There is a general consesus in the media and amongst politicians that Islam is a good religion and most muslims practise it well. Terrorists distort Islam and twist it to their evil purposes.

But I see the other way round. I think Islam is an agressive, nasty religion. Thankfully most muslims are much better than that and are decent people. The terrorists are the true muslims and interpret the bloody-thirsty battle-cry that is the Koran correctly.

To me, the Old Testament Bible shows similar characteristics.
It has many examples of the overtaking of lands, and peoples, in the name of god.
It shows examples of how god was on the side of the conquers.
It appears that conquest, and the taking of lives, in these original religions, was o.k, if in the name of a god.

These early religions seem to be an attempt at justification of man's need to acquire, and possess.

Read the story of the 40 year travels of the Moses group. Conquest, with the help of god, was justified.

Christianity could march against the Islamic religion, finding full justification in the Bible.

Agreed, but with at least they have NT too. When a christian says jesus or god is love, at least their book backs them up (even if it contradicts itself in other places such as the examples you mention).

To the best of my knowledge - which admittedly is wanting - the koran does not really have any nice or positive bits to it.

I would be interested to see Innocent's take on this. I have always heard quite the opposite. That the Koran is a book of peace and love.

But - you think they are all going to hell right?

The only way to heaven is through Jesus Christ.

So - the answer is yes - you think they are all going to hell.

How arrogant is that !

Anybody with half a brain could determine that such beliefs made absolutely no sense at all.

What exactly do you get out of your pointless name calling and tasteless rhetoric?

Anyone who doesnt except Christ as their savior will not go to Heaven.

What part of what I wrote is incorrect?

How can you possibly condemn 3 billion muslims to hell and think you are right? It's insane.

Only a very deep level of brainwashing could make you content that you are correct on that point.

Also - the simple fact that you refuse to say

"All muslims are going to hell"

and skirt the issue - betrays your level of embarrasement with that view. Do you not struggle with such a view? How can you justify it? How can you live with such a belief?

Only a cruel and unjust God would create such rules that basically White American / Europeans go to heaven and the "savages" go to hell (unless they see it our way of course)

The only logical conclusion is such a rule is patently false.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
The only way to heaven is through Jesus Christ.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Quite a statement.

Shows a belief in two things. Both Heaven and Jesus must exist.
How has this been proven to you without a shadow-of-doubt?
Absolutely confirmed.

Something written, or word-of-mouth, is not proof.
A hope, or feeling, is psychological, not proof.

Should I receive absolute proof, I too would make such a statement. I would spread the word while showing this proof for all to see, removing all doubt.

I believe I have clearly said it, Drew. If one of islam or any other religion chooses not to accept Christ as their personal savior, they are indeed going to hell.

And remind me again what you base such a radical view upon?

Estimate what % you believe this to be true. (ie 100% would mean you do not have even a single doubt)

Ugh! I base this view upon the fact that Christ himself said, "no one enters the kingdom of heaven but by me."

And I believe in Christ 100%.

From what I've seen of the Koran, Islam can be a peaceful, loving religion, as well as a violent, aggressive one. It all depends on which parts you want to look at and how you interpret it. I personally believe that that's the result of either one person writing it over the course of his lifetime, or multiple people writing it, with each inserting his own views.
Or I could be completely wrong and the Koran really is the word of God. But I wouldn't bet a dime on that.

Originally posted by Jester
But I wouldn't bet a dime on that.

Seems to be a problem around here. People are scared to put their faith in anything....but themselves.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
And I believe in Christ 100%.

Why?

Seems to be a problem around here. People are scared to put their faith in anything....but themselves.
There's a difference between fear and logic. You abide by the former, we abide by the latter.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
Seems to be a problem around here. People are scared to put their faith in anything....but themselves.

We have another problem also of people who have their head deep in the sand of spoon fed religion.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
Seems to be a problem around here. People are scared to put their faith in anything....but themselves.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Self, is the only thing that I have 100% proof of.

Food for thought.......

Your christ is another mans satan If he's right, you're in a world of trouble. And he is as convinced as you are that he is right.

When you grow up in hick town Bible belt USA - you get brainwashed from birth. The ones that stick around and where the brainwashing fails to stick turn to crystal meth for meaning.

Ok - a bit of a generalization I know, but it's not too far off the mark.

Originally posted by DrewM
Why?

Because I have felt his power and presence in my life. He has worked through me. I can feel him within my heart.

Originally posted by Blibblob
There's a difference between fear and logic. You abide by the former, we abide by the latter.

When someone says theyre logic tells them there is no God, it's nothing more than a way to deal with the emptiness of having nothing higher than themselves.

Because I have felt his power and presence in my life. He has worked through me. I can feel him within my heart.
And although I don't I agree, it is commendable.

Because I have felt his power and presence in my life. He has worked through me. I can feel him within my heart.
And I often get the feeling as though somebody is watching me. Nobody there. Just as little kids are absolutely certain that there's a monster in their closet. It's not there. You can feel whatever you want, but placebo is more powerful than reality.

Originally posted by DrewM
We have another problem also of people who have their head deep in the sand of spoon fed religion.

What exactly is "spoon fed religion" I hear you make a lot of accusations and do a lot of name calling, but I have never once seen you actually say anything of any substanial claim as why I am so bad for believing in God.

So...all you do is result to name calling and childish games...as you do later making fun of where I live.

Originally posted by Blibblob
Because I have felt his power and presence in my life. He has worked through me. I can feel him within my heart.
And I often get the feeling as though somebody is watching me. Nobody there. Just as little kids are absolutely certain that there's a monster in their closet. It's not there. You can feel whatever you want, but placebo is more powerful than reality.

It's more than just "warm, fuzzy" feelings. Or paranoia.

I cant explain how it feels, but it is like nothing in this world.

It's more than just "warm, fuzzy" feelings. Or paranoia.
What's this about "warm, fuzzy" feelings? I said nothing similar to that. I was speaking of feeling as though there is something there, and feeling absolutely certain about it, but it not actually existing. That's common. Not to mention you do realize there are people out there that see "invisible" things. They're called paranoid schizophrenics.

I cant explain how it feels, but it is like nothing in this world.
Ah, the human mind's tricks and brainwashing... powerful combination.

Originally posted by Blibblob
What's this about "warm, fuzzy" feelings? I said nothing similar to that. I was speaking of feeling as though there is something there, and feeling absolutely certain about it, but it not actually existing. That's common. Not to mention you do realize there are people out there that see "invisible" things. They're called paranoid schizophrenics.

And I mentioned "paranoia"


Originally posted by Blibblob
Ah, the human mind's tricks and brainwashing... powerful combination.

Christ and one's heart. The most powerful combination.

And I mentioned "paranoia"
If you don't understand, it's best not to reply at all.

Christ and one's heart. The most powerful combination.
Someone that may or may not have existed and a muscle that pumps blood?

Someone who came to Earth to die for our sins, and has to be invited in to heart in order for us to be saved by his grace.

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
Someone who came to Earth to die for our sins, and has to be invited in to heart in order for us to be saved by his grace.

why do you believe that?

Originally posted by jerejerebinks
What exactly is "spoon fed religion" I hear you make a lot of accusations and do a lot of name calling, but I have never once seen you actually say anything of any substanial claim as why I am so bad for believing in God.

So...all you do is result to name calling and childish games...as you do later making fun of where I live.

Spoon fed religion is where somebody else tells you what to believe and it sticks.

I have never said you are bad for believing in God. I believe there is a God, but I do not believe what you believe. I do not and could never believe in something that for instance condemns all muslims to hell.

I have never made fun of where you live

Jere - I have presented you with a lot of solid reasoning. I get frustrated with you because you never ever debate. You dismiss anything presented to you and never respond to it. Either you do not understand debate or you lack skills in either reasoning or responding. I cannot reach any other conclusion at this stage.

This is a discussion board, you are not going to go to hell for discussing. Why don't you start discussing instead of constantly avoiding??

Originally posted by Blob
There is a general consesus in the media and amongst politicians that Islam is a good religion and most muslims practise it well. Terrorists distort Islam and twist it to their evil purposes.

But I see the other way round. I think Islam is an agressive, nasty religion. Thankfully most muslims are much better than that and are decent people. The terrorists are the true muslims and interpret the bloody-thirsty battle-cry that is the Koran correctly.

Blob, am I correct in assuming you separate Muslims the people from their belief system? How is that possible?

Have you read the Koran and thus concluded it is a book full of hate and aggression?

Originally posted by ~Sal~
Blob, am I correct in assuming you separate Muslims the people from their belief system? How is that possible?

Have you read the Koran and thus concluded it is a book full of hate and aggression? Woa! An on topic post! :D

I suppose I do separate muslims from their belief system. I think the people are better than their holy book. The same goes for christians (e.g. consider all that grim stuff in the OT) except I think the bible has some redeeming verses where the koran does not.

This perhaps relates to a perception of some atheists, myself included, that most believers don't actual believe in practice. For example, how many christians actually hit the road to preach, living in poverty? It seems to me that's what the bible demands and if you fall short of that you have little chance of getting to heaven. Similarly, the koran demands jihad of the true muslim - if the infidels and pagans refuse to convert then slaughter them.

I have not read the koran. But I visit and post at http://www.faithfreedom.org which is a site for and by intellectual ex-muslims. Whereas ex-christians tend to still have affection for their old religion, and to keep their old christian friends, ex-muslims tend to despise their old religion and to have few or no muslim friends.

Here are a few sample verses from the koran, posted by a knowledgable ex-muslim at faithfreedom to demonstrate the ugly brutality of the koran:
Sura 4:144: Believers, do not choose the unbelievers rather than the faithful as your friends. Would you give Allah a clear proof against yourselves?Sura 8:13: When thy Lord revealed to the angels, saying, 'I am with you; so make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Smite them above their necks, and smite off all finger-tips.' Sura 8:40: And fight them until there is no persecution and religion is wholly to Allah. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Watchful of what they do.Sura 9:5: And when the forbidden months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever you find them and take them captive, and beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent and observe Prayer and pay the Zakaat, then leave their way free. Surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful. Sura 9:14: Fight them, that Allah may punish them at your hands, and humiliate then, and help you to victory over them, and relieve the minds of a people who believe;Sura 9:29: Fight those who do not profess the true faith (Islam) till they pay the jiziya (poll tax) with the hand of humility.Sura 47:4: When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her burdens.

Here is another resource.
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/cruelty/short.html

EDIT: link fixed

Blob, according to your post the greatest sin is not believing, and punishable by death. Beats the hell out of the lake of fire thingy.

Boy, this must be a great incentative for recruting new members.
This attitude explains the high number of muslims within the Arabic countries. Two classes of people, Islamic and infidel.

This "fear factor"recruitment leaves me wondering how many might be simply, going along with the program, rather than being true believers.

No wonder they, fight and fear, the education system of the Western world.

Originally posted by Dan Fussell
Blob, according to your post the greatest sin is not believing, and punishable by death. Beats the hell out of the lake of fire thingy.Fear not - they have the lake of fire too! Or at least they have an eternal hell very similar to the christian one. (I've posted before: if I wake up in hell how will I know if the christians or muslims were right?)
Boy, this must be a great incentative for recruting new members.Yes. It is also a crime punishable by death to stop being a muslim. That explains why so many ex-muslims are bitter and have no muslim friends.
This "fear factor"recruitment leaves me wondering how many might be simply, going along with the program, rather than being true believers.I'd say a lot.
No wonder they, fight and fear, the education system of the Western world. Except of course advanced chemistry, nuclear physics and aerodynamics.


I don't have the statistics but I do believe it is the case that 90% killed in terrorist attacks perpertrated by muslims are muslims. Also, there is no reaction from the international muslim community at large when the oppressors of muslims is are muslims themselves; the Taleban; Saddam; Pakistan's military dictorship; Saudi Arabia's elitist monarchy and so on.

Originally posted by ~Sal~
Blob, am I correct in assuming you separate Muslims the people from their belief system? How is that possible?

Have you read the Koran and thus concluded it is a book full of hate and aggression?

Aaaaaaaaaaalrighty then! That was a shocker for me.

I can see now why you separate individual Muslims from their faith. I do not know many Muslims. My stylist is a Muslim which always kind of confused me because he styles women's hair and yet Muslims are to wear hijabs or berkas.

I know his wife doesn't but one of his sisters has recently begun to wear a hijab. When I asked why all of a sudden she covers her head I was told it was because Allah had revealed himself to her and now she must cover her head forever. It looks weird to see her always covered now but I never thought deeply about what that really meant.

I guess because of my own Catholic yet incredibly liberal upbringing (my parents "believed" yet always kind of did their own thing) I have never really thought of danger being attributed to any "God" belief. I always just think of the danger inherent when things are unbalanced.

I will really have to think about this aspect of "religion" in general. I know about the Christian crusades and I know about the Salem witch hunts. But I am surrounded by Christian believers daily and for the most part they are cool with my zany belief structure since I don't hold much back. Therefore I guess I just kind of project that wide acceptance onto the world in general.

Thanks for the nudge to look deeper (as always) at this aspect.

Thanks sal.


I've led a fairly multicultural life and have known many muslims.

When I lived in Africa it was the christians not the muslims who were the in-your-face religionists. You could barely pop out for a loaf of bread without someone telling you they had been "born again" with a huge "I'm-so-happy" grin. The real long-lasting friendships I made with africans tended to be muslims, or more accurately, ex-muslims. They were a bohemian Nairobi atheistic group of teachers, journalists, artists and the like who enjoyed calling themselves socialists.

In Britain my city is >50% south asian origin including a lot of muslims. Many young British muslims are completely pleasant people, but they often still sympathise with Osama and jihadism to a disturbing degree.

I'm no authority on Islam though by any means.

I will really have to think about this aspect of "religion" in general. I know about the Christian crusades and I know about the Salem witch hunts. But I am surrounded by Christian believers daily and for the most part they are cool with my zany belief structure since I don't hold much back.Regarding the historic atrocities of christianity I posted this to J-man the other day.
Neither do I bear a grudge against modern day christians for the brutalities of christians long dead. Life was tough in those days all round (though I do believe it is a move to science and secularism that has alleviated such harshness). For all I know my very own great-great-great..etc...grandparents may well have been persecutors of non-believers. You are no more to blame for inheriting their religion (by name at least) than I might be for inhereting their genes.

Besides, non-religious Stalin was arguably the worst tyrant of the 20th century.

Therefore I guess I just kind of project that wide acceptance onto the world in general. Perhaps I too am over-protective of christianity because it is afterall mixed up in my own british culture, despite my personal atheism. Another point may be that because christian nations have dominated the globe for centuries they have spread their religion through colonialism, missionaries and cultural dominance. No need to resort to the dirty tactics of holy war to be heard.

Why did I not 0.0 see this thread before?!
Okay, here's my intake! :D *rolls up her sleeves*

Originally posted by Blob
I think Islam is an agressive, nasty religion. Thankfully most muslims are much better than that and are decent people. The terrorists are the true muslims and interpret the bloody-thirsty battle-cry that is the Koran correctly.

The Quran is anything but violent, for Islam is a religion of peace. The word Islam means giving up everything, in this case, it means giving up everything for God. The word Islam also comes from the Arabic word "Salam" which means peace.
The Quran is full of peaceful texts. When following the religion of Islam, since it is a religion in which you absolutely surrender yourself to God and to His rules, you may not choose what you like from it nor are you allowed to interpret things as you like.

Terrorists and extremists are not true Muslims, for they intrepret things falsely. If you like, I will back that up ;)

Originally posted by Dan Fussel
Christianity could march against the Islamic religion, finding full justification in the Bible.

By the same token anyone could say the opposite.
Also, Islam fully believes in Christianity and in the Bible. It is believed that it was a religion from our God.

Originally posted by Blob
To the best of my knowledge - which admittedly is wanting - the koran does not really have any nice or positive bits to it.

The Quran is full of them. If you like, I would gladly show you some.

Originally posted by jerejerebrinks
I have always heard quite the opposite. That the Koran is a book of peace and love.

Of course it is, you heard right ;)

Originally posted by jerejerebrinks
I believe I have clearly said it, Drew. If one of islam or any other religion chooses not to accept Christ as their personal savior, they are indeed going to hell.

The prophet mentioned a similar passage that I'm not going to quote as I don't recall the exact wording of it. Let me believe in my religion, as you believe in yours.
We'll see ;)

Originally posted by Jester
From what I've seen of the Koran, Islam can be a peaceful, loving religion, as well as a violent, aggressive one. It all depends on which parts you want to look at and how you interpret it. I personally believe that that's the result of either one person writing it over the course of his lifetime, or multiple people writing it, with each inserting his own views.
Or I could be completely wrong and the Koran really is the word of God. But I wouldn't bet a dime on that.

There's nothing about "it depends on what you look at". This is a religion that you must look at as a whole, the number one point of it is to surrender yourself to everything God ordered you to do. It is all peaceful, and violence is only encouraged in terms of self defense never in conquests nor in injustice.
It's sad how a few extremists used the Quran as an excuse to go about blowing up the world as they please, killing innocent people as they go along.
The Quran, we believe, is the word of God and no one has written it nor has had any say in it.

Oh, and there's no use betting a nickel nor a dime on that :D gambling is a sin. ;p

Originally posted by Blob
I suppose I do separate muslims from their belief system. I think the people are better than their holy book. The same goes for christians (e.g. consider all that grim stuff in the OT) except I think the bible has some redeeming verses where the koran does not.

Why do you say so? To make a sounder judgement, I would advise you to read the Quran.

Originally posted by Blob
the koran demands jihad of the true muslim - if the infidels and pagans refuse to convert then slaughter them.

It absolutely does :D not.
If they refuse to convert, then be it, Islam believes in freedom of choice and choosing religion comes under that freedom. No one will force them to convert, it is their own choice and everyone will be penalized for their sins on Judgement Day.

Originally posted by Blob
I have not read the koran. But I visit and post at http://www.faithfreedom.org which is a site for and by intellectual ex-muslims. Whereas ex-christians tend to still have affection for their old religion, and to keep their old christian friends, ex-muslims tend to despise their old religion and to have few or no muslim friends.

Not all websites are sound sources. You have not read the Quran, let me help you get started should you be interested ;) here are a few sites with good explanations of all the verses of the Quran :D
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
http://lordswords.com/

Originally posted by Blob
Here are a few sample verses from the koran, posted by a knowledgable ex-muslim at faithfreedom to demonstrate the ugly brutality of the koran:


I wish I could view that site but it's blocked here in the UAE. I might try using a slower proxy that'll unblock all blocked sites just to take a look at that one.
Anyway, what makes you say that he's knowledgable? I can explain and show you each and every text that you have quoted. By the way, you must not take only one part from the text, the whole part must be read so you may understand it well or else misquotes may cause misunderstandings such as these.

Originally posted by Blob
I don't have the statistics but I do believe it is the case that 90% killed in terrorist attacks perpertrated by muslims are muslims. Also, there is no reaction from the international muslim community at large when the oppressors of muslims is are muslims themselves; the Taleban; Saddam; Pakistan's military dictorship; Saudi Arabia's elitist monarchy and so on.

All of the listed above are extremists, not true Muslims.

Originally posted by ~Sal~
I can see now why you separate individual Muslims from their faith. I do not know many Muslims. My stylist is a Muslim which always kind of confused me because he styles women's hair and yet Muslims are to wear hijabs or berkas.

I know his wife doesn't but one of his sisters has recently begun to wear a hijab. When I asked why all of a sudden she covers her head I was told it was because Allah had revealed himself to her and now she must cover her head forever. It looks weird to see her always covered now but I never thought deeply about what that really meant.


This struck me as the most interesting reply.

Allow me to explain...
They do not follow Islam fully. Wearing the hijab is an obligation for all girls who have reached puberty, or to be more exact, have started to menstruate. Thus, I can conclude the following: They are either misinformed, as the hijab should not be worn when "Allah has revealed Himself to you" (which is the first time I hear of this by the way, does she mean she saw Him?!!! If so, that's an outright lie it is absolutely not possible. The prophet perhaps you might dream, yes, but Allah.. no no no, unless she meant it as a metaphor or something?)
Your stylist shouldn't be handling women anyway, in Islam it's a sin for strange women and men to touch at all (strange being someone who's not a family member such as brother, father, uncle etc.)
Many Muslims do that, they do not follow Islam properly. Sal, this isn't in Islam, they're one of those who take what they like and leave what they don't like. The word, these days, seems to be "liberated" ;)

This struck me as the most interesting reply.
Allow me to explain...
They do not follow Islam fully. Wearing the hijab is an obligation for all girls who have reached puberty, or to be more exact, have started to menstruate. Thus, I can conclude the following: They are either misinformed, as the hijab should not be worn when "Allah has revealed Himself to you" (which is the first time I hear of this by the way, does she mean she saw Him?!!! If so, that's an outright lie it is absolutely not possible. The prophet perhaps you might dream, yes, but Allah.. no no no, unless she meant it as a metaphor or something?)
Your stylist shouldn't be handling women anyway, in Islam it's a sin for strange women and men to touch at all (strange being someone who's not a family member such as brother, father, uncle etc.)
Many Muslims do that, they do not follow Islam properly. Sal, this isn't in Islam, they're one of those who take what they like and leave what they don't like. The word, these days, seems to be "liberated"

Yes they likely do pick and choose what they follow because I doubt he has a prayer mat at his shop or observes the call however many times a day a Muslim is supposed to pray. He also drinks.

I don't think Jamile was saying she saw Allah, I think she meant she feels like before she was blind to His will but that now she uderstands what she must do as a Muslim woman living in the West.

I can see why Blob would say he separates a Muslim person from their religion since in order to fit into the "world here" one must adapt or leave. So they learn to adapt since our work force or day does not allow for the same observances that a Muslim nation would.

Would you say then that a practicing Muslim must really stay in a Muslim country?

The word 'salam' is more accurately translated into 'submission',
If islam is a religion of peace and choice, then there should not be military campaigns across Africa to force conversion on the Animists and Christians.
The theocratic islamic nations of the middle east take action against those with apposing views, even supporting the "extremists", either financially or providing sanctuary.
And if they are not 'true muslims' then why are they lead by clerics of islam, why do they use mosques as staging/planning headquarters. Why are there attacks on the 'infidels' (christian churchgoers, jews, hindus, etc).
As far as being 'from the same god', (although this sometimes depends on who you ask) the more educated on theism in the world will strike that down. Allah and God are not one in the same.
I have read most of the Qu'ran and disagree with its teachings and certain values.
I appreciate you being an apologist for your faith, defending it in a respectable manner, but some things just are not fully truthful.
The realities of the modern world cannot be hidden.

Submission

Hello Innocent Sweety.

I think I've mentioned I've known many muslims. I have holidayed, studied and spent new year with muslims. Some of them were practising some of them not. I just want to make it clear that my admittedly strong views are purely theological and political, not personal. As I mentioned, most muslims are much nicer than my perception of Islam itself.

Originally posted by Innocent Sweety
The Quran is anything but violent, for Islam is a religion of peace.Look at the quotes above. No doubt you'll argue they are out of context, but they are still brutal and still in the koran.

Also, Islam means submission, not peace (whatever the roots of the word) hardly an endorsement.
Terrorists and extremists are not true Muslims, for they intrepret things falsely. If you like, I will back that up ;)They are holy warriers fighting the infidels as sanctioned by allah in the koran.
The Quran is full of them. If you like, I would gladly show you some.I believe you. As I said my knowledge of the koran is sparse. But just because there may be some good bits too doesn't draw fire from the fact there are many brutal verses.
If they refuse to convert, then be it, Islam believes in freedom of choice and choosing religion comes under that freedom. No one will force them to convert, it is their own choice and everyone will be penalized for their sins on Judgement Day.Sura 4:144: Believers, do not choose the unbelievers rather than the faithful as your friends. Would you give Allah a clear proof against yourselves?
Sura 8:13: When thy Lord revealed to the angels, saying, 'I am with you; so make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Smite them above their necks, and smite off all finger-tips.'
Sura 9:29: Fight those who do not profess the true faith (Islam) till they pay the jiziya (poll tax) with the hand of humility.
Sura 47:4: When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her burdens.
Not all websites are sound sources.I agree. I chose carefully. faithfreedom.org is a well researched site written by ex-muslims who are experts in the koran.
You have not read the QuranI've read some chapters. Open a random page in the koran and you typically find angry, intolerant stuff.
I wish I could view that site but it's blocked here in the UAE. I might try using a slower proxy that'll unblock all blocked sites just to take a look at that one.
Anyway, what makes you say that he's knowledgable?Because I post there and am familiar with his posts.
I can explain and show you each and every text that you have quoted. By the way, you must not take only one part from the text, the whole part must be read so you may understand it well or else misquotes may cause misunderstandings such as these.I'm sure you can. Christians too construct apologetics to excuse what is written in black and white. I see muslims try to do it all the time at faithfreedom.org. It's easily done but it merely rationalises the horrors and errors - it does not detract from them.
All of the listed above are extremists, not true Muslims.They would say the same about you. Indeed, some muslims use the concept of "not a true muslim" to persecute other muslims. Also, my point was muslims commonly raise the issue of palenstinians and other muslims suffering at the hands of infidels; but they fail to make any noise when what you call "not true muslims" like the Taleban cause the suffering.

I'm glad you are a reasonable and pleasant person, as most people are be they muslim or infidel. I disagree that Islam is a reasonable and pleasant religion.

Thank you Blob

saying anyone who doesnt beleive in jesus will go to hell is no more arrogant then telling everyone there is no such thing

Originally posted by Travh20
saying anyone who doesnt beleive in jesus will go to hell is no more arrogant then telling everyone there is no such thing Really?

"If you do not believe in Jesus you will eternally suffer horrors worse than any seen on earth and what's more you deserve it. I am 100% correct and you must adopt my point of view."

"You believe in Jesus but I do not. I am not certain and could be wrong. Also, no ill will come of you for believing in Jesus indeed it may well be a positive aspect to your life."

I'd say one position in more arrogant than the other.

"Not believe" in Jesus?

Well, he was a real person, so its kind of hard not to believe that.
The belief is not "i do/do not believe in Jesus" its believing "Jesus was the Son of God and is the way, the truth, and the light" or just falling back on the fact that he is a great and the most influential philosopher of history.

Yes, I think it was understood Trav meant believe jesus is the saviour.

BTW there is no good reason to believe jesus was a single, literal person.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

Sorry for taking such a long time for replying to this post, I've been busy lately. Anyway I'm here now, and here're my answers:

Originally posted by ~Sal~
I can see why Blob would say he separates a Muslim person from their religion since in order to fit into the "world here" one must adapt or leave. So they learn to adapt since our work force or day does not allow for the same observances that a Muslim nation would.

Would you say then that a practicing Muslim must really stay in a Muslim country?

A Muslim stays a Muslim as long as he or she follows Islam. The country has nothing to do with it, it's the true following that matters.

About the call, yeah it's five times a day and since he drinks I guess then it's obvious that he's not religious.

Originally posted by Evakian
The word 'salam' is more accurately translated into 'submission',
If islam is a religion of peace and choice, then there should not be military campaigns across Africa to force conversion on the Animists and Christians.
The theocratic islamic nations of the middle east take action against those with apposing views, even supporting the "extremists", either financially or providing sanctuary.
And if they are not 'true muslims' then why are they lead by clerics of islam, why do they use mosques as staging/planning headquarters. Why are there attacks on the 'infidels' (christian churchgoers, jews, hindus, etc).
As far as being 'from the same god', (although this sometimes depends on who you ask) the more educated on theism in the world will strike that down. Allah and God are not one in the same.
I have read most of the Qu'ran and disagree with its teachings and certain values.
I appreciate you being an apologist for your faith, defending it in a respectable manner, but some things just are not fully truthful.
The realities of the modern world cannot be hidden.

Submission

Do you speak Arabic?
Salam means peace as well as it does submission. You submit yourself to God, and Islam is the religion of peace.
Regarding the military campaigns across Africa, I fully agree with that there should not be force of conversion on the non-Muslims. These people have clearly not read the Quran, since in one of it's Sura's it clearly states the freedom of choice.
Regarding the Islamic nations, I'm afraid you've mixed politics with religion as they are different. Islamic nations do not even follow the true Islamic Shari'a law and have had western laws mixed with our own and this, the mixup you see and contradiction between us saying we are people of peace yet are using violence, is the end result.
Why are they lead by clerics of Islam? Why are there attacks on infidels? Well.. why do some other religions like Christianity for example have priests that commit adultery? Or Jews who gamble among each other even though they're not supposed to? What all the above are doing is clearly wrong, yet it is being done. It should not be done!
Allah and God are one and the same. Allah = God, God = Allah. Allah is simply the Arabic word for God, that is it. Allah, ilaah "a God", they all mean God. They are one and the same.
I agree with saying that the reality of the modern world cannot be hidden, and nor can the reality of the truth of this religion and the misconception that many seem to have.

Originally posted by Blob
Look at the quotes above. No doubt you'll argue they are out of context, but they are still brutal and still in the koran.

Also, Islam means submission, not peace (whatever the roots of the word) hardly an endorsement.

Would you like me to get you the real texts out of those quotes and explain each and everyone thoroughly? I'm more than ready to do it, and I think you'll be surprised.

Regarding Islam meaning submission and not peace, believe me it means both. Salam = peace, salam = submission. Read my explanation to Evakian above. Maybe it'd be easier to understand were Arabic your native language.

Originally posted by Blob
They are holy warriers fighting the infidels as sanctioned by allah in the koran.

Prove it :)
I stand by what I said: they are not.

Originally posted by Blob
I believe you. As I said my knowledge of the koran is sparse. But just because there may be some good bits too doesn't draw fire from the fact there are many brutal verses.

They seem brutal because you have not taken the full explanation, show me any I'll gladly counter.

Originally posted by Blob
Sura 4:144: Believers, do not choose the unbelievers rather than the faithful as your friends. Would you give Allah a clear proof against yourselves?
Sura 8:13: When thy Lord revealed to the angels, saying, 'I am with you; so make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Smite them above their necks, and smite off all finger-tips.'
Sura 9:29: Fight those who do not profess the true faith (Islam) till they pay the jiziya (poll tax) with the hand of humility.
Sura 47:4: When you meet the unbelievers in the Jihad strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take ransom from them, until War shall lay down her burdens.

The Quran is in front of me, I'm reading the Arabic and English texts as well as their explanations, here the text is quoted yet the explanation is mine.

Sura 4:144:
O ye who believe! Take not for friends unbelievers rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer God an open proof against yourselves?

Explanation:
It is better to be friends with a person who is a Muslim as you, for they are more trustworthy in that they follow Islam and its teachings.

Sura 8:13:
This because they contended against God and His Apostle: If any contend against God and His Apostle, God is strict in punishment.

Explanation:
Whoever goes against God will be punished. (meaning, on judgement day)

Sura 9:29:
Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Explanation:
Fight those who do not believe in God nor the Last Day (judgement day) nor acknowledge the religion of truth (Islam) would they not pay the Jizya (tax) that should be paid would they be living under your full Islamic rule.
Here, the purpose of this is not to take their money nor to make the Muslims more powerful or rich. The point behind this action is to let them live freely as they wish yet be reminded with this tax that they are living under a Muslim rule and will therefore abide by their laws.

To tell you the truth :) were I to go to a Christian or Jewish community or any other religion and live there and they asked us to pay a certain tax as we do not follow the same religion as they do, I would respect it and pay willingly as it is not in my favor to say what I like or not because I am not living in a land that is ruled by people like me.

Sura 47:4:
Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been God's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of God,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

Explanation:
When you come upon the unbelievers in battle (if they have attacked you and there is a fight between you) then kill them by your sword with a slice towards the neck (as this is the least painful attack, and the receiver will not be tortured so much with it).
Bind them means take them as prisoners of war should you win the battle, then you may either imprison them or let them be and live under your rule, or you may let them go in exchange of a sum of money. Do this until the war is over.
If God wished, then He would have easily smited them and made you the victorers, yet He is letting you go ahead with the fighting in order to test you and see the strength of your belief.
Should one of you die in battle, their deed will not be lost as he will die a "shaheed" (death in war, a person who fights for Islam).

:)

Originally posted by Blob
I agree. I chose carefully. faithfreedom.org is a well researched site written by ex-muslims who are experts in the koran.

Perhaps you should consider the sites I posted as one to check. I might visit faithfreedom.org one day to see what your choice was exactly based on. :)

Originally posted by Blob
I've read some chapters. Open a random page in the koran and you typically find angry, intolerant stuff.

If you would like, I would explain any "random typically angry intolerant stuff" as I have explained the above verses.
By the way, I advise you to make sure that the copy of the Quran that is in your posession is a sound one, not one that might have some of its text played around with. Also, purchasing a book with an explanation of the Quran isn't a bad idea. :)

Originally posted by Blob
I'm sure you can. Christians too construct apologetics to excuse what is written in black and white. I see muslims try to do it all the time at faithfreedom.org. It's easily done but it merely rationalises the horrors and errors - it does not detract from them.

I disagree, for while you might see them as apologetics they are not. It is simply the belief that a certain thing cannot possibly be true is what gives this impression.

Originally posted by Blob
They would say the same about you. Indeed, some muslims use the concept of "not a true muslim" to persecute other muslims. Also, my point was muslims commonly raise the issue of palenstinians and other muslims suffering at the hands of infidels; but they fail to make any noise when what you call "not true muslims" like the Taleban cause the suffering.

Politics and religion are two different matters. Interesting that you brought this up, I've never thought of this, but now that I do it's true that Muslims have failed to make any noise regarding things like Taleban and women not being allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia when it is her right.
I guess that's human nature perhaps, it's in your instinct to defend a foreign substance more violently than you would a familiar substance that is on the same level.

Originally posted by Blob
I'm glad you are a reasonable and pleasant person, as most people are be they muslim or infidel. I disagree that Islam is a reasonable and pleasant religion.

Likewise, I'm glad that you're reasonable as well and have enjoyed our debate to a length.

Regarding your disagreement: to each his own ;)

Well in my defense, i don't speak Arabic FLUENTLY, but i do know some, and i have studied over the Qu'ran

Oh, I didn't mean that question as an offense I was just surprised with your knowledge of the word that's why I assumed you spoke Arabic.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Innocent Sweety
Islamic nations do not even follow the true Islamic Shari'a law and have had western laws mixed with our own and this, the mixup you see and contradiction between us saying we are people of peace yet are using violence, is the end result.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Could be that I have been mis-reading history books.
I was under the impression that the middle east had many internal wars, centuries before western influence.

The current ones that I know of are in Sudan and Egypt. What happened before?

Oh btw, I speak of tribal wars

originally posted by Innocent Sweety
Islamic nations do not even follow the true Islamic Shari'a law and have had western laws mixed with our own and this, the mixup you see and contradiction between us saying we are people of peace yet are using violence, is the end result.

are you implying that "Western civilization" is very violent and corrupts the middle east???

Originally posted by Innocent Sweety
The current ones that I know of are in Sudan and Egypt. What happened before?
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Islam started with war, with Muhammed as leader.
Some information on Islam is at the link shown. I will show others later when I have time.

http://www.abalance.com/Islam-MiddleEast.htm

Yep, i'm with Dan on this one.
Mohammed went to Medina and riled up a loose army and then conquered Mecca. After that Islam swept through Africa with military campaigns, then up to Spain causing bloody civil wars but were stopped in Gaul (modern day france) they also went east to India and Southeastern countries like Malaysia and Thailand, literally forcing the religion on those peoples. Since then bloody civil wars have occured over the whole of India, such as the creation of East and West Pakistan resulting in mass bloodshed.
Now they sweep through areas like Sudan and Niger, forcing conversion of the animists or christians in the areas.
And there is a massive terror network throughout the middle east of many governments and government-backed organizations that is waging war on "the West" aka predominantly christian societies that allow democracy instead of fascists theocracies. Looks like i'll be shoveling camel dung in Algeria at a death camp when i am older.
It was bred in war, grew by war, and continues to do so, although the modern technologies and worldwide powers has changed their ability to be so imperialistic and they have to change tactics.
The religion of 'peace' will only have peace after everyone is their religion, whether by self-chosen conversion or violent 'submission'.

Hi Innocent.

Maybe it'd be easier to understand were Arabic your native language.Not really. A simple translation can be looked up by anyone. Also, I speak Swahili which is a derivative of Arabic.

Every scholarly source says unambiguously that Islam means submission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_%28disambiguation%29) or Resignation to the will of God (http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Hughes/i.htm) and so on.


Don't you find it strange that different english versions of the koran exist? You seem to have a wonderfully PC copy with you there. If an all-powerful god exists how come he has trouble translating his absolute word? How come his writing is so poor as to require human interpretation and explanation? That alone shatters the idea that Islam is true. We see this in the divisions among the Islamic world. From those angry young men who justify viloence against infidels (and who would agree with me more than you in this debate); through to tribal rival practices of Islam; through to modern liberal muslims such as yourself. One thing that muslims do have in common is they claim that their own interpretation is the correct one and that other muslims are not true muslims. What a mess your god has made if he exists and the koran is his exact revelation to man!

You asked me to substantiate this: They are holy warriers fighting the infidels as sanctioned by allah in the koran.
I'm spoilt for choice.
9:73 Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home.
2:216 Jihad is ordained for you though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.
are just two of many, including those I posted last time. Really, the koran is packed full of this stuff.
They seem brutal because you have not taken the full explanation, show me any I'll gladly counter.I've read your explanations. They tone the brutality down ever so slightly but not much. They also present Islam as a victim, brutaly defending itself, but do not detract from the brutality itself. For example advocating cutting the heads off disbelievers (whether they are being aggressive or not) as the kindest way to kill them is hardly reassuring. Compare that to Jesus's or Ghandi's "turn the other cheek".

Originally posted by Blob
... They also present Islam as a victim, brutaly defending itself, but do not detract from the brutality itself. For example advocating cutting the heads off disbelievers (whether they are being aggressive or not) as the kindest way to kill them is hardly reassuring. Compare that to Jesus's or Ghandi's "turn the other cheek". [/B]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

One thing that I find interesting is that an all-powerful god would rely upon men to carry out his punishments.
The old "believe as I do or die" thingy is so obviously (to me) a human characteristic. Invented by men, to protect their religion.

One thing that I find interesting is that an all-powerful god would rely upon men to carry out his punishments.- Dan Fussell

Wondefully put, If they have truly done something wrong by their religion's standards and punishment awaits them by God/Allah/other deities in the next life then why must we punish them here?

The old "believe as I do or die" thingy is so obviously (to me) a human characteristic. Invented by men, to protect their religion.- Dan Fussell

Yep

Muslims consider non-Muslins to be unbelievers and worthy of hell-so I know some people think only Christians have that opinion but they are not the only ones-I think they are a Peaceful religion(Muslims) but in the guidance of the wrong spiritual leader can as been seen throughout the world-become quite nasty!

Sorry for not replying to this thread sooner I was busy with university and the such.

I'll be back with a long one soon :)

Wikipedia's Islam entry states that salam means peace, as well as being a common salutation. Who would go around asking each other to submit on a daily basis?

In my history class, we were taught that only five things were required to be accepted as a Muslim, called the five pillars of Islam. Pray five times a day, profess faith in Allah, give alms to the poor, fast on Ramadan from sunup to sundown, and make your once-a-lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca, which is really more of a guideline, because the poor and those in hardship aren't required to do it. Adherance to sharia is not necessary, and many a Christian and Jew have managed to convert to Islam even in Islamic nations peaceably simply by following the five pillars, including many notable persons whom memory fails to recall. Conversion by force would lead to nothing more than that, and is actually a much more peaceful method than those that existed at the time Islam was created. Most of the laws in sharia and the Quran are very liberal for the times in which they were written, very similar to Christianity.

Islam in its heydey was quite peaceful for the time and had impressive accomplishments in mathematics, astronomy, art, and culture, not something you generally find in barbaric civilizations. I believed they invented the zero, and the number system we use itself, hence the term, Arabic numerals.

Where Islam went wrong was during the pre-Industrial Revolution, where they fell behind in tech to the barbarous, ruthless Europeans, who were itching for land and colonies. Islamic nations were so peaceful that they had let their militaries stagnate, which contributed to the downfall of the wealthy Arab kingdoms. Only when the brutal Europeans destroyed the mighty kingdoms did they regress, as a retaliation to the far more militant Christians. (at the time, anyway) One can definately find a sense of cosmic irony when it placed the vast majority of the world's oil in Arab hands.

The word jihad is mostly misunderstood by the West, it merely means to struggle for Islam. This struggle can come in any form.

Christianity is a doctrinal faith, which means one must adhere to Christian doctrine to be considered a Christian by the rest of Christianity. Islam requires only certain actions, and doctrine is left to the individual. One believes in Christianity, one practices Islam.

As such, I cannot hold that Islam is a brutal, warlike religion, and I must separate the faith from it's followers. It is not required to read the Quran, or even be aware of anything in it to be a Muslim, the same being true for Christianity and the Bible. So no amount of quotations from it would convince me that Islam is a brutal religion. The Quran is not Islam, it is a history and guide book for the Muslim faith.

I should note that the five pillars apply to Sunni Islam, the dominant sect. Shia has a few more requirements, a tax and a fairly loose (for the time) moral code.

Also, during the zenith of Islamic history, other religions were mostly tolerated, and a tax was collected, called a jizya, from conquered nations.

Conversion was often discouraged, because it was thought that conversion merely to avoid the tax was distasteful. Islam penetrated very deeply to its followers.

Anyone interested in a deeper history of Islam than Wikipedia offers, I cannot recommend highly enough Karen Armstrong's, "A History of God," written from a humanist perspective. Also recommended is the follow-up work, "The Battle for God." Both detail the ancient and recent histories respectively of the three main monotheistic faiths.

What a deliciously sachrine and twee vision of Islam you have. As does Wikipedia.

Islam is a brutal religion of barabaric origins founded by a paedophile. It spread through conquest and violence.

Islam in its heydey was quite peaceful for the time and had impressive accomplishments in mathematics, astronomy, art, and culture, not something you generally find in barbaric civilizations. I believed they invented the zero, and the number system we use itself, hence the term, Arabic numerals.
Yeah, Arabic numerals, not Islamic numerals. That fact that Arabs were scholars is something I am profoundly thankful to them for - but it was despite, not due to, Islam. We're talking about a religion that advocated a flat Earth centuries amd centuries after the Greeks discovered it was not.

It's true the current wave of Islamism is new - i.e. compared to say the peaceful muslims of the 1950s. But to claim jihad does not include literal violence is plain silly.

So put the 1960s politcal correctness away and get on the ball Napsterbater.

It was no more brutal and barbaric and a good deal less than most of it's contemporaries were at the time. It grew out of the influences that shaped it. The Middle East was never a nice area, until Islam. After the Europeans came in and destroyed the great Arab kingdoms, it regressed. That it was able to flourish and provide a better standard of living than Christianity did, will forever be a testament to how peaceful the religion really was, and will forever be a burr in the backs of Christian supremecists and apologetics. It is not, sixties political correctness, it was the truth, before and after the horrific terrorist attacks that were provoked by the West by their capitalistic forieign policy.

Put me back in that time period, and I would have much rather lived in an Islamic kingdom than a backwards, brutish European castle. The Europeans built their castles for military efficacy, the Arabs built their palaces for comfort. I would rather have had the life of an Arab peasant than a European king.

Yeah, Arabic numerals, not Islamic numerals. That fact that Arabs were scholars is something I am profoundly thankful to them for - but it was despite, not due to, Islam. We're talking about a religion that advocated a flat Earth centuries amd centuries after the Greeks discovered it was not.

Back in those days, you could not separate people from their faith. The culture and accomplishments in the day were inseparable. Arab=Islam and European=Christianity. Western society to this day is indelibly marked by Christian culture. Without the background of a common religion, they never would have survived to become scholars. The sad fact of the matter is that Islam does not repress its followers to the extent that Christianity does. The standards of decorum didn't exist as strongly. To hear a perverted story come out of the Middle East was commonplace, in the West it was quite rare, and always attributed to the devil's influence. That kind of societal control is never good for running an empire, which is one reason why Europe was a backwards pigsticker feudalism forever grasping at the greatness that was the Ottoman Empire, warts and all, even after they destroyed it.

It is true, they did convert by the sword. As opposed to Christianity, which forced outsiders to uncertain social doctrinal conversions, and burning at the stake those that didn't play along.

And this was the time after Alexander, when you had to live in an empire to gain any sort of peace within your land. It simply was not possible to have peace without war. Barbarians and mercenarys were as plentiful as camels and horses, back then, forever raiding and looting, until the conquerors came in, at which point you could finally have a measure of peace. They converted by the sword because they had to.

And you cannot apply today's standards of political correctness (which you did when you called Mohammed a paedophile) to that day. Pedophilia was not an evil and was quite commonplace even in the West, where girls got married as early as twelve with kids expected soon after. There is strength in numbers, and they breeded like rabbits.

No, what is PC today is hating Islam. It is you making the anthropomorphized arguments here.

Islam in its heydey was quite peaceful for the time and had impressive accomplishments in mathematics, astronomy, art, and culture, not something you generally find in barbaric civilizations. I believed they invented the zero, and the number system we use itself, hence the term, Arabic numerals.

First off, that is arabic civilization as a whole, held together by a common faith. And Aristotle used the symbol 0 to represent nothing in his studies, many of the scholars in Baghdad, Damascus, and Alexandria studied greek texts and kept these ideas alive. While Europe was in its Dark Ages, Islam flourished and kept ideas alive and made great leaps and bounds, but that fell apart at the end of the middle ages and then it was/is back in Europe's hands.

salam means peace

As well as 'submission'

The word jihad is mostly misunderstood by the West, it merely means to struggle for Islam. This struggle can come in any form.

Yes, many different forms of violence. ;)

One believes in Christianity, one practices Islam.

Which is a not good when you're involved in a religion. Belief is the primary factor of a faith, practice comes second. To go through the motions is how a small child views religion, and there is a problem with that.

The Quran is not Islam, it is a history and guide book for the Muslim faith.

Which is a problem, since in Christianity-the Bible is a book of spiritual and moral insight, not a historical or scientific text (those who think otherwise are wrong and misguided).
When you run around saying angels visited you and dictated an extensive book to you...a book full of "mysterious" and "supernatural" occurances and it is supposedly historical/scientific fact is a problem.

We're talking about a religion that advocated a flat Earth centuries amd centuries after the Greeks discovered it was not.

Yes, one of the reasons they were able to keep this alive is because of the close proximity to Rome and ancient Greece, so they picked up on many ideas, also--their overall ideal climates and the fact that they had to group together to survive helped spur on ideas. Islam has little of the sort to do with scientific and medical achievements of the Arab.

a tax and a fairly loose (for the time) moral code.

Paying taxes, having women cover themselves at all times, segregating genders everywhere, making it a requirement to pray five times a day including a washing, and other codes of conduct are not exactly "loose" morals...not to mention what taxes have to do with morality of the individual aside from lining pockets of the city's governors and generals to pay for public buildings.

Also, during the zenith of Islamic history, other religions were mostly tolerated, and a tax was collected, called a jizya, from conquered nations.

Yes, and if you were not a muslim...you had to pay a bigger tax, that is what i like to call coercion.

Islam penetrated very deeply to its followers.

As if anyone could even know that :rolleyes:
A religion based on practice, not belief, as you stated--hardly serves as an example to be a deeply spiritual faith.

Islam is a brutal religion of barabaric origins founded by a paedophile. It spread through conquest and violence.

Although Mohammed's wives from my knowledge were not children (well, i suppose 13 could be considered adult back then), but it was spread through conquest.

But to claim jihad does not include literal violence is plain silly.

It may be for spiritual, political, or social reasons that the jihad is brought about--but it is done no other way then violence.

So put the 1960s politcal correctness away and get on the ball Napsterbater.

Everyday, we are bombarded by images of islamiah fascist governments in the middle east, supporting terrorism groups. Wars and attacks against jews, christians, and unorthodox muslims all the time. Children being married away to be one of half a dozen brides to the local camel herder. Women cannot be seen or even drive or represent themselves in court. and other atrocities...all the while being told that "this cannot represent islam as a whole, as most muslims are peaceful people". As a Christian, i am given a bad reputation by many atheists or others because of the fundamentalists who misinterpret the Bible and its teachings, or twist it for their own purposes, or even things they have done in the past that contradict Christ's teachings. But i fully accept science, it is a search for truth in God's universe that we live in, and i am not a sheep of a believer, i go over the doctrines and see the reasoning behind many of the decisions. I also support the cultural and moral aspects it has on western cultures and the citizens. But many run around making us look bad, but those are intellectual reasons, not violent ones.
If you are a peaceful person--even a christian---you do not sit by and take no violent defense to stop a rapist in your town.
If they are truly what we are told, they should shun and stone mullahs in the streets, and not let this charade continue.

After the Europeans came in and destroyed the great Arab kingdoms, it regressed.

Arab nations were splintering and attacking one another the day Mohammed passed away. The Crusades to take back the middle east failed, and when colonization happened--it is because they were able to easily take the weak countries by their own inner problems. The reason they even matter to us these days is oil--without oil, they would have much, much importance and wealth. They would not be able to pay for these expensive armies and terror organizations, they could not grow rapidly since they couldn't support the population grow rate. Was it not for oil, the middle east would be a plot of sand with camel drivers who can't get along and so fell apart.

It is not, sixties political correctness, it was the truth, before and after the horrific terrorist attacks that were provoked by the West by their capitalistic forieign policy.

Capitalism is freedom, economic freedom--you are suggesting they are against freedom.
Was it not for "western" capitalist foreign policy, they would much worse off.

Put me back in that time period, and I would have much rather lived in an Islamic kingdom than a backwards, brutish European castle. The Europeans built their castles for military efficacy, the Arabs built their palaces for comfort. I would rather have had the life of an Arab peasant than a European king.

Definitely, living in the middle east during the middle ages in the middle class was definitely something to be thankful for.

Arab=Islam and European=Christianity.

As the overall majority faith, yes.

Back in those days, you could not separate people from their faith. The culture and accomplishments in the day were inseparable.

What has changed so now you can?
With your logic, cars, planes, and all the great inventions brought about here in the modern world are results of christianity---*buzzer* wrong!
You always separated it.

The sad fact of the matter is that Islam does not repress its followers to the extent that Christianity does. The standards of decorum didn't exist as strongly. To hear a perverted story come out of the Middle East was commonplace, in the West it was quite rare, and always attributed to the devil's influence.

Yes, keeping to their doctrine by suppressing lust, a cardinal sin, is being repressive. They are keeping to their beliefs, not having sex talked about on every street corner was for the moral implications and faith reasons.

They converted by the sword because they had to.

Oh, yes...now the violence and lack of freedom of religion is justified. :rolleyes:

No, what is PC today is hating Islam. It is you making the anthropomorphized arguments here.

*switches it* what is PC today is telling us how peaceful muslims are.

Pedophilia was not an evil and was quite commonplace even in the West, where girls got married as early as twelve with kids expected soon after. There is strength in numbers, and they breeded like rabbits.

Ahh of course, so if everyone steals or kills...its not wrong because everyone does it. Wedding a child is wrong, no bones about it.

There is strength in numbers, and they breeded like rabbits.

*bred

First off, that is arabic civilization as a whole, held together by a common faith.

Again, in those days you could not separate the civilization from the faith.

Which is a not good when you're involved in a religion. Belief is the primary factor of a faith, practice comes second. To go through the motions is how a small child views religion, and there is a problem with that.

A problem maybe to you and your divinely revealed faith, but not so when it comes to social and political expediancy. The Islamic kingdoms were never terribly intolerant. That crown goes to the Christians and their Inquisition.

As if anyone could even know that

People convert to Islam because they feel that deep-rooted need to submit to a force far greater than oneself. The faith penetrates deeply, and is itself the proof. Most put the hijab on willingly.

A religion based on practice, not belief, as you stated--hardly serves as an example to be a deeply spiritual faith.

In theory you would be correct. In practice, this effectively cuts a lot of the political aspect out of faith, and enables its followers to penetrate much more deeply into their religion without the doctrine hawks forever examining them.

Yes, and if you were not a muslim...you had to pay a bigger tax, that is what i like to call coercion.

It was often discouraged. Also, muslims were typically a lot more peaceful than people of the other pagan faiths, and it probably cost them more to keep them in line. Keeping the peace in those days wasn't free. When compared to European feudalism, a tax seems tame, to say the least.

Paying taxes, having women cover themselves at all times, segregating genders everywhere, making it a requirement to pray five times a day including a washing, and other codes of conduct are not exactly "loose" morals...not to mention what taxes have to do with morality of the individual aside from lining pockets of the city's governors and generals to pay for public buildings.

You like Blob, are using today's standards to judge an almost ancient civilization, looking at your own through rose lenses.

From Blob
But to claim jihad does not include literal violence is plain silly.

You are putting words in my mouth. I said any struggle for Islam is jihad, which does indeed include violence. I am sure when our Muslim friend gets back, she can elaborate more on the jihad, because that is a doctrinal thing, which I have not studied.

That said, this is a surprisingly informative post you wrote here, far better than your standard fare.

Capitalism is freedom, economic freedom--you are suggesting they are against freedom.
Was it not for "western" capitalist foreign policy, they would much worse off.

Capitalism is one form of freedom. The religious freedom of Islam is another.

What has changed so now you can?

Religion does not rule people's lives today like it did in the Middle Ages.

Yes, keeping to their doctrine by suppressing lust, a cardinal sin, is being repressive. They are keeping to their beliefs, not having sex talked about on every street corner was for the moral implications and faith reasons.

No argument there. I still would have rather been in the Middle East, though.

Oh, yes...now the violence and lack of freedom of religion is justified.

We are talking politics here, not religion. Islam was militant because that was the only way to bring peace in those days. And religious freedom always existed, which was my point in the first article. It is quite difficult to maintain an empire if your citizens are rebelling against a harsh imposed religion. Islam never did that, and offered a great deal of freedom, even to the point of considering Christianity and Judaism sister faiths.

Ahh of course, so if everyone steals or kills...its not wrong because everyone does it. Wedding a child is wrong, no bones about it.

So says the comfortable middle class American! In those days morality was not a luxury.

*switches it* what is PC today is telling us how peaceful muslims are.

An argument I never hear today, except from Muslims. It most definately is not PC these days. September 11 changed all that.

A problem maybe to you and your divinely revealed faith, but not so when it comes to social and political expediancy. The Islamic kingdoms were never terribly intolerant. That crown goes to the Christians and their Inquisition.

The spansih inquisition? you mean the one that occured shortly after islamic leaders left? so the entire country had been affected by their culture for centuries?

Also, muslims were typically a lot more peaceful than people of the other pagan faiths

True

It was often discouraged.

Yet practiced by islamic hierophant Mohammed.

Keeping the peace in those days wasn't free. When compared to European feudalism, a tax seems tame, to say the least.

True

You like Blob, are using today's standards to judge an almost ancient civilization, looking at your own through rose lenses.

But those things are human rights being abused...which no matter what time have importance and worth.

That said, this is a surprisingly informative post you wrote here, far better than your standard fare.

Bah! Blob always spits out some good stuff in the religion forums. :)

Religion does not rule people's lives today like it did in the Middle Ages.

Yet they still pray five times a day, and follow the Shar'ia and Qu'ran.

I still would have rather been in the Middle East, though.

Yes, i see. But Christians have guidelines that help tame their animal traits, making them propel themselves to a greater spiritual elevation...thus the reason for the strictness

Islam was militant because that was the only way to bring peace in those days.

How has that changed? Unless you have guns, you can't boss people around. That's how politics, especially America and the nuclear age has still worked.

even to the point of considering Christianity and Judaism sister faiths.

misguided people of the book*
the latter of which is facing extreme problems...:(

So says the comfortable middle class American! In those days morality was not a luxury.

I like how you speak as if you are not one...

An argument I never hear today, except from Muslims. It most definately is not PC these days.

Turn on Katie Moronic and Matt Liar for a few minutes as an example, if they get off on the subject of religion, that seems to come up.

September 11 changed all that.

That day helped americans realize what they are up against and how much they are hated.

Bah! Blob always spits out some good stuff in the religion forums.

I was talking to you. This thread represents a slide in Blob's objectivity, to my standards, at least.

But those things are human rights being abused...which no matter what time have importance and worth.

Human rights as a concept didn't exist until the pre-Industrial Revolution and the Enlightenment. You can't judge those times by today's standards.

The spansih inquisition? you mean the one that occured shortly after islamic leaders left? so the entire country had been affected by their culture for centuries?

You might be right, but the papacy at the time inflammed the issue and made it a lot worse than it needed to be. Also, Spain is a long way from the rest of the Middle East. Lack of contact with the capital tends to make bad situations worse.

I was talking to you. This thread represents a slide in Blob's objectivity, to my standards, at least.

Oh, well blob does seem rather passionate being against islam.

Human rights as a concept didn't exist until the pre-Industrial Revolution and the Enlightenment. You can't judge those times by today's standards.

So? They matter to all people everywhere.
If a country didn't allow freedom of press, but it was long ago...does that make it right?

You might be right, but the papacy at the time inflammed the issue and made it a lot worse than it needed to be. Also, Spain is a long way from the rest of the Middle East. Lack of contact with the capital tends to make bad situations worse.

They had their own capital, in Cordoba.
When the Umayyads were ousted from Arabia, they took their faith and wealth with them to Iberia.
The fact they were separated doesn't detract from the fact they still had the same faith, and still made contact with each other through north african sea routes.

Yet they still pray five times a day, and follow the Shar'ia and Qu'ran.

Islam is slowly starting to catch up with the times. The industrial and information revolutions have staggered it, but there is a lot of interesting ideas starting to come out of Islam today, particularly capitalism based on the ideals of Islamic brotherhood. It would be interesting to see how it adapts.

Yes, i see. But Christians have guidelines that help tame their animal traits, making them propel themselves to a greater spiritual elevation...thus the reason for the strictness

So does Islam. And every other religion for that matter.

How has that changed? Unless you have guns, you can't boss people around. That's how politics, especially America and the nuclear age has still worked.

Very true. Nothing has really changed, we have simply given our taxes to new masters with new weapons.

That day helped americans realize what they are up against and how much they are hated.

Hated for good reason, in my book. I don't agree with the methods, but America had been courting disaster of this nature for decades now.

Katie Moronic and Matt Liar

Never heard of them. Maybe because the conservative noise here is too great to find any really liberal thinkers out there.

If a country didn't allow freedom of press, but it was long ago...does that make it right?

Freedom of the press is only given to those that have one. Even today it is a mostly inconsequential right. It was similarly impractical in the Middle Ages. It just wasn't possible to enforce human rights, but the Arabs managed to a much better degree than the Europeans did.

Even today it is a mostly inconsequential right.

The Internet is beginning to change that, however.

Even today it is a mostly inconsequential right.

Tell that to the soviets, freedom of the press was a difference between '18 and '91.

It just wasn't possible to enforce human rights, but the Arabs managed to a much better degree than the Europeans did.

Saladin and those of the era did a better job at looking out for their citizens well-being, that goes without saying.

It was similarly impractical in the Middle Ages.

It served as an example; whether pedophilia is socially acceptable in their time does not make it necessarily right.

So does Islam. And every other religion for that matter.

Then why do you claim it is based on practice, not faith? That would contradict this.


Never heard of them. Maybe because the conservative noise here is too great to find any really liberal thinkers out there.

I bet you've watched them many times...and ten bucks says this site is populated with leftists several times over conservatives.
You're such a loser bwahahaha

Hated for good reason, in my book. I don't agree with the methods, but America had been courting disaster of this nature for decades now.

Justification of terrorism *clapping* you've outdone yourself

It served as an example; whether pedophilia is socially acceptable in their time does not make it necessarily right.

Again, morality is subjective. Right and wrong as concepts were quite different back then. The only reason you can say that is because they evolved to a point where you can state, from your high horse, that this is wrong and this is right, from your middle class Christian upbringing, that this is right and this is wrong. You can claim objectivity all you want, but you cannot deny where you are standing right now.

Then why do you claim it is based on practice, not faith? That would contradict this.

I never said the faith aspects didn't exist. There is a huge body of Islamic philosophy around their concept of brotherhood and alms. None of it is necessary to practice Islam, however.

Most Christians practice their faith every Sunday, and go no further in their faith.

I don't agree with the methods

does not agree with

Justification of terrorism

Quit putting words in my mouth. Radical Islam today resembles nothing like its glorious past. All attempts to bring it back will end in failure. I do not condone terrorism. As I said earlier, Islam is starting to wake up, and make peaceful expressions of its faith once more.

You're such a loser bwahahaha

Can I take that to mean the debate is over and we can indulge in wonderfully childishly fun insults, until the thread gets closed? Please, I want to take my cereal box out and put all the insults I can glean from it out for the whole forum to read!

and ten bucks says this site is populated with leftists several times over conservatives.

I was discussing mass media. I don't bother with the political forums here. I like philisophical debate far better.

Again, morality is subjective. Right and wrong as concepts were quite different back then. The only reason you can say that is because they evolved to a point where you can state, from your high horse, that this is wrong and this is right, from your middle class Christian upbringing, that this is right and this is wrong. You can claim objectivity all you want, but you cannot deny where you are standing right now.

Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4.
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.

(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 18.
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

- Taken from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Mastur, its not right to have children marry other children, or adults, and especially not against their will, irrelevant of culture. Don't feed me this morality is subjective garbage---relations with a child are universally not acceptable.

A debate for another time, perhaps. I do not care to both hijack threads and take them off topic.

does not agree with

I does not agree with...yea that sounds intelligent

Don't= contraction of the terms do not as in I do not agree.

I do not condone terrorism.

Yet the Sept. 11 attacks were our comeuppance for our intrusion into the world's affairs...???

As I said earlier, Islam is starting to wake up, and make peaceful expressions of its faith once more.

Yet al-Qaeda grows every day...

Please, I want to take my cereal box out and put all the insults I can glean from it out for the whole forum to read!

hehe, well, i didn't know what to say since you were making me laugh---so i just went along with it. Besides, don't turn away the truth ;)

I was discussing mass media.

Mass media is more liberal than Freethinker and 500lbguerilla's theoretical children...

I don't bother with the political forums here. I like philisophical debate far better.

Well, to me this is a political debate:

Evakian and Blob: Islam is bad

Napsterbater: Its just misunderstood...

Sweety: Salaam means peace

Blob: you suck since i am british

Evakian: haha political correct loser

Napsterbater: but, look at the culture, you can't judge them from today's morals...

Evakian: *Leaves desk, will return later*

Blob+sweety=brewing storm when they return

Napsterbater= *sticking hand down pants to pass the time while he waits*


:D :D :D

Yet the Sept. 11 attacks were our comeuppance for our intrusion into the world's affairs...???

I don't believe in justice. So, no, there is no comeuppance.

Yet al-Qaeda grows every day...

As is the backlash against fundamentalism by mainline Muslims.

Napsterbater= *sticking hand down pants to pass the time while he waits*

An accurate description of the type of pleasure I get from philisophical debate :D

An accurate description of the type of pleasure I get from philisophical debate

"Oh ohhhhh Nietzche, Locke ohhhhh"

ahem, *straightens tie, zips up pants*

Anyway, i shall return when Blob and Sweety hit back.

Originally posted by Blob
There is a general consesus in the media and amongst politicians that Islam is a good religion and most muslims practise it well. Terrorists distort Islam and twist it to their evil purposes.

But I see the other way round. I think Islam is an agressive, nasty religion. Thankfully most muslims are much better than that and are decent people. The terrorists are the true muslims and interpret the bloody-thirsty battle-cry that is the Koran correctly.

You're absolutely correct.

I try to not badmouth Islam, because I don't want to inflame stereotypes, racism, etc, but amongst adults who are responsible, I tell them what I really think.

And just to make it clear I feel the same way about the religion I was raised with. I just feel that Islam is at this time particularly medieval in outlook and needs to go. Let's start by chucking that holy mediorite into the deep blue sea.