10 commandments....

Thought of this last night right around the time i was falling asleep.

If all major religions agree that God gave the 10 commandments, one of which is 'Thou shalt not kill"

So how do religious fanatics or religious people in general (not just radical Islamics, but Christians, Jews etc) justify the mass killing of people under the banner of "God".

I know that some people are bound to say, well the commandment in hebrew (לא תרצח) Can also be translated into "Thou shalt not MURDER" but then the same question applies, isn't killing innocent civilians murder? and if so, should those people not be condemned, not revered as martyrs etc?

Just wondering....

All in all i consider all religious conflict basically a fight for who has the best imaginary friend. But personal views aside, and following dogmatic logic, i came about this thought.

anyone who kills in the name of any God should go to hell

Originally Posted by Liz

Thought of this last night right around the time i was falling asleep.

If all major religions agree that God gave the 10 commandments, one of which is 'Thou shalt not kill"

So how do religious fanatics or religious people in general (not just radical Islamics, but Christians, Jews etc) justify the mass killing of people under the banner of "God".

I know that some people are bound to say, well the commandment in hebrew (לא תרצח) Can also be translated into "Thou shalt not MURDER" but then the same question applies, isn't killing innocent civilians murder? and if so, should those people not be condemned, not revered as martyrs etc?

Just wondering....

All in all i consider all religious conflict basically a fight for who has the best imaginary friend. But personal views aside, and following dogmatic logic, i came about this thought.

I agree i with u.

Jihad is tooken as an advantage by terrorists as a way to gain control.

Same thing is done by the crusade. and the Zionist.

All is for control.

BUT, the meaning of Jihad isn't fight in the name of God. but its depth is a paradox.

-Fight only when attacked
Not just stand there and get killed.

BUT. Jihad is for when the RELIGIoN it self is under threat, not a group i.e a country.

Iran = Get attacked by America, Many shiekhs called Jihad. and the Muslim world laughed at the call. but still helped.

The word Jihad is one of the most powerful words in the world.

--

Crusade just wanted jerusalem, not because its were jesus [christian believe got killed]
But because they felt threatened by Muslims and Jews in the holy land then killed them. then war started.

Christians vs Muslim, which was a Jihad. a holy war.

--

Zionism isn't orthodox jews. orthodox believe you can convert to judaism, zionist believe your born jewish. and none jews are "demons".

orthodox can be the nicest people :]

Well im not taking a side or asking who started first. But simple truth, call it for what it is, why call it a "jihad" or a "crusade" if its really just for defense/conquest. It is my honest belief that these terms were simply used to gather popular support for what otherwise would be a less motivational conflict, make a fight for your personal beliefs rather than what it truly is (land.money power) what have you, and gain popular support and backing... If religions actually followed what they preach, aka the 10 commandments there would be NO conflict. But even Moses did not follow them, so in truth its just a hypocritical law.

Also regarding Iran or w.e To my knowledge, Iran has received no military attacks by any democratic nation. They have only received UN sanctions due to their continuous research to create atomic weapons. So there is no affront to religion there.

The crusades, according to history, started because Islamic groups of bandits attacked Christian travelers to Jerusalem, and allegedly also tried to destroy Salomon's temple. Crusades was frankly a bunch of crap. Sure if people start attacking travelers thats one thing, but fighting just to fight, its outrageous. There's no proof that the Europeans wanted to "take over" Jerusalem, the official story is that they wished to seek safe routes for pilgrims to visit the site where Jesus lived.

Originally Posted by Liz

Well im not taking a side or asking who started first. But simple truth, call it for what it is, why call it a "jihad" or a "crusade" if its really just for defense/conquest. It is my honest belief that these terms were simply used to gather popular support for what otherwise would be a less motivational conflict, make a fight for your personal beliefs rather than what it truly is (land.money power) what have you, and gain popular support and backing... If religions actually followed what they preach, aka the 10 commandments there would be NO conflict. But even Moses did not follow them, so in truth its just a hypocritical law.

Also regarding Iran or w.e To my knowledge, Iran has received no military attacks by any democratic nation. They have only received UN sanctions due to their continuous research to create atomic weapons. So there is no affront to religion there.

The crusades, according to history, started because Islamic groups of bandits attacked Christian travelers to Jerusalem, and allegedly also tried to destroy Salomon's temple. Crusades was frankly a bunch of crap. Sure if people start attacking travelers thats one thing, but fighting just to fight, its outrageous. There's no proof that the Europeans wanted to "take over" Jerusalem, the official story is that they wished to seek safe routes for pilgrims to visit the site where Jesus lived.

My question is, how much nuclear weapons has the UN found? None? thus its called an invasion.

Originally Posted by iRateIslam

My question is, how much nuclear weapons has the UN found? None? thus its called an invasion.

What part of developing nuclear arms are you missing? Developing does not mean made, it means making, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad widely acknowledges the fact that they are enriching uranium. There is no "invasion" UN sanctions Iran for trying to make nuclear weapons without approval, Iran is a part of the UN, and they have an agreement on who can have nuclear arms, and they are actually trying to reduce that number, not add radical, volatile states to it.

Who cares about the hebrews...
They obey chuck noris.

Its called radicalism

/close thread

Originally Posted by Ghost of Obama

Its called radicalism

/close thread

what does an 18th century descriptive concept have to do with conflicts hundreds of years before that.

Like liz said, any religious action towards war is just hypocritical.

Can't really justify it when one of the ten is "do not kill".

Killing in the name of God according to the scriptures I follow is wrong.
There was a time before the commandments were written where God advocated violence against Pagans.

Christ said clearly that the Commandments of the father are to be upheld,
but he also said that through him salvation will be granted.
I cannot clearly tell you that a murderer can be saved.
This is between the offender and God.

The father also said Thou shall not steal,
but the Christ saved a thief while he was on the cross.
Does breaking the Commandments mean you face Hellfire?
This is a good question, I believe the Commandments should be followed by Jews and Gentiles alike, breaking them is an offense to God almighty but even so,
salvation can still be obtained if you truly believe in Christ, and seek his atonement.
I think many people think that no punishment awaits them if they make it to heaven.
I think this is false, and that there are believers that have strong faith,
and will be granted gifts, and the lukewarm/offending believers will not have as much glory in heaven.

As far as travesties in our history are concerned,
we must all keep in mind that the moves made by dictators/world leaders
do not reflect an individuals virtues and beliefs.
Again, these things are between God and the offender.
We are only held accountable for our own deeds/misdeeds.
Our own love in our hearts or lack thereof.

because the bible(s) (religious texture) was made by man.

Originally Posted by Austin

because the bible(s) (religious texture) was made by man.

Bro gtfo this thread?

Originally Posted by iRateIslam

Bro gtfo this thread?

Finally you've made some sense to me.

The meaning of Jihad (true meaning) : The concept of Jihad in Islam

Its quite long so yea look at the link. Fighting/killing should be a last resort for any arguement.

10 commandments....

Tags for this Thread