Democrat Ilhan Omar wins Minnesota House race

Muslims were mostly illiterate, just like today.
However there were some who could read, and they were following doctrine.

 

There have been groups of Christians trying to push their "Biblical Law" into our government for decades and have been fairly unsuccessful thanks to the First Amendment and the SCOTUS and Christians are the vast majority. Muslims make up about 1.1% of the US population. How much power to you really think they have?

 

At this point they have no power other than the phony claims of racism, islamophobia, and others that are made for the
Americans to feel guilty.

 

Claiming its false again and again, doesn't make it so. You've refuted nothing. And some **** made up by the Catholic church with no support in the written doctrine of the bible, is not Christian doctrine. It would be Catholic doctrine.

 

Bullsh-t

show me that doctrine. and don't show me Jewish, and pretend it is Christian.

I can show you thousands of clips from Islamic doctrine, but not one from Christian doctrine.
There are two, I believe, that are controversial, and not inline with the life of Christ,


But hardly a comparison with the thousands of Islam.

 

I have given plenty of support. How does the 1000 years of horror under Christianity not demonstrate that Christian doctrine advocated violence ?

How does a Papal Bull legalizing torture of heretics not advocate violence. How is a Papal Bull not Christian Doctrine ?

Your claim that Christian doctrine did not advocate violence is completely false.

 

Either you do not know what "Doctrine is" or you are completely ignorant of History.

How does a Papal Bull legalizing Torture of Heretics not advocate violence ?

 

LOL

That's catholic.
Many Christian groups do not consider Catholics, Christian.

You and I both know, I am looking for "Christian" doctrine.
Not something some group wrote a thousand years later.

 

That was the Christian doctrine of the day. There were no such thing as Protestants at that time. Even if there were Protestants (which there were not) this would still be part of Christian Doctrine.

I don't think you understand what doctrine is. A Papal bull is "by definition" Christian doctrine. "Sola Fide" is "by definition" Christian doctrine.

Name one significant Christian group that does not consider Catholic's "Christian" ? You are grasping at straws and delving into nonsense.

 

There were Christians before there were Catholics.
Catholicism overtook Europe, and then the known world, in many cases by the sword.
This falls into the old claim, where it is not the religion, but the evil people in charge, and the some of the Catholics, Popes included, were pretty evil.

The Christian doctrine in America, was to wipe out the natives, destroy their religion and language.
Well, that's not in the religion, it was used by the religion. Mostly Protestant.
But in your logic, it was the doctrine of the day.

https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-do-...der-catholics-to-be-christians-and-how-do-you

 

Because Christian committing violence isn't evidence of Christian doctrine advocating violence. I can show you Muslims who don't pray 5 times a day. This is not evidence that Islam advocates NOT praying 5 times a day.

 

What nonsense. Papal Bull isn't Christian doctrine. How can something absent from the Christian bible and absent from half the Christian s beliefs in the world, be characterized as Christian doctrine when it is exclusive to the Catholic church and beliefs. ITS CATHOLIC doctrine. And following beliefs exclusive to the Catholics doesn't exclude them from the classification of "Christian". It excludes THEIR doctrine, exclusive to the Catholic Church and it followers from classification as "Christian Doctrine".

 

Christian doctrine advocating violence (Papal bull legalizing torture of heretics) is the evidence of Christian doctrine advocating violence.

 

Of course a Papal Bull is Christian Doctrine. Catholic and Orthodox were the main factions of Christianity at the time and shortly prior to this time Catholic was the only main denonmination. It was "Christianity" for all intensive purposes.

Even if it wasn't "The main denomination" - being a main denomination still makes it part of Christian doctrine.

You do not seem to understand what the word "Doctrine" means. If Catholic doctrine is not "Christian doctrine" then there is no Christian doctrine period.

 

You can call it tree frogs if you like, whatever the "Doctrine", it is different from the original.

 

Much of Christian doctrine is different from the "original" .. what even is the "Original" ? There is no "Original" right from the get go there were huge differences in doctrine among the various Christian communities.

Regardless - one Christian doctrine differing from another does not make these doctrines "NOT" Christian doctrine. Just because there were various Christian groups who rejected the Trinity (and the Trinity was not part of "original doctrine") does not make the Trinity "NOT" Christian doctrine.

You are talking nonsense.

 

Like I said, that would be Catholic doctrine. Text of the bible put an end to that practice so that it is no longer even a part of Catholic doctrine. That's why we don't see any torture of heretics while we do still see the slaughter of unbelievers in Islam.

 

Different sects, will have their "Doctrines", if you insist on using that word.
Just like Kony, of the Lords resistance army, has his "Doctrine" that no Christian sect acknowledges.
We have snake handlers with their "Christian doctrine".
Westboro Baptist with theirs.
even Butler of the Aryan Nations had his.

 

Catholic Doctrine is Christian doctrine .. sorry to burst your bubble but, it is what it is. You claimed that Christians doctrine never advocated violence. This claim is patently false.

 

For some it's Christian doctrine, for others it's not.
Many think Catholicism is satanic.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

Remember Butler of the Aryan Nations promoted murder, and got it.

 

'

I am not the one that introduced this word .. it was you or Dixon. I am just telling you what the word means. You wandering off into some fairy tale land ... where no Christian Sect in the Middle ages acknowledged the primacy of the Pope and the doctrine that came out of that office - is nonsensical gibberish on steroids.

Comparison to Westboro Baptist is even more nonsensical.

 

What bubble ... You are the one who was having trouble figuring out what doctrine is ... now you are creating a straw man fallacy because you have no valid argument.

For some Muslims Sharia is doctrine .. for others it is not. I for one think both Cathoicism and Sharia are Satanic but who cares as this has no relevance to what is being discussed and neither do your comments.

 

No dude,
every single sect has their doctrine.
I suppose technically it is Christian doctrine.
but that would be a play on words.
It is not valid straight across the board

Are Catholics christian
https://www.born-again-christian.info/catholics.htm


You're not going to change your mind, nor am I going to change mine,
so I think we can agree to disagree.

 

Change your mind to what ? - you have wandered so far down a nonsensical rabbit hole that the central point of the discussion was lost a long time ago.

You post this link about "born again's" the wing nuts of the wing nut farm - claiming Catholics are not Christian. Who cares .. what does this have to do with the difference between a Muslim who is an Islamist and one who is not ?

Disagree ? what do we disagree on. I agree that Catholicism in general does not follow the teachings of Christ but, neither do the fundamentalist wing nuts. Only someone who themselves does not understand the teachings of Christ would bother posting what you just did.

What does any of this have to do with the difference between a Muslim who is an Islamist - and one who is not ? Fk Me.