Honestly, First of Two has dealt with the first and we've already established that they WERE following Christian beliefs.

Oh, yes? And how did he do that? All he said is that they CLAIMED to be Chrisitian, which, as anyone with two brain cells to rub together should realize, is a totally different thing. They did NOT follow the teachings of Christ, and thus were NOT Christians. Period. Dot it, file it, and stick it in a box marked "DONE".

Jesus and the other founders of Christianity are not responsible for how others reinterpreted their sayings and thus Marx is not responsible for Stalin or Mao....and you'll have to give up your current violently illogical and unfounded hatred of Marx.

Fair enough. You all stop your illogical attacks on Christianity for things we didn't do, and I'll stop blaming Stalin on Marx.

I was hoping someone would make that suggestion. I think I found a new debate tactic. You deal with illogic by throwing back the exact same illogic in a slightly different form.

We'll leave the more radical view that the Christians fighting the Crusades and doing the Inquisition WERE following the Bible....a book which includes directions to smite, or fight a holy war against, anyone that worships idols, other Gods, more than one God, etc..

No, they were NOT following the Bible. Where does Christ say that Christians should go to Israel and commit all manner of attrocities?

Why can't you just be nice guy. Isn't that what Christianity is about.

I am nice. Is it now considered mean to show your opponent to be wrong? Oops, guess it's a good thing I never got into that debate team, or I'd be goin' ta hell for sure.

Just be nice and leave the faith part out.

Can't do it.

Tim:

Hm... Sounds like Christianity...

Except that we're not doomed to fail, as communism is. We're you're only chance for survival. Come with me, if you want to live.

Sol:

despite sharing a name they had surprisingly little in common.

Your arrogance truly knows no boundaries.

"What you believe isn't what determines your intelligence. HOW you believe it, and how you put that belief into effect, can be an indicator of your intelligence."

And how have you put your belief in effect? You pick fights with anyone over ancient and insoluble questions and claim to be the winner of the argument pretty much every time, all in the name of Christianity. You don't seem to separate "I believe" from "I know".
And you can never be comfortable in your own faith and leave it out, no. This seems more and more like a personal crusade.

I mean, this thread was destroyed seven posts into it, BlueElectron is sitting in a chair somewhere, staring out of a window and is being spoonfed jello. What are we gonna say to him, huh?
It was partly my fault, commenting the islamic bit about talibans. That eventually started the natural element that is omega, and here we are.

We're proving that the very belief in an aggressively evangelical relgion/cult.....whether it be Islam or Christianity is inherently dangerous because its followers cannot believe that they have the only "truth" while on the other hand still being tolerant towards others and respecting their different systems of belief....as you have so dramatically demonsrated.

What this means is, I don't think that Islam is inherently more dangerous than Christianity or vice versa.....its just hypocritical for Christians to slag Islam for being intolerant when they've done, and continue to do many of the same things.

PS: So...Omega I genuinely hope that we can work by our agreement. I won't blame Jesus for the inherent faults of Christianity as it has developed, and you won't blame Marx for the inherent faults of Marxism, as it has developed. Fair and square.

PPS: Infinity.....you have a wet-ware problem, not a Mozilla problem...