http://www.kingdomofjesuschrist.org/2/index.php

I've been monitoring this movement for some time, and now increasingly with concern.
It weaves in a LOT of sound Biblical teaching, in fact truckloads of it, but then.. the Pastor/Founder says this about himself:

"The revelation of SONSHIP started in the year 2003 when Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy officially announced this revelation among the sons and daughters of God. He, being the residence of the Father on earth and heir of all things the Father entrusted to him not only His words, name, life, kingdom but also the lives of his enemies, the power to raise even the dead, riches, fame and power in the airwaves."

Notice the key points he claims for himself?

1/ "Residence of the FAther on earth"
2/ "Heir to all things entrusted..
a)Words
b)Name
c)Life
d)Kingdom
e)The LIVES of his enemies.
f)Power to raise the dead
g)RICHES
h)Fame,and power in the airwaves.

If this was some backwoods effort we might not concern ourselves, but it is becoming world wide.

I recommend a close study of his personal story and see how it parallels another false 'religious founder' in so many points.

This is also what he says about himself:

"Why do you need to accept that I am the first-born Son of God among the Gentiles? You need to accept it because it is the first-born Son, the eldest Son among the Gentiles, who will bear His life and preach to His brothers to enter into the Kingdom until they understand the will of the Living God in heaven. That is very, very important. Children of God, now is your chance. Philippines, this is your time. You have been chosen. You are the chosen nation of God. Davao City, you are the Water Center of the World . Tamayong, you are the seat of God’s spiritual governance on earth!"

THIS is most interesting. His "calling" sounds similar to 'another' founder of a major world religion who began in a cave and thought he was going mad.
http://www.kingdomofjesuschrist.org/2/kd/completion/4/the-proving-of-the-fathers-call-in-kitbog.html

Seems perfectly normal to me.

Some guy thinks he is in sole possession of "the truth", and spends his entire waking life telling everyone else where they are going wrong.

And then there's this guy Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy...

But seriously Boaz, can't you tell a spoof when you see one? Do you really believe everything you find on the Internet? Just because some sad sack decides to call himself the Son doesn't mean that he deserves anything more than your pity.

If I were not such a charitable person, who naturally thinks the best of people and their motives, I would be tempted to believe that the only reason you posted this tripe was to enable you to make even more snide remarks, directed at Islam...

>>I recommend a close study of his personal story and see how it parallels another false 'religious founder' in so many points<<

Wow, and who can that possibly be, Boaz? Surely you don't mean...

>>THIS is most interesting. His "calling" sounds similar to 'another' founder of a major world religion who began in a cave and thought he was going mad<<

Golly, Boaz, you don't mean who I think you mean, do you?

Well, I'm shocked. Shocked to find anti-Islam sentiments in one of your posts.

(With apologies to Captain Renault)

Now you know how the Romans felt.

Pericles
this is not a spoof, this bloke is for real, and is a danger to people.
Its a thinly disguised exercise in megalomania.

I draw parallels to Islams founder because they are both dangerous.

One (Quiloboy) says mostly good things, but includes a little sneaky curved ball suggesting that one of his 'rights' is RICHES. If that does not make the alarm bells sound nothing will.

I've raised the alarm over Islam sufficiently so as not to need to repeat it here. (this time)

One could draw contrasts and similarities between Jesus, Mohammad and Quilaboy

Similarities.

-Wildnerness experience leading to 'enlightenment' (though in Jesus case it was not 'leading' to, but confirming his Sonship)
-A sense of mission.

Differences.

Jesus did not act for his own benefit either materially, sexually or politically.
Quilaboy and Mohammad did/do. (not much information about Quilaboy and sex, but watch that space)

Quilaboy is working among Philipino's in other countries and this could impact Australians.

Watching him, and the growth of his power and influence, is an interesting exercise in itself.

Key point.

-The greater his power, the less his errors seem important.

This lesson should not be lost on us. Whether it be the likes of Benny Hinn, Peter Popoff, Oral Roberts, or even Hillsong should their be errors in them.

Bugsy.. indeed.

America is not the only country in the world continuing mans habit of manufacturing Gods.
It is however the home of the maddest ones.
I include cargo cults and some truly primitive ones.
We would do far better asking ourselves why we create a need for them.
No matter how mad and even evil some are we give tax benefits and much more to them but at most 10% of us who claim to believe in the Christian God go to church.
A better world awaits if we learn man is able to stand alone.

Pericles, well written.

BD, "I've raised the alarm over Islam sufficiently so as not to need to repeat it here. (this time)"

Who were you refering to in the original post then? I'd assumed that you were talking about one of your favourite bashing subjects (next to make it as you go). Or were those warnings gratituous rather than needed?

"I recommend a close study of his personal story and see how it parallels another false 'religious founder' in so many points."

"THIS is most interesting. His "calling" sounds similar to 'another' founder of a major world religion who began in a cave and thought he was going mad."

R0bert

Boaz, here's a little secret.

Promise you won't tell?

OK then.

Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy, in all likelihood, is a fraud in exactly the same way as those noisy American evangelists you see pop up every so often. He has a following of really slow people, who are sucked in by a combination of guilt and stupidity.

His chosen vehicle is the Christian religion, and I'm sure that if you lived in the Philippines, and wanted to make money out of a bunch of religious mugs, you would choose Christianity too.

One thing it is NOT, is a new religion, as you assert in your opening post.

It is a huckster making a buck out of an old religion, from the people within it who ask just a few too few questions.

Sadly, this is one of the drawbacks, of any religion, in that it desensitizes people to the simple realities of the world in which they live. They are too trustworthy of people who claim to be more religious than themselves (that's the guilt bit), and too dumb to realize they are being taken for a ride.

Or should I say, more of a ride than usual.

Have a great day

Pericles, its not a secret, I add my ditto to what you said about that.

I say its a 'new' religion' because it sure is not Christianity. It does make use of it, just as Islam does, but Islam is not Christianity.

Yes, he is a fraud, but the worrisome thing is that many of his followers appear NOT to be dull of intellect nor poor. No, he is attracting the attention of seriously heavy duty politicians, and as I mentioned has had presidential visits.

There is a clear lesson in all this- personality cults are recognizable as frauds (just like some of the US Televangelists)by their self indulgent fruit.

That 'fruit' is personal advantage, the gaining of power and wealth and usually involves sexual advantage at some stage.

I sound a warning that ALL such people should be avoided, and that includes the religion of Mohammad, Mararaj Ji for the very same reason. http://www.ex-premie.org/papers/whoisgmj.htm

The only religious identity who I cannot include in that 'false religion' category is Buddhism. The "fruit" is not the same.
But Buddhism (true buddhism) is not a 'religion' it is a science they will tell you. My only gripes with Buddhism is that it seeks the enlightenment and victory over the flesh that can only be found in Christ, but without Christ. Also, it does not address the issue of sin, forgiveness and eternity. It solves all those issues with 'karma'... which of course leads us back to 'Is it sound and true'? But thats another issue

Bahai's are similar to Islam in building a parallel state within states. From their web site:

"A person becomes a Bahá’í by recognizing Bahá’u’lláh as the Messenger of God for this age and accepting to follow His laws and teachings and the administrative institutions"

So, again, it gets back to earthly power.

Off with his head, send him to the lions, deliver us from the scourge of boaz,that shining example of christian recitude, compassion and forgiveness, that wonderous lover of all mankind.
But please make it quick so we don't have to read more of his crap.

Maybe you could go over to his place with a sign in your back pocket? That'll show him.

HA HA bugsy
It could say "jesus saves bank comonwealth"
Imagine boaz as modern day crusader with his sign, wearing a white tshirt with a big red cross, cargo shorts with the pockets full of bibles, thongs with fish painted on them, a bandana around his head with "for jesus" printed on it, a cross in one hand and a swiss army knife in the other screaming "jesus loves me" as he storms the ramparts.
RATFFLMFAO

Alan and Bugsy

having a bit of a 'mock' at me is cool... no biggy. Pity you don't have anything to offer to people yourselves except MIUAUG. But you know, you should consider the response of my usual target to such antics.
Which is of course the very reason I target them. By all means hold me up to scorn.. nothing physical is going to happen to you. (from me)

I'm highlighting in this thread, the beginning of a religion which will quite likely gain a significant following. I draw your attention to the parallels with Mohammad's "cave experience" and his self doubt, which this so called pastor also experienced. (Though not in a cave).

Here is what Quranic Muslims say about 'mocking' the prophet or..insulting Islam.

Al Ghurabaa'UK

"The insulting of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) is something that the Muslims cannot and will not tolerate and the punishment in Islam for the one who does so is death. This is the sunnah of the prophet and the verdict of Islam upon such people, one that any Muslim is able [to]execute"

Now.. Quiboloy might not be as fervent as this, but he will be milking his flock and gaining power. The more power, the greater the following.. the more likely he will seek 'creative' solutions to his enemies. After all.. he considers himself 'Son of God' appointed for this time.
These are not small claims, they are equivalent to those of Mohammad.

You may consider such observations as fodder to 'make sport', well.. thats ok. Each 2 his own after all, its about choice.

I am exceptionally glad that there is no death penalty for mocking you.

Cult leaders come and go, the real test of his "religion" of course is how his followers will remember him and keep the faith when he dies....

Sound familiar? Of course Jesus' followers never really admitted that he died, or he did and came back and then left for more than 2000 years, or whatever. There are a myriad of smaller cults, just like this one that never make it, or at least fade away after the fraudulent nature of them is exposed. You seem to be panicking over something that is in all likelihood not a major threat, unless they are making WMDs? Do they have oil? oh noes!

Speaking of which, I must have read plenty about you and your "usual target" Boazy, but I have not seen you go off about Scientologists, not once. You probably have, I just haven't seen it. Why not more about them? Perhaps because they have no oil, just Cruise control?

What? As well as the three major and three minor groups, no mention of the more than 3000 other Christian Denominations in existence?

Surely they can't all be right.

One group must surely be True Christians and all the others simply misguided churchgoers and victims of money-and-power-hungry fraudsters.

Unlike Franciscan monks, at least the evangelical "happy clappers" are careful enough to hedge their bets and make some money on this side of life.

I bet the Romans had similar thoughts about an uppity bearded fellow who emerged a few thousand years ago.

Guys and gals, I know it is tempting to mock, and heaven knows there is a great deal of material here worthy of mockery, but let's try to focus on the main game.

This rant of Boaz's has little, if anything at all, to do with the credibility of some guy who, until this thread was started, had made nary a ripple on the consciousness of all but a tiny minority of fruitcakes.

Boaz - no doubt after months of diligent research - came across a tinpot evangelist from Hicksville, and found some aspects of his fruitcakedness that he could use to further his whack-a-mozzie campaign.

All other aspects, including his desperate forays into comparative religion (Buddhism, Boaz? you are scraping the barrel, aren't you?) are irrelevant. He has managed already to make a handful of gratuitous and quite specious swipes at Islam, and is sure to have a few more in store unless we stop him.

But ridicule, however tempting, is not the way to do it.

Simply follow the bouncing ball, and send to oblivion every one of his transparently manufactured "connections" between this particular Christian nutter, and Boaz' real target, the Islam of his fevered, paranoid and prolific imagination.

And Boaz, please don't pretend to be naive, it is not a good look and is beginning to become quite tiresome.

>>I say its a 'new' religion' because it sure is not Christianity.<<

He says it is Christianity. You say it's not.

Look at it logically.

He uses (as you kindly pointed out) all the right words. So under the "looks like, walks like, and quacks like" rule, it is Christianity.

Dressed up in a wig and a tutu, but unmistakeably Christianity.

Only under the Boaz law that states "it is only Christianity if I say it is", can you be correct.

But while everything about the man screams "scam", instead of putting him in the (already well-filled) nutty-evangelist basket, you decide to make a song and dance about him.

Admit it Boaz.

You simply found another stick, didn't you?

You have to break it down into syllables B_D
O-M(h)oM- I Am mad;; Mere Coincidence?

This is the internets Pericles and I will ridicule who I like, when I like. I will thank you to leave your logic out of it, as you know exactly how much good it will do.

Yo bugsy
Using logic against boaz is like giving an enema to a rock.

Thats funny, 'cos I've often felt that reading some of this crap is like getting an enema with one.

*grin*....I don't know why you blokes even bother with the mocking, at least Pericles puts a bit of effort into it.

But Let me tackle Alan/Bugsy's point about "logic".

If you can point out a logical inconsistency in what I wrote I'd be appreciative.

My main thesis is: "You can tell false religions by their fruit"

While that does not tell the full story, as in, some false religions are not just out to promote some individuals glory or expand his feifdom, like Buddhism. Their only problem is they are sincere..but sincerely wrong.

By that, I mean they have little foundation or basis in reality or history. Buddhist scriptures are very obscure. Bahai's are more about expanding the Bahai State, but it is based on democratic principles.

But shall we say 'false prophets' are clearly evident by the simple rule that they are in it for either the power, money or the sex or all of those.

I read today that Nigerian $$$ scams sucked in professionals.. doctors, teachers.. who continued to send money AFTER the Police told them it was a scam.....

Anything using Christianity...be it Islam or "pastor" Apollo, but which comes down on self glorification, agrandisement, involves murder, assassination, sexual privileges, wealth accumulation... those things are deserving of a call 'beware'.

After all.. intelligent people fell for the get rich quick Nigerian thing.

Pericles, did you fall for that Nigerian thing ? I wonder. You don't see the dangers of Islam, you just see me grabbing another 'stick' but this snake needs to be whacked repeatedly until it dies.

I see you whacking something Boaz, but it ain't a snake.

And I do not mock you for your benefit, Boaz, so you can get over yourself there. I do it so we can all have a bit of a laugh at your expense. If it doesn't affect you, then thats even better, we all win.

Internally, your arguments may be consistent but that doesn't mean anything because they all make one big assumption that is never proved. You also cannot accept the alternative objective viewpoint: All religions are actually "false". It's hilarious that you think that all these other religions " have little foundation or basis in reality or history". Man, keep it coming, you really don't see it do you? While you are so fervently against all these "scams", the real one is actually the one you've pulled on yourself

Well, you say this Boaz, but you don't actually mean it, do you?

>>My main thesis is: "You can tell false religions by their fruit"<<

This is diametrically opposite to what you have said when I and others have in the past pointed out the "fruit" of Christianity.

We cited the Jerusalem massacre, Oral Roberts, Adolf Hitler, paedophile priests, ducking witches, the Spanish Inquisition (nobody expected that one, did they?), the Borgia Popes, our friend here Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy, and a whole lot more.

The list is indeed extensive.

Given such "fruit", I an absolutely sure that this is not what you intended to say, was it?

However, I realize that you want it to be true, so that you can point your querulous finger at Muslim terrorists and say "by its fruit shall ye know, Islam is a false religion".

Unfortunately, there is a saying involving male and female geese, and some sauce.

It would also throw into some disarray your usual apologetics, Boaz.

You customarily employ a position that we have come to know as the Boaz defence. It goes "if they act like that, they can't be Christians".

Unfortunately, you cant use this with the "by its fruit shall ye know it" argument, just doesn't work. It's like trying to switch from Ruy Lopez to Sicilian half way through. Can't be done.

Also, you generally follow up with the Boaz two-step and do-si-do, which points out that all Muslims have to act like terrorists, because the Qur'an tells them to.

Unfortunately, with so many peaceable and civilized Muslims around, this one looks kinda silly too, if you apply "You can tell false religions by their fruit" to it.

It looks strongly as if this is a major error of judgment on your part, Boaz.

If you disagree, I'll be fascinated to hear an explanation.

Truly.

Now Boaz sit down in the corner and be QUIET for a while
God/gods do not exist.
They were created by man to explain the world around them and the events and disasters that befell them.
They were then exploited by those in power to gain and retain control over others.
Churches and ritual were created to fill the entertainment gap as there was no TV.
Modern day religous people follow relgion for various reasons,
Brain washed.
Need a physological crutch to get them through life.
Relish the community and social interraction that places of worship offer.
Now I don't give a monkeys bum who or what you worship as long as you don't shove it down my throat, you however Mr Little Boaz are a dangerous man, hopefully without power or means,you really should desist from this infernal diatribe of hatred against your coreligonists.
I suggest you follow some of the christian principles you profess to follow try John 13:34-35 , it is your type of behaviour over the last 1000 or so years that has got us where we are today, thanks a lot.

Let me put it this way:

religion

pumping archaic brains
toxic with superstition marching
down history cocksure
to the thumpty-thump
of old battle hymns
revelations and prayers

ii

i’d rather save a moderate applause
for a saner science
it’s little discoveries won
with reason and compassion
in the atmosphere
of a clear air

cheers

Ok..Pericles first.

Your feedback has helped, as feedback does in an electronic closed loop, by refining the original signal.
If I may, I should add some limits to my statement 'by their fruit'.
You have aptly pointed out, that if this is too broad, it has to include the historic manifestations going under the name of this or that faith. Fair point.
You are quite justified in pointing out the 'usual' list of horrific things done by historic Christendom after Constantine.

I would like to clarify the limit now, and restrict it to the "founder" and his immediate circle of disciples/followers. After all, it starts and ends there. We can only assess the behavior of 'followers' in terms of 'leaders'. The primary leader is the main focus. I think any fair minded person will agree to this?
Hitler.....Nazism.
Mohammad...Islam
Jesus....Christianity
Quiboloy....His own thing.

Alan, I sense your passion there, but you are simply "asserting" with more confidence than the issue can withstand. I point to Christ, in faith, and for faith. I believe it is reasonable to do so on the basis of the evidence, both intertnal and external to the NT. I fully appreciate that Pericles and yourself may disagree with this.

I draw your attention to Pauls own testimony.. "If Christ is not risen, we of all men are most to be pitied"

Regarding my rants.. you know what to do..'change the chanel' :) no-one is forcing you to watch.

All religions are false. It is amazing that in this day and age people still believe in such tripe. The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus settled the matter once and for all. He put it like this:

Either god wants to abolish evil and cannot
Or else he can but does not want to
Or he cannot and does not want to
Or he can and wants to

So, lets deal with these four propositions.

If god wants to remove evil and cannot, he's not omnipotent
If he can but does not want to, he's not benevolent
But if god can abolish evil and wants to
how then is it that evil exists and persists?
Since evil does exist and persist
and god is described as being both omnipotent annd benevolent
then god does not exist

Either god exists or doesn't exist. If he does exist, he's not a god worth worshipping, for he has either permitted a measureless amount
of unjust pain to continue, or else he directly wills this suffering upon us. God is either, irresponsibly negligent or downright sadistic.

peace

Why has God stopped talking to us, back in the olden days every time you turned around there it was, this big booming voice coming from heaven "don't eat the apple". Then it stopped Why?
Why doesn't god make the earth bigger? its gotten too small, and theres not enough water, shouldn't be too hard just make it a bit bigger, chuck in a continent in the temperate zone and some really nice big fresh water lakes, presto problem solved.
While he is at it, clean up the air , now thats not too much to ask surely.
I mean 6000 years and no renovations.
And how about some more books in the bible, heck its nearly 2000 years since we have had an update, and the world could do with some moral guidance.
I'm feeling a bit let down here, seems like we have been abandoned,I know we have been a bit naughty, what with all this sex and far too many wars and not feeding the poor, but no need to be vindictive just a few minor adjustments and we should be right for another couple of 1000 years, we will even bump off a few sheep if that makes you happy.
Looking forward to hearing from you I will stand out near the carport tomorrow at noon if you want to talk to me.
Regards Alan

I'm not sure I entirely understand your response, Boaz, so let me try to make my point again.

You said "My main thesis is: "You can tell false religions by their fruit"

To which I said, fair enough, but you have to accept that the fruit of Christianity includes the Crusades, Oral Roberts, Adolf Hitler, paedophile priests, ducking witches, the Spanish Inquisition, the Borgia Popes, Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy etc.

You now reply that you would like to "restrict it to the 'founder' and his immediate circle of disciples/followers".

But Boaz, I'm afraid you can't do that. The founder can hardly be described as fruit, can he? It is what is propagated by the founder that is fruit.

Do be reasonable.

You then further confuse matters with the statement:

>>We can only assess the behavior of 'followers' in terms of 'leaders'<<

But Boaz, this is impossible.

The behaviour of followers, the fruit as you describe it, can only be the result of the leader's example, not the cause of it. That would be utterly ludicrous, now wouldn't it?

So we are left with the simple conclusion that the depradations of the fruit, e.g. the Crusades, Oral Roberts, Adolf Hitler, paedophile priests, ducking witches, the Spanish Inquisition, the Borgia Popes, Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy et al, are the direct result of Jesus' teaching.

But we know that cannot be the case.

So, in your own terms, Christianity can best be described as a whole bunch of people - the Crusades, Oral Roberts, Adolf Hitler, paedophile priests, ducking witches, the Spanish Inquisition, the Borgia Popes, Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy etc - making it up as they go.

Seems the only way to reconcile the facts, don't it?

You are quite right about those groups 'making it up as they went'.. spot on. And clearly they were doing things outside the scope of behavior laid down by the founder/foundation documents.

That 'is' my point mate.

When we see horrific behavior which MATCHES the founder and foundation documents, we can judge this as genuine 'fruit'

Fruit, comes from the root. But like my pear tree, it was grafted onto a wild rootstock, and consequently, 'strange' looking growth occurs coming up from around the bottom of the tree, stemming from that wild rootstock. That weird growth has long sharp spikes.

So, this fits in with false religion. If the rootstock is the wrong kind, there will be a mixture of 'pleasing' and 'dangerous' growth.

This illustration falls down in one area, we know that the "wild" rootstock in fact makes the 'intended' fruit tree more robust. But leaving that aside, there are some similarities.

May I refer you to this discussion from the ABC, by a former Muslim, on the issue of apostasy, and Islam in general, and you may observe the similarities to my 'rootstock' illustration. (The same applies to Quiloboy by the way)

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/relrpt/stories/s892997.htm

He includes:

"I saw a well-equipped invading (Muslim) army indiscriminately killing millions of civilians and raping 200,000 women."

In Christian circles, we heard during that war that many Muslims were leaving the faith due to the unspeakable horrors perpetrated by Muslims. Ibn Warraq is one of them.
Note his mention of the connection between the 'root' and the fruit.

I'm currently away from home, in beautiful (and wet!) North Queensland, with sporadic internet access, but I'm delighted to see that our cyber-missionary BS artist is being kept suitably occupied by his intellectual betters in my absence.

As for this -

Bugsy: "I see you whacking something Boaz, but it ain't a snake."

That's almost too funny. If I splutter more coffee over my laptop once more I'll hold you guys responsible!

Boazy, has anybody ever told you to stop it lest you go blind?

Now you have totally obfuscated your original statement, let's take another look at it.

>>My main thesis is: "You can tell false religions by their fruit"<<

But now you claim that fruit from the Christian tree can only be so-called if it is somehow "pedigreed".

Yet as you point out, there exist (non-metaphorical) tree variants that still are classified along with the original.

I know we are veering off into Platonism here, but let us assume for a moment that there is an "ideal" apple tree. The fruit are "ideal" apples, and only propagate further versions of themselves.

Let's call these Jesus apples.

In your view of the universe, these are the only fruit that may be termed "apples". Anything else - Cox's Orange Pippins, Fuji, Pink Lady or whatever - are not apples, but "false apples".

I know it will come as a surprise to you, but when the rest of the world looks at these, they first see "apple", then the variant. They do not say to themselves "well, they are not Jesus apples, so they cannot be apples".

Which one they pick, of course, depends on whether they are in favour of messianic preachers, bloodthirsty mediaeval knights or sex-starved priests, but the "rootstock" is the same.

So we look at the fruit and say "apple".

We look at the Crusades, Oral Roberts, Adolf Hitler, paedophile priests, ducking witches, the Spanish Inquisition, the Borgia Popes, Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy etc and say "Christian".

Simple, really.

I'm not surprised that you walked quickly away from this aspect of your analogy:

>>This illustration falls down in one area, we know that the "wild" rootstock in fact makes the 'intended' fruit tree more robust<<

Forget the strengthening bit for a moment, and concentrate on the other side of the coin, which is what happens to purebred stock - of any species - after generations of inbreeding?

After a while, their resistance to infection diminishes, until they become a mere caricature of their original selves.

Over-introspection will do that to you, Boaz.

Open up to new ideas before it is too late.

*smiles*....Pericles, using work time for OLO ? :) I guess ur also ur own boss eh.

Please don't spend toooo much time on the intricate details of everything I say, as it will obscure the major point....which I will simply re-iterate here.

Religions.

-Founders, foundation documents= 'standard by which all followers may be judged'.

If the founder is flawed, the religion will be flawed no matter what.
A faith which has a sound beginning can be corrupted, but a faith which is corrupt by nature, will simply continue being corrupt. Even if it experienced a 'fundamental revival' a ..back to basics revival, it would still come back to the corrupt foundation.

In the case of Christ, if we go 'back to basics and fundamentals' we will find the Master washing the feet of the disciples, healing the sick, berating his followers when they edged towards violence and self glorification.

We can evaluate Quiboloy also in terms of the foundation he claims.
Does he emulate Jesus ? No, clearly he does not.

Osama bin Ladin, does he emulate Mohammad ? yes.. clearly he does.

Here is a most interesting story
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2007/01/136765_comment.php

"NAZI converts to Islam" then... read the story to see how this once 'violent aggressive' Nazi, is now a violent and aggressive Muslim.

"Myatt is reportedly the author of a fascist terrorist handbook and a former leader of the violent far-right group Combat 18. But now — in his mid-50s and sporting a red, bushy beard — he subscribes to radical Islamist views"

"Radical" ? "May Allah destroy them" (Quran 9:30).. kind of says it all

CJ.. For a bloke who glories in his position at one of Australias universities in the social science dept, that last post was a tad whacky and unbefitting.

Does Jesus juice come from Jesus apples?

And Boazy: if you are the "fruit" of your religion, isn't your argument self defeating?

I guess that's the difficult bit, Boaz.

>>Please don't spend toooo much time on the intricate details of everything I say, as it will obscure the major point<<

If it were the "intricate detail", it wouldn't be a problem.

But you contradict yourself at the top level, not in the detail - as in:

>>My main thesis is: "You can tell false religions by their fruit"<<

The "major points" you make are always the same.

"Christianity is what I, Boaz, define it to be"

"Christianity is good, every other religion is false"

"And while I'm on the subject, did I mention how evil Islam is?"

Unfortunately, the arguments you put forward in support of these statements are riddled with errors of logic, observation and fact.

It is sometimes difficult to maintain a sense of humour in the face of such blind intransigence, but so far I've been able to see the funny side of someone who can only respond to logic with dogma.

And when you so clearly lose the plot and make such utterly fatuous claims as "My main thesis is: 'You can tell false religions by their fruit'", it's actually quite fun.

Have a great day.

This is all getting so confusing.

I'll try and summarise BD's points as I see them
- By their fruit you shall know them (well the rootstock really because there are both good and bad mossies and christains so you have to go back to the rootstock).
- Islam has a wild rootstock with a tame trunk grafted on by some. You can tell it's a bad tree because of the shoots coming up from the rootstock.
- Christianity has a tame rootstock and has a bad trunk grafted on by some.
- BD's pear tree has a wild rootstock with a tame trunk grafted on because as everybody knows you get a healthier tree and better fruit that way.
- This really, really wasn't just another swipe at Islam disguised as a discussion about a new false religion (BD crosses his heart and hopes he doesn't die). True, no really etc.
- CJ hit a bit to close to the mark on that last one.

R0bert

Rob...not a bad summary mate. Glad you caught most of it.

Pericles you said:

"Unfortunately, the arguments you put forward in support of these statements are riddled with errors of logic, observation and fact."

That's a nice soundbite, but unfortunately its not quite right.
A casual observation of most of my posts will reveal considerable effort has been expended in determining the actual facts on which to base my premises.

I've demonstrated over and over that I am YES being selective, but not taking things out of context.

Quran 9:30 is a prime example.
So, in this example. (probably the single most important) I see no errors of
-Logic
-Observation
-Fact.

if you see any, please outline them to 'finally destroy' my credibility :)

Today I offer another angle on false religions. The common theme usually present is 'What is in it for ME' but then, if we simply blathered on about the 'me' factor people might get wise and see it as one of those things which "if it seems too good 2 b true is probably is" so, you have to give a balance of the 'alluring' with the 'responsible'.

Here is a classic example from the Hadith collection called
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishkat_al-Masabih

Notice which hadith is selected for headline inclusion in the Wiki article?

"He is not a perfect believer, who goes to bed full and knows that his neighbour is hungry. [Mishkat Al-Masabih 2/424]"

yep.. has a good ring to it.

In the SAME book there is this:

"The Holy Prophet (Mohammad) said:The believer will be given tremendous strength in paradise for sexual intercourse. It was questioned "Oh Prophet of Allah, can he do that?" He said "He will be given the strength of 100 persons" 4:42:24 2536

I'm not able to verify personally that last one. It is not out of character with verifiable hadith of a higher rank where Mohammad himself is described as having the 'sexual strength of 30 men'.

Bottom line, when the 'root' is about sex, we should not be surprised if the fruit has a certain flavor.

Oh c'mon boaz
If you be a good christian, and ask for forgivenes, as soon as you turn up your toes , zap straight upstairs, if thats not about ME! what is may I ask?.
You keep ranting about fact , truth and evidence there is not one religon that can produce any of these three,
even Moses tablets you lost, yeah right,the only concrete (pun intended) bit of evidence you ever had and you lost it, likewise the ark of the covenant, seems like a lot of carelessness going on here.
All religons are based on faith and faith alone,you follow and you get your reward in heaven, nirvana , afterlife, whatever, its all about ME superfically, what its really about is power and money, don't worry about this life , thats your lot, your reward is in the next life, what a con.
Concise Oxford Dictionary
Faith = spiritual apprehension of divine truth APART from PROOF.

Belly,

"America is not the only country in the world continuing mans habit of manufacturing Gods."

Very true in time as well as space. H.G. Wells, as an historian, refers to ancient Alexandia as a "god factory". There are at least five in the Christian bible alone. Moreover, cargo cults have existing since the times of exploration not only to the commonly cited New Guinea example.

Over the past six months in several threads [Sellick] I have tried draw religionists attention to the Archetecture of Theocrasia in the ancient Middle East, the cults, the various interpretations and the interreligion borrowings: A creation story, a message from a god, laws/lessons, consequences for non-believers and sacafices are typically highlighted. I have made little impression.

Moreover, the way a religion progresses from an idea to a group of cults, standardisation of the cults and the formation of an institutionalised religion [creed and doctrine, is often avoided by a priesthood with a stake in worshipers "indweling" Polanyi in a performance, rather than study religious content in a forensic manner, as might an anthropologist ask is Homer's Troy, VI or VIIa?
This approach could certainly be adopted for the debates leading to Nicaea. Herein, claims about divinity and godheads etcetera need to be revisited.

Religion has been a huge business from the days of Ur (Sumer) to US, Al Sharpton. That is, managing the Land on behalf of God (Sumer) until Rolex watches and corporate jets and bishops' palaces. In the US, today, it is also interesting how the Religious Empire is handed to the eldest son, suggesting their some special about familalism and having testicles, when it comes to teaching religion. Not a fisherman's shoe to be seen.

BD, you really do make this difficult :( .

When you bought your pear tree why did you choose one with the wild rootstck and the tame trunk grafted on rather than looking for one with a tame rootstock and a wild trunk grafted on (might be hard to find one of those)?

R0bert

Boaz, you offer an interesting challenge...

>>A casual observation of most of my posts will reveal considerable effort has been expended in determining the actual facts on which to base my premises<<

The first thing I notice is that you are already firmly on the defensive.

You invite only a "casual" observation, for example.

This is understandable caution on your part. As we have consistently found, if you so much as scrape the surface of your bluster, it falls immediately apart.

And as soon as this becomes obvious, you make dismissive remarks such as "don't spend toooo much time on the intricate details of everything I say...", and walk away.

Also, you invite scrutiny of only "most of my posts..."

That presumably ensures that any evidence that comes to light that shows your casual disregard of logic, observation and fact, will be categorized as coming from sources outside the term "most"

Ingenious.

Taking the nearest example - "My main thesis is: 'You can tell false religions by their fruit'", what does this tell us about your adherence to logic, observation and fact?

The logic, as I pointed out earlier, falls at the first fence. You are simply using a version of the old fallacy "post hoc, ergo propter hoc".

Observation? As you readily admit, you only see what you want to see... "I've demonstrated over and over that I am YES being selective..." So you choose to include the evil you see in Islam, but reject that which also occurs in Christianity.

Fact? Having selected a fact - say, the existence of a couple of verses of a scripture - you proceed to draw your own inferences from them, and describe those as facts too.

There is no factual content in "You can tell false religions by their fruit", only your unique mixture of flawed logic and skewed observation.

Your obsession is that you see evil in Islam everywhere you look, predominantly because it is not Christianity. This blinds you to the fact that your comments here are pure, one-eyed, inflammatory rabble-rousing, unadulterated with logic, clear observation or verifiable fact.

alanpoi,

--Rocks of Ages--

The story of Moses is about the Law being received by Moses from a tribal volcano god of the Council of El [aside: Psalm 82 is an intersting read. Different godhead to Nicaea]. The idea was copied from earlier Middle Eastern myth [just a stone throw away]. Way before Moses, the Epic Poem, the Righteous Suffer notes, Shamash [a sun cum wisdom god] felt it only fair that Laws were required, if, the gods were to deal justly with men. [seems fair to me] Consequently, Shamash gave Hammurabi his divine Laws. [Frankfort in McNeill)

I will let you in on a secret... There is an Eleventh Commandment, "Thou Shall Not Commit Plagiary". Moses hid that one. Hence, we find theocrasiac borrowings throughout the OT and NT and into the current era.

God's/Gods' laws, carved in stone, or, religionist lapidary

"Pastor 'Apollo' C. Quiboloy, in all likelihood, is a fraud in exactly the same way as those noisy American evangelists you see pop up every so often."

Yep. The Jews didn't allow statues of Apollo in The Temple. Can one really accept Apollo as the name of the leader a Jewish later-sect?

The whole Judea-Christian/Islamist/ Zionist gobbledegook of religion and their claims to origins pales into insignificance, when looked at in light of the latest archealogical research in certain parts of India, where what is believed to have been a university has just been dug up, estimated age: 'about 60,000 years...' Daah....Jesus...

Hammerlet,

God(s) subsist in fictions that do exist, like any artform. Audiences "indwell" in the performance. Structurally, Yehwah and Micky Mouse subsist. Alternatively, the humans, Josuah Son of Joseph [aka Jesus]and Alexandros of Troy [aka Paris] may have lived, like us.
[Well no like us, no TV]

Point taken Oliver. Perhaps we are prone to fiction i.e historic metaphors, something to live up to, to measure ourselves against, morally, ethically and so on. Myths all have implicit qualities that reflect the higher and sometimes lower aspects of human nature. Perhaps we need to find a new (false) religion more suited to our species at a time when we are on the verge of travelling beyond our solar system (star trek) mapping the gene and so on. To attempt to squash expanding human consciousness into the current models, is like trying to travel to the moon on the back of a cow. It won't work. Considering the mud men mentality of today's crop of world leaders, the future doesn't look bright, or as George Bush recently put it in his now famous quote: It will take some time to restore chaos...

Hammerlet,

I would like to introduce you to particle physics- which delves into Quantum physic theory.

This is not some environmental Mohammadism; it is plane and simple Science at work; and principled theory
Note the ratio to Particles that constitute matter, and the Down particle constituent, that constitutes Anti-matter
Note the quantum dimension theory.

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast123/lectures/lec07.html.

Then if you enjoyed that, then search for; “Pathcurve Vortex Generators”
The message is not always delivered in tact or articulated as well as it could be , but it is time to realise there are some things we can not explain- but that should not indicate to any that there is a void or vacuum that needs others to get sucked into like a black hole you will never escape from.
Too much antimatter is not good!
That sounded cryptic enough.

Oliver, As I have pointed out to boaz, to which he didn't deign to reply,
there is already an 11th commandment John 13:34-35, one which he would be well advised to follow

Very interesting Mr All. What makes living in the world so inspiring to an atheist such as I, is that there is SO MUCH mystery, Life itself is a mystery. But would you want it any other way? Not me. Science 'without mud men intervention' is the key to opening up mystery after mystery ad infinitum. If the human species still exists in five hundred years, and have 'evolved' I'm sure they'd laugh at our stupid little tribal gods

Boazy, you old fruit - it seems that you've taken your tortured analogy so far out on a limb that it's well and truly rooted :)

A minor correction, if I may: I am not employed by a university, in Australia or elsewhere. Nor am I a student of one.

Then again, as this thread so abundantly demonstrates, truth and accuracy aren't your strong points, are they?

Well boazy old chap seems you have been pruned, selectively logged , clear felled and now you are well and truly rooted, old fruit.

Yep, that's one branch of Boaz's anti-Islam campaign that withered on the vine.

But I don't suppose he's twigged yet.

Or that he will bough under the pressure.

But I think we might safely leaf it there for the time being, buds.

He'll be back, our ol' whack-a-mozzie, just wait and see.

This whole thread has gone a bit pear-shaped.

I can't believe noone really commented on this:

"Bottom line, when the 'root' is about sex, we should not be surprised if the fruit has a certain flavor."

That's pure comedy gold! It works for me on so many levels.

DB,

What did the historical Jesus do that justifies the attention given him? In histiory, there have been many martyrs and advocates of not being affixed of the Law above fundamentals and spoke of morals & humanist values? What is truly exceptual [unlike no other] about the historical Jesus? His values existed before and after his life in history.

Thanks.

O.

alanpoi,

Can't argue with that; good advice too. Yep: You have tagged the eleventh commandment. :-)

The twelfth commandment ...

What is significant I posit about Islam vesus Christianity. Is that for many Muslims, is the Western Englightenment. However, circa. the tenth century the Arabs were more advanced than the West in science, liberalism and tolerance. Yet, the Muslims seem to have regressed. Luckily, the yoke of religionism was loosened as secvular science started to prove some real understanding.

The above said, I feel historically relihion has performed an important organistaional role taking us from tribalism to the monarchical state. Perhaps, country states are heterogeneous. between religious and secular. Globalisation will be a challenge. In the next century or two, we have a choice between global secularisation and major conflicts between the monotheists. Further, the West might not monopolise the agenda. Thus, the outcome is unclear.

It would be good to see a fully secularised world by say 2300. Else, savage disharmonies will continue, continue, and, continue.

Love does not need a God.



O.

DB,

Can you please see earlier post? Please articulate those characateristics which made Jesus beyond special, unique, in his human capacity; not merely a highly actualised person.

DB and All,

The silence suggests that DB cannot differentiate Jesus. This would seem problematic for relionigists.

TEAM.. :) blessed are those who can extract the nth degree of humor from a simple analogy !

Good on ya's all.. I never thought a simple story about a fruit tree could being so many smiles.

Alan..sorry if it seemed I was not responding mate.... not deliberate.

Pericles is in good pedantic form.. but I need to 'counsel' him on one point.

"So you choose to include the evil you see in Islam, but reject that which also occurs in Christianity."

Now.. P, it is you who is loose on things here.

1/ I choose to see the evil in the 'fundamenal documentary foundation' of Islam..which reports the behavior of Mohammad and sets down guidelines for human society which I find astonishingly horrible.
2/ "Christianity" simply does not contain such things, in terms of the documentary foundation, or the founder. CHRISTENDOM as a social historical force, definitely has a bad prawn or 3 among the good ones.

But I'm not comparing 'the historical unfolding of Islam' with the same thing in Christianity...I'm drawing comparisons between the founder, foundation and early outworking of those things.

TOPIC... but in this particular case...I'm showing just how whacky and megalomaniacal can some people be in the name of religion, and how we must constantly be on guard over things said to us which demand our alleigance.

Quiboloy is a very STARK example of a man (Like many, but not all, Televangelists)who has inverted the faith for his own personal benefit.. glory, authority, even claiming SONSHIP to God in a way which places he himself at the very HEAD of all things Christian in this world.
If he said "God has called me to serve the poor, please share in this ministry by your giving" ok... but when he claims all authority and RICHES on earth..... aaah.. he needs to be verbally hit for six.

Google him.

"The Appointed Son of God".....(indeed)..
"the Holy Father declared to the whole world that He has found His residence here on earth—His Son, in the person of Pastor Apollo C. Quiboloy" (Shudder)

BD -
"1/ I choose to see the evil in the 'fundamenal documentary foundation' of Islam..which reports the behavior of Mohammad and sets down guidelines for human society which I find astonishingly horrible.
2/ "Christianity" simply does not contain such things, in terms of the documentary foundation, or the founder. CHRISTENDOM as a social historical force, definitely has a bad prawn or 3 among the good ones."

Your continued refusal to accept the contents of the OT as being relevant would suggest that you don't accept that the Jesus of the NT is one with the father of the OT. Not what I would have expected from your stance on other theological issues.

Is the Jesus of the NT one with the god of the OT?
Did the Jesus of the NT reject or fulfill the actions and decrees of the god of the OT?

Your continued avoidance of the issues around the god of the OT by pointing to the NT does not fit with what most christains would claim about Jesus and the OT.

R0bert

Robert,

Good comment. What Boaz likes to ignore is that the OT arguments were used by followers of Christianity to kill others (Hitler and even the infallible popes like Urban II).There are no good or evil religious practices Boaz there is only good and bad people. Religion like everything mirrors what they have inside.

To get the latest on Australian Muslim activities in the society, please visit : www.Affinity.org.au

Peace,

Rob, still grinding that axe:) careful or you will have no blade left sooon.

Ok.. Jesus of NT and God of the OT.. "are they the same"?

YES... without question.

Why then, does the Lord Jesus not manifest the 'judgemental' attitude of the Father with the enemies of Christ, as the Father did to the enemies of Israel.

Lets be very clear. God, did not generalize the idea of 'mass killings' of enemies of Israel. There were some specific incidents where God ordered mass executions/judgement 100% men, women, children, animals. All I can say, is that if you read about the incidents, it might make some more sense. If you read about them, and it does NOT make sense, then there is little I can do for you.

SALVATION HISTORY. For reasons known only to God Himself, there has been a plan of human redemption, which began with the historic people of Israel, and culminated in the coming of Christ Jesus.
While you only see bad things in the Old Testament, I happen so see the same love which is manifest in Christ. I ALSO see the hand of justice and judgement as outlined above. I am on the same page as Paul in trying to put it all together to my own 100% human satisfaction (which of course has been conditioned by MANY diverse ideas and forces) I just say

20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this.

You are trying to wrap eternity up in a little human napkin.. its impossible.

Please don't ask me again about God in the Old Testament and the Jesus of the New.. ask God Himself, while reading Romans 9 VERY carefully... you will come away from that either with a hardened or softened heart.. but the answer is right there..

F.H. I suppose somewhere out there is a cult which cuts off their hand or gouges out their eyes each time they sin..... get me? :)

PS. your_view on Madhi Bray?

F.H. don't forget about Imam Mahdi Bray....k..

I went to the Affinity site.

Interesting. A couple of things I note.

1/ they gave a small donation towards re-building the Church burnt down by ...... (they said 'vandals' but given it was after the Cronulla riots)..well.. u can figure that one out.

2/ They presented food to the Christians.

3/ Did they ACCEPT food from the Christians? :) aah..now that might be a different story eh.

4/ There some strange contradictions.. Churches ? Christians are cursed remember... "Allah's curse be on them"...for believing Christ is the Son of God.. did the Tongan/Auburn Church suddenly put that belief aside?

I can't see the point of 'inter-FAITH' get togethers. I prefer just to be good citizens and if we see a Muslim citizen in trouble, then we help them no matter what and hopefully likewise. But why try to bring the religions together ?
How nice it would be that mosques and Churches never said bad things about followers of another faith.. but is this possible?

Madhi Bray is coming soon (unless my letters to the AFP and Immig have their desired effect) and this man has led demonstrations which call for the slaughter of Jews.. the ICV who sued Danny and Daniel for SAYING that such things will be done by Muslims INVITED the bloke... duh.. It makes you wonder mate.

You see.. no matter how well intentioned you or your friends are, you don't need to worry about us 'hating or harming' you.. we don't/wont -its the likes of Mahdi Bray who are doing the hating of PEOPLE in contrast to say myself who is ranting against the IDEAS in the faith.

Show me Muslims from Affinity who will happily partake of snacks prepared by Christians (no pork) at a Christian gathering, and I'll call that 'progress' :)

BD - "Please don't ask me again about God in the Old Testament and the Jesus of the New" when you stop pretending that it is Ok to judge other faiths (eg Islam) by their scriptures but refuse to have your own judged by it's scriptures I'll stop asking that question. Quite simple.

"While you only see bad things in the Old Testament, I happen so see the same love which is manifest in Christ. I ALSO see the hand of justice and judgement as outlined above." - while you only see bad things in the Quran perhaps muslims see love, justice and judgement.

For the record I don't only see bad things in the OT, it is a mixture just as the Quran appears to be. Muslims can point to verses which paint it in a good light, you and others point out the bad bits. Each sees what they want to see.

I don't really care much what either set of scriptures says, the bit that matters is how people choose to live. Clearly some muslims use their faith as an excuse for wrong doing but I think that the vast majority choose to live peaceful lives (within the constraints of the society they live in). Same for christains, I just get more exposure to their wrongdoers.

What concerns me about your actions is that they may further alienate muslims who feel on the outer anyway. Rather than building bridges you build seige towers. You create and promote the conditions that turn people to extremism.

Your comments about Imam Mahdi Bray are full of irony because the things you accuse him of seem so much like what you appear to be doing.

I don't have much concern about running out of blade, you seem to be determined to keep on feeding material in to grind.

R0bert

Rob.. well.. now that I'm having a break. I can provide you with more grinding material.

Our dialogue would be enhanced if you looked much more closely at what you say. I don't say that out of arrogance, I'll show you what I mean in a second. Me.. yep..I also need to look more closely at some things I report on.. ok..

Lets look at a couple of things you said.

1. "Judging by Scriptures". Rob.. do you see a difference between God ordering the Israelites to exterminate ONE people (in this example) for purposes of specific judgement for what THOSE people had done....
and a general cursing of another faith for its core beliefs for all time? One is a historical event.. a 'once only'.. not a general principle or command to Israel regarding their enemies or our enemies.
You might disagree with Gods order.. or.. consider it nothing more than a human invention to justify a slaughter. Either way, u cannot draw out of this a 'generalized command/principle' for all time.
THAT....is the difference.

2/ "Each (Muslim/Christian) can find good bits and bad bits." in the others faith document. Lets look deeper at this.
I can find such things in the Quran which suggest Christians are closer than anyoneelse(besides Muslims) to Allah. But the weight of evidence/verses is abundantly and unambiguously clear that anyone who 'joins partners' with Allah is condemned eternally. Guess who that means?
In other words.. "close...but no cigar". Sure.. you Christians are 'closer' than the pagans, but you still miss and you are cursed and Allah is going to destroy you anyway.

Now.. here is my problem. "I" ..am a Christian. (no..don't go there :).. and as such, I am the specific named target of wrath both human and divine according to Islamic scriptures and traditions.
This would not bug me if it were not for the unsettling fact that Islam is always directing it's energies to building a STATE, which is based on RELIGIOUS laws, and.. having LIVED under some of those laws, I find this irksome.

Boaz,

“They gave a small donation towards rebuilding a church”…
It’s the meaning not how much Boaz.

“Did they ACCEPT food from the Christians?”
If you know anything about islam as you claim then you should know Muslims are allowed to eat what the ‘people of the book’ eats except from what we were banned from (ie pork, blood, etc..)

“I can't see the point of 'inter-FAITH' get togethers. I prefer just to be good citizens and if we see a Muslim citizen in trouble, then we help them no matter what and hopefully likewise. But why try to bring the religions together?”
You still need a degree of dialogue to understand each other specially when there is fear and hate mongers (like, God forbid, people other than you;) ).

“Madhi Bray”
As I suspected I googled the guy and he is a director of Politics in the NAIA. People have religious views and political opinions. If you want to quote people who blend religion and politics that’s your problem.

“Show me Muslims from Affinity who will happily partake of snacks prepared by Christians (no pork) at a Christian gathering, and I'll call that 'progress' :)”
Regardless of Affinity almost all Muslims I know socialise and eat with people of other religious convictions including myself. That’s a weird statement; you never entertained an Aussie Mossie guest before?

"close...but no cigar"
Why do you need two cigars?
You don’t believe the Quran is God’s word nor Mohammed prophet hood and nobody wants you to. No Muslim I know cares or talks about your faith or asking you to recognise us with a ‘cigar’.
Each has a responsibility to a) investigate and b) take a decision and c) stick with it.
We are comfortable with our cigar, stick with yours

BD, last time I checked your faith made me a target of divine wrath because I do not happen to belong to it. I'll conceed that the NT does not appear to command christains to beat up on non-christains but somehow throughout history christains have found ways to get that meaning out of it anyway. The last book of the NT certainly suggests some wrath in store for those who happen to be living at the time.

There seem to be a number of places where the god of the old testament slaughtered or ordered slaughtered people, the first born of the egyptians, the flood comes to mind (can't get much more general than that).

You duck and weave and look for excuses as to why you don't think the bible has some of the same stuff as the Quran but if you are not looking to defend it your excuses are just that excuses.

R0bert