Dear davidf,

We have canvassed this issue on earlier threads and ended by agreeing to disagree.

You will note that I used the little 'c' christian rather than the big 'C'. Although not a practising member of that faith I do have some affection for it.

I recognise the transformative power it can have on some very blighted lives and seen first hand the anger abating effect possible in new converts.

This is why I am so struck by the positions of proxy and AGIR. Their attitudes and views are so discordant with what I traditionally understand to be christian ethic.

I humbly venture that were I to state the actions of the IDF in gunning down peace activists in the recent convoy was an example of a Jewish ethic I would be rightly chastised.

Just as I feel deep anger at the blight past actions of the Church have placed on what could be a gentle faith, so have I reacted to the words of proxy. My post to him was in some ways an attempt to hold him to account and in another wanting to know where his 'deep anger and hatred' was coming from i.e. was it from his faith. If it were, then it would have been disturbing and certainly worth exploring further.

I think it was quite revealing that he/she answered with a diatribe about Islam. Is this a sign of a determined unwillingness to conduct any sort of self examination? This would be indicative of a pathology just in its self.

Just as I respect your right to defend the Hebrew testament from misuse by Christians I am asking that I be allowed similar elbow room to defend my notions, (and those I suspect of many cultural christians) of what a christian act is, against one who professes to be a follower of that faith, but only it would seem in its letter rather than its spirit.

Dear Proxy,

With respect you haven't answered my question.

Dear csteele,

Christianity, Judaism and any other living religion or secular belief system is defined by its doctrines and by what it inspires its adherents to do. We cannot always be sure that it is the belief system that caused them to act in that way, but we may venture to make a connection.

AGIR has specifically appealed to the Bible and has connected his beliefs with those of scripture.

http://www.johnshelbyspong.com/bishopspongon_theTerribleTexts.aspx contains the New and Old Testament biblical texts that Bishop Spong cites as inspiration for bigotry, homophobia and antisemitism. The inspiration is in Holy Scripture. Some people take these texts seriously and are inspired by them.

You wrote: "I humbly venture that were I to state the actions of the IDF in gunning down peace activists in the recent convoy was an example of a Jewish ethic I would be rightly chastised."

If you can establish that they were gunned down and the IDF (I prefer to call them the Israeli Armed Forces - armies can do many other things besides defending themselves) reacted without provocation you could be right in calling it a Jewish ethic.

I regard the idea of a chosen people as denigrating the part of the human race not chosen and the idea of a real estate dealer god as designating a particular territory for a particular people as religiously justified irredentism. In short some of both Christian and Jewish behaviour stinks, and the souce of the stench can be found in scripture.

Religion is a mixed bag, and the ethics derived from it is both bad and good.

AGIR and proxy are true Christians as their attitudes are inspired by their religious beliefs. Baruch Goldstein who murdered the unarmed Muslim worshippers in a mosque and Yigal Amir who murdered Rabin are true Jews by the same account.

Martin Buber who opposed anti-Arab bigotry is also a true Jew, and Martin Luther King jr was a true Christian.

I was objecting to you equating good behaviour with religious belief but my objection is not restricted to Christian behaviour. Religion can inspire both good and evil.

CSTEELE...it worked...you obtained my attention.

What they heck did you mean by 'my remarks' which you equate with Proxy's "send em to Davy Jones".....all I said was that 2 buffoons from the UK could not solve the problem..and I pointed out that ultimately it is about Jerusalem..

I didn't advocate violence of any kind. I just tried to explain it.

david f,
<<I regard the idea of a chosen people as denigrating the part of the human race not chosen and the idea of a real estate dealer god as designating a particular territory for a particular people as religiously justified irredentism. In short some of both Christian and Jewish behaviour stinks, and the souce of the stench can be found in scripture.>>

If a God who promised his chosen people a small patch of desert, without oil, surrounded by warmongers in the middle east stinks, what then of a God who promises his followers the whole planet and exhorts them to kill anybody who resists?
ie Allah.

You lack perspective.

<<We cannot always be sure that it is the belief system that caused them to act in that way, but we may venture to make a connection.>>

You seem unable to make the Islamic connection.
I'll help you.
The Koran represents part of the Islamic belief system:
* Infidels are your sworn enemies (Sura 4:101).
* Be ruthless to the infidels (Sura 48:29).
* Make war on the infidels who dwell around you (Sura 9:123, 66:9).
* Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day (Sura 9:29).
* Strike off the heads of infidels in battle (Sura 47:4).
* If someone stops believing in Allah, kill him (al-Bukhari 9:84:57).
* Take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends (Sura 5:51, 60:13).
* Never be a helper to the disbelievers (Sura 28:86).
* Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (Sura 2:191).
* No Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel (al-Bukhari 1:3:111).
* The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land (Sura 5:33).
Do you still have problem connecting the beliefs (above) with the 24/7 acts of Islamic terrorism around the world?
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Amusing, even Andrew Bolt (http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_how_hamas_fooled_the_west/) has come to see through the smoke & mirrors, while Reuters have reported something very disturbing, from an Al-Jazeera cameraman no less, that IDF Troops had been taken and were being held (http://alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE6521UG.htm), something of a grim thought - being taken and handed over to Hamas... (NB Gilad Shalit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilad_Shalit) still hasn't had any access to the Red Crescent/Cross). While here is an ex-British Marine, discussing the event (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG0EfG8mnAo&feature=player_embedded)... Seems like the worm is turning, here is the Guardian article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/01/israel-no-choice-gaza-flotilla)...

The simplicity of the plot and the hysteria meant the intelligent people of the world were always going to dig deeper... It isn't a pretty "peace protest" when one looks under the rug is it?

Dear Proxy,

I am well aware of Islamic terrorism. However, that was not what csteele and I were discussing. We were discussing Judaism and Christianity. One can also discuss Buddhist terrorism and mention the fact that the Japanese officer corps in WW2 responsible for numerous atrocities were almost completely Buddhist as are the Sinhalese in Sri Lanka whose Buddhist monks opposed any peace settlement with the Tamils. We could also mention the Hindus who burnt a missionary and his sons alive in their car. and burned Muslims alive. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was responsible for the demolition of the historic Babri Mosque in 1992 and the Godhra (in the western state of Gujarat) genocide in 2002, in which hundreds of Muslims were killed.

However, I didn't mention Muslim terrorism for the same reason that I did not mention Buddhist or Hindu terrorism. That was not what we were discussing. Before you get on your hobby horse and accuse other people of lacking perspective pay attention to what the other people are talking about. Other people don't have to ride your hobby horse.