The real one.

That might be the message contained in the bible, but that's not how Christians portray it.

Yes and just think when they get 5 percent what they will be like look at parts of Michigan already.

They get everything there fucking way now.
Just wait and see what happens when they get 50 percent in a country.

That's the only thing good about the Hispanic wave coming from the south.  They breed almost as fast as the mooslims and they are mostly Christian.

The mooslims have learned how to use a countries rules against the country.  They get on all forms of assistance and breed like rats taking over entire community's forcing the others out and changing the schools, and eventually the laws and the courts.  Then the Christians and Jews that stay behind are taxed to remain and they finally killed out.

If I valued my life and was an Atheist I wouldn't attack Islam either.

Christians don't react as violently as Muslims when their religion is attacked IMHO.

What sand you had your head stuck in?


 

Cthulhu?

Krom?

 

I thought y'all were supposed to be tolerant and non-judgemental?

So claimed Mohammad, some 600 years after Jesus, with no basis.



Every Old or New Testament item that he incorporated in what became the Koran (supposedly dictated to him by the Archangel Gabriel because no mortal, even "Allah's Messenger" can hear "Allah" and live) is changed or different from any Jewish or Christian tradition.



Mohammad alleged that the Koran was "uncreated" - always existing and unchanging - and therefore predates any Jewish or Christian texts.



Historically, "Allah" was a primary or highest god among the pantheon of Arab pagan gods in Arabia (the Nabataean pantheon).  

Back to Sumeria, it was "Alla".



It doesn't appear in Hebrew or Aramaic Biblical source texts as a name for the God of Abraham but is used among Christian Arabs. (Elaha is used in "modern" Assyrian Aramaic and it seems to have been used among pre-Mohammad Arab Christians as a name for God).



Mecca, as a trading crossroads, had a significant Jewish community and a significant Gnostic community (Gnostics are a heretical "Christian" sect that denies the divine nature of Christ, saying He was just a man).



Mohammad studied with both communities and began to preach, claiming he was a prophet.  The Jews rejected his claim of prophecy (beginning his hatred of the Jews) while the Gnostics provided many early converts.



This is key.  Islam also rejects Jesus as the actual "Son of God" and casts him as a prophet.  He cannot be the "Son of Allah" because He's the son of Miriam (Mary) and Joseph.



"Allah" is the god of Mohammad and Islam.  The incorporation of Mohammad's version of some Biblical aspects into the Koran don't create a connection.

The entire time I was in Saudi I was pressured to convert.

Not at all. However, the constant badgering of "you're going to hell" gets really old.  I have no problem with what a person believes as long as they don't try to push those beliefs on me.

That works out to one terrorist act every couple of years somewhere in the USA, vs Christianity being imposed through blue laws or modern attempts at imposing religious views via civil laws repeatedly around the country every year

This is where that other retards thread spawned.

I would agree. Athiests come from all walks of life and all political groups--conservative, liberal, pro-gun, anti-gun. ARFCOM athiests are fine people.  However, i would suggest that militant athiests, the ones who throw lawsuits about and put up Grinchy signs at Christmas, tend to be leftist politically and thus have a special dislike of Christianity.

They're usually the young and/or the newly converted that are particularly strident jerks regardless of their beliefs or lack thereof.  For example, when I realized that I was an atheist and that that was an actual thing, I became a particularly outspoken jackass.  Of course, I was only thirteen at them time and I grew up.  Then there's a good friend who was raised in a non-denominational home, went to college, got saved, and then wouldn't shut the fuck up about it for the next year or so.

That being said, there strident jerks that are neither young nor newly converted, like the professionally offended anti-theists that sue to have the ten commandments removed from the courthouse, etc.  I don't understand those folks at all.

I'm not picketing in front of mosque for the same reason I'm not picketing in front of a church - I really just don't care about all of that.  Of course, I find myself in threads like this from time to time, because I sometimes I feel like standing up for people like me.  Sometimes you just have to to all of the nonsense like  "You hate God."  "You're a brainwashed tool of the left."  "You don't have a moral code."  "You're destroying America."  

For the record, I was baptized and confirmed Catholic.  Despite having left the church, no longer believing, I do consider myself ethnically Catholic in the same way a nonobservant Jew would consider him or herself ethnically Jewish.  So when folks start in on Catholics, that sometimes gets a reaction from me as well.  Of course, I don't feel the need to stick up for Catholics as often, because the CoC here prohibits Catholic bashing but not atheist bashing so . . .

Bullshit.  Atheists will debate religion with anyone who wants to, and will oppose any religion that tries to force itself on the masses.  I've taken plenty of shots at Islam.  But here in this country, Islam is dwarfed by Christianity, so that's what atheists are confronted with every day.

But hey, go ahead and feed your personal fantasy of what an atheist is.  

Yup.

Couldn't have said it better.

American atheists grew up in a Christian environment.  It's what they know best and have experience with.

I was going to put this post on this thread and the other "call out" thread (before it was locked.)

The question at the heart of BOTH threads is this:

Why are Muslims exempt from the treatment that either Christians or atheists feel are given to them by each other.


I'll give my take on it, and expect that neither group will be overly happy with my assessment.  My disclaimer to this is that I am a Christian, but not an evangelical.  I am a firm believer that one has the right by free will to make their own choices.  If, through natural interaction, faiths come up I will tell my beliefs.  A person may accept or reject them. It is their choice.  I won't shove mine down their throat, and I expect the same from them.

As to the question...

It becomes a question of the perceived impact the "opposing" group has on their personal lives.  Atheists in America seem to feel that Christians have an unwanted impact on their personal lives through certain values that they feel are legislated.  From that view, they negatively react to all reference to Christianity when they see it.

As has been stated in one of these threads, other religions are not perceived to hold that ability IN AMERICA yet. (Most of the responses seem to hinge on the American perspective.)

On the flip side, Christians believe that atheists are their faith is under attack by the prevention of free exercise of religion.  Again, Christians in America have not see any other faith groups make real efforts to impact their practice of faith, and seem to accept that a person of convicted faith is extremely unlikely to be converted.


The fight is over control, not souls.

To me, this does open the door for hypocrisy on every level and every group.

An evangelical person or organization actively challenging atheists should be just as willing to challenge other faiths-- if they stand by the fundamental premise of saving souls.  Otherwise, you are a hypocrite (and possibly a coward.)

An activist atheist person or organization actively challenging Christians demonstrates hypocrisy (and likely cowardice)  if they attack the principles of Christianity by name, but are unwilling to do so with any other group by name.

On the issue of "control," the singling out of either Christians or atheists respectively is probably a valid line of thinking since it certainly does seem to be that the visions of the groups seem to be squarely in opposition.

I like it.

...

Well I never said all that!!

I just call them "pesky atheists".

that which we are, we are

Well played Sir

So are beans/no beans thread really stressful for you?

Yes they are, you have no idea.  How people can put beans in Chilli is beyond me.

they dont want to get Blown up!

When I was in Iraq, I had LN come up to me in town, on a patrol outside the wire and hand me a pamphlet in (broken) English about how Islam was my birthright and that it had been denied to me.



 

If they took a stand against Muslims, they would be labled "racist".  That would be the end of their run.

Pussies!

That looks like Hebrew, not Arabic.



 

Because they are more anti-christian than anti-religion.

Bingo.



 

I do think it needs to be pointed out, that nobody living in America is seriously afraid of "attacking" the beliefs of Muslims, for fear of reprisal. I'm certainly not. You're not going to get beheaded for it, and anybody who claims otherwise is being disingenuous.

How many Muslims do you know, personally?

How many do you think those militant athiests know, personally, in order for them to make their 'attack'?

Yeah.

How is it my Parody thread gets locked and I get a warning because of the highlighted above for violation of COC?  Yet this thread gets a pass?  Not butthurt just asking .

They are scared...Hardcore Christians will more than likely turn a cheek, hardcore Muslims will more than likely hunt you down and kill you.

Two things, come to mind:

 

Because what is the real motivation of confrontational atheists is the destruction of western civilization, not religion.