Alchemist,

I note your agreeable comments on the multi_Culti_stone thread.

Your experience of interaction with Missionaries in rural Australia is interesting, as is your mention of Sarawak/Sabah, as it’s my old stamping ground. (what did you observe there ? I’m interested) I also have stories of governmentworkers.

EMOTIVE
You used some terminology that was quite emotive, even more, it was like you have some kind of pathological hatred for anything Christian, which worries me a bit, because I don’t find it balanced or rational. I mean.. by your tone, you would be hanging, drawing and quartering even Mother Theresa as some kind of psychopathic demon in nun’s clothing. I doubt you could find anything of value in her work, because you make ‘blanket’ condemnations of all.

HONESTY
I’ll be brutally honest with you, we did have a couple of lady missionaries I know of among our team who did dangle the stick of ‘God will punish’ over some people, in regard to some acts, usually the immoral kind and guess what ? There are 2 of the indigenous people here in Melbourne (Kelabit tribe) who recounted this to me. We had a great chat, and now they have seen past this ‘turn or burn’ improper use of the Gospel, and understand that God actually LOVEs them. The problem in that case was not the gospel of Gods love and forgiveness, but an unbalanced presentation of it.

ASSAULTED ?
I can’t challenge what you said about being “assaulted” as you describe it by some missionary in central Australia, but I’d like to have been a fly on the wall on the day, perhaps there are things you are not telling us about that incident ? Perhaps it was you who instigated it ? If your serious, you can still lay charges, because there is no statute of limitations on an indictable offence (violent attacks are such).

Why not try to work through some of your pain, I don’t mind helping.

GZ,
Again you miss the point – let me spell it out for you.

The points I highlighted in your post are equally applicable to Christianity as to Islam. I do not deny that Islam has it’s problems – as does Christianity. I simple highlight that to belittle one with certain claims is hypocritical as some of those claims can be applied to the other. Clear?

Tiring as it is, I will address a few of your rebuttals.

Spin-off: I do not think that Judaism would agree that Christianity is a continuation. Jews deny the deity of Jesus. However, Jesus recognised the history of the Jews and the God they worshipped, claiming the same for himself. Further, Mohammed recognised both Judaism and Christianity as worshiping the same God as he, just that he proposed to be the next (and last) prophet of that God. If that is not worshipping the same God, then I don’t know what is. If the ‘redirection’ of a faith by a new proponent is not spin-off, what is?

Evangelical and Missionary: A close look at history will show that Christianity has as much to be guilty of concerning plundering, torturing and forcible conversion as Islam. The fact that Christianity currently does not, does not mitigate its history – or the dangers of zealous preaching in the future.

Jesus claims: My point here is that Jesus claimed divine being – much as Mohammed claimed divine guidance. Both claimed a divine mandate (to be God or speak for God is little difference if they are only claims).

I don’t have enough space to continue. Suffice to say, I am only stating that if you make claims about one, be prepared to see some of them reflected. I never claimed them to be the same, just similar – they both claim the family of Abraham as their historical start point.

May I ask, were you ever a Muslim?

Islam is dangerous for two reasons:

(1) Religious reason
Jesus is the God in Christianity. The Arab word for God is Allah. Hence it was easy for Mohammad to tell people that Allah and Christian God is one and the same. Then came Mohammad's deceptive twist- Jesus cannot be God because there is only one God. Hence Jesus was lowered to prophet status in Islam, even ranking lower than Mohammad himself.

Another important deceptive twist- Mohammad wouldn't say that Jews are Allah-chosen people. He couldn't stand that idea. Instead he preached that Jews and Christians are 'people of the book' and are 'protected' as long as they follow the 'true' faith. Sounds like a sensible conditions huh. Behold it became very easy for him to then turn around and accuse the Jews and Christians for deviating from the 'truth', hence are to be punished.

-> Islam is dangerous for misdirecting people to turn to a false god that Mohammad had made up to persecute his enemies.

(Does this remind of Bible mentions of false prophets towards the end times?)

(2) Threat to freedom and democracy
It's a number game in a Western democracy. If there are more Muslims than non-Muslims, then Islam wins. Unfortunately Islam is slowing winning, simply because the religion encourages a high birthrate. (These days you don't count on the Catholics to produce more babies to lever off with the Muslims.)

No amount of time will tranform Islam as part of western democracy because, unlike Marxism/Communism which faded away, Islam is regarded as from 'god' (albeit wrongly). Hence it will stick around, cannot change and will not change.

-> Islam is dangerous for democracy.

Hi Reason,

The Jews are still awaiting their messiah who had already come in the body of Jesus. Had they accepted Jesus as their saviour, today you would probably be calling yourself Baptist/Presbyterian 'Judaist' instead of Baptist/Presbyterian 'Christian'. That the Jews did not accept Jesus as their messiah is a separate matter. Also Jesus was Jewish. Mohammad was not.

Regarding criticism on Islam being reflected on Christianity. I'd say on careful analysis, most would be found unfair reflection. I understood your position very well from the start. But some things are far better said then not.

When people are able to clearly differentiate between Islam and Christianity, they should see them in different lights.

For instance, Jesus preached love, a Godly quality that embodies selflessness.

Mohammad simply could not bring himself to preach love, as that would have made him a pussy warrior and it would be difficult for people not to see him as a hypocrite. He settled on calling Islam a religion of 'peace' and 'submission'. Wise choice, under the difficult circumstances.

Kiss my foot... peace and submission aren't even virtues but something with distinctly selfish undertones. Those are subjective terms which mean different things to different people under different circumstances. This is part and parcel of a false religion that is rich in doublespeak and deceptions - a religion that talks about peace, but then encourages an attack on others for not being submissive to Allah.

I came from an Islamic country. But I was never a Muslim.

...the truth will set you free- Jesus

GZTan, “a religion that talks about peace, but then encourages attacks on others for not being submissive to Allah.” What is the difference if we changed a couple of words of that, a religion that talks about peace, but then encourages attacks,for not being submissive to God.

Religion has terrorised people since its inception. All godhead religious factions are the same, you all worship the same god. You all continue to mentally terrorise everyone you come into contact with in your missionaries towards hell. How can you vilify those that constantly impart violence upon the world in whatever form they can find.

BD, I doubt that you would have the ticker to investigate and accept the historical archives relating to the works of missionaries throughout Australia during the last century. That may mean you have to accept something that goes against your programmed indoctrination.

Sarawak, Sabah, 1963-65, a member of the Naval FESR dive team. Liaising with native chiefs and missionaries to combat the incursion.

Watched missionaries working with the people without their knowledge on many occasions, very different to when we personally dropped in. I watched as those who lived there cowered under the verbal terror some missionaries used to frighten and subdue them.

Christian hater, one of my closest friends was the late Rev Mario Schoenmacker head of the I.C.A. and others from the hierachy of christian churches. It is irrelevant as to what you believe, it is how you implement that belief and the example to others that you give that counts. I left the church for that reason, as the example it provides is totally the opposite to what it preaches.

Universal love, whilst beating people around the head with constant tirades of irrelevant mythical scripture, terror and vilification. It would be good to see all the religious standing before their god and explaining why they are the way they are. Could it be that they are in the image of their god and thats why he doesn't intervene.

Don't drop in the free choice rubbish, that is just a typical irresponsible cope out.

Hi The alchemist,

We can consciously exercise our freewill to obey or not to obey Jesus's teaching at any point in time. It is human nature, not Christianity per say. For instance I'm here to reveal the danger about Islam, not to love like Jesus did. It is my conscious decision, not in the name of Jesus/Christianity. I'd be doing this even if I'm an athiest.

You get the bad missionaries but don't forget there are lots of other good works that you don't know about. Just like your mood swing, hopefully there are more good days than bad. It is not the fault of Christianity. Humans are fallible.

Religion is here to stay. You have no choice. No religion does not equal Utopia - Just look at Marxism and Communism.

Your comment: "It is irrelevant as to what you believe"

Not so. You'd be better off with the ethos of Christianity, or you prefer others. I don't care.

Your comment: "...it is how you implement....that counts."

I agree. Like the Bible says, your body is the church of Christ. It is really YOU that matters. How YOU practise what you believe, rather than pointing a finger at church/missionaries.