19 replies »

  1. Exactly which part of the comment bothers you, Adam ? The part about Christianity, Islam, or the inference that religious zealotry is and has been the cause of many conflicts, something I assume we all agree is a historical fact.

  2. MTC…….errm…..it’s inaccuracy perhaps?

    A religion cannot be ‘bloodthirsty’ – individual operators within that religion possibly can. The generalisation and stereotyping of millions of members of any group with specific traits is, of course, a form of bigotry.

    Christians do NOT ‘literally drink blood’. Either the writer (& moderator) does not know the meaning of the word literally, or he/she is quite happy to spread silly libels of the kind which in this modern world it is not implausible to conclude may cause strife.

    Just weeks ago we were witness to the fact that people were killed because of a rumour that a Koran was to be burned without it actually happening.
    10 years ago violence exploded in this region at least in part because of a rumour of the death of a child named Al Durra.

    Is the Guardian really in the business of stoking the fires of baseless hatred?

  3. Have you ever heard of the term Transubstantiation?

    Roman Catholics believe that the wine and bread consumed is changed into the substance of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Eucharist.

    Since it is only catholics who believe they are literally drinking the blood of Christ, does that make the statement less accurate?

    How do you turn this into a blood libel?

    The Jews were pretty bloodthirsty according to the bible. And the Muslims have been known to slit a throat or two. As have Christians?

    What exactly are you complaining about?

  4. What exactly is the problem here?

    Anyway. My parents go to a Methodist church where they drink ribena instead of that-which-shall-not-be-named.

  5. Why should Islam be beyond criticism? The inquest on 52 people murdered in London by Muslims begins today. What is it that we are supposed not to notice?

    Who murdered that poor aid woman in Afghanistan on Friday? And Margaret Hassan?

  6. They believe that they receive a gift from God at a moment of intense spiritual contemplation of what that might mean. In the flesh of Christ is incarnated the Father, but despite the profundity of their supplication, they would be horrified to find that swimming in the cup was not vin ordinaire, but a more robust liquid procured by venesection. They do not in reality drink fresh blood, nor do they in reality, gnaw on a tender piece of human meat. They taste wine, water( or even Ribena so we are told ) and biscuit, and imagine the blessing that accompanies their devotions.

    The poster is ignorant of the meaning of words and of religious dogma, but devious enough to manoeuvre Islam alongside Christianity for intrinsic violence, which was no doubt his bitter purpose.

  7. epidermoid

    As well as the obvious making literal that which cannot be, the commenter is using the false equivalence.

    Maybe such all read or watch too much “magic realism”. In some cases it seems like ingestion of too much magic mushroom.

    I believe that on UK census forms “jedi Knight” is acceptable as a definition of one’s religion.

  8. Its not nice to make fun of a person ignorance , someone should teach him what the word literally means .

  9. MTC, are you being sarcastic, because I really can’t tell. Ok, assuming you’r not: what am I offended by? “Christians drink blood”? At best, that’s just bizarre? More importantly, do you think that the argument that all religions are “bloodthirsty” is reasonable? “religion is the root of all evil” is as trite as it is historically inaccurate. The worst butchers, by far, of the 20th century – Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot have all been atheists who have persecuted people of faith. Do you deny this? A secular totalitarian ideology by the name of communism has killed over 100 million people in the 20th century – a fact folks are in complete denial about. I’d recommend this book: http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674076082

  10. The idea that some of our local Anglican community – who take communion, incidentally – are ‘religious zealots’ has given me my chuckle of the day.

    These religious zealots! Will they ever desist and decease from their flower arranging activities, their tea and biscuit mornings and their dastardly vicar who – be prepared to be appalled – visits the sick and sings at the local care home? And don’t get me started on their annual summer fete! Devils!

    The local Catholics are no better. Why, they arranged so many fund-raisers for the Indonesian Tsunami appeal that you’d scarce belive the audicity of it! The town was knee-deep in raffle tickets and events for months.

  11. As a Catholic I can confirm that I do drink the Lord’s blood every Sunday (Well, unless I am at a church where only his body is provided, although of course this incorporates blood). My Orthodox brethren do likewise.

    That aside, I don’t agree with this comment, and indeed I think it is really rather stupid, but nor do I believe that it should be removed or its poster banned. One of the joys of living the United Kingdom is that it is not a totalitarian-inclined state.

  12. Adam:
    “The worst butchers, by far, of the 20th century – Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot have all been atheists who have persecuted people of faith. ”

    Wrong. They founded religions that worshiped them instead of God. They persecuted anyone who believed in other faiths, both the religious and the atheist ones.

  13. MTC,

    re: “Adam:
    “The worst butchers, by far, of the 20th century – Stalin, Hitler, Mao, and Pol Pot have all been atheists who have persecuted people of faith. ”

    Wrong. They founded religions that worshiped them instead of God. They persecuted anyone who believed in other faiths, both the religious and the atheist ones.”

    That’s my point. The problems in the world aren’t, per se, caused by traditional organized religions, they are causes by zealous, rigid, extremist totalitarian ideologies – whether they be religious based or secular based. I thinks its pretty silly of the poster I quoted to assume that if the world was suddenly free of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism, peace and harmony would break out. I think he’s heard the John Lennon song “Imagine” too many times.

  14. @Pretz:

    I think the post relates to anti-Semitism at CiF, insofar as it says that Judaism (among other religions) is a “bloodthirsty” religion. Imagine if he said that “….and “Africans” are bloodthirsty people? Wouldn’t that rightfully be considered bigoted?

  15. The passage in John 6 that refers to drinking Jesus’ blood is often misunderstood and has been misunderstood for centuries. It is because of this passage that many Christians have been accused of cannibalism. What people making this accusation never bothered to do was read the entire context:

    John 6.63-64 “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe.”

    Meaning no ill-will to Catholicism, we do not literally eat or drink Jesus’ flesh or blood, for “the flesh is no help at all.” Jesus’ broken body and spilled blood, symbolized in the Lord’s Supper, are what purchased our salvation and we commemorate that in the Lord’s Supper. We drink that cup at the table because Jesus drank the cup of God’s wrath (Isa 51.17, Matt 26.39ff) .