Difference Among Christianity, Judaism, and Islam

[Illuminaughty]

As many of you may know, Lady Gaga's Tour came to a screeching halt in Indonesia after repeated violent threats from Islamic groups as well as political hindering from South Korean and Philippian Christian groups. I don't agree with either group's approach to displaying their condemnation of the singer/performer; however, it inspired some thoughts that are often overlooked. Now these questions require very wide generalizations, but what are your thoughts about any of these?

Why do radical Islamic groups oppress people via violent means more often whereas radical Christian groups are oppressive via political and social means more often? (In the past few decades) What major differences in scripture, if any, affect followers behavior differently among Jews, Christians, and Muslims; think of it this way, if we were to give three indigenous tribes, who have not made any communication or have any knowledge outside of their tribes either a Qoran, Old Testament, or New Testament, and they adopted one of these religions, how do you think each religion would affect these tribes? If you think that these religions are similar, why do we have so much conflict among them?

First thought, well most Europeans and North Americans are Christian, and most Middle Easterns and some western Asians are Muslims. Therefore, it's the difference in government structure, but is it a two way street? Does government affect religion, or does religion affect government? I personally, know Muslim people who live in the United States, and they are pretty darn normal/boring people like the rest of us. I think that government/culture affects most of the differences in religious group actions. However, I think that the governments that exist today were majorly influenced by the religious populations of the past.

Religious population => government => Religious Group Behavior

For the second part, about difference in scripture. I think that the Old Testament and Qoran are pretty similar. So why are Judeo-Christian and Jewish groups so much different in action? I think this goes back to the diagram I made above. Since most Judeo-Christians and Jews live in countries whose religious populations have always been less influenced by the Old Testament and more by the New Testament, the governments structure is different from those with Muslim origins. Therefore, Jews and Judeo-Christians have adopted non-Judeo Christian customs.


All-in-all, I think that history has shaped each religion. I think that given different circumstances or events occurred in history, religion would not be the same it is today. So with the hypothetical tribes, I think that it could affect the tribes in several unpredictable ways; it doesn't matter which book you give them. Although, the New Testament tribe is very slightly more likely to be less harsh or despotic, although it certainly could be just as harsh or despotic as the other two.

Ugh, that was a mouthful. Please try to keep this conversation a "conversation". Please try not to blatantly offend any group. Conversely, try not to take any generalizations personally. If you disagree, please explain in a "friendly" or "philosophical" tone. With that being said, have a nice discussion!

 

[twocows]

Why do radical Islamic groups oppress people via violent means more often whereas radical Christian groups are oppressive via political and social means more often?

Your single example fails to convince me of the truth of this statement. There have been plenty of violent, militant Christian groups in history. The KKK comes to mind. Also: the Crusades.

 

[Illuminaughty]

Your single example fails to convince me of the truth of this statement. There have been plenty of violent, militant Christian groups in history. The KKK comes to mind. Also: the Crusades.

It was meant to be taken as a current status of both religions. But the two examples you mention go back into the history of Christianity, which definitely helps justify the fact that the practice/scripture of Christianity doesn't necessarily inspire more peaceful/diplomatic acts. I personally feel like a group's actions can go either way, but how did we arrive to this current state in which Islamic groups distill physical fear into people on a large scale more so than do Christian groups?

I fixed the main thread to clarify the point to ensure that it is taken as the current state of behaviors.

 

[Deadrocks]

I think most radical Islamic groups follow Shiria Law.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

I don't see the KKK as a Christian group. Doing something idiotic in the name of religion, does not make it part of that religion. Given where Jesus lived, I don't think he was a white supremacist. Or that pastor the other day who held the anti-gay sermon. He's Christian (apparently), but that doesn't make his opinion Christian. Jesus said nothing about gay people.

The Crusades were bad, but why do the Catholics always get the sole bad press? They were being persecuted, denied access to Jerusalem, their holy sites destroyed. It was an extreme act of retaliation, which is not to say it was good or entirely justified. A modern example, I'd say would be the Japan bombings America launched during WWII. Horrible. But the country isn't defined by that moment today, and yet Catholic-detractors are always quick to bring up an event from the 11th century.

Regardless... in the modern context, if I had to give a reason, I'd say because Jesus was a preacher and Muhammad was a war hero. Also, Shiria Law is part of the culture like Deadrocks said.

Also, I think there's a bit of a "religious lifecycle". Islam is still relatively new compared to Christianity and Judaism, both of which have violence in their past. Personally, I would have thought those instances were more part of the climate of the times than anything else, and acting that way today in 2012 just seems extreme to me.

 

[Charicific]

Ok let's get started....

I personally believe that the environment and government has an impact on religion, vice versa is also true. We see lots of Islamic Terrorist groups, but the truth to be told...Muslims are NOT Terrorists. It is the very group that does the terrorism due to their weak understanding, so it's not fair to claim Islam as a religion is a religion of violence and terrorism. Same thing goes for all other religion, but I used Islam as an example since it's the religion with highest rate of misconceptions.

Government in the Middle East can be the key, the problem is, they have quite huge conflicts at that category. For example, they have a very disturbing scarcity and insufficient education, it is extremely weak and outrageously priced. Putting that in hand, what are the results? Youth who might be unable to build their future and represent their country as a whole. They get slackers, jobless youth, low literacy, and very slow technological concern. The way government organizes things there is disastrous unfortunately. Why am I making all of these claims? Well, as ironic as it may be, their religion...is actually totally against all of these negativity they have, it also offers solutions! But...people just neglect, and they would simply be laughed at :(

Some people might claim it's the religion impact that brought people to this state...but...have you seen American Muslims for example? Have you seen non-arab Muslims? They are PERFECTLY NORMAL and even better! Man, I don't know where I reached :P Anyway, the point is, it's not fair to judge a whole belief out of an individual.

Worst problem here is, the MEDIA. It's simply lies after lies, and the worst is..the ignorant people who follow it. They always tend to target the black spot in the community and present it as "Look, this is how all (insert group here) act" Outrageous!

I also have the same opinion on the other religions. Factually speaking, I do not believe there would be a religion on earth that commands its followers to do something bad! It just doesn't make sense. If you have a doubt about any religious group, just look at their count. Don't you feel suspicious? Billions of people practice Christianity and you expect all of these billions would accept following something claimed by others to be Violent, Pointless, Immoral etc?
Same thing for Judaism. Billions of people follow Islam, yet people make the claim that they are terrorists? Violent? Uncivilized?

To wrap my argument up, simply, separate religion from culture. Do not criticize a religious group out of individuals. And most importantly, If you want to know the true properties of a certain religion, just read it's HOLY BOOK! Read them yourself and ALWAYS BE OBJECTIVE! Seek what's right not what's satisfactory.

BTW, let's face it, those people...who do radical things under the name of Religion and God...are complete idiots. They don't know what they are talking about and they are DEFINITELY not doing something accepted by their religion. On the contrary, they are defying it yet they claim they are right *sigh..*

 

[Esper]

For the record, you should use a term like Hebrew Bible or Hebrew Scriptures instead of Old Testament since that is a Christian-centric term and carries some assumptions you don't want to make when talking about religion.

There's more to the issue than just religion and government. Take economy for an example. Lots of predominantly Muslim countries are much poorer than your average Christian-majority nation. Look at the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, two countries with a lot of oil wealth. Not exactly places where armed gangs roam the streets. (They have other problems, of course, but I'm just trying to make a small point.) I also hate to bring up the whole Kony, but that's a pretty good example of Christians today causing violence, and it happens to be across rather impoverished areas.

Without making my post too long I would just like to say that I think you get more violence the poorer your country is and the more religious its leadership is, regardless of the religion. I think that a relative lack of violence in Europe etc., is due to our relatively high levels of secularism and the fact that people are comfortable enough that they don't want to be violent.

I don't see the KKK as a Christian group. Doing something idiotic in the name of religion, does not make it part of that religion.

I'm not just saying this to be argumentative, and I don't mean to get off topic, but why not? How do you (not you specifically) decide what is part of a religion and what isn't?

 

[Deadrocks]

I'm not just saying this to be argumentative, and I don't mean to get off topic, but why not? How do you (not you specifically) decide what is part of a religion and what isn't?

As a Christian myself, they are a mis-representation of Christianity. Though you could obviously argue the opposite. I don't believe Christians kill in the name of God or Jesus.

Or that pastor the other day who held the anti-gay sermon. He's Christian (apparently), but that doesn't make his opinion Christian. Jesus said nothing about gay people.

As a Christian I too don't believe in homosexuality. No Jesus doesn't say anything about it, but it referred to in the Old Testament/ Hebrew Bible. However, I do not condone how most Christian treat homosexuals, calling them names, telling them they are going to go to hell, etc. God hates sin, I don't believe he hates people.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

For the record, you should use a term like Hebrew Bible or Hebrew Scriptures instead of Old Testament since that is a Christian-centric term and carries some assumptions you don't want to make when talking about religion.

There's more to the issue than just religion and government. Take economy for an example. Lots of predominantly Muslim countries are much poorer than your average Christian-majority nation. Look at the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, two countries with a lot of oil wealth. Not exactly places where armed gangs roam the streets. (They have other problems, of course, but I'm just trying to make a small point.) I also hate to bring up the whole Kony, but that's a pretty good example of Christians today causing violence, and it happens to be across rather impoverished areas.

Without making my post too long I would just like to say that I think you get more violence the poorer your country is and the more religious its leadership is, regardless of the religion. I think that a relative lack of violence in Europe etc., is due to our relatively high levels of secularism and the fact that people are comfortable enough that they don't want to be violent.


I'm not just saying this to be argumentative, and I don't mean to get off topic, but why not? How do you (not you specifically) decide what is part of a religion and what isn't?

I'll try to rephrase it. They may be Christian (probably applies to other religions too, but I'll speak for my own) in that they were raised as such or converted on their own. They may perform some atrocity in the name of their religion, but that doesn't make it a religious act. If the action is counter religious teaching, then it is contradictory.

As a Christian myself, they are a mis-representation of Christianity. Though you could obviously argue the opposite. I don't believe Christians kill in the name of God or Jesus.



As a Christian I too don't believe in homosexuality. No Jesus doesn't say anything about it, but it referred to in the Old Testament/ Hebrew Bible. However, I do not condone how most Christian treat homosexuals, calling them names, telling them they are going to go to hell, etc. God hates sin, I don't believe he hates people.

What do you mean you don't believe it? It's a thing.

Anyway, one can hold that viewpoint I suppose. But, the preacher said to round them up and electrify them. I would say that goes against the faith. Love thy neighbour and all that jazz. Not killing people.

 

[Illuminaughty]

I'll try to rephrase it. They may be Christian (probably applies to other religions too, but I'll speak for my own) in that they were raised as such or converted on their own. They may perform some atrocity in the name of their religion, but that doesn't make it a religious act. If the action is counter religious teaching, then it is contradictory.

I see where you are getting at, but let's say that we have 2 people who interpret their faiths in different ways:

1) Believe homosexuality is wrong.
2) Believe homosexuality is all right.

Many churches teach 1; many churches teach 2.

So if you are a 2, the 1's might seem contradictory to faith, but they are still acting in the faith in which has been interpreted for them, whether we agree or not; we cannot claim they are not taking a religious action, since we cannot define religious beliefs for all people within a given sect.

This side discussion aside, I have to agree with Scarf's observation about economics. I wonder if it's because of the religion of the people that they are usually more poor, or if it's the other way around. What makes people from "Muslim" countries more susceptible to poverty than "Christian" nations? The scriptures or the way in which they are interpreted?

 

[droomph]

Just as many people say that born-again anti-gay Christians aren't exactly Christian I have heard Muslims say that the extremists who hate America aren't exactly Muslim.

It's just that we give bigger press to them because they hate AMERICA, and we don't like it that way and we'll embarrass them into defeat. Which is not working.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

I see where you are getting at, but let's say that we have 2 people who interpret their faiths in different ways:

1) Believe homosexuality is wrong.
2) Believe homosexuality is all right.

Many churches teach 1; many churches teach 2.

So if you are a 2, the 1's might seem contradictory to faith, but they are still acting in the faith in which has been interpreted for them, whether we agree or not; we cannot claim they are not taking a religious action, since we cannot define religious beliefs for all people within a given sect.

This side discussion aside, I have to agree with Scarf's observation about economics. I wonder if it's because of the religion of the people that they are usually more poor, or if it's the other way around. What makes people from "Muslim" countries more susceptible to poverty than "Christian" nations? The scriptures or the way in which they are interpreted?

I don't have a problem if someone says it is wrong. That is technically true to the faith, even if I don't like it. My problem would come from "Well, then we should kill them". No, no you shouldn't. "Thou shalt not kill". If you kill in the name of any religion, when that religion teaches against it, then you have not committed a religious act. So, I conclude the KKK were not a Christian group.

Anywho, I'd say the economics have more to do with the people in charge and how they want to control their people. Lots of dictators in the mideast. But lots of oil too. They entire country could be very wealthy. From the leadership and the culture also comes discrimination against women. They could be educated and working, but they're not. I don't think that inherently part of Islam the faith, but rather Islamic culture. Like the burqa. Not a mandatory item as dictated in the Koran, but they chose to wear it as a cultural item of faith. Like Italians wearing a cross around their neck... if that cross we're gigantic and covered their entire body. It's culture.

So, we could argue interpretation I guess. It's culture, but religious culture - even if not religious doctrine.

 

[Deadrocks]

What do you mean you don't believe it? It's a thing.

Of course, of course. I meant that I believe homosexuality to be sinful.

 

[Livewire]

Seeing as the KKK used plenty of religeous imagery and religeous symbolism in their vitriol, then yes, they count as a religeous extremist group.

 

[diab_low]

I think most radical Islamic groups follow Shiria Law.

Hi im actully a muslim and your kinda wrong. The way we (muslims) see it, sharia law is the ruling of god Allah. we would not be good muslims if we did not follow sharia law. Its our way of life. its like how the christians and the jews and any other religon following what god has set out for them. you see you just cant call us radical because we are following our religon. And the thing that hurts us the mist is that we try to show the world how good of a nation we are, but the government and media all help each other to demoralise us, and for what.


Posted from Pokecommunity.com App for Android

 

[OmegaRuby and AlphaSapphire]

Well I beleive the differences come the evolution of the religions. They all started at different times though can be traces back to Abraham. Islam just like Christianity of the Crusades period is going under a radical period due to popular radical figures who abuse the image of Allah (or God in the case of the Crusades) to wage war for their own political gain.

Also not all Muslims are terrorists, there's some religious centric bias against them, after the media discovered that the guy in Norway wasn't a Muslim they ceased to call him a Terrorist...

 

[Illuminaughty]

Some issues don't even relate to terrorism or war, they are domestic.

For instance, the bible and quran both have passages about women, and where their place in society is. It's interesting how the sentiments are vastly different between the two, although the passages are quite similar.

 

[Livewire]

Part of it is that Islamism (extremist Islam) and to another extent, the Islamic world, is still in its infancy in terms of development & technology compared to Judaism & Roman Catholicism. It's just that Christianity & Judaism have already gone through their violent phases for the most part. Islam is catching up, on account of being the newest and youngest of the three great Monotheistic faiths. When heath standards rise, when education rates rise, when the theocratic fanticism & censorship wanes, the violence too will wane.

 

[Kung Fu Ferret]

Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists these days ARE Muslim.
Individual people like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden were the reason a lot of people in the United States felt a sort of prejudice toward all Muslims. That is what I think.
I also recall that I read somewhere that Muhammad wanted Islam to be a peaceful religion.

 

[KingCharizard]

I dont see the difference between them, dont know why people like to.. also stop calling people terroists who aren't Saddam Hussein was a dictator he only became a "Terrorist" when we went into his country and picked a fight. Osama bin Laden was a scapegoat not a "Terrorist"

It is true, "History is written by the Victor"