S. Korean hostages beaten for Christ

Israfil wrote: Tom123 then allow me to officially change my opinion and give you the benefit of the doubt. Although this interfaith dialogue doesn't accomplish anything at least you have thus far acknolwegded your intentions.

   Glad you know where I stand. I acted quite boorish, I should have introduced myself and stated why I'm here in the Introduction Section.

Israfil wrote: Regarding the Christian Missionaries I didn't say specifically that the Korean missionaries called the muslims "devils" rather, I'm merely indicating the running opinion of mainstream evangelical christianity. Time and time again I have heard that missionaries are out to do the work of "Jesus" by preaching the word of God to the godless (that being muslims).

   OK, glad you clarified that. There are Christians who call Muslims 'devils', although this is not as mainstream as you may believe. Although that kind of offensive language is used by some high profile religious leaders in the USA, they do not represent most Christians around the world. They do not represent even all Christians in the US, and even in their denominations (evangelical, pentecostal and baptist for the most part) there are many who are beginning to question and challenge their misinterpretation and political abuse of the Christian faith. The Pope also quoted an offensive statement about Muslims, I know, but he later stated he did not believe what the quote said. It was dumb of him to said what he said but he I don't believe he hates Muslims. The Islam-bashers are for the most part found in the American South (not S. America ), they do not represent most of the Christian world although with the media attention they get one could be justified for believing that.

   Now as Christians, we do believe that our faith has the whole truth about God, as you as a Muslim believe that you have the whole truth about God. So we both want to share what we believe is the truth with others.

   I have also heard Muslims speak of the Christian faith in very arrogant terms, even if they do not mean to. I read a 'testimony' by a person who converted to Christianity from Islam ending by saying that he or she (I read this a while ago, will try to find it) hopes that one day churches will lead people to heaven instead of hell like they are now.

Israfil wrote: Regarding altruism Tom123 in my opinion when people do charity especially when such charities are associated with religion it usually generates this feeling that one is doing good for the deity they worship, but, in essence, such charitble acts as I have experienced personally are done because there is usually a blessing or reward. Obviously religionist like yourself will not admit to the fact that what they do are inherently selfish of course not and I wouldn't expect you or others to admit that. But haven't you ever done something that makes you feel good and you find yourself doing that again because it makes you feel good (as well as the person whom you're helping)? Scientifically speaking we are attracted to the things that makes us feel good whether its sex or charity we do certain things based on our biological chemistry. Seeing the smile from a child after give him/her a toy makes us feel good inside because we are seeing the fruits or labor so to speak. When it comes to religion this generates the same results. People do things for God because obviously they link moral action with religious teachings but an incentive to doing moral good is the future paradise that we end up in once we die. You mentioned this briefly by saying if you were to die you know you'd go to heaven. Not just because you were baptized but because you feel in heart that what you do as a Christian you would be rewarded for. Christians may operate on similar though processes by doing missionary work. Although they may not admit to acting for self-interest their actions whether good intention or not is not pure altruistic. Tom123 think about it in your chair for a second that, there is no such thing as pure altruism in this word. Humans are selfish creatures and its not necessarily a bad thing but merely a biological process in our brains that trigger a "reward mechanism" when certain beneficial actions take place. with that being said I'm continuously skeptical of mssionaries who say they are doing the work of Christ because their reasons are religiously motivated not necessarily humanitarian. Of course the humanitarian part is second but take into account the prioritization.

Israfil wrote: Feeling good by doing good things is not necessarily a bad thing its just that we've developed a reward mechanism in our body that rewards us with this "feeling" ofelation that we've done a good thing. Humans biologically are geared to more pleasurable things than harmful things so it is not surprising that people do things for God and for helping others both are triggers for the reward mechanism. Am I skeptical of muslims who help others? Yes I am skeptical. There are muslims who fund bad groups and some who fund good groups. The same rule applies to Jews and Christians it depends on the organization. Not saying God isn't in all things because God is existing and his essence is an emanation of all things but, if we do things it should be because we want to not some religious or spiritual motivation. When I'm on the streets and I help someone yes I do feel good about helping people but I try to get rid of the feeling of feeling good because this is my job and that is what I should do. I want to help other humans because it the human thing to do. I believe in the success of our species and in order to maintain that I must preserve human life that is how I see things. I've heard muslims talk about doing things to get mutiple blessings and doing things to get triple blessings. To me, I don't look at charity or other things like a video game with the person with the most blessings wins, I look at it as something that all humans who are conscious of morality should do.

   We agree on everything. Even if you don't help people just to make yourself 'feel good' though, Israfil, you do feel so after you help them, don't you? Not necessarily 'aww... I'm such a nice person' feeling but you do feel some satisfaction after seeing someone benefiting from something good you've done, even if you don't want to feel that way.

   This may be one of the things we have in common. I also don't go out to help people so people can see 'what a nice person I am' (I'm not) or to get something back from them or to feel 'good about myself'. I also feel that if someone needs help I have a responsibility and duty to help them, perhaps like in your case, my conviction comes from my faith. When I start feeling 'good' about myself for helping someone, I also do my best to push these thoughts aside and have been getting better at it. I'll actually say 'in Christ's name, go away Satan'. I believe that such thoughts are actually sinful b/c they are pride, and I don't believe we should be proud of ourselves because we are all sinners and only God is perfect, secondly when we help someone we don't do anything extraordinary except living out our faith. I don't deserve any blessings from God, I believe as a Christian He has already given me the ultimate blessing on the cross so I have no reason to ask for more.

Israfil wrote: As far as evangelical christianity is concerned I'm glad to see your an apologist to those in mainstram chgristianity because as far as the running opinion of Christianity of today is concerned, Islam is the anti-christ (although such terminology is wrong since we believe in the christ who is Jesus). Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all christians but I say most christians in mainstream believe this way.

   Thanks, Israfil.

   I don't hate Muslims or think Islam is violent or demonic like some do, though to be honest with you I also don't believe that it is correct in all its teachings (as I'm sure you feel about Christianity and other faiths).

   In terms of the 'antichrist' word, the New Testament does say that people who deny that Jesus is from God (1 John 4:3), who deny 'the Father and the Son' (1 John 2:22), who deny Jesus Christ 'coming in the flesh' (2 John 1:7) (Christians believe Jesus was God in flesh when He walked on the earth)  is 'an' antichrist.

   I know that as a Muslim you see this as offensive, though the Quran also has passages that would offend many Christians- like where it says that those who believe Jesus Son of Mary is God (which happens to be what Christians believe) are 'blasphemers'.

   So in terms of the word 'antichrist' being applied by some Christians, it does have some Biblical background although their behaviour does not. Christians are told to be loving towards others, to be humble and patient, not to judge or condemn others, and to look for logs in our own eyes before we point out the specks in those of others. None of these traits apply to most of the televangelists who go around bashing Muslims.

   I don't see how labelling someone an 'antichrist' would be helpful in discussion with him or her, especially if we want to share our faith with them. John does not tell Christians to run around condemning and insulting people and he does not call anyone an antichrist to his face. The term is used  to denote people who deny Christian beliefs, but nowhere do the disciples go around calling people antichrists.

   I think a comparison can be made with the word 'blasphemer' in the Quran. Muslims may believe it applies to non-Muslims who believe in the Trinity but in a friendly discussion with a Christian where both of you are conducting yourselves in a respectful manner you aren't probably going to yell 'you blasphemer!' at him or her.

   I think there are many good and true things in Islam and I have a lot of respect for many Muslims, even if I believe that on certain issues you are mistaken. I believe that many of the vociferous and disgusting attacks on islambashing engaged in by certain 'christian' religious leaders like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Anne Coulter, others...are usually wrong, often unjust, almost always hypocritical, and always unChristian.

Israfil wrote: The pope changed his answers based upon soiciety but he still believes those views. I remember read about him and his beliefs on Islam and let me say that he had nothing good to say about it.

   Can you show me where, please? I wouldn't be surprised if that was true but I'm curious to see what he actually wrote. The reason I'm saying this is sometimes the media misquotes people. I certainly had a lot of issues with Pope John Paul 2 but I think he was far more respectful towards Muslims than Ratzinger and he built many bridges with Muslims which sadly the new Pope is now destroying.

   Cristo Vive!

     - Tomasz

They invade our countries, kill thousands of people making tens of thousands of children homeless and orphans. Then they gather the poor and the orphans who dont even know how to read or write and have little or no idea what religion they belong to and convert them by giving them a few gifts.