Quote
Being a Christian myself, I can tell you the militant "Muslims" today are no worse than the militant "Christians" of ages past. They call themselves Muslims but they are not, just as those who called themselves Christians were not. Both now and then, they were committing acts that went against their own scriptures. Today, these so-called Muslims have the "jihad", then the so-called "Christians" had the crusades. Can we even mention the atrocities perpetuated by "Christians" against their own kind in Constantinople during the crusades? Oh that's right, the people they slaughtered and raped were not "real" Christians because they didn't share the exact same interpretation of scripture. What right do we as Christians have to judge the Muslims when our own past was just as bloody if not more so than current Muslim extremists? The average Christian then and the average Muslim today have no link to the extremist branches.
I agree with you almost completely. The only thing is i don't think judging people as not real christians, or muslims is not the way to go. Just as when Constantinople was sacked (one of the things that makes me believe christianity had done more harm then good in history, and makes me incredibly angry) it was justified by this reasoning, saying that these extremist muslims are not true muslims is leading down the same road (mentally that is, obviously it is one thing to say and another thing to act on). They are real muslims, simply just a different interpretation, and saying they aren't is no better than when they say non-extremist muslims aren't either. There is a lot of violence in both these books. In many ways, these extremist are MORE real if you believe these text aught to be looked literally and as completely inerrant. It depends on the interpretation you have, and no one is really any more of a "true" person of faith then anyone else.
Doesn't it say somewhere "Judge not lest ye be judged?" Wolf, let god decide who is a real christian and a real muslim.
MultiQuote
