Damned if you do, damned if you don't. A question about Islam v. Christianity.

[Muad_Dib]

Oh come on you guys. Everyone knows that the one true faith is Mormonism.

[Scott_Plaid]

::Rereads the thread.::
It,s interesting to see how many fellow non-theists are here. After all, since so many people play “devil’s advocate”, it’s not alway easy to tell who believes what.
P.S. I see exactly what sqweels is talking about in real life.
Oh, and before I forget… Yoink!
::Grabs his shoes back from Malacandra::

[yBeayf]

According to Islam, all christian go to akira, which as I understand it is both a good movie, and their name for hell.

Tha hell? The Islamic (Arabic) term for “hell” is “Jahannam”. I’ve no idea where you got “akira” from.

[Genghis_Bob]

@Scott_plaid

. . . How arrogant. I am disgusted by the whole thing. What kind of a dialog are members of an interfaith alliance, such as I see springing up everywhere, suppost to get along when each feels the other is going to hell!

Scott_Plaid, read **Israfel’s ** post again, more carefully this time. You completely missed the point.

[Scott_Plaid]

I don’t see how.

@Israfel

<snip>, it may be possible to receive that salvation without worshipping Christ** by name.**

So you’re not chrisitian, but don’t worry, you are still worshipping jesus, even if you don’t think you are.

<snip>people of other religions might have an **“implicit faith in [Christ].” ** And in Mere Christianity, Lewis writes that while “we do know that no man can be saved except through Christ; we do not know that only those who know Him can be saved through Him.”

So you’re not chrisitian, but don’t worry, you are still worshipping jesus, even if you don’t think you are.

In other words. Jesus is the only way to heaven. For muslims it’s either “You are going to hell.”, or it’s “You didn’t worshipp the right guy, but doen’t worry. Jesus wants you to go to heaven.”

Either way, it’s jesus. How arrogant.

[sqweels]

@Genghis Bob

Which post exactly are your referring to? I haven’t seen much that I would characterize as defensive behavior or playing the victim in this thread. Or are you referring to Religious folk in general?

Just in general. Self-appointed spokesmen for “the religious community” frequently portray themselves as under attack by “secular humanists” but, as this thread demonstrates, there is plenty of attacking going on internally and there’s hardly a consistent viewpoint to attack. Or to put it another way, what’s wrong with disagreeing with religion when religion disagrees with itself?