believed them as he read them and understood them? We have gone from believing the Bible a literal, 100% factual text, to a number of interpretations depending on scientific advances and cultural evolution. There is a reason why there are so many denominations out there.
I can tell you that quite a few contemporary Roman Catholic cardinals, priests, laity almost universally hated, despised and totally objected to how Rodrigo Borgia(Pope Alexander II) usurped, made promises and then completely discarded them, openly fraternitized with a estranged Italian young noblewoman, hosted a wild, sacrilegious Bacchus-themed orgy inside the old St. Peter's Basilica and held old-pagan Roman themed festivals. You don't need to be a Masters student in Theology to instantly recognize just how sacrilegious, heretical and contrary to basic New Testament and Christ's teachings just these two acts the Borgia Pope committed. He was privately despised and even openly condemned for his sexual impropriety, lecherous morals and immoral/unethical decisions in running the Catholic Church.

. His daughter, Lucrezia, was even accused of being a witch and harlot by some high-ranking Cardinals and some theologians and historians have argued that Borgia papacy essentially made the Protestant Reformation inevitable because long-simmering political, papal, ecclesiastical tensions, hypocrisy, and Church corruption just became too visible and glaring to ignore any longer.
 
I don't doubt there was money involved, but that was not the main motivator. Even today, it is clear what Jerusalem means to Christians. No Jerusalem in the hands of the Jews, no prophesy fulfilled.

During the Crusades, the Christians and the Jews weren’t on the same side.
 
[/QUOTE]
During the Crusades, the Christians and the Jews weren’t on the same side.

I just wanted to point out the religious importance of Jerusalem today, vis a vis the religious importance of Jerusalem then. Probably didn't explain myself right.
 
I don't doubt there was money involved, but that was not the main motivator. Even today, it is clear what Jerusalem means to Christians. No Jerusalem in the hands of the Jews, no prophesy fulfilled.

Actually, one reason often cited by historians that led Pope Urban's calls for a crusade to drive Muslims rulers out of Jerusalem and most of the ME was to distract from the long-running, contentious papal investiture crisis going on over papal authority and its sole right to nominate bishops, arch-bishops in European kingdoms or countries. Religion was a convenient tool to attract landless peasants, farmers, young, disenfranchised noblemen, knights and soldiers to gain fortunes, titles, land and territories. For some, a possible chance at social mobility that was almost impossible to attain in late 11th century medieval Europe.

. The Crusades was more of a land grab then a truly altruistic religious crusade. That distinction cannot be emphasized strongly enough. A crude, early form of European imperialism where the Church wanted to preserve and strengthen its control over temporal and religious matters in European countries or extend its authority into new regions because there were clear signs Papal authority was weakening or being challenged by mid-11th century, particularly in Norman-controlled England.
 
Truth be told, not all Christians were an the same side either.
Yeah, there was that the interesting bitter, irrevocable final schism between Western Roman Catholic Church and the-then Byzantine Eastern Orthodox Church located in Constantinople in 1054 which occurred over 40+ years before the beginning of the Crusades in 1095.
 
Yeah, there was that the interesting bitter, irrevocable final schism between Western Roman Catholic Church and the-then Byzantine Eastern Orthodox Church located in Constantinople in 1054 which occurred over 40+ years before the beginning of the Crusades in 1095.

Indeed.
 
Are you asking me if I think it is ok? No, don't.



Another thing that is straight forward is that, when Jesus allegedly said that, he was in direct violation of the 2nd commandment: thou shalt have no other gods before me, which prompted to later develop concept of the holy trinity to get around that.
No I wasn’t asking you if you thought it was ok. No one that is even remotely human would think that was ok and from reading your posts on here I would assume that you are at least human with maybe just a bit of questionable behavior at times.
Now to your statement on the 2nd commandment no he wasn’t in direct violation. If you look at the Old Testament as a whole we are told throughout it that the only way to heaven is by faith. We must have faith in his word in order to achieve heaven. After Christ’s birth and eventual death things changed and we could reach heaven through grace. The grace and the blood of Christ paved our new way to heaven. This is also talked about a lot in revelations and even stirs up another discussion when it comes to pre millennials and post millennials.
 
More like animalistic. I don’t care what you religion is condoning this type of behavior is inhuman. I really don’t want ti insult anyone but if you feel this is ok then please explain it to me.
Who in the world is saying this is ok?!?
Please quote who you think said this is ok and we can discuss
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom