FH, once again I have not explained myself clearly (a bit much of that lately :( )
I'd missed your response and tried to acknowledge that in my last post, sorry the message was not clear.

I'm guessing that athiests and agnostics like any other grouping would have a mix of those who laughed at a clever pay out and others who were offended.

Liberty brings with it a responsibility which unfortunately some take to lightly. There are some posters on these forums who appear to try and give offence rather than debate the issues as they see them. I don't count BD in that, but one of his fellow believers has a habit of spewing some really hateful stuff in his posts which sends a fairly strong message about the character of his belief. Somehow I want BD to retain the freedom to argue his case (even if I disagree with him) but those who choose offence for the sake of offence to be silenced. Beyond my limited wisdom to achieve that with law.

R0bert

Pedant

You are still refusing to understand the msg projected by the 'thief in the night ', scriptures.

The Catholic church and Catholic oriented translators, while they seem to treat all the words of the original text, they play games with the grammar. The King James translators may add up to 50% of words or disregard 50% of words of the original text, or somewhere in between, and so insert their meaning into the translation. The Catholic translators change the grammar, while retaining words, and make the peripheral things relevant and the irrelevant things relevant.

Your understanding seems to me to take this form; Beware, be alert, be awake, so that if the Lord comes unexpectedly you wont miss him. You have accepted the twisted teachings of Christendom. This is not the teaching of the scriptures. In short you have your knickers knotted , religiously speaking.

Suppose you grab Him by the ankle and say, “Gotcha”. The Lord of Lords will make a decision. If you are wearing the garments that He provides, in other words you are ready, with enough oil in your lamp, He will say, “Move to My right and prepare to inherit the Kingdom of God”. If you are found with your pants down, that is not wearing the apparel that He provides, He will say, “Depart from Me, you who work Lawlessness”. You will have forfeited your Salvation, because you have not made yourself ready, and have not kept your self ready. Having seen Him coming is of no consequence, it is His job to find you.

I don't see any need to say good bye.

I am sorry, I have placed my last comment on the wrong blog or what ever these things are called.

Sheesh Goldbrick, some people think Islam is weird, but after reading your post, I have to admit that Xtians have their share too :)

IMHO the fact that people become religious is fairly easily explained. As we evolved to have larger brains and become smarter, we also evolved to become more anxious. The brain needs homeostasis or balanced brain chemistry, for us to feel content and happy. The anxiety of uncertainty makes us seek perceived certainty.
ie. we want answers to make us feel better. As long as we believe the answer, even if its wrong, we will be happier. No wonder that every tribe discovered anywhere, has invented some kind of god, or gods, to explain the world.

If I was walking through the woods 2000 years ago and lightning struck 6ft in front of me, killing my friend in the process, I would have been petrified. I would want answers, so that the same did not happen to me, to quell my anxiety. Along came people with what sounded like credible explanations for all these things. I would have gladly believed them, to feel better. No wonder that religions have done so well in history!

Yabby,
you have disclosed your no brain answer, obviously according to you evolution has not as yet developed religion in your thought process. Perhaps you can give us some of your philosophy for how you find answers to you own behavioural problems, since faith and hope has not yet evolved in your brain. Or perhaps you have no answers!

F.H. given that Islamic law is founded on the Quran AND the hadith, as u well know, it is legitimate to refer to it when discussing Islam.

DAWOOD. I had a good read of the link you provided, and can make some preliminary observations.

1/ Islam spread by aggressive "Jihad" The articles justification is as follows:

<<We shall thus restrict the remainder of our discussion to the aggressive jihad. As I intimated above, the aforementioned "state of war" was not restricted to Arabia. It characterized the pre-modern world in general>>

In short, he is saying that due to the lack of any overall government, everyone was defacto at war with everyone else, apart from treaties.

But clearly, and undeniably, the key to understanding the spread of Islam is via aggressive Military attacks on Infidels due to this 'defacto' state of war he claims.

The general tone of the article confirms the fundamental difference between the expansion of the gospel of Christ to the time of Constantine, and the expansion of Islam from Mohamed till now.

That difference is found in a part of Acts, demonstrating the Christians response to persecution.

Acts 8:1
<<On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria.>>

Then

<<4Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.>>

It was this, and not military conquest, not self defence, not treaties which gave rise to the early Church ..and after 300 yrs the Power of Rome was forced to admit "The empire is Christian"

There is no concept of 'Holy War' in the New Testament. There is only a concept of a Justly ruled state, even if the emporer is pagan.
Christianity does not 'need' 'territory' to survive and flourish.

The link you gave me 'assumes' an Islamic State. We never assume a Christian 'state'. Our war is fought with the Word of God and the truth of God incarnate, not swords or arrows.