I’m curious about who still practices their faith.

Again, red herring. What does this have to do with whether someone takes the supposed holy writings of a given religion as literal or not?

 

When people use scriptures to justify their actions then they are certainly acting upon them. Just because your interpretation of them and theirs do not match, it does not mean that they are not acting upon them. Different groups use different scripture sets. I gave you the example of witches from Exodus, yet you don't seem to want to accept or address it. I am not going to bother to make specific example, because it comes down to the specific interpretation of others as to their justification of actions by scripture. Look at how much WBC claims they are acting according to scripture.

 

Where are traditional Christian values not under severe criticism much less direct attack?

 

Christians have largely given up their literal interpretations particularly as influential to the politics of their areas. Muslims have not.

 

Paul worked during his ministry. He traveled place to place working for a living making tents. He didnt have a salary from a church so I dont understand the hatred and talk about grifting. He wrote letters to churches instructing them to stay true to Christ. He was a sinner, born again and served God through his relationship with Jesus Christ....following Jesus by speaking the good news. Have you read Acts? I just dont get how someone can hate someone who profited so little but spread Christianity so much.

 

Exodus was written long before the Christian period and ignored by Christians as much as Deuteronomy and the laws against pork or the mixing of linens.
Muslims have not abandoned anything of their primal past.

 

He profited a great deal as it gave him a livelihood and never took any responsibility for his former murderous life. If I am wrong show me where he ever apologized for the murder of Stephen for example or show me any corroborating evidence from the others of his claim on the road to Damascus. He was the Joseph Smith of his time.

 

Here in the US for one. What is under severe criticism and direct attack are attempts to force Christian values upon others. For example, no one is attacking Christians for feeling that marriage is between one man and one woman. What does come under attack is any attempt to have that belief codified as law, or when Christians get into others' faces about what they feel is immoral. Now we are not talking about just being out on a corner and preaching, but those Christians who see a male couple holding hands or kissing, and come up to them telling them they will go to hell.

But again, being under attack is not automatically being the most persecuted religion. All religious values, from Jewish, to Muslim, to even Wicca, are under attack, from each other as well as from atheists. What makes Ms. Merkel's statement more than opinion? What numbers can you present to show her claim as objective instead of subjective?

 

You originally asked:

By this, then you see the Muslim faith as the more accurate faith since it is followed more literally than the Christian one. So, I am lost as to what point you are trying to make.

 

And yet that verse is a common one for why pagans should be attacked, not to mention Leviticus as a common reason as to why homosexuals should be attacked.

 

Here is one
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/apr/22/attacks-christians-double-2017/

not more authentic but more intolerant by their own rules in the Koran which I have reported but you still defend.

 

Again, like the prohibition on pork and mixing of linens abandoned my most Christians today. Why go back so far and please cite any Muslim who defies its ancient teachings? Pain of death might discourage that. Why so sympathetic to a faith with continued State entrenched misogynistic tendencies that exist to this day?

 

God gave him what he needed. He left a posh life as a respected jewish official to face persecution and uncertainty. He persecuted Christians until he was humbled, brought to his knees and saw the errors of his ways and was reborn with a new life turned to God through His son Jesus Christ. It took time for Christians to trust him. Dang...that is the Christian story. That's my story. He was forgiven. I was forgiven.....not sure why Paul's story aggravates you. His story is the same as any reborn Cgristian.

 

And I do believe that homosexuality remains a capital crime in most if not all Muslim countries. You of all people should take special offense at that. Which majority Christian country executes homosexuals?

 

Because he never even came close to apologizing for his murders.

 

How do you know. Why would you assume he didnt? Were you privy to the conversations he had with the Christian community that was hurt the most by his previous actions? They forgave him and eventually trusted him. Why is your opinion so much more insightful then theirs?

 

Because he was responsible for so many epistles. Why didn’t he express regret in even one of them?
The only explanation is that his murders weren’t even registering to him because he was a psychopath who couldn’t even begin to understand the suffering of others. Today a psychologist would call him that and probably a classic narcissist.

 

Also prayers in public schools are strictly forbidden in most Christian countries as are some Christian gatherings in these buildings after school hours. Compare this to Islamic communities which mandate this instruction. There is no separation from church and state as this would be blasphemy.

 

https://www.vox.com/2020/7/28/21333345/uighurs-china-internment-camps-forced-labor-xinjiang
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/11/15/assaults-against-muslims-in-u-s-surpass-2001-level/
https://time.com/5617161/india-religious-hate-crimes-modi/

You still are not showing where Christians are being persecuted in higher numbers than any other religion.

Ad hom and strawman on one argument. Good job. At what point have I defended the Koran? Do please include a quote. Calling out biased arguments does not mean a support of opposing points.

 

I have a brother who's converted to Mormonism, his whole family actually. They insist on taking photographs with a portrait of Jesus in an unyielding pose on the wall behind them.

As far as I know, they believe that karma dictates their lives in the subsequent reincarnation ... and that's about it

 

All you are doing is showing the hypocrisy of the vocal Christians who oppose things like SSM. They will argue with sources that they ignore for other topics. They still do their share pf persecution as my previous post shows, as well as other groups. I can't think of any religion as a whole that is innocent of persecution. Individuals, even a majority within the religion, may not participate in that, but all the religions do it nonetheless.

 

Yes. Christian intolerance from millennia ago needs to expunged as quickly and deliberately as possible. But current Muslim intolerance needs to be valued as evidence of cultural diversity. Got it and not all hypocritical, right? You have repeatedly attacked Christian theology by citing verses from 3000 years ago, You have been silent on Koranic verses that are used to this day and even silence women. So until I hear even a whisper of condemnation of Islamic doctrine from you, you are a waste of my time. Am I clear!?

 

Since when is execution the sole definition of persecution?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_States

Sure, LBGT+ individuals have it better in 1st world countries than in 2nd or 3rd world countries, but they are still persecuted, and Christians are a major player in that persecution, as well as other religions, mostly Jewish and Islam. Most, but nowhere near all, pagan religions tend to be LBGT+ friendly.

 

Actually not true. Forced or mandated prayer is strictly forbidden. There are many school systems that still allow various religious groups to meet within their walls, student based or from outside the schools. However, the schools are not allowed to discriminate. So if a Christian group is allowed to meet, they cannot forbid a Muslim group to meet. Some systems, because they are so Christian oriented, won't let any group meet. Their mentality is if we can't keep the others out then no one will be allowed in.

But evidence of persecution is still not evidence of being the most persecuted.

 

Paul didnt decide what letters were included in the Bible. He didnt decide or have control over what churches preserved his letters and what letters were preserved. That process was under God's direction. You are assuming he had no remorse but logic dictates that Christians in his day learned to trust him, forgave him and accepted him. So...whatever you want to believe isn't based on logic.