Egyptian jihad leader calls for the destructiion of the Sphinx and Pyramids.

[catsmate1]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Allah? ALLAH? You think that's bad? What are you going to do when deep R'lyeh rises and our Great Cthulhu wakes up and you chose wrong? Well, granted, those who chose right won't get a free pass either, but just shows how equal-minded our Great Old One is

Case Nightmare Green begins soon.

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by DOC

It shows just another of the many differences between Islam and Christianity. Also, some people might not know that you are not allowed to paint an image of any living thing in Islam which is why their art has so many geometric designs. So it gets back to the "Law of Non-Contradiction". Since there are so many differences between Christianity and Islam, both can't be right, and at least one religion has to be wrong. Of course some will say they both could be wrong but that's another topic.

DOC, that's an impressive amount of silliness in one post.
But perhaps I've misunderstood you.
Are you saying xtians have never torn down constructions from other religions?
Are you saying the Persian miniaturists didn't exist?
Are you saying one of the two religions MUST be right?

Originally Posted by ddt

They could of course hire Christo to conceal them.

I rather liked the wax option ANTPogo mentioned earlier.

[zooterkin]

Originally Posted by DOC

I'd tell him I must have interpreted some of the evidence wrong:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...46#post5959646

How did you choose that particular example of getting the evidence wrong from the many you had available?

[tsig]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Allah? ALLAH? You think that's bad? What are you going to do when deep R'lyeh rises and our Great Cthulhu wakes up and you chose wrong? Well, granted, those who chose right won't get a free pass either, but just shows how equal-minded our Great Old One is

In that Great Day of the Old Ones many will regret they were not eaten first they will cower in fear as we the Divinely Delicious become one with our god.


>evil maniacal laugh here<

[ddt]

Originally Posted by DOC

You left out the first few sentences of the article:

Aniconism in Islam is a proscription in Islam against the creation of images of sentient living beings. The most absolute proscription is of images of Allah, followed by depictions of Muhammad, and then Islamic prophets and the relatives of the Prophet, but the depiction of all humans and animals is discouraged in the Hadith and by the long tradition of Islamic authorities, especially Sunni ones. This has led to Islamic art being dominated by Islamic geometric patterns, calligraphy and the barely representational foliage patterns of the arabesque; but figurative art still has a strong tradition, especially on a small scale in private works for the home or palace.

Maybe you should reread it. You claimed "not allowed to", the wiki article I cited says "discouraged". Two different things. It also singles out Sunnis for being discouraged, Shias not or to a lesser extent.

[Resume]

Originally Posted by DOC

I'd tell him I must have interpreted some of the evidence wrong:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...46#post5959646

That's the thing about that particular evidence: it's all matter of misinterpretation, confabulation, cultural bias, and self-deception. But the real rub is in the idea that they're all wrong these religions; no contradiction there.

[geni]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Recycling or not, it was still actively destroying actual science documents for the sake of making bibles and other crap. As in, if that oh-so-beneficial religious gang didn't exist, MAYBE nobody would copy the old science documents, but with them existing many were actively destroyed.

Given Europe's climate you don't need people to actively destroy such things. Then there are always those who need kindling.

Quote:

Besides, if you reduce it to such a generic essence, then the inquisition was just making a fire or two.

Ah no. Such matters were left to the civil authorities.

Quote:

What matters is what was recycled to make what. Turning valuable stuff into crap is still just that.

A bunch of greek waffling with no day to day relevance? Please if it had value we would expect civil copies. See again De Re Militari. The church hung onto what was then usless information far more than anyone else.

Quote:

As opposed to the Arabs who could study those texts just as well, without having a Latin-speaking church?

The Eastern empire fell rather later so different situation.

Quote:

We were talking about learning, not about whatever red herring you can throw on the religion side of the scales. In fact most learning and technological advance in China was pretty secular.

Not really. If that was the case they wouldn't have been able to keep so much of it under control. Knowlage was for the emperor not wider society.

Quote:

In reality, for example writing in the middle east evolved out of inventory tags, and had nothing to do with religion. It was something appropriated by religion later.

And the reason things were stable enough for worthwhile inventories to take place was the theocratic goverment of the time.

Quote:

The alphabet later, ditto, it came from Phoenician merchants, not from religion.

Err alphabets predate the phoenicians

[HansMustermann]

Yes, but now we moved from the church and religion having anything to do with the history of human learning, to such irrelevant waffling as that, yeah, but the theocratic government at least provided stability for laymen to do that. As grasping at straws goes, that's pretty low.

Again, by the same token, you could credit communism for providing the stability and resources that allowed some scientists to put the Sputnik in orbit. In reality, well, do you really think living in a corrupt communist dictatorship actually helped?

Besides, exactly what DID that theocratic government provide? Do you think people would have just left invaders to roll in, if some upper class twit didn't claim divine right, or what? Exactly what did a theocratic government do that disproves my "this is your brain on religion" quip?

[I Ratant]

I'd like to see only the faithful dismantle a pyramid...
No modern engineering aids permitted.

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by DOC

You left out the first few sentences of the article:

Aniconism in Islam is a proscription in Islam against the creation of images of sentient living beings. The most absolute proscription is of images of Allah, followed by depictions of Muhammad, and then Islamic prophets and the relatives of the Prophet, but the depiction of all humans and animals is discouraged in the Hadith and by the long tradition of Islamic authorities, especially Sunni ones. This has led to Islamic art being dominated by Islamic geometric patterns, calligraphy and the barely representational foliage patterns of the arabesque; but figurative art still has a strong tradition, especially on a small scale in private works for the home or palace.

Again, as a number of us have pointed out, this is a stricture Muslims themselves often violate.

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by geni

. . . (mega snip . . . Err alphabets predate the phoenicians

Well, actually, writing systems predated the Phoenicians. There are three basic writing systems, pictographic, syllabary and alphabetic. In pictographic systems, such as Egyptian hieroglyphs, each symbol stands for a word. So, if your language has 5000 words, you would need about 5000 symbols. There would, however, have to be certain symbols that stand for sounds, so that one can write foreign words down when needed.

In syllabaries, each symbol stands for a syllable. Usually, this is a consonant followed by a vowel. So, we might have a symbol for bah (long a), bay (short a), bee (long e), beh (short e), by (long i), bih (short i), boo and boh (varying "o" sounds), and buh. So, if we have about nine vowel variants for about ten consonant sounds, we'd end up with about 90 such characters, to which we might have to add ten end consonant symbols, for a total of 100 characters.

The alphabet, invented by the west Semitic peoples (Phoenicians, Israelites etc.) of the Iron Age, was a vast improvement over the pictographic and syllabary systems.

[Soapy Sam]

I'd give good money to see anyone attempt to dismantle the pyramids.
McAlpines and the ghost of Fred Dibnah would have their work cut out.

[HansMustermann]

Just as a minor correction to what Tim otherwise correctly said, there is actually a fourth writing system, between full-tilt pictographic and syllabic: rebus.

In a rebus writing system, you can write bigger words by combining the symbols for smaller words, for no other reason than that they sound the right way. E.g., if English were rebus, if you lacked a symbol for 'charitable' you could for example approximate it as chair+table. (Not a very good modern rebus, but chosen to illustrate ancient rebus writing: it really was that approximative.) It's not composite words, like 'outreach' which actually combines the meanings of two words, but stuff where the symbols are combined just for the sound value. It's similar to syllabic, and some of the signs are indeed syllables, but symbols for stuff that's longer than just a consonant and a vowel can be used in the same way as the syllables would be.

Really, it works exactly like a modern pictographic rebus puzzle.

Which brings me to the minor correction:

Egyptian writing was not full-tilt pictographic, but rebus. As were Summerian and Akkadian, for that matter, although those had their own category-signs twist (similar to Linear B) on top of the rebus.

[dudalb]

Nice way to totally destroy Egypt's economy, which is heavily dependent on Tourism.

[ANTPogo]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Nice way to totally destroy Egypt's economy, which is heavily dependent on Tourism.

For certain groups, that's a feature, not a bug.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by geni

Err do you feel embarrassed adopting a position that is entirely inconsistent with the last 8000 years of human history? Religious institutions have long been major sources of learning if only because they are about the only people with time to consider what will happen beyond the next harvest who weren't distracted by planning the next war.

More and bloodier wars have been fought over, and more and bloodier campaigns of persecution have been justified using Religion than any other single philosophy in the history of humanity...

► Twenty Crusades in 400 years from the 11th C to the 14th C killed about a million people in the name of God and Christ!!
► The French Wars of Religion
► The 30 Years War
► The Lebanese Civil War
► The Civil Wars in Sudan
► The Irish Civl War

then there are the persecutions.
► The Spanish Inquisition
► The Salem Witch Trials
► The Persecution of the Jews by the Nazis
► The Persecution of Huguenots by Roman Catholics (which is in my geneology)

The list goes on.

While Religions may well have been "seats of learning" it was more by accident than design. The Roman Catholic Church's dogmatic adherence to the Ptolemaic Theory of the Solar System effectively stalkled the advancement of science for nearly 1,500 years, and they persecuted anyone who questioned it (Copernicus, Galileo) sometimes murdering them (Giordano Bruno) if they dare question it, and all in the Name of God.

The world would be a much better, more advance place without "organised" religion.

[Darth Rotor]

Originally Posted by smartcooky

More and bloodier wars have been fought over, and more and bloodier campaigns of persecution have been justified using Religion than any other single philosophy in the history of humanity...

► Twenty Crusades in 400 years from the 11th C to the 14th C killed about a million people in the name of God and Christ!!
► The French Wars of Religion
► The 30 Years War
► The Lebanese Civil War
► The Civil Wars in Sudan
► The Irish Civl War

then there are the persecutions.
► The Spanish Inquisition
► The Salem Witch Trials
► The Persecution of the Jews by the Nazis
► The Persecution of Huguenots by Roman Catholics (which is in my geneology)

The list goes on.

While Religions may well have been "seats of learning" it was more by accident than design. The Roman Catholic Church's dogmatic adherence to the Ptolemaic Theory of the Solar System effectively stalkled the advancement of science for nearly 1,500 years, and they persecuted anyone who questioned it (Copernicus, Galileo) sometimes murdering them (Giordano Bruno) if they dare question it, and all in the Name of God.

The world would be a much better, more advance place without "organised" religion.

smartcookie, I hate to tell you that Mao, by himself, made your whole shopping list look like picnics. (So did the bubonic plague).
His ideology and aims had the advantage of modern scientific methods and tools.
His butcher's bill is at about 100,000,000, which makes Stalin and Hitler both look like utter pussies.

Cheers.

[Craig4]

Originally Posted by DOC

It shows just another of the many differences between Islam and Christianity. Also, some people might not know that you are not allowed to paint an image of any living thing in Islam which is why their art has so many geometric designs. So it gets back to the "Law of Non-Contradiction". Since there are so many differences between Christianity and Islam, both can't be right, and at least one religion has to be wrong. Of course some will say they both could be wrong but that's another topic.

I'll follow whichever one a god tells me to. The first one to speak for him/her self wins.

[Craig B]

Originally Posted by geni

Which would have had no effect whatsoever if anyone else held such documents. Documents of interest to non religious groups (mostly millitary manuals) did just fine. Have you any idea how many copies of De Re Militari there are floating around?

No. Tell me. And tell me that military affairs were of no interest to Christianity or Islam, only if you have the audacity to ignore the Crusades, and other similar events.

Quote:

Err that's just recycling. Parchment was expensive so reusing it was common. You expect people to slaughter a herd of cows everytime they want to write up this years accounts?

I do not. I wonder why it was necessary. Why was there no cheap writing medium in Christian Europe? In pagan times books were much more common, and vastly more people could read. Pagan Rome was full of bookshops where people could buy cheap copies of popular works, written on papyrus.

Originally Posted by geni

And the reason europe had a non trivial number of people who could read latin (and a lesser extent greek) was?

I want you to think seriously about what you have written there. In earlier times Latin and Greek were well known. They were spoken languages. Before Christianity people could read Latin and Greek. They were even quite good at it!

What should be asked instead is: why was there no significant literature and education in the spoken languages of early medieval Europe? Answer, because the Church monopolised education. It educated a smll number of priests in fossilised forms of ancient languages. The ancient secular literature was forgotten, more or less, and was reintroduced into Europe by Muslim and Jewish scholars. The destruction of ancient learning is symbolised by the Emperor Justinian's suppression of the Academy in Athens, and the other seats of ancient learning in 529 AD. In the early middle ages even many kings and emperors were illiterate! Charlemagne learned his letters late in life.

Quote:

The european middle ages are a fairly small part of human history.

But the part most fully dominated by institutional religion. Thankfully, a small part!

Quote:

Given that the first civilisations were theocracies its pretty safe to say that without religion we wouldn't have much learning beyond flint knapping.

If you are really unaware that anything was invented between "flint knapping" and "the first civilisations" (eg, the control of fire, agriculture, domestication of animals, weaving, ceramics, construction of stone buildings, metal working, etc etc), or if you think that the inventions of early civilisations were dependent on theocracy, then I don't think that anything you utter is "safe to say".

[tsig]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

smartcookie, I hate to tell you that Mao, by himself, made your whole shopping list look like picnics. (So did the bubonic plague).
His ideology and aims had the advantage of modern scientific methods and tools.
His butcher's bill is at about 100,000,000, which makes Stalin and Hitler both look like utter pussies.

Cheers.

This whole "Yours killed more than mine" is pointless.

[Craig B]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

smartcookie, I hate to tell you that Mao, by himself, made your whole shopping list look like picnics. (So did the bubonic plague).
His ideology and aims had the advantage of modern scientific methods and tools.
His butcher's bill is at about 100,000,000, which makes Stalin and Hitler both look like utter pussies. Cheers.

I think we can conclude from these facts, if the figure for Mao's victims is accurate (let us accept it for the sake of this discussion), that none of these people were inspired by an almighty omnibenevolent Supreme Being. Neither, then, were the religious people who committed monstrous crimes or spent centuries fighting wars and torturing rivals and dissidents. If your historical facts prove anything it is that Soviet Communism, for example, is a false ideology. So then must be Christianity - by the same reasoning.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by Craig B

I think we can conclude from these facts, if the figure for Mao's victims is accurate (let us accept it for the sake of this discussion), that none of these people were inspired by an almighty omnibenevolent Supreme Being. Neither, then, were the religious people who committed monstrous crimes or spent centuries fighting wars and torturing rivals and dissidents. If your historical facts prove anything it is that Soviet Communism, for example, is a false ideology. So then must be Christianity - by the same reasoning.

NOTE to Mods: Smileys are hotlinked to my photobucket account

[HansMustermann]

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

smartcookie, I hate to tell you that Mao, by himself, made your whole shopping list look like picnics. (So did the bubonic plague).
His ideology and aims had the advantage of modern scientific methods and tools.
His butcher's bill is at about 100,000,000, which makes Stalin and Hitler both look like utter pussies.

Cheers.

Actually, no, that's BS.

For a start, whenever I hear such "but X killed more", the problem is that they ignore percentages.

E.g., you could say that Mao killed more people than the 30 year war, a war of religion, but you're comparing a country of 1 billion people to Renaissance HRE which had 20 million total, INCLUDING Austria and Bohemia. But when you look at percentages, just that one religious conflict alone killed a frikken half of the population of Germany. Mao's revolution did NOT kill half the population of China.

If we're talking the contribution of revolution to our species as a whole, and the climate it produced, as opposed to just tallying the score of individual dictators, then we must look at percentages of the total population. That's why for example the statistics for crime are per capita, not just number per country. Because it's just not the same thing if 1000 people are murdered in a country of 300,000 as if 1000 are killed in a medieval city of 10,000 people.

The Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520 -- for offending a bishop by daring stand against him, I might add -- may have killed "only" 80 to 90 people, but that was a different thing back when Stockholm's population was less than 1% of what it is today. It actually had only 5000 to 7000 people total. To have the same impact nowadays, you'd have to execute at least 10,000.

The massacre of Acre in the crusades may have only killed about 2700 muslim prisoners, but that was the whole population captured in the city, including the women and children. It was a complete genocide. As in 100%.

Ditto for the witch hunts. Sure, they may have killed "only" 40,000 to 60,000 or so, but when you do the ratio between population of Europe back then and population of Europe now, you get more like the equivalent of half a million to a million. And that's just witches.

And so on.

Second, the scales are not stacked similarly. Which is frankly BS.

E.g., for Stalin or Mao usually famines resulting from bad decisions are included in the death toll. And they should be indeed. But then we should do the same thing for religion. We should include all the famines caused by such idiotic decisions as condemning the merchants as guilty of a mortal sin, if they sell for more than the prescribed prices, or just recoup their "fees" paid to robber barons along the way. Countless people died because the church didn't let the economy function in a normal way that would have created the incentive to bring food to them. If deaths resulting from bad economic policy are included for Mao and Stalin, why wouldn't we do the same for bad economic policies dictated by the church?

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Actually, no, that's BS.

For a start, whenever I hear such "but X killed more", the problem is that they ignore percentages.

E.g., you could say that Mao killed more people than the 30 year war, a war of religion, but you're comparing a country of 1 billion people to Renaissance HRE which had 20 million total, INCLUDING Austria and Bohemia. But when you look at percentages, just that one religious conflict alone killed a frikken half of the population of Germany. Mao's revolution did NOT kill half the population of China.

If we're talking the contribution of revolution to our species as a whole, and the climate it produced, as opposed to just tallying the score of individual dictators, then we must look at percentages of the total population. That's why for example the statistics for crime are per capita, not just number per country. Because it's just not the same thing if 1000 people are murdered in a country of 300,000 as if 1000 are killed in a medieval city of 10,000 people.

The Stockholm Bloodbath of 1520 -- for offending a bishop by daring stand against him, I might add -- may have killed "only" 80 to 90 people, but that was a different thing back when Stockholm's population was less than 1% of what it is today. It actually had only 5000 to 7000 people total. To have the same impact nowadays, you'd have to execute at least 10,000.

The massacre of Acre in the crusades may have only killed about 2700 muslim prisoners, but that was the whole population captured in the city, including the women and children. It was a complete genocide. As in 100%.

Ditto for the witch hunts. Sure, they may have killed "only" 40,000 to 60,000 or so, but when you do the ratio between population of Europe back then and population of Europe now, you get more like the equivalent of half a million to a million. And that's just witches.

And so on.

Second, the scales are not stacked similarly. Which is frankly BS.

E.g., for Stalin or Mao usually famines resulting from bad decisions are included in the death toll. And they should be indeed. But then we should do the same thing for religion. We should include all the famines caused by such idiotic decisions as condemning the merchants as guilty of a mortal sin, if they sell for more than the prescribed prices, or just recoup their "fees" paid to robber barons along the way. Countless people died because the church didn't let the economy function in a normal way that would have created the incentive to bring food to them. If deaths resulting from bad economic policy are included for Mao and Stalin, why wouldn't we do the same for bad economic policies dictated by the church?

One should also remember that modern science and technology make killing large groups easier. So, tribal and religious groups in the Caucasus have been going at each other for centuries. During most of this time they were using spears, swords bows and arrows. In later centuries they had firearms, starting with muzzle-loaders. By the middle of the nineteenth century, they had breech-loading rifles. In the wars that erupted in the 1990s with the break up of the Soviet Union, the Armenians and Azers were going at each other with armored personnel carriers, hand-held rocket launchers and jet aircraft.

If we compare the "final solution to the Gepid problem," when the Lombards attacked the Gepids from the west, and the Avars attacked from the east, thereby annihilating the Gepids as a people, or Charlemagne's genocidal wars against the Saxons to the Holocaust; we must remember, in the first two situations the perpetrators were limited to, again, swords, spears, arrows and a virtually non-existant infrastructure. The Holocaust was helped along by railroads, making concentration of the Jews far easier, and the industrial mass production of hydrogen cyanide.

[HansMustermann]

A very good and insightful point indeed.

[Nosi]

Originally Posted by DOC

http://english.alarabiya.net/article...12/249092.html

Personally, I think they should leave them up for the historical value.

Christian, Muslim, Whatever extreme flavor religious nut bag doesn't give a for history or science. Note what's passing for science education out of some Texas book publishers. Jesus road a Brontosaurus into....

[Nosi]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Allah? ALLAH? You think that's bad? What are you going to do when deep R'lyeh rises and our Great Cthulhu wakes up and you chose wrong? Well, granted, those who chose right won't get a free pass either, but just shows how equal-minded our Great Old One is

Or worse still that plate of spaghetti and meatballs may yet reach out to slap you silly for idoleatry? Every Pastafarian must go to bed at night in terror over some meal eaten somewhen.

[Nosi]

Originally Posted by ddt

Really?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Islam:

You might first check your facts before blathering off.



But really, you want to claim that Christianity is right, because the gospels don't contradict each other w.r.t. things as Jesus' nativity, his last words, the number of people present at his resurrection, and more such things.

Islam has various depths of obedience, the same as does Catholicism.

The deepest Roman Catholic is very different than the American Catholic, most notably in the stance on birth control, but in many other ways as well.

[Craig B]

Originally Posted by HansMustermann

Actually, no, that's BS.

For a start, whenever I hear such "but X killed more", the problem is that they ignore percentages.

E.g., you could say that Mao killed more people than the 30 year war, a war of religion, but you're comparing a country of 1 billion people to Renaissance HRE which had 20 million total, INCLUDING Austria and Bohemia. But when you look at percentages, just that one religious conflict alone killed a frikken half of the population of Germany. Mao's revolution did NOT kill half the population of China.

A most excellent point, and I'm not detracting from you, but from the utter thoughtless blindness of religious "they killed more than we did" proponents, when I say it should be too obvious to have to state. They blow themselves up with their very own arguments!

In relation to the size of the affected populations, the Wars of Religion were vastly more costly than the depradation perpetrated by Stalin or Mao. Of the Thirty Years War it is observed that:

Quote:

So great was the devastation brought about by the war that estimates put the reduction of population in the German states at about 25% to 40%. Some regions were affected much more than others. For example, Württemberg lost three-quarters of its population during the war. In the territory of Brandenburg, the losses had amounted to half, while in some areas an estimated two-thirds of the population died. The male population of the German states was reduced by almost half.

(wiki on the Thirty Years' War.)

In Ireland during the same period, population losses were comparable.

Quote:

The death toll of the conflict was huge. William Petty, a Cromwellian ... concluded that at least 400,000 people and maybe as many as 620,000 had died in Ireland between 1641 and 1653. The true figure may be lower, but the lowest suggested is about 200,000. And this in a country of only around 1.5 million inhabitants. It is estimated that about two thirds of the deaths were civilian.

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_C..._Wars#The_Cost) The main cause of death was famine, resulting not merely from mistaken agrarian policies, but from the intentional destruction of crops and harvests as an act of war against the civilian population.

So if the famines of the 1930s and 1950s prove that Stalin and Mao were inspired by false ideology (and they do!) what do the murderous deeds of Catholic and Protestant armies three centuries earlier prove about the validity of Christianity?

[catsmate1]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

One should also remember that modern science and technology make killing large groups easier. So, tribal and religious groups in the Caucasus have been going at each other for centuries. During most of this time they were using spears, swords bows and arrows. In later centuries they had firearms, starting with muzzle-loaders. By the middle of the nineteenth century, they had breech-loading rifles. In the wars that erupted in the 1990s with the break up of the Soviet Union, the Armenians and Azers were going at each other with armored personnel carriers, hand-held rocket launchers and jet aircraft.

If we compare the "final solution to the Gepid problem," when the Lombards attacked the Gepids from the west, and the Avars attacked from the east, thereby annihilating the Gepids as a people, or Charlemagne's genocidal wars against the Saxons to the Holocaust; we must remember, in the first two situations the perpetrators were limited to, again, swords, spears, arrows and a virtually non-existant infrastructure. The Holocaust was helped along by railroads, making concentration of the Jews far easier, and the industrial mass production of hydrogen cyanide.

Look at the Taiping Rebellion, an example of what happens when a religiously motivated war is fought with post-medieval technology. ~25 million dead out of a world population of ~1,250 million; 2% of humanity dead.

[DOC]

Originally Posted by Craig B

So if the famines of the 1930s and 1950s prove that Stalin and Mao were inspired by false ideology (and they do!) what do the murderous deeds of Catholic and Protestant armies three centuries earlier prove about the validity of Christianity?

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 7:21

"These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me." Matthew 15:8

[Elizabeth I]

Originally Posted by DOC

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 7:21

"These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me." Matthew 15:8

Interesting...Mao and Stalin were True Communists, but the Christian mass murderers were No True Christians.

[kmortis]

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

Interesting...Mao and Stalin were True Communists, but the Christian mass murderers were No True Christians.

I am steadfast; you are a stubborn ass.
I carefully consider my options; you can't make up your frikkin' mind!

and so on.