Quote Originally Posted by Hax View Post
Don't get me wrong, I don't see Iran as the shining example for Muslims lands, I'm stating that even in a land as Iran, the civil rights of Jews and Christians are defended by the law. I missed the nuance there, myself.
A law which enshrines their rights as inherently less than those of a Muslim? That was last progressive 1,000 years ago.

Quote Originally Posted by Hax View Post
MuslimRoman-Catholic Conversion Practice
1. Invade a region on jihad Crusade making it inherently holy
2. Tell all your followers how evil the enemy is
3. Kill every Muslim
4. Kill every non-Christian
5. Oh yeah, those that survive might be "persuaded" through aggressive questioning to convert to christianity; if fails, try 4).


Guess what, I have something for you; it's from the Qu'ran, 106.9;

"You have your way of life and I have mine."
Actually, a Crusade is a war of liberation, at least originally. Further, conversion by force is expressly forbid to Christians.

Like how Jesus killed a tree because it didn't want to give him any figs? Don't be ridiculous. Religion can be used for political means. It is not inherently good or evil, or whatever, it's how it's read. It's very typical for us in the west to want to speak of superiority and things of the like; "this is more than that", or "Islam is more violent than Christianity".

Haven't we learned in 2,000+ years of "civilized" history that "truth" is relative?
Truth is not relative, perception is. The fig tree episode is problematic, but it's also purely about a naked display of God's power. Jesus asked for the tree to be destroyed, and it is. Never is it suggested that this validates violence against people.

Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
Two major problems in your theory, rory:

1. There are plenty of people who believe that the holy ghost "possessed" the writers of the bible when they wrote, therefore making it the direct word of god, and as such is unalterable and final.
I think the distinction being drawn is what is actually in the Bible, and that is not. I believe Rory is reffering to the prologue to Luke, which makes it explicit that finding a reliable Gospel is nigh impossible. FYI Luke's protestations to accuracy are standard for Hellenistic history and biography.