No reason you shouldn't make the connection. Both sides (Christian/Islam) have guilty histories. Both sides also make ridiculous claims and justifications based on supernatural fantasies.
But you are deluding yourself if you don't think some Muslims are the greater threat today.
I do not know where I have stated that some Muslims are not, currently, the greater threat. I have stated that for the vast majority of Christian history, Christians have preached and practiced as much or more hatred and violence than Muslims have; and, that those who want to inflict violence can find "justification" for it in either "holy" book. Just as those who want to live peacefully with others can find "justification" for tolerance in either "holy" book.
Its going to be harder for Islam to come around, much harder than it was for Christianity. Both holy books are absurd, but on every corner in the Qu'ran it preaches subjugation of non-believers and infidels. Just about everything can be interpreted to be a slight against Islam, opening the door for violence.
The Bible, while still ridiculously violent and intolerant, has the NT, and things like the sermon on the mount which is a beautiful discourse on morality and human interaction, that tempers much of the bloodletting.
We seem to agree on Islam being the greater threat, but I disagree both theological teachings are equally good or bad. Islam, and the Qu'ran, give teachings that are much more pre-disposed to violence.
The interpretation and context argument doesn't apply in my opinion. Looked at with unbiased eyes, there is no way to tell who is interpreting correctly, the moderates or the extremists. The text is there and it says what it says.
I have read most of it. As well as all of the Bible.
An original topic for sure. The comparison of two religious books. Nevermind the behavior of the followers of each book, that is certainly not relevant.
Like the Christians in Uganda who execute homosexuals? Or, like the Christians in America who bomb abortion clinics and murder abortion providers (in the middle of a church, nonethelesss)?
Both of these groups justify their actions through the Bible.
I get the point but the FB thing does not suggest that the two things go together. In fact it suggests that guns and bibles (Christian religion) are two distinct things with the only connection being people ought to know how to use each and neither of these pieces of knowledge are taught in schools.
The Islamic symbol is less clear on whether weapons and the religion should be connected but suggests they are linked.
I get the point but the FB thing does not suggest that the two things go together. In fact it suggests that guns and bibles (Christian religion) are two distinct things with the only connection being people ought to know how to use each and neither of these pieces of knowledge are taught in schools.
The Islamic symbol is less clear on whether weapons and the religion should be connected but suggests they are linked.
Good examples of deplorable behavior. You looking for someone on here to defend it?
But at least you stopped there. The site might not could handle you listing the deplorable acts done in the name of Islam.
The site definitely could not handle the listing of the deplorable acts done in the name of Christ over the past 1,500 years. Further, individuals are locked up every single day in America mainly because what they enjoy as recreation, Christians despise as sin (drugs and prostitution).
An yes, as consistent as ever. Nevermind current behavior.
Locking people away for 10-20-30 years of their life simply because your religion does not approve of their recreation is as indefensible as killing someone for the same reason. This happens in America, right now, and the majority of Christians in America see nothing wrong with it (in fact, plenty want the penalties to be even harsher).
Moreover, what do you consider "current"? Ten years? Twenty years? One-hundred years? Two-hundred years?
It is convenient for the pro-Christian, anti-Islam individual to restrict violence that Christians have committed and justified through the Bible to certain time-periods and/or certain regions. It certainly makes the greater history of barbaric cruelty that is the history of organized Christian religion more palatable, right?
furthermore, Christianity and Christians continue to demonstrate, by spreading propaganda like the picture with which I began this thread, that the "Enlightenment" corner has not yet been fully turned (for more on this, simply look at the historical origin of the Southern Baptists and their mission to Biblically defend the practice of generational slavery).