I removed the Old Testament from my Bible. It's now 2/3rds lighter and exclusively pertinent to Christianity. Well, actually Jesus was a Jew teaching Jews exclusively, but Paul set the record straight. Of course, he was also a Jew as were all of the New Testament authors with the possible exception of Luke.....

The Old Testament is Judaism.

Strange title, not sure where its going...however, to those that believe the USA was founded on christianity is far from the reality of the situation. many of the forefathers were outspoken against the "hypocrisy and evils" of christianity....


Treaty of Tripoli

Article 11:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

This Treaty received ratification from the U.S. Senate on June 7, 1797 and signed by President John Adams on June 10, 1797.

You can spout Holy Books all you want- but that doesn't make Religions comparable TODAY.

While the vast majority of Christians and Jews are secular - the Vast majority of Muslims are Holy Book literalists and far less secular.

You can spout the OT or 'an eye for an eye' til your blue in the face but even "The Jewish state" doesn't have the death penalty. and is itself secular.

The fact is in Islam Religion comes first- and this is expected and the Norm.
Even in Islamic countries, (and even moderate ones) most would tell you so proudly.

So for Muslims in the West- who don't even have a semblance of Sharia or Islam in the Govt, this would be even more true.

'Apostasy' - a conversion from Islam of withdrawal from it - the Koran (and a few islamic countries) prescribe/have the Death Penalty for it. Not to mention other Barbaric theological practices like Stoning and amputation.

'Apostasy' IS the 'treason' for Muslims, not burning the/any flag.

Of course .... Islam is a religion of truth and justice
Many doctors and Alalmeger Muslims because they entered Akchwo trunks of the Koran and creativity of God in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the creation of Adam

And also come on the Day of Resurrection and there Paradise fire

The difference between the two very large
Believes that God and one entered the Bliss and Kafr God entered the fire of hell

Ditto for Muslims & the Koran, I imagine. At least it seems to be true that homosexuality is considered very bad by Muslims to the extent that some countries have and do execute homosexuals.

There are also many many (probably more) Christians & Jews who do not feel that way about homosexuality. I really try to judge a religion by what its adherents are doing today. Had I been around during the Inquisition or the Crusades I would have despised Christians I am sure.

Finally, there will be prejudices around forever, whether for gays, women, blacks, whites, Chinamen, left-handed people, Jews, dwarves, fat people.... you name it... somebody hates them. Every prejudice has its justifications. Hitler had a huge number of justifications for hating Jews. The fact that these justifications had little or no basis in fact did not deter him for one second from his plan. No one believes that he or she is a bigot. They all just think they dislike a certain type of people for good reason(s).

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0bU...watch_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL0C2QvqIlo#
"The courageous over the infidels, make war for Allah and are not afraid... This is the depiction of the army of Allah that will come at Allah's decree, from here or from there, to liberate these lands from the defilement of the Jews, for Allah was angry with them in his book and called them once 'monkeys,' once 'swine,' and once 'donkeys.'" (Palestinian TV, March 30, 2001)

That's a very interesting concept. It would certainly be lighter, but I have to say that they don't call it the Judaeo-Christian 'tradition' for no reason. In order to really understand the New Testament and Christianity, I think you have to appreciate its Jewish roots. As you say, the very concept of a Christ and a Messiah derives from Jewish thought. The Ten Commandments were expounded and expanded by Jesus in his Sermon on The Mount. He was merely interpreting Jewish law as did all Rabbis at the time.

What is really tragic is the confusion and problematics associated with the death of Jesus, which the New Testament (which was written 40-70 years after the death of Jesus) appears to blame the Jews for. Of course the history of the New Testament is interesting too in that during the middle ages it was edited by the Fathers of the Church.

It is no doubt true that after Jesus' death a rift occurred that widened over the decades. Jesus always thought of himself as a Jew. It was not until this rift was institutionalized that the Jew became a pariah. The various Gospels each have a slightly different take on the death and trial of Jesus, allowing for various interpretations, including one that does not make the Jews the villian of the piece, but the Romans.

That particular part of the Christian Bible is responsible for the death of (I don't know how many) Jews, during the Crusades, the Inquisition, and various blood-libels and pogroms and stringing up, expulsions etc throughout history. It is truly amazing that that could stem from a book about Jesus, who himself was a sweet and gentle (and wise) creature.

A fascinating book on the subject can be found here: Amazon.com: The Trial and Death of Jesus: Haim...
Mohammed was a different story.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0bU...watch_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL0C2QvqIlo#
"The courageous over the infidels, make war for Allah and are not afraid... This is the depiction of the army of Allah that will come at Allah's decree, from here or from there, to liberate these lands from the defilement of the Jews, for Allah was angry with them in his book and called them once 'monkeys,' once 'swine,' and once 'donkeys.'" (Palestinian TV, March 30, 2001)

The practical answer is at the beginning of the article. Many are, and many more could be.

But yes a strict reading of their religion opposes it. However there are secularist, reform, and various other takes on Islamic jurisprudence such as those that say the law gives broad guildlines that need to adapted to a given age.

In a practical sense I take that to mean it's OK to assimilate a number of Muslims. However if you open the floodgates of immegration things could becoem ugly.

I will make the blanket statement: Muslims don't assimilate.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0bU...watch_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL0C2QvqIlo#
"The courageous over the infidels, make war for Allah and are not afraid... This is the depiction of the army of Allah that will come at Allah's decree, from here or from there, to liberate these lands from the defilement of the Jews, for Allah was angry with them in his book and called them once 'monkeys,' once 'swine,' and once 'donkeys.'" (Palestinian TV, March 30, 2001)

I've said it once and I'll say it again.
A religion's success is dependent on the ability for followers to rationalize anything.
Islam and Christianity are no different in this regard.

If there is no major conflict with the nation, Muslims will not pay attention to those parts of the book.
When a conflict comes up, they will go into a religious nationalism of sorts and start using scriptures like that to rationalize.

The most true thing about religion ever in any scripture was that Old Testament bit about "a time for this, a time for that" and whatnot.

__________________
"It's never over... BOY!"
The Tall Man, Phantasm III

In my post a few above I showed how you are wrong.
Yet you persist with the liberal, mindless, moral equivalence.