In my previous post I meant to address it to Ameinnava, not to say that that was who was posting. I put her name in the space where I should have put mine. So sorry ameinnava I certainly did not mean to make it look as though you had posted that.

How many "evangelicals" did you "interview" to reach your conclusions. Surely you are a fan of scientific research methods and would be opposed to reactive sweeping generalizations based on mere personal experience.

I believe that to spread vicious stereotypes about Muslims in such a manner would be wrong as it would be for any other group. That is how hate is spread, and you sadly enough seem to be spreading it on thick. Perhaps you should do some fact checking to validate your "test". It certainly will not build you any confidence among those who are considered "evangelical"

The term "evangelical" in fact is totally misused and means basically nothing except that non-religious or non-Christians use it describe anybody who is not of the Catholic or other orthodox religion. There is in fact such diversity of thought and practice among those considered "evangelicals" that it is really not a group at all. Since it is not a cohesive group by any stretch it is impossible to define and predict as many who post on "On Faith" enjoy doing. Let it be noticed that in all my posts I try to respond to individual reactions as individual.

In my posts there should always be an absence of sweeping, vicious, unfounded stereotypes and if anyone ever observes such I plead to be called on it immediately. How can we reach the understanding we say we want to acheive so badly when we box other people in without ever actually hearing what they as individuals say or believe. I may call myself a Christian and believe in the Bible as the word of God, but since is that all you need to know about me to make an assessment of who I am?

I plead with you sir or madam to stop the hate and smear campaigns as I would plead with many other people posting as well. Is this truly a place where all can share about their faith, or is it simply a disguised format for the irreligious to bash those who are?

I think it's great that there are evangelists who are seriously concerned about AIDS and other pressing global crises. (Before they pat themselves on the back, the core teachings of the new testament demand it, so a lack of serious concern and subsequent action would only prove that even they don’t believe in the tenants of their faith). However, I have to point out, as many have previously, that absolutist dogma of any kind is often not conducive to solving complex global problems.

For example, while Rick Warren has voiced his support for condom use (a big first step which not surprisingly has raised the ire of many) he maintains that only an acceptance of the immorality of pre-marital sex will stop AIDS altogether. Rick, come on man. You might as well try to stop the sun from shining in an attempt to curb global warming. Any good problem solver knows that the first step is to accurately assess the situation, not to propose unrealistic solutions that simply prolong the problem while more effective solutions are ignored.

That being said, one point Mr. Warren makes is certainly true (though not for the reason he believes it to be): it is difficult to see how long-lasting solutions can be implemented without the churches getting involved. As a freethinker, I have no love for dogma of any kind. But with an overwhelming percentage of people in our nation and our world who call themselves religious, it would be foolish to assume that the solutions to the world’s ills can be devised and implemented absent support from the religious. The concern for most of us who have studied religious intervention in the Amazon (often done in the name of humanitarian need) is, can we trust them just to solve the problem and not continually try to convince someone to abandon their own cultural and religious practices that are wholly unrelated to the crisis?

An interesting exchange. However I am not satisfied, or at least convinced that many Evangelicals (or Baptists for that matter) are changing. I find far too much arrogance, intolerance and narrow-mindedness among them. (Let me clarify that I do not apply it to ALL, but obviously a very large percentage that is tolerated by all (?) ). And to be sure, this is clouded by the prevalence of the likes of Robertson, Falwell, etc.

The rule of thimb I use for Evangelicals and Baptists (and I have yet to be disappointed, unfortunately) is that:

1. If you are poor, it is your fault and you deserve what you get.
2. You must be pro-life. However, there is a very limited definition of 'life'. That is because you must also adore the death penalty, and must not object to any war.
3. You must be a Republican. A Republican can divorce as often as he wants, be disowned by his children, and still be considered a paragon of family values. The concept that a married couple should work to resolve their problems is an alien philosophy.
4. Frankly, those of us who share a priority other than whatever the Evangelicals and Baptists pronounce at the time have no values. (I believe that I find this as the most objectionable item).

In short, I find very little difference between them and the fanatics of other faiths.

Anonymous:

Can you not see the contradictions in your position? You insist that "Evangelicals have ALWAYS looked out for the less fortunate," but define the key issues as "abortion and gay marriage," i.e. controlling other peoples sex lives.

You also define the whole issue in terms of doing the opposite of what liberals want. This is at least reactionary and certainly hate centered, as in, "who would Jesus hate." It is also opposite to looking out for the less fortunate, an attribute that defines liberals.

I'm surprised this act of intolerance in our community hasn't made national news: "Organizers of an Austin interfaith Thanksgiving celebration scrambled to find a new location for the annual event after an evangelical Baptist megachurch objected to Muslims worshipping on its property." http://news8austin.com/content/your_news_/stories/?SecID=372&ArID=195448

Thankfully, a local synagogue was happy to volunteer its space instead--one good, uplifting act to counter a shameful one. Of course there are good evangelical people--just as of course there are good people of any or no denomination. But intolerant acts such as these, done in the name of "Christianity" (an insult to the always generous Christ), should be publicized and roundly denounced.

I'm surprised this act of intolerance in our community hasn't made national news: "Organizers of an Austin interfaith Thanksgiving celebration scrambled to find a new location for the annual event after an evangelical Baptist megachurch objected to Muslims worshipping on its property." http://news8austin.com/content/your_news_/stories/?SecID=372&ArID=195448

Thankfully, a local synagogue was happy to volunteer its space instead--one good, uplifting act to counter a shameful one. Of course there are good evangelical people--just as of course there are good people of any or no denomination. But intolerant acts such as these, done in the name of "Christianity" (an insult to the always generous Christ), should be publicized and roundly denounced.

That last "Anonymous" was me "A Muslim" :-)

BTW, I think "Anonymous" answered question 3 well below.

Georgiason: Satisfied?

But let say one last thing. Do Muslims need reform? Yes they do. That is why I welcome questions like those posted by Georgiason. They help in:

(1) Allowing moderate Muslims to respond to the concerns of non-Muslims, and

(2) It allows Muslim reformers to know and think hard about addressing the criticisms of modern-day Muslims.

So thanks Georgiason.

Finally, on to the easy ones:

"4.What does Islam say (according to the above authoritative voices) should be the fate of heretics? For example, if a member of the Egyptian soccer team got up tomorrow morning and announced he was converting from Islam to Christianity and changing his name from Mohammad Ali to Cassius Clay, what do the authoritative voices of Islam say should be his fate?"

See Sura 109 (The Unbelievers): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Kafirun

It does not say "kill them". See my response below in regards to the often cited verse 9-5.

There is also the famous Sura 2 verse 256:
"There is no compulsion in Religion".

Two kinds of people deliberately undermine these two verses: (1) the Islamist extremists because these undermine the terror justifications, and (2) those who hate Islam.

5.Does Islam allow for the publication of a scholarly book alleging that Mohammad was a fraud?

Haven't you heard of the writngs of the sufis. Haven't you heard of Ibn al-Arabi, Al-Ghazali, and Ibn Rushd. They wrote pretty radical stuff back then, were sometimes persecuted by some in "government", but their ideas progressed and their books preserved to our day. Again, please do not judge by the stupid Iranian fatwas against Rushdie etc.

Can I say that your questions have been answered (even if a bit shallowly?).

Regarding:

"2.Does Islam allow for the full legal equality of women?"

This is a very ambiguous question in some sense. For example, in early Islamic society, the first four leaders (caliphs) were essentially elected by the people through the bay'aa process. Women were certainly allowed to "vote" (it was more like a caucus). Given that during the early years the homogeneous sense of community allowed for very little disagreement on the possible leaders (though I think that with Othman there were alternatives, but Othman came out as the clear choice). When did the US get its 19th Amendment? 143 years after the Declaration of Independence. I do not mean to demean the Declaration or American history. The Declaration, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights are the best peaces of law and statements on human rights we have in the world. I am very proud indeed.

Also, when Islam came, a woman was given the right to ownership, demanding for divorce, etc-- privileges that weren't granted to Christian women until very later in Western societies.

Now I think you are talking about the beatings, etc. These are grossly un-Islamic. You seem to look at Saudi Arabia and Taliban run Afghanistan (or a video here or there on youtube) and think of that as the "Muslim standard". You'd be dead wrong!

You may be referring to Hirsi Alis stories regarding FGM. You'd then be right that FGM is a brutal, stupid, cruel treatment of young girls. But what does this have to with Islam? FGM is an East African tradition prevailing in the Horn of Africa (Somalia, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Southern Egypt, and Sudan) among BOTH Muslims and non-Muslims (including Christians). This phenomenon is unheard of in Saudi Arabia (the "most Islamic" of states), Pakistan, Afghanistan (I mention those since they seem to be the most extreme Muslims states) as well as the rest of the Muslim state.

If you are thinking of something other than those I mention above, please let know.

(you may also have been thinking of the scarf [the burqa is not Islamically mandated], or the man-marrying-four thing, to which I have answers)

1.Does Islam allow for the separation of church and state?

What is "state"? Here in the US we have the executive, the legislative branch and the judiciary. The executive is the branch that executes the laws (very roughly speaking). This has nothing to do with religion. So as far as executive goes, a "Muslim Nation" would have no problem with the executives being non-Muslim (this happened over the centuries in many Muslim dynasties,, where Jews and Christians held powers as in Egypt for Christians and Jews in Morocco).

Now the judiciary. The judiciary does not make any laws. It only uses the law (wherever it may come from) to judge between parties. No problem there to regarding separation of church and state in Islam (nowhere in Quran does it say "pick Muslim judges.. it just says things like "pick judges" [sic.])

Now on to the legislative, what is the source of law? It could religious creed, atheist creed, what have you. Some sort of moral source. In predominantly Muslim countries, chances are the law comes from Islamic teachings.

It may surprise to learn that in Egypt for example, for centuries, there are in fact "Coptic Courts". Chrsitians do not have to go to courts that apply the Islamic code.

So, the bottom line is that there is a lot of room in Islam for separation of "Church" and State. Now that we have extreme governments as in Saudi Arabia or Iran should not reflect on Islam as whole. Islam, too, could be (and has been during some pockets of history) a very flexible system.

[[[[3.Does Islam allow for religious pluralism? For example, if a Muslim male married a Christian female, would the husband and wife be able to say to their children, “We will attend the mosque on Friday and the church on Sunday and consider ourselves a bi-religious family. When each of you is 18 years old, you will be free to choose. You can continue of bilateral approach; or, you can choose one religion over the other; or, you can choose another religion altogether.”]]]

Catholics don't do that. Neither do Apostolic Christians or some Baptists. Unles I'm mistaken I believe Mormons are the same way. Some force you to choose. So that cannot be a qualification for inclusion into a western country. Unless you are willing to apply that standard across the board it is meaningless.

Once more, I am struck by the goodwill and common human decency that speaks loudly from the words of Ebo Patel and all those he quotes, including Muslims.

Once more, not having received an answer so far, I pose my five questions that seem to me to get at the heart of the Islamic faith.

I ask Mr. Patel and all Muslims what the most authoritative voices of Islam would say in answer to the five questions posed below.

Here are the questions:
1.Does Islam allow for the separation of church and state?
2.Does Islam allow for the full legal equality of women?
3.Does Islam allow for religious pluralism? For example, if a Muslim male married a Christian female, would the husband and wife be able to say to their children, “We will attend the mosque on Friday and the church on Sunday and consider ourselves a bi-religious family. When each of you is 18 years old, you will be free to choose. You can continue of bilateral approach; or, you can choose one religion over the other; or, you can choose another religion altogether.”
4.What does Islam say (according to the above authoritative voices) should be the fate of heretics? For example, if a member of the Egyptian soccer team got up tomorrow morning and announced he was converting from Islam to Christianity and changing his name from Mohammad Ali to Cassius Clay, what do the authoritative voices of Islam say should be his fate?
5.Does Islam allow for the publication of a scholarly book alleging that Mohammad was a fraud?

(Alternatively, instead of posing the questions to the authoritative voices of Islam, you might ask your Muslim interlocutor to imagine the question was, “What would Islamic textbooks used in the teaching of Muslim students in America say in answer to the following questions?”)

What do Muslims believe the most authoritative voices of Islam would answer in reply to those five questions. Or what answers you would find in an Islamic textbook.

The answers to those questions will determine whether even orthodox Islam can be accommodated to a Western liberal, pluralistic society.

[[[["But, if you're arguing that we can't judge Muslims according to Bin Laden's actions but that we can judge Christians according to Bush's actions, then I don't agree with your logic. Which is it are we going lump people all together or judge them on the basis of their own individual actions? If you are pleading for tolerance and understanding of Muslims, okay then show the same to Christians no matter how much it may pain you. Do you not think their are plenty of people in the world who have been hurt by Muslims who would say all Muslims are X?"]]]]

I was an evangelical in the early 80s. I am horrified by the change that politics have brought to the movement. I am not a Muslim so I am not speaking from personal experience. I was an evangelical. It's as simple as that. My brother is currently an evangelical and I cannot believe the bloodthirsty war like nature of his church. According to them, Muslims are less than human, they deserve to be treated like the child molesting dogs they are. Oh yes, he called them child molesters. Because they are, it doesn't matter what we do to them. Kill them or torture them. It doesn't matter. Torture is a war crime and our country has institutionalized it.

I am disturbed by the attitude changes that have happened in just the last 20 years. It affects me personally so I am angry and upset about it because I know the faith intimately. As far as I'm concerned the threat to the US has been elevated for political purposes and has had the unfortunate consequence of elevating people like Bin Laden to hero status among Muslims.

I put the blame for that on Bush, Rove and their party. There is just no way that Muslims are going to "force our women to wear burquas or make us all pray to Mecca". That is hyperbole and an outright lie used to generate fear and hatred for purely political purposes. Evangelicals are in on it too. They don't seem to give a rat's arse about the truth or legitimacy of the charges as long as they get to demonize Muslims. That is not even close to Christ-like but VERY Republican.

[[[[Blame the Saudi thing on Wahabism, a puritanical fringe interpretation of the religion. Do not blame it on other Muslims, Islam in general or Patel. He's probably not a wahabi. You need to stop mixing things up.]]]]

But if they did that they couldn't scare the p1ss out of people and get them to vote Republican. Fear, fear, fear.

JD - Nope not a Mormon. Not really sure what I have said that would lead you to that conclusion, please let me know though. I am simply a man who is earnestly seeking to follow the example of Christ and who admitedly fails each day. Yet I have been renewed by His love for me and each day is an opportunity for me to honor that gift.

Artmann - Maybe we're making headway? Glad to see you aren't quite so angry now that we cleared up my little typo.

But, if you're arguing that we can't judge Muslims according to Bin Laden's actions but that we can judge Christians according to Bush's actions, then I don't agree with your logic. Which is it are we going lump people all together or judge them on the basis of their own individual actions? If you are pleading for tolerance and understanding of Muslims, okay then show the same to Christians no matter how much it may pain you. Do you not think their are plenty of people in the world who have been hurt by Muslims who would say all Muslims are X?

The best way to teach other people a different way of approaching conflict is to do it by demonstrating it yourself.

My next point. I would love to see an article or better yet a series written on who are the evangelicals. I don't describe myself as evangelical yet many would say that I am. The fact is among the myraid groups that are considered "evangelicals" there is an incredible and vast diversity of belief and lifestyle and political views. Evangelicals don't really think of themselves in that way, it has been a convenient way for others looking at many groups who are not Catholic or Orthodox and trying to figure them all out.

Beyond Horror:

Blame the Saudi thing on Wahabism, a puritanical fringe interpretation of the religion. Do not blame it on other Muslims, Islam in general or Patel. He's probably not a wahabi. You need to stop mixing things up.

To the person upthread who quotes verse 9-5. It does sound bad when taken out of context. For a detailed explanation, see:

http://www.muslimaccess.com/articles/jihad/surah9_5.asp

(I get a scrpting error, just be patient and click cancel when the error message comes up.)

Here is the key paragraph from that link:

"A close look at the above verses shall suffice as evidence to the fact that the directive, “Arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush for them” is given against those polytheists with whom the Muslims, under the leadership of the Prophet (pbuh), had entered into an agreement and who had disregarded this agreement and aided others against the Muslims. Obviously, these qualities cannot be generalized on all the polytheists of the world."

That anonymous was artmann11. You think they could remember our Ids.

[[[[However, the point still stands which both of you missed and that is that neither I, nor you should judge a whole religion based on the actions of a few. If you do that you show your true intolerence. The ball is in your court now. Surprise us.]]]]

Believe me, I am very happy to know yours was an honest mistake as far as the name Obama goes. Maybe you should use the name Bin Laden instead. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But too many Republicans are using that very slander even though it's been proven Obama is not Muslim. It really torques me off to see supposedly morals and values advocates using fear and terror to motivate voters. Good for you to admit your error.

There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world. Bin Laden is only one. Al Queda is not representative of all Muslims either but that doesn't matter to some people in this country who consider the whole religion as nothing but terrorists. Bush and his party have carefully cultivated that lie and use it regularly to whip our country into a bloodthirsty frenzy for political purposes. That is just disgusting.

[[[[neither I, nor you should judge a whole religion based on the actions of a few]]]]

If it were only a few Christians who feel this way. Even my brother has been taken in by the big lie. Perhaps that is why it angers me so.

How many rightwing Christians like Dobson advocating global war and torture does it take? As I said, I have little to no respect for MOST U.S. Christians. I respect Billy Graham but despise his war mongering, hate filled heir, Franklin. I respect a peace loving man like Jimmy Carter who actually walks the walk unlike George Bush who doesn't miss an opportunity to use the fear and hatred for the benefit of his party.

Sorry for insulting you, but I am sickened by the mental and religious manipulation that comes from politicians.

JC, are you a Mormon?

Beyond Horror, doesn't that compel you to encourage all girls to become Muslims!? LOL!! Gosh Eboo, you defend this religion? And before all you Christian haters out there in WWW land jump on Christians show where born again Christians have done anything similar?

Artmann,

By the way, chill. And FYI I have repented and continue to do so each day. You are right that it is very necessary.

To all the readers out there:

please note that JD and JC are two different individuals. I am not the one saying the Mr. Patel is on his way to hell.

Eboo, if doing good to others with other religions makes you feel better on your way to hell, LETS DO IT!

Obama is reportedly not a Muslim, you are correct. I wasn't even thinking of Obama.

I wrote Obama and was thinking Osama, the names do sound somewhat similar to me, there is only one letter difference. Note: before you go all rabid again I am just saying the names are similar, not that the individuals are.

However, the point still stands which both of you missed and that is that neither I, nor you should judge a whole religion based on the actions of a few. If you do that you show your true intolerence. The ball is in your court now. Surprise us.

"There is an ugly side to any thing made up of humans, and Christians are humans. Hate is poisonous to whoever projects it no matter who or what it is projected towards. A person cannot hold so much hate without it sooner or later leaking into their own souls."

You have shown it yourself and it is ugly. Repent.

"Shall I base my view on Muslims on what Obama has done?"

What? Why would you even consider that?

Obama is not even a Muslim. HE IS A CHRISTIAN.

This kind of bold-faced lie/slander is exactly why I have little to no respect for most Christians in this country. You'll do and say anything to win elections. It's been shown that Obama is not a Muslim but it makes a great Republican attack ad so they keep lying about it. Repeat the big lie enough and some bigoted ignoramus will believe it.

DO YOU HAVE ANY SHAME WHATSOEVER? How can you sleep at night?

Is there any line you won't cross? The answer is obviously NO.

(unbelievable)

I hope this country sees exactly what kind of venom and hatred you zealots are peddling. You have -0- credibility. Apparently you need to get in touch with Jesus or whatever moral guide you use because you need it badly.

From 1 Peter 3 (New International Version)

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strage were happening to you. But rejoice that you particpate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.

If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you. If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or theif or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler. However, if you suffer as a Christian do not be ashamed, but praise God that you bear that name.

_________________________________________________

Thanks for the article. It is true that not all who bear the name of Christ are truly His followers and therefore give Christ and His disciples a bad name.

Thank-you though for the article. Many who call themselves Christians do seek to be Christ like.

Keep in mind though that as no one expects a Muslim, religious Jew, or Buddhist to be perfect why hold Christians to that standard? Christians make mistakes also.

Shall I base my view on Muslims on what Obama has done? Shall I base my view on Buddhism based on the Kmher Rouge? Shall I base my view of Catholics on child molesting clergy?

There is an ugly side to any thing made up of humans, and Christians are humans. Hate is poisonous to whoever projects it no matter who or what it is projected towards. A person cannot hold so much hate without it sooner or later leaking into their own souls.

Christ commanded His followers to lead but in a radically different way. He called them to lead through example and that admittedly has not always been done. But it has been done as our reader in Mexico has observed.

There are those who truly do want to see the destruction of the United States and have even danced in the streets at little glimpes and foretastes of it. But no friends they were not those who you lump together as evangelicals, they are not the ones who we should be worried about.

We all know who was dancing in the streets that day, and it wasn't the assembly of the First Community Church in some little Bible belt town getting out of services on Sunday.

_________________________________________________

1 Peter 5:6

Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on Him because He cares for you.

Less fortunate? Like the victims of human rights violations?

When James Dobson threatened to withdraw support from McCain if he didn't support Bush's torture legislation that was the last straw for me. I knew then that he is merely a mindshredder, a religious manipulator interested in raw power and cash.

Organized evangelicals have sided with big business, the super-wealthy elites and sold their consciences for a buck. Now even they suck at the teat of the government.

That's a fact.

By the way, the all out war you people have declared on anyone who is NOT a stupid, brainwashed Bushbot is for the Republican party's benefit. You notice even with a lock on congress and a president who is supposed to be an evangelical they never ended abortion, nor will they ever. It's too much of a hot button issue to trick gullible fools into supporting all the other baggage that comes with being a Republican. All out war on domestic rivals, global war, the accumulation of vast wealth at the expense of everyone else and even torture.

None of which are even remotely Christ-like.

Evangelicals have ALWAYS looked out for the less fortunate. Its just that finally liberals are looking more closely at them.

Of course liberals will all hate them again when they refuse to support abortion and so-called "gay marriage".

In the end I'd rather not cooperate with liberals on abortion or gay marriage, even if it means they leave the country and we have an all out battle.

The true reason for monotheism is to keep the population from growing uncontrollably. Christians doing good is an aberration, and besides their evil far outways the good, all throughout history.

Reasonable not hateful:

The radical right evangelicals that I describe are right here replying to Mr. Patel and smearing all Islam. They were part of On Faith general topic as the only two commentators defending torture. They were all around me as I grew up in North Carolina. Back then they were explaining how God commanded racial segregation. They are a vigorous political presence in every state and county. Every Republican candidate has sold his soul to their demands so that they might win the nomination. Right here in Montgomery County Maryland they are the sharp tip of the Ignorance Lobby on sex education.

You say you don't get all those hateful attributes from the evangelicals you know. Maybe you only know progressive evangelicals and close your eyes and ears to the radical right evangelicals. It would be better if you looked around you. Radical right evangelicals exist, and they hate you.

CCNL -

Misery loves company

Reasonable not hateful:

The radical right evangelicals that I describe are right here replying to Mr. Patel and smearing all Islam. They were part of On Faith general topic as the only two commentators defending torture. They were all around me as I grew up in North Carolina. Back then they were explaining how God commanded racial segregation. They are a vigorous political presence in every state and county. Every Republican candidate has sold his soul to their demands so that they might win the nomination. Right here in Montgomery County Maryland they are the sharp tip of the Ignorance Lobby on sex education.

You say you don't get all those hateful attributes from the evangelicals you know. Maybe you only know progressive evangelicals and close your eyes and ears to the radical right evangelicals. It would be better if you looked around you. Radical right evangelicals exist, and they hate you.

CCNL -

Misery loves company

Stuff them self righteous, sanctimonious, snakehandling evangelicals...............I'd be quite happy if all those scumbags were to rapture themselves of somewhere and free the earth of their polluting presence.

I have never met an evangelical I didn't instictively despise - mainly for their pompous self righteous attitude that they should decide how people should live their lives. Notice how those buybull thumpers screech on about their "sanctity of marriage" crap whilst conveniently forgetting that the highest divorce rates in the country are in their massed ranks of screeching hypocrites

Read this story in the link below.
SAUDI WOMAN SUBJECTED TO 200 LASHES FOR GANG-RAPE BY RELIGIOUS COURT!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7098480.stm

Is this the rational part of religion? Any comments Mr. Eboo. Find it hard to see a seemingly intelligent man like you defend the religion. By the way I am not singling out your religion. There are major irrational issues with all faiths, with yours having the most ridiculously insane and irrational.

Reasonable Not Hateful - Evangelicals are rational and educated? As in the Grand Canyon was created 6000 years ago by the flood that Noah weathered while somehow tending to a pair each of the millions of animal and insect species (the Bible overlooks plant life) on earth, including the dinosaurs - the flood that was made possible by the ancient Hebrew belief expressed in the first creation story (at complete odds with the second story, by the way) that the sky serves as a physical barrier to keep out the ocean which extends over the earth. That kind of rational and educated? I won't even bother with the "loving" part. Plenty of ex-evangelicals, whose experiences I've read about, can better attest to that bit of malarkey.

Hey Patel before you run off to Africa with Ms. Hilton saving the elephants (it's a joke son) I would like to broadcast a head's up to the clergy for this coming holiday season.

Traditionally Holidays can be the most depressive and suicide prone time of year from seasonal emotional and mental diseases, to addictions and of course situational stress disorders such as being separated from family and loved ones during the holidays. Those suffering family losses most recently through war on numerous continents will feel the effects too.

Bridging the gap to these families and friends this time of year is very important. The Big "D" depression seeks to isolate its victims compounding symptoms. A lack of communication or unusual quietness is a tip off. Some people will go into planning stages of suicide giving away possessions so there are alot of clues to watch for among those recently suffering losses.

Plus side is that the internet affords us a virtual community to support those in need even if they do not consciously exhibit outreach. My main gripe against big brother is violating privacy or annonymity adding an atmosphere of paranoia in situations whereby the descrete of Catholic confessional is needed to facilitate relief. We must start by implying that with few exceptions, all of God's warm blooded creators do have a conscious.

Be well and go in Peace.

If you admire them, you just don't have enough experience. Beware.

Mischka, Mischka, Mischka,

Hopefully you have access to the writings and thoughts of contemporary religious exegetes, many of them are On Faith panelists. I recommend reading some of their books in your pursuit of knowledge. E. Favorite and many others to include myself are continuing our pursuit and you now have the benefit of our many conclusions i.e. we have done the work for you.

Apparently you are not willing to accept said reviews and conclusions at the moment, but as you get older and more mature, it will all become clear as you finally conquer your koranic brainwashing.

CCNL -

Having a blast aren't we?

The benefits of retirement : lots of time and drugs.

There is great difficulty in generalizing and stereotyping. Many Americans find themselves conflicted, forced to choose sides when they do not completely agree with either. These are troubling times and the news media hammers our leaders to answer complex questions with a 'straight' yes or no. If like were only so simple.
Ohg
http://thefiresidepost.com/2007/10/31/a-conflict-of-ethics/

The most important thing to know about evengalicals is that they are splitting.
The smarter of them have figured out that their movement is chased and fed by right wing jews and zionists...to USE them. As they have done.
It was a Rove idea, to marry the two.
I recall that Rush Limbaugh was complainigng that nearly all of the Clinton cabinet was made up of Jews...then the next day Sharon and company took him on a little trip to Israel.
And he became the right wing poster boy for the
Rove plan...which was to get all that nice jewish campaign money from democrats to republicans.
And he did, didn't he...and then create a
conservative domination for a hundred years...he didn't did he?

Hewitt says:

"ignorant, irrational, arrogant and proud of it, they are principally concerned with hating Muslims, controlling other people's sex lives, and making the world safe for wealth, privilege and power. They can justify torture, domestic spying, and stealing elections. Being so rigid, they are resplendent hypocrites."

I don't get that from the evangelicals I know. They don't even mention controlling anyone's sex lives, and give to the poor and downtrodden. They are repulsed by torture, but at the same time want us protected by the government against terrorism. They are educated, rational, loving people that abhor sin but at the same time want to help others.

I doubt you have been in a evangelical church lately- where do you get your information to paint such a broad stroke of judgement?

You write:

Any time an entire group of people is written off as the enemy, I think it’s probably time to get a little closer.

Ick:

1. Please, get away from me. I don't want to be proselytized. It's kinda like dealing with a really annoying salesperson who just won't go away.

2. The right, supported in large part by evangelicals and other Christianists, has treated us like the enemy for 30 years now -- calling us traitors, calling for our deaths, saying 9/11 is retribution for this or that...

And now they want to be nice? Fuggedaboutit.

CCNL -

I hope your insurance covers mental deficiencies and psychiatric help...it can get quite expensive for an old geezer like you.

Try being gay and see how far you get with them. Even the "liberals" like Cizik continue to insist, against all reason and common sense, that it's a choice - a really really really bad choice - and somehow akin to being an alcoholic or drug addict. I suppose that's progress, though. We used to be plain old evil incarnate.

Jews for Jesus are a bunch of ?Nazis

all you people want to do is convert everyone to your unforgiving god who hate everyone

Jews for Jesus are a bunch of ?Nazis

all you people want to do is convert everyone to your unforgiving god who hate everyone

The divide in evangelicals is manifest from the comments posted so far. Most are still in the camp of:

Who would Jesus hate?!

Ignorant, irrational, arrogant and proud of it, they are principally concerned with hating Muslims, controlling other people's sex lives, and making the world safe for wealth, privilege and power. They can justify torture, domestic spying, and stealing elections. Being so rigid, they are resplendent hypocrites.

More and more evangelicals, however, find themselves repulsed by radical right evangelicals. They are in the camp of:

What would Jesus do?

Rather than use Christianity as a club to beat down others, they choose to live and behave as Christians. What a radical thought. Their principle concern is with improving lives today. I am not a Christian, but I have met a few of these progressive evangelicals. I respect them. It is hard to do good and build a decent society, but they are willing to work hard and sacrifice.

I do not know why they are growing in number, but I wish them well.

Patel's snake analogy fits me exactly. Mention evangelicals and my mind conjures up Dobson, Haggard, Craig and Robertson.

I saw a different side of evangelical Christians yesterday in Southern Mexico. In the small village of Cardenas near Cintalapa, Chiapas, evangelicals run a free eye clinic called Cinica Pena de Horeb.

Throughout the year, about 25 poor Mexicans a day go to the clinic and wait patiently (sometimes up to three hours) for their eye exam. After, they are fitted with used glasses donated through the Lions Clubs. The positive changes this clinic makes in poor Mexicans' lives is unbelievable. Many are now able to drive, read and work. Their only payment is an optional donation. During campaigns, some of the best eye surgeons in the US come to Chiapas to perform up to 400 surgeries over the period of a couple of months, creating more miracles.

Instead of demonizing Mexicans like the hateful political agenda of US Christian extremists, these Christians truly do God's work. Although each visitor gets a Bible tract in Spanish (yesterday was excerpts from the Book of John and the Book of Romans), there is no hateful pressure to convert the many who are Catholic.

After this experience, I will look more closely at the stripes on the snakes to try to discover more like these people who profess and act in the true love of Jesus and not the now stereotype Robertson neocon hatred.

Patel's snake analogy fits me exactly. Mention evangelicals and my mind conjures up Dobson, Haggard, Craig and Robertson.

I saw a different side of evangelical Christians yesterday in Southern Mexico. In the small village of Cardenas near Cintalapa, Chiapas, evangelicals run a free eye clinic called Cinica Pena de Horeb.

Throughout the year, about 25 poor Mexicans a day go to the clinic and wait patiently (sometimes up to three hours) for their eye exam. After, they are fitted with used glasses donated through the Lions Clubs. The positive changes this clinic makes in poor Mexicans' lives is unbelievable. Many are now able to drive, read and work. Their only payment is an optional donation. During campaigns, some of the best eye surgeons in the US come to Chiapas to perform up to 400 surgeries over the period of a couple of months, creating more miracles.

Instead of demonizing Mexicans like the hateful political agenda of US Christian extremists, these Christians truly do God's work. Although each visitor gets a Bible tract in Spanish (yesterday was excerpts from the Book of John and the Book of Romans), there is no hateful pressure to convert the many who are Catholic.

After this experience, I will look more closely at the stripes on the snakes to try to discover more like these people who profess and act in the true love of Jesus and not the now stereotype Robertson neocon hatred.

Eboo and Mischka, you may have met these misguided bible thumpers but I am sure they had you checked for vest bombs before opening their doors. Goes with being a member of a 24/7 koranic-driven, warmongering religion!!!

Again, there is always the Five Step Deprogramming whenever you are ready to escape the mad Arab's hold over your neurons. And please forward this offer to all your Muslim friends.

CCNL -

Your pills are not working right...you want to up the medication so it actually reaches your brain/heart/wherever the defect is.

You are decaying old man.

[[[["It will be a good day when the left starts listening to religious voters on all issues, not just the convenient ones where they agree. When academia starts reaching out to the faithful, I think that will be evidence that the left has decided to embrace the faithful as equals in intellect rather than as a dumb mass of followers."]]]]

But they are a dumb mass of followers. How do you explain their flip-flop on torture? Or the accumulation of vast wealth in this world? Or global war? Christians have been against torture since the dark ages. These political fundamentalists are taking us back. They can justify ANYTHING with fear, hatred and anger. Read the headlines. It is a cult by any definition. A cult of Bush, a cult of personality. He and his party can do no wrong. ANYTHING GOES.

I was an evangelical in the early 80s and the movement is not the same. They mixed politics with religion. Which one has poisoned the other fatally is still up in the air. The movement today is based on power, money, greed and hatred.

They are snakes in the grass.

It is a perfect cover for those who like to manipulate others. It's the old mind screw. Except now they use mass marketing. Religious manipulation presented with Madison Avenue techniques. I wish I had a dollar for every time those fakers cashed in at the expense of others. Now, thanks to W, they even suck at the government teat.

Sorry dude, I have run out of patience with the hypocrites and blind followers. They have alienated me for life.

Eboo, you say, "Any time an entire group of people is written off as the enemy, I think it’s probably time to get a little closer."

When it comes to Muslims there will be a check made of the luggage before getting too close, thank you and no thanks to suitcase bombs. We've had enough of the other kind, "the exploding kind" of bombs to be exact.

Christian ministers expect to run the world while we wait for Jesus to come down from heaven and reclaim His throne. Governments are really just "tools" in their "holy" hands to enforce God's laws in the kingdom of God.

It seems to me that ayatollahs have the same thing in mind. In Iran for example the secular government is just a tool in the hands of the rich and powerful ayatollahs. Real soon they'll get the "exploding" kind of bomb suitable for destroying the whole wide world.

I'm an optimist. Let the fighting begin to see which group, rich Christian ministers or rich ayatollahs will control the whole world.

Of course you could do your part to educate evangelicals. You can begin by noticing that all worship is Devil worship. Muslims get their Allah God from the burning bush too.

http://www.hoax-buster.org/sellyoursoul Will clue you in. You haven't already sold your soul and are incapable of saving yourself much less others?

Legitemate and sincere evangelicals need to cast out the money changing snakes from their churches like Jesus did. They also need to stay out of politics, and get back into the ghetto serving poor people with love and compassion.

God vs. Mammon?

Basically in my opinion every televangelist is a hypocrite and criminal tax evader, and thief of donations intended by the donors to benefit the poor... At best...

Will the REAL evangelical christians who live like Jesus would have approved of please stand up!

WE NEED YOU TO THROW OUT THE FAKES AND CARNIVAL BARKERS IN SUITS AND DIAMONDS WHO MAKE YOU LOOK BAD AND WRECK YOUR GOOD WORKS!

Eboo said:

"...we talked about how the Qur'an and the Bible call us to be interfaith peacebuilders..."

Hahahahahaha! You're funny Eboo.

“… slay the unbelievers wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush…”

Koran sura 9:5

If the left stopped hating religious people so much, they would have figured this out long ago.

But you can't ban prayer in schools, push abortion-on-demand, attack religious people as unqualified to be appointed to positions in government, and characterize the faithful as followers who can't think and win their votes at the same time.

It will be a good day when the left starts listening to religious voters on all issues, not just the convenient ones where they agree. When academia starts reaching out to the faithful, I think that will be evidence that the left has decided to embrace the faithful as equals in intellect rather than as a dumb mass of followers.

Eboo, they may have met these misguided bible thumpers but I am sure they had you checked for vest bombs before opening their doors. Goes with being a member of a 24/7 koranic-driven, warmongering religion!!!

Eboo,

Thanks for your rather incisive look at evangelicals. Past evangelical leaders were fairly narrow in defining their important issues--abortion, prayer in schools, homosexual marriage--and were willing to make compromises with Wall Street and the military industrial complex to advance them. Emerging evangelicals value many of those same issues, both also other issues such as the environment and tackling poverty.

Who will be the emerging evangelical candidate for president? I suspect there are several possibilities, including Hucklebee and Obama. Perhaps their dream ticket would be a combination of the two! And that augurs well for reducing the rancorous tone of politics in Washington.