+- Las Venturas Playground (https://forum.sa-mp.nl)
+-- Forum: Miscellaneous (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: General Talk (https://forum.sa-mp.nl/forum-24.html)
+--- Thread: [Serious Discussion] Religion (/thread-26936.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Gladiat0R - 05-22-2011
Did you ever asked yourself why there are terrorists in the world? I really would like to know how the world would be without USA.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - striker - 05-22-2011
You forgot China too
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Gladiat0R - 05-22-2011
There are some more but i dont want to name em.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - SAFC - 05-23-2011
(05-21-2011, 05:14 PM)0Target0 link Wrote: One question, do you believe the press if they report about a story? Do you think different people report the events differently?
If something happened 2000 years ago, will the real story be told or will different people make different stories out of it? At that time a lot of people couldn't read so the story will have led it's own life. People love spectacular things.
The press often exaggerate to gain more public interest. So no, I don't always believe what I read in the news papers, unless there is evidence and consistency. You can pick up three different newspapers from the same day, and each of them will have a different take on the same story. Why? Because they don't really know the facts, they're making it up from rumors.
(05-21-2011, 04:48 PM)SAFC link Wrote: Here are a few questions I'd like to ask directed to Christians concerning the Bible, and it's contradictions.
This is concerning the resurrection.
Who went to the tomb and first discovered Jesus wasn't in the tomb?
Was it discovered in the early morning before sunrise, or after sunrise?
Who rolled the stone away from the tomb?
Was there anything or anyone in the tomb? If so who or what?
Who told the disciples to go to Galilee?
I'm interested to see what answers I get, and if they differ from each other.
Are any Christians or people with good knowledge of the four gospels in the Bible willing to answer any of these?
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - 0Target0 - 05-24-2011
(05-22-2011, 05:38 PM)Gladiat0R link Wrote: Did you ever asked yourself why there are terrorists in the world? I really would like to know how the world would be without USA.
It's just Bush who saw terrorists everywhere.
There used to be a lot more terrorism in Europe 70-80. Rote armee fraktion, Illich Ramirez Sanchez...all few of small 'gangs' in Belgium who killed innocent shoppers and their target...
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - ELABD - 05-24-2011
[quote pid='27316' dateline='1306082283']
Did you ever asked yourself why there are terrorists in the world? I really would like to know how the world would be without USA.
[/quote]
terrorism isn't related to any relegion tell me wat do u call it when the isrealian army kill unguilty phalastenians?! Wat do u call it when the american army kill unguilty peaple in iraq ?! Thats the real terrorism not wat media is talking about
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - Silent_Bob - 05-25-2011
(05-24-2011, 10:25 PM)ELABD link Wrote: terrorism isn't related to any relegion tell me wat do u call it when the isrealian army kill unguilty phalastenians?! Wat do u call it when the american army kill unguilty peaple in iraq ?! Thats the real terrorism not wat media is talking about
the very definition of terrorism is "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce", that is what the media talks about, sure most of what they say is probably fake or a stretched truth but it is what they talk about. When the U.S. drops a bomb on a city intending to kill someone that is a terrorist( i.e. Bin Laden) if they kill some innocent bystanders in the process it is sad yes but it isn't exactly terrorism (this is an example, this may not be what you were talking about). But yes, when an American soldier lines up a bunch of innocent people and shoots them that is an act of terrorism and as sad as it is it does happen and I guess in a way it makes them a bit of a hypocrite.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - [SAE]Grim - 05-25-2011
(05-24-2011, 10:25 PM)ELABD link Wrote: terrorism isn't related to any relegion
Haha, right.
Dumbest shit I've read in a while.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - SAFC - 05-25-2011
Quote:Grim link=topic=28190.msg388913#msg388913 date=1306306210]
Haha, right.
Dumbest shit I've read in a while.
Dumbest reply I've read in a while.
Religion doesn't incite terrorism, it's the terrorists themselves who claim their actions are justifiable by the religion they claim to follow.
The teachings of Islam aren't of terrorism, hate, descrimination, violence, and manipulation. It's of repentace, forgiveness, peace, honesty, and purity, to mention just s few.
It's also specific on treatment and behavior towards other religions. Not teaching to hate or be violent or ill mannered towards them, but behaving towards them as if they were also Muslim. The exceptions are specified, such as. If there is conflict between a Muslim and non-Muslim, a Muslim is to side with the Muslim, aslong as the Muslim isn't going against Islamic teachings.
The media are widely responsible for the linking of religion and terrorism. It's a shame so many people these days take the media information as fact, they're a business out to make money, so they need to make their product as eye catching as they can within the law.
Take for example, football. The champions league final is this weekend, some Man Utd fans arrive at Wembley and spot some Barcelona fans. The Man Utd fans start attacking the barca fans, and chanting pro Man Utd songs.
The media report would call them Man Utd fans, but also define those supporters as hooligans, saying they're not real football fans. They make distinctions between Man Utd fans and hooligans interested only in violence, because they know that it's the truth. Yet when it comes to terrorist who associate themselves with Islam, they'll not mention that these terrorists aren't true Muslims, they'll call them Muslim extremists.
There's nothing in Islam to support the terrorist actions, yet somehow the media say it's extreme Islam.
Terrorists are terrorists no matter what religion they claim to follow. They're not true followers of the religion, more like wolves in sheeps clothing.
Re: [Serious Discussion] Religion - ELABD - 05-25-2011
(05-25-2011, 09:37 AM)SAFC link Wrote: Dumbest reply I've read in a while.:x can't say more
Religion doesn't incite terrorism, it's the terrorists themselves who claim their actions are justifiable by the religion they claim to follow.
The teachings of Islam aren't of terrorism, hate, descrimination, violence, and manipulation. It's of repentace, forgiveness, peace, honesty, and purity, to mention just s few.
It's also specific on treatment and behavior towards other religions. Not teaching to hate or be violent or ill mannered towards them, but behaving towards them as if they were also Muslim. The exceptions are specified, such as. If there is conflict between a Muslim and non-Muslim, a Muslim is to side with the Muslim, aslong as the Muslim isn't going against Islamic teachings.
The media are widely responsible for the linking of religion and terrorism. It's a shame so many people these days take the media information as fact, they're a business out to make money, so they need to make their product as eye catching as they can within the law.
Take for example, football. The champions league final is this weekend, some Man Utd fans arrive at Wembley and spot some Barcelona fans. The Man Utd fans start attacking the barca fans, and chanting pro Man Utd songs.
The media report would call them Man Utd fans, but also define those supporters as hooligans, saying they're not real football fans. They make distinctions between Man Utd fans and hooligans interested only in violence, because they know that it's the truth. Yet when it comes to terrorist who associate themselves with Islam, they'll not mention that these terrorists aren't true Muslims, they'll call them Muslim extremists.
There's nothing in Islam to support the terrorist actions, yet somehow the media say it's extreme Islam.
Terrorists are terrorists no matter what religion they claim to follow. They're not true followers of the religion, more like wolves in sheeps clothing.