Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does Islam need a Reformation?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 106 of 300 (227558)
07-29-2005 6:11 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by ringo
07-29-2005 5:57 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
Literally understanding the Bible doesn't lead me to believe that hacking off your head would be a service to God.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by ringo, posted 07-29-2005 5:57 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by ringo, posted 07-29-2005 6:22 PM Faith has replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 442 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 107 of 300 (227561)
07-29-2005 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by Faith
07-29-2005 6:11 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
I think that's what Jazzns has been trying to tell you about the Quran.

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Faith, posted 07-29-2005 6:11 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-29-2005 6:40 PM ringo has not replied
 Message 110 by Faith, posted 07-29-2005 6:44 PM ringo has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 108 of 300 (227564)
07-29-2005 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Jazzns
07-29-2005 4:23 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
Sigh. I really do not get your hostility.
I don't know where you are seeing my hostility. This is a debate forum so of course since I am arguing against you I am going to be 'hostile' to your position. I have a feeling that you are carying over some sense of hostility from out other encounters.
This is in your whole tone, and your accusation of hatred in particular. It's personal, not about my "position." You started out attacking me personally on this thread and that has continued.
There is nothing hateful about any of this except in your own mind and I'm at a loss to explain your attitude.
From my perspective, I see invalid and biased sources being used to promote the idea that not entirely correct.
Well that would be a matter of error wouldn't it, why hate? It's the emotional personal attack that makes you seem hostile. Why accuse me of hatred just because you disagree with my sources? And why don't you even name my sources and say why they aren't trustworthy? Simply disliking them isn't much of an argument. All the sources here given by me and by Steve seem to me to be quite legitimate and honest. It appears that you call them biased for the simple reason that they don't share your opinion. But bias means something else, it means they lie and misrepresent things. I have no reason to believe this of any of the sites quoted here.
My issue has been with the method of inquiry about this in order to try to resolve it. The primary reason for wanting a reformation of Islam as a whole is being driven by evidence from critics.
But this is a very odd thing to say. The "critics" are people who have learned that there is a big problem that needs "reformation" -- otherwise they wouldn't necessarily be critics. It's what MAKES them critics. They don't start OUT critics and then discover the problem they want to see changed.
Yes there are some Moslems that believe Islam needs some changes and I would be happy to talk about their ideas with regards to the reformation of THEIR OWN religion.
Seems to me that many Muslims have been cited here. However, if the problem is that they tend to defend their religion, speaking of bias, and deny that there is the problem that is being demonstrated, it could be that a very serious threatening problem could exist but there would be nobody willing to address it. What then?
Yes, the BBC appears to be biased to the left, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have factual material too. If there are errors in the
material at any of the sources they ought to be correctable by facts from somewhere else. But the sources are pretty well documented. But you are just bitterly complaining and not engaging in discussing
the actual facts in any case.
The problem is that the facts are not the facts. Some people have an 'expert' opinion on what the war verses mean. They also have an 'expert' opinion on what the word 'jihad' means. These are not facts they are analysis done from various degrees of obviously biased persuasion.
The facts are that there are authorities who have the opinion that the verses are to be understood literally. Their opinion is opinion, but their having that opinion and being in a position of authority to execute it, is fact.
I choose to get my definitions from the majority of the practitioners and I have been debating that this is a far superior way to address the issue.
The problem with that is that the majority of practitioners may simply have one interpretation and refuse to acknowledge the literal one and refuse to address the problem we are trying to address here, which is a real problem because there are Muslim authorities who DO have this literal interpretation. That is what the whole discussion is about.
However, if you want to bring to the discussion what you know about what the majority of practitioners have to say about this, about the threat of some Muslim schools of thought reading the war verses literally, that's fine. Do so.
You also didn't seem to give the BBC as much merit as you are doing now. Last time sources from there were summarily disregarded without examiniation or comment.
I don't remember the discussion is the problem and you didn't reference it, merely alluded to it. I don't even remember what it was about.
What has changed? I feel it because I am using a legitimate form of the argument about source bias in this case. I mean come on. "I neutered my pet and now they are liberal." A site that would purposfully display something like that and you would not have us question motive and bias?
It's a conservative site. Nobody denies that basic bias. Such a bias doesn't automatically mean that its facts are wrong which is what you are claiming. We're not talking about opinion, we're talking about facts.
Your hostility and emotionality are scary. I don't hate anybody, but this is a real problem the world is facing right now. It ought to be discussable but obviously it isn't. You're a nice guy. I don't get your total irrationality on this subject.
I feel the same way. I really can't figure how you don't see the hypocrisy in your position. No there is no quote in the Bible of Jesus saying to torture and kill to bring people to God but people have still managed to twist the religion and the text for their martial goals or otherwise.
But that's exactly the point. There ARE quotes in the Koran that DO say to torture and kill if they don't convert, it is NOT about twisting anything, it is not about "some people" twisting things, it's about what is written in black and white. As long as it is there in so many words there will always be a basis for some Muslim school of thought to train its followers to enact it. That is what is going on with the jihadists. They aren't twisting anything. It is there in so many words, and no matter what you think of the Ayatollah Khomeini there is no way to honestly argue with him when he says, look, that's what the prophet is telling us to do.
The case with Islam is a little more obvious because of its encouragement of violence in certain cases but the principle is the exactly the same. You have certain people twisting religion for evil purposes.
Jazzns, you are simply refusing to acknowledge the simple fact that these directives are in the Koran in black and white. You keep wanting to make it a matter of "certain people twisting religion" but that simply is not the case. It is there in black and white, and it has the support of history, especially the actions of Mohammed himself. This is the reality of the situation, not somebody's bias, not somebody's hate, not somebody's twisting.
To say now that the majority of Moslems who do not follow the extremist agenda must now reform their religion is ludicrous.
I haven't said that. I don't know what the solution is. I'm just glad that there are at least a few Muslims who are talking about it honestly instead of pretending it doesn't exist and accusing those who do recognize it of hate and all kinds of bad motives.
The problem is the extremists, not Islam. Many of the comments made in this thread so far, by their motive and or ignorance, have been a direct or indirect assault on faith of millions of peace loving people IMO.
That's too bad that you see it that way, especially since both Steve and I have acknowledged that the majority do not adhere to the literal reading.
In any case I don't see any point in contributing to this thread further. I'll leave it to you and Canadian Steve.
Sometimes it is hard to see the other side. I admit that sometimes I look back at older posts and think about how I could have handled things better. But I feel the same is true for the opposite side. I have seen no regard in either direction for even a minor point on the other side until some of CS's latest replies which have seemed a bit more thought out.
It is true that I get preoccupied with answering a post and may overlook legitimate points on the other side.
Can't you at least see why I might have issue with the two most cited sources on this thread so far?
That's why I've avoided quoting those sources myself, though I appreciate them personally. I would certainly have a problem if you quoted from a CAIR site. Their agenda is well known. However, it's a matter of checking the facts and the authorities quoted, no matter what the source, isn't it?
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-29-2005 06:42 PM
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-29-2005 06:47 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Jazzns, posted 07-29-2005 4:23 PM Jazzns has not replied

CanadianSteve
Member (Idle past 6503 days)
Posts: 756
From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 109 of 300 (227565)
07-29-2005 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by ringo
07-29-2005 6:22 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
There is nothing in the NT about hacking off heads. There is, though, in the Koran, many times. Thus, with respect to the NT, we have no reason to intepret such (non existent) passages, but with respect to the Koran, we do. That is a vital distinction.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by ringo, posted 07-29-2005 6:22 PM ringo has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 110 of 300 (227566)
07-29-2005 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by ringo
07-29-2005 6:22 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
I think that's what Jazzns has been trying to tell you about the Quran.
It doesn't lead him or many other Muslims to hack off heads in the service of God, but it does support such an idea and does lead SOME to hack off heads in the service of God. Whereas the Bible doesn't support such an idea AT ALL.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by ringo, posted 07-29-2005 6:22 PM ringo has not replied

MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6384 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 111 of 300 (227602)
07-29-2005 8:24 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by CanadianSteve
07-29-2005 3:27 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
many islamic nations allied with Hitler
Could you give us a list of these many Islamic nations that allied with Hitler?

Oops! Wrong Planet

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-29-2005 3:27 PM CanadianSteve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-29-2005 11:26 PM MangyTiger has replied

CanadianSteve
Member (Idle past 6503 days)
Posts: 756
From: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 112 of 300 (227641)
07-29-2005 11:26 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by MangyTiger
07-29-2005 8:24 PM


Re: Context of "War" Verses.
Google this name: Haj Amin Muhammad Al Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem.
Here's an article on post war relationship between Nazis and Arabs:
Nazi Roots of Modern Radical Islam
and another:
The beginning of the reckoning
There's this:
"The one region where the British still had significant influence was the Middle East. Hitler set out to change that. Husseini wanted to get rid of the Hashemites. Both men wanted to get rid of the Jews and the Brits. It was a marriage made in heaven.
Despite a powerful Navy, the United Kingdom its army was modest in size and spread thin throughout the Empire. Middle East and especially Iraq seemed like the next pawn to fall to the Third Reich.
In 1940, King Ghazi (son of King Faisal I) died, leaving only his four-year-old son to govern. Emir Abdul-Illah, the regent for the young Iraqi King, felt the need to bring Rashid Ali al-Kaylani into the government as the Prime Minister, despite the latter’s support for Nazi Germany and links with al-Husseini. The new head of state immediately shifted the policies of Iraq in favor of Nazi Germany, guaranteeing supply of natural resources to Hitler, as well as refusing to cut its tied with Italy. The former Mufti of Jerusalem and his surrogates frequently acted as the government’s representatives with foreigners. Kaylani also asked from Hitler the right to “deal with Jews” in Arab states - a request that was granted. [22]
Britain responded with severe economic sanctions which, coupled with UK’s defeat of German forces in North Africa and pressure from the Iraqi royal family, brought down the pro-German government on January 31, 1941. Kaylani and other pro-Axis Iraqi, under the influence from al-Husseini, conspired to murder the Abdul-Illah. Two months after the Kaylani left government, the regent of Iraq fled the country and the old Prime Minister was back in power. [23]
As one of its first acts, the new administration sent its artillery to attack UK’s Royal Air Force in Habaniyya, causing the Brits to respond by invading Basra. The hoped-for support from Nazi Germany never came and Kaylani fled to Saudi Arabia. [24]
Haj Amin al-Husseini, who issued a fatwa (Islamic religious ruling) calling on all Muslims to help pro-Axis government in Iraq, became one of England’s most wanted men. In May 1941, a group of Jewish fighters, including David Raziel, the leader of right-wing Irgun (predecessor of today’s Likud Party in Israel), set out for Iraq to assassinate the former Mufti on a mission sponsored by the Churchill administration. The mission, however, ended prematurely when Raziel was killed by a German plane. Realizing the threat to his life, al-Husseini fled to Europe dressed as a woman. [25]
He was officially received by Adolf Hitler on November 28, 1941, who agreed to establish a bureau for al-Husseini which was used to spread propaganda on behalf of Nazi Germany, organize spy rings in Europe and the Middle East, and most importantly, establish Muslim Nazi SS divisions and Wehrmacht units in Bosnia, the Balkans, North Africa and Nazi-occupied parts of the Soviet Union. After the meeting, the Mufti was also named SS Gruppenfuehrer by Heinrich Himmler and referred to as the “Fuhrer of the Arab World” by Adolf Hitler himself. [26]
The largest Muslim Nazi SS unit was the 13th division known as “Hanjar.” Husseini also organized smaller, less efficient units, including the 21st Waffen SS division known Skanderbeg (made up predominantly of Croatians) and the 23rd Waffen SS division known as Kama and made up mostly of Albanian Muslims. Thus, the Hitler’s Mufti organized or helped to organize three out of 27 Waffen SS divisions formed before 1945 (eleven other SS divisions were formed in 1945, but most of these were of questionable caliber and accepted soldiers of questionable skill). According to the Encyclopedia of Holocaust, Husseini “organized in record time” Croatian units that went on to massacre hundreds of thousands of Serbian Orthodox Christians. Jacenovac, the third largest death camp where over 200,000 people met their death, was run by Croatian Ante Pavelic with the aid of al-Husseini. In all, at least 800,000 Yugoslavian civilians were murdered by pro-Axis regimes of Utasche and Pavelic, with significant aid from the units established by the “Fuhrer of the Arab World.” [27] Tens of thousands of Jewish people outside Yugoslavia also perished when the Mufti persuaded not to trade them for German POW’s held by the Allies.
Al-Husseini opened a North African Bureau in Germany, whose goal was to recruit 500,000 Arab soldiers from Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria. The plan failed when the German forces were forced to withdraw from much of North Africa after a successful British operation. [28]
However, an Arab Legion was founded and fought under the German flag. The Arab soldiers had hoped to fight in the Middle East, but were instead sent to the Russian front, where they were completely wiped out while fighting in the Caucasus region. Some time later, in response to the British decision to create a Jewish Brigade made up of some of the 26,000 Palestinian Jews who had fought under the United Kingdom’s flag, the Mufti convinced the Germans to create an Arab Brigade. The unit, however, either did not fight or was not very efficient because very little is known about it. [29]"...
"Support for Nazism was not limited to the former Mufti. "We admired the Nazis. We were immersed in reading Nazi literature and books . . . . We were the first who thought of a translation of Mein Kampf. Anyone who lived in Damascus at that time was witness to the Arab inclination toward Nazism," recalled Sami al-Joundi, one of the founders of Syria’s ruling Ba'ath Party. [34] Indeed, a popular WWII song was heard in the Middle East featuring words: Bissama Allah, oria alard Hitler - in heaven Allah, on earth Hitler. Picking up the theme of the book, posters were put up in Arab markets and elsewhere proclaiming, “In heaven Allah is thy ruler; on earth Adolph Hitler.” John Gunther of Inside Asia reported: “The greatest contemporary Arab hero is probably Hitler.” [35]
In October 1933, pro-Axis Young Egypt Party was founded. Styling itself of its German ideal, the new party built a storm-trooper unit, marching with torches under the slogan “One folk, One party, One Leader.” Among the members of the violently anti-Semitic party was the young Gamal Abdel Nasser. [36] Nasser’s brother, Nassiri, was the translator of Hitler’s Mein Kampf into Arabic, describing the Fascist despot in glowing terms. After the “Free Officers” came to power in the 1950’s, President Nasser used Joachim Daumling, the former Gestapo chief in Dusseldorf, to build the Egyptian secret service. Gestapo chief of Warsaw organized the Egyptian security police. [37]
Another future Egyptian President, Anwar Sadat, was imprisoned during World War II for cooperating with Adolf Hitler’s regime. Towards the end of World War II, Sadat wrote to the Fuhrer: “My dear Hitler, I congratulate you from the bottom of my heart. Even if you appear to have been defeated, in reality you are the victor. You succeeded in creating dissensions between Churchill, the old man, and his allies, the Sons of Satan. Germany will win because her existence is necessary to preserve the world balance. Germany will be reborn in spite of the Western and Eastern powers. There will be no peace unless Germany once again becomes what she was.” [38]"
Inside Every Progressive Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out - David Horowitz
Then, this:
"Nazis fleeing justice for war crimes they had committed often found refuge in the Arab world. Fritz Stangl, the commandant of Treblinka, lived in Damascus for several years before moving to Brazil, where he was finally caught and brought to Austria to stand trial. Alois Brunner, Adolf Eichmann’s aide who played a central role in the extermination of the Jewish communities of Slovakia and Greece, has spent virtually all the postwar years in Egypt and Syria, where he is still believed to live to this day.
Egypt in particular threw open its doors, and this was not merely a case of offering refuge or asylum: as the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser put it, "We will use the services of those who know the mentality of our enemies". Franz Bartel, previously the assistant Gestapo chief of Katowice, worked in the "Jewish Department" of Egypt’s war office, while Standartenfuhrer Baumann, who took part in the liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto, worked for the Palestine Liberation Front - based in Egypt - as did SS-Sturmbannfuhrer Wilhelm Borner. Several Nazi doctors found work in Egypt after the war, including Dr Herbert Heim, responsible for "experiments" on prisoners at Mauthausen camp, and Dr Willerman, who committed similar atrocities at Dachau. The fact that these Nazis were positively welcomed in Egypt is emphasised by Nasser’s repeated refusals to extradite them for war crimes, even to his East European and Soviet allies."
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by MangyTiger, posted 07-29-2005 8:24 PM MangyTiger has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by MangyTiger, posted 07-30-2005 9:11 PM CanadianSteve has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 113 of 300 (227643)
07-29-2005 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by Faith
07-29-2005 6:10 PM


No, according to many Muslim authorities and scholars of Islam, who have been quoted and referenced on this thread.
According to some, yes. According to other authorities your authorities are wrong. See the problem?
Eric Rudolph is a party of one, not a scholar and not a leader of the faith, which are the kinds of sources who have been quoted concerning Islam, not lone man-in-the-street Muslims.
Party of one? Do your research before you open your mouth. Rudolph acted on the orders and under the protection of national Christian group "Christian Identity", who continues to support him to this day. He's been memorialized in not one but two country music songs and long been considered a hero among his home community. Party of one? Nonsense. Your fundy pals are lining up behind this guy.
But if he's not enough of a leader then take the word of the Reverend Fred Phelps, who's a real winner. He's simply too disgusting and obscene to link to in a public forum so I leave it to you to do your own research. Start with his Wikipedia entry.
Nobody is saying there is just one legitimate or true way to read the Koran, and I defy you to show that that has been said anywhere on this thread. The argument is that there are MANY legitimate ways to read it and the literal way is one perfectly legitimate way to read it.
Who decides what's literal and what's not? Leaving aside the fact that it's impossible to read a religious text literally; all interpretations are metaphoric and subjective.
To assert that the literal reading is such-and-such is to make the exact assertion you say you're not making. Of course blatant inconsistency is really the hallmark of your argument, isn't it?
We are not discussing any old kind of violence that somebody may or may not have performed as described in a text, the topic is SPECIFIC DIRECTIVES TO THE READERS OF THE TEXT TO PERFORM VIOLENCE AGAINST CERTAIN GROUPS OF PEOPLE.
Like, say, the blanket directive to stone witches, homosexuals, and other violators of God's law. Sure, sure, you say those are for the Isrealites only, but you've yet to actually quote any scripture in that regard, so I'm forced to reject this assertion.
And your reference to Jesus' "violence" is an absolutely ludicrous comparison and dishonest in the extreme. You haven't read the thread at all, have you?
Not only have I read the thread, I've read the Bible. Doesn't appear that you've bothered to do either.
According to the knowledgeable people who have been quoted and referenced, many scholars and Muslim leaders and other Muslims and exMuslims, that's who, which you would know if you'd bothered to read the thread.
And others disagree, which was the point of my first post, which you have yet - yet, after 3 posts to me - to meaningfully respond to.
Obviously it is you who are repeating yourself and learning nothing.
I learn nothing because you post nothing of value. Next time I hope you'll try actually addressing my points instead of repeating what I already know from the thread, ok?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by Faith, posted 07-29-2005 6:10 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 3:04 AM crashfrog has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 114 of 300 (227665)
07-30-2005 3:04 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by crashfrog
07-29-2005 11:47 PM


Christian Identity is an oddball fringe group.
Nobody is saying there is just one legitimate or true way to read the Koran, and I defy you to show that that has been said anywhere on this thread. The argument is that there are MANY legitimate ways to read it and the literal way is one perfectly legitimate way to read it.
Who decides what's literal and what's not? Leaving aside the fact that it's impossible to read a religious text literally; all interpretations are metaphoric and subjective.
The literal reading is that if it says to the reader to kill idolaters the believer takes it as a command to kill idolaters. This is how the jihadists read it and it is the jihadists this thread is concerned about.
{EDIT: Let's stop fighting, Crash. Seriously, it doesn't look like you've read much of the thread as you aren't addressing the points that have been made and are bringing up points that have been answered as if you haven't seen them.
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-30-2005 04:04 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by crashfrog, posted 07-29-2005 11:47 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by crashfrog, posted 07-30-2005 8:12 AM Faith has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1497 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 115 of 300 (227682)
07-30-2005 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Faith
07-30-2005 3:04 AM


Christian Identity is an oddball fringe group.
Just like Al-Queda. What's your point?
Seriously, it doesn't look like you've read much of the thread as you aren't addressing the points that have been made and are bringing up points that have been answered as if you haven't seen them.
It was precisely because my questions were not addressed in this thread that I asked them. it appears that you don't understand the issues that I'm raising.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 3:04 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 9:29 AM crashfrog has replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 116 of 300 (227697)
07-30-2005 9:29 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by crashfrog
07-30-2005 8:12 AM


Christian Identity is an oddball fringe group.
Just like Al-Queda. What's your point?
This HAS been answered here over and over, by both Steve and me in various ways. You may not like the answer but if you're going to repeat the charge you should at least acknowledge the answers that have been given and try to say what's new about your version.
As has been said before, there is NO scriptural justification for any form of terrorism in the Bible. There is NOWHERE it gives even a HINT that violence toward nonChristians is justified. Quite the opposite. Since you mention Jesus' dealings with the moneychangers in the temple, if we were to take it as a model for anything it would be a model for dealing with supposed Christians, not with outsiders, AND nobody was killed. BIG point.
WHEREAS, there are SPECIFIC LITERAL COMMANDS to violence against the unbeliever in the Koran and they have been obeyed literally by Muslims ever since Mohammed set the precedent by slaughtering Jews and Arabs who would not submit to his new religion. Yes LITERAL. SPECIFIC. COMMANDS. Straight to the reader, the believer. Straight to Al Quaeda and many other jihadist groups. And interpreted as such by many Muslim leaders over the centuries despite there also being other interpretations that spiritualize it and emphasize other passages that are against violence. AS WRITTEN they are unambiguously commands to kill "idolaters" and Jews and Christians. These have been quoted here, and many scholars and Muslims and ex-Muslims have been quoted affirming that the literal meaning is the basis for the violent actions of Muslims all over the world. Not some fringe group like Christian Identity, but a LOT of Muslims in the world. Far from a majority, but a lot nevertheless. This explains not only Bin Laden and the WTC but Muslim attacks on the indigenous Christians and other groups in the Sudan and all over Indochina. They are ideologically inspired. A lot bigger operation than Christian Identity.
Seriously, it doesn't look like you've read much of the thread as you aren't addressing the points that have been made and are bringing up points that have been answered as if you haven't seen them.
It was precisely because my questions were not addressed in this thread that I asked them. it appears that you don't understand the issues that I'm raising.
They sound exactly like what has been raised and answered over and over already. Equating Christian Identity with Al Qaeda? Answered over and over. The one turns a mere reported historical event into a command for today, the other simply follows a literal command as written.
Even Steve sees this, even being Jewish with all kinds of reasons to find fault with Christianity.
This message has been edited by Faith, 07-30-2005 09:31 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by crashfrog, posted 07-30-2005 8:12 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by CK, posted 07-30-2005 9:32 AM Faith has replied
 Message 135 by crashfrog, posted 07-30-2005 11:08 AM Faith has replied

CK
Member (Idle past 4158 days)
Posts: 3221
Joined: 07-04-2004


Message 117 of 300 (227698)
07-30-2005 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Faith
07-30-2005 9:29 AM


As far as I'm aware there is no justification in the bible for people to kill people who run abortion clinics - doesn't stop christians does it?
It seems to be to be a total red herring to talk about what's in either of those books. Christians and muslims see what they want anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 9:29 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 9:35 AM CK has not replied
 Message 119 by jar, posted 07-30-2005 9:36 AM CK has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1475 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 118 of 300 (227699)
07-30-2005 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by CK
07-30-2005 9:32 AM


As far as I'm aware there is no justification in the bible for people to kill people who run abortion clinics - doesn't stop christians does it?
That is correct there is no justification. What you and Crash are missing is that there is justification for Al Qaeda in the Koran and the Hadiths and much evidence for this has been given here over and over.
It seems to be to be a total red herring to talk about what's in either of those books. Christians and muslims see what they want anyway.
A pretty bald unsubstantiated assertion after all the evidence and argument that has gone into this thread already that proves you wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by CK, posted 07-30-2005 9:32 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by jar, posted 07-30-2005 9:41 AM Faith has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 119 of 300 (227700)
07-30-2005 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by CK
07-30-2005 9:32 AM


Not quite fair CK
Fanatics see what they want. They can be Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Aethist, Hindu, Buddhist or Agnostic.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by CK, posted 07-30-2005 9:32 AM CK has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-30-2005 10:24 AM jar has not replied
 Message 123 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 10:26 AM jar has replied
 Message 176 by MangyTiger, posted 07-30-2005 9:26 PM jar has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 424 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 120 of 300 (227702)
07-30-2005 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 118 by Faith
07-30-2005 9:35 AM


Well, there are commands in the Bible to kill people.
The OT is filled with them. We can start with the command in the Bible to kill anyone who works on the seventh day.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 9:35 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Faith, posted 07-30-2005 10:23 AM jar has replied
 Message 127 by CanadianSteve, posted 07-30-2005 10:30 AM jar has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024