Islamic jihad: the genocide in the Sudan

This is false. I don't recall what Randman and Buz have said about this, but I know Canadian Steve has clearly acknowledged that there are two different trends of thought in the Koran, and I have agreed, the live-and-let-live trend and the calls to violent overthrow of all opposition to the claims of Allah, murder of infidels, particularly Jews and Christians and so on. Either side of Islam may be embraced by a particular group or at particular times, but the violent side is always there in black and white to be acted upon whenever it seems expedient.EDIT: Perhaps I misread you. You were saying that the violent calls in the Koran are all only for defense? That calls for a different answer. They are clearly calls to murder the infidel. Wherever you see a Jew, kill him. That's the sort of thing it says. That's not defensive violence. Nor are the beheadings we've all seen done in the name of Allah. You are whitewashing Islam to claim that all that is not in their holy books. Wahabbism is simply the honest holding to what the texts actually say, refusing to water them down. }} It most certainly is. It is driven by the whole ideology of Islam, which includes Sharia law as well as the Koran. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

No I'm not going to say that those acts of barbarity are explicitly prescribed in Sharia law or the Koran, but they represent the spirit of the violent parts of the text, and if beheading infidels is OK by Islam then mistreating infidels in any way isn't going to be frowned upon too severely.The vast majority of Muslims unfortunately are not the definitive interpreters of the Koran or their laws. As long as a sizeable number of Muslims treat the violent directives as literal and as coming from God it is their views that will dominate.I don't see the vast majority of peaceful Muslims rising up to stop the violent aggressors either.You may say that the Ayatollah Khomeini was just a fringe fanatic, but he had a high position and he led a lot of people, and he is not alone, and this is how HE interprets the Koran, critizing those who ignore or reinterpret the War Verses. This speech of his is classic: * Interesting that the point of focus in a mosque is labelled "place of war" whereas Jesus Christ, the point of focus in Christian worship, is a focus of peace, the God who died to secure our peace with God.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : to add footnote

They were too busy being killed by the Inquisition perhaps. The rest of them believed in the Inquisition because they were ignorant of the truths of the Bible, and only knew what the Roman Church fed them. And something similar is no doubt why great numbers of peaceful Muslims don't object to the terrorism -- in their heart of hearts they know it is what the Koran prescribes. that might be a good point and perhaps more should be speaking out, but there are plenty of Christians who criticize the charlatans within Christian circles -- and after all who suffers from the charlatans other than Christians anyway? But for the sake of the image of Christianity to the world perhaps more Christians should be condemning the false Christians. Problem is that, as is well known from EvC, every sect is going to be pointing the finger at other sects and calling them false Chrsitians and then everybody will even be more confused. But again, there is no absence of such denuniciations of you look for them at your local Christian bookstore or other Christian places. There are many books out warning against them, and many pastors speak against them from the pulpit.But the charlatans aren't murdering anyone either, however deplorable their behavior, certainly not attacking unbelievers, and if that were the case you can be sure that there would be plenty of PUBLIC action from Christians against them. I had no reason to believe anything about Islam until I understood what it has been doing in the world. Obviously it is you who have some kind of preference to deny the source of terrorism in Islam itself. I find this very odd. You should be one of the ones rising up to denounce it.

I said "denounce the source of terrorism in Islam itself." It's easy to denounce terrorism, but you are denying its source in the texts and history of Islam.I am aware that most Muslims are just living their lives. Nobody is asking for the entire Muslim world to rise up, but for a sizeable number. If the lefties can get together big demonstrations for their causes, surely the huge population of the Muslims can do better than this deafening silence about terrorism in their ranks. But it must be psychologically difficult, because the terrorism DOES come from their books.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Shall we review the oh so holy bible?
  —SNC

---

Certainly, and the passages you refer to do in fact demonstrate its holiness, which means "set apart unto God." In general, you read out of context. Those are laws given by God to His own people, not involving anyone else. And you misrepresent them.

quote:

---

Anyone who dreams or prophesizes anything that is against God, or anyone who tries to turn you from God, is to be put to death. (Deuteronomy 13:5)

---

Yes, here is the entire passage: The context of all these references is the covenant God made with Israel, by which they promised to have no other Gods before Him, and to obey His laws. They entered voluntarily into this covenant. These commands you are referring to are all about preserving God's own people from contamination by alien influences. They have nothing whatever to do with any people other than the Israelites. There is absolutely nothing in them that suggests wanton violence against outsiders, which is the practice of Islam based on their holy books.

quote:

---

If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
  —SNC

---

Again, the context is God's people and their agreement, covenant, vow, to have no other gods before the one true God. And again the quote:

quote:

---

If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it's inhabitants... even the animals. (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)

---

Again, you are out of context and imply things that are not there. The city in question is an ISRAELITE city:

quote:

---

Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)

---

No, not "kill anyone" but kill an ISRAELITE who is in violation of the covenant he or she made with God to follow His laws and worship Him only, and it is done carefully, according to law. It is all within the community of Israel and it is all entirely legally determined. There is nothing wanton or vague about it, and nothing that applies to anyone outside of Israel.This is simply nothing at all like what fundamentalist Muslims recognize that Islam commands of its followers in the "war verses," which is wanton murder of NONMuslims.If Muslims controlled their own community by such laws, that were accepted willingly by the people, that would be something entirely different from their terrorism against nonMuslims willynilly.Edited by Faith, : added some boldsEdited by Faith, : No reason given.

See my ansswer to your post to Randman, Message 25 above. You make the usual false equivalences, ignoring context.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : corrected post # reference

Well there's a sturdy indefensible {sorry, wrong phrase. What am I looking for? vague statement} that manages to convey absolutely nothing. The Tao is nice, good teaching on how to live, like the Book of Proverbs. That's the most relevant comparison to make. Though it's been years since I read it. God decided to reveal Himself to Abraham rather than to Lao Tse or any of his predecessors, so what he teaches is just maxims for life, and many cultures have preserved great practical and spiritual wisdom like that. Including the Bible. The Bible does something entirely different along with that, however, it records the actual historical dealings of the Creator God Himself with a chosen people. Well, everybody's made-up God tends to be a sort of granddaddy rather than the real God we all hate because He's holy and we aren't.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : strikeout & correction

Sure, He's the one in the Bible. No need to consult me at all. He gave the revelation, I didn't.

There are whole cadres of ex-Muslims who demonstrate that Islam is inherently violent, that the fundamentalists who promote terrorism take their inspiration directly from the Koran. The quote I gave from the Ayatollah Khomeini shows that the call to murder derives from it.Just because many Muslims prefer to read the violent parts spiritually or pretend they apply only to a historical context means nothing when the fundamentalists don't have to stretch a thing to take the call to terrorism from it. It is clear that the book COMMANDS THE READER to murder the infidel and all the reinterpreting only obscures the actual nature of the enemy. Which is what you are doing when you claim there is no source of terrorism in Islam. Perhaps because you have Muslim relatives who do not subscribe to the violent side of Islam you are willing to be deceived about its true nature. If we do not know the true nature of our enemy we cannot defend ourselves properly. Our enemy is the Koran itself.

Most of them were Roman Catholic, followed the traditions of the RC Church rather than the Bible, and were all in favor of such unbiblical things as the Inquisition so had no reason to oppose it. The rest protested the RC Church and were the victims of the Inquisition if they spoke out.Is something similar the case in Islam perhaps? It is sad to see how deceived you are. You've been shown the history of the religion with its commitment to the violent conversion of dissidents and the abuse of unbelievers and you insist on whitewashing it and pretending that the terrorism is merely a few crazies. It is the majority of peaceful Muslims who could be called "crazy" because they deny what their religion clearly prescribes -- and I'm very glad they do, but they are the ones out of step with its directives, not the fundamentalists.

It is a shame that you refuse to follow the argument and understand what you are talking about. The TEXTS of the religion are what we are talking about. Learn something for a change instead of spouting the usual politically correct lies.

Many Muslims and ex Muslims have been quoted, by Canadian Steve mostly, and I can dig up plenty myself, about their own holy books, saying clearly that the source of terrorism is there. The quote I gave of Ayatollah Khomeini, no small-potatoes Muslim, is classic. Mohammed forced conversions at swordpoint. This is a matter of history. The attempt to equate the history of Islam with Christianity is just politically correct lies. Sorry, there is no comparison. The Christian texts are violated by violence, while the war verses of the Koranic texts are fulfilled by violence. You all live in a pink cloud of moral equivalence that has no relation to reality.

The difference is that the Bible does not EXHORT THE READER TO VIOLENCE, but merely reports on historical calls to JUSTICE that are CLEARLY in the past, while the New Testament calls Christians AGAINST any kind of violence, even to dying oneself instead. Read it, that's what it says. The Koran on the other hand has both peaceful and violent messages in conflict, but clearly preaches violence against unbelievers to be done by your average Muslim, and this is what the fundamentalists go by. They don't make it up. They follow the Koran. The quote I posted of Ayatollah Khomeini Message 12 shows that he derived his exhortations to kill people from the Koran.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I'm sorry, you are flat out wrong and making it all up. Read the texts for pete's sake. You don't have a clue.

If you read the texts, Rick, which is ALL I have been talking about, you will see that the Bible does NOT endorse such acts of violence and where it addresses the reader explicitly prohibits them, whereas the Koran actually does address the reader and exhort him to murder the infidel. I think I've been pretty clear in my statements. So that yes violence has been done in the name of both but you cannot equate them because in the one case it is a violation of the religion and in the other it is a fulfilment of the religion, and this you would know if you read the texts.