The Islam Thread...

Religion has been exploited to justify acts of violence or prejudice for years.

More recently, Kahanism is an ideology (If I recall correctly) that promotes violence against the Arab population and the taking away of Non-Jewish people's right to vote and uses Judaism for their justification.

Identity Christianity is a violent Christain orginization that finds it's justification from the Bible.

And, of course, we have Al-Queda, Hamas, etc. all Islamic terrorists groups finding their justification through the Quran.

I believe Islam is another religion that has been perverted into a casus belli of violence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

that site and many on its links page use quotes and translations from a very eminent scholar of Islam . It really makes their sites seem well established in fact and thoroughly researched .
Yet they never quote what his actual conclusions are , only the bits that they can take and use to push their message .

---

:shame::shame::shame:

ahhh okay, i guess thats what mislead me to think they were actually legitimate.

Whew!!! Thanx for not letting them brainwash me guys. :sweatdrop::sweatdrop::sweatdrop:

Quote:

---

....many times its quite comical when someone still tries to cite them as a source of information.

---

If this was the EB board, i'd be posting stuff from wikipedia about Lorica Segmentata!!!:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

:shame::shame::shame:

ahhh okay, i guess thats what mislead me to think they were actually legitimate.

Whew!!! Thanx for not letting them brainwash me guys. :sweatdrop::sweatdrop::sweatdrop:

---

I will hold my comment for now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwedishFish

I will hold my comment for now.

---

okay, i admit it, i thought they were a legitimate site and i posted stuff that was severely taken out of context. :oops:
:sorry:

Apparently, the extremist muslims are only 7% of the entire muslim population.

Thats still a lot of people, but, the vast majority of muslims are harmless. I know this.

I was making an attempt to scrutinize some things out of the Quran, and i ended up picking a source that was very biased against it while trying to act like it was impartial.

can you guys please just realize that i was misguided and i have nothing against muslims, because like i said, some of my Best, and i mean it when i say best, friends are muslim.


Really though. My bad. really. i feel bad now. :embarassed:

:grouphug: :2thumbsup:

:jawdrop:

Did... did that just happen? No way.... I must be imagining things... can someone else verify this? Did someone in the backroom actually admit to being wrong or out of line? Did someone actually shift a position through argumentation? :drama2:

i dont know if i necessarily shifted my position per se...i still think that some stuff in the qur'an is violent and it is the reason for a lot of terrorism going on today, but yeah, i was definately wrong, and yeah, probably out of line too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by makaikhaan

:jawdrop:

Did... did that just happen? No way.... I must be imagining things... can someone else verify this? Did someone in the backroom actually admit to being wrong or out of line? Did someone actually shift a position through argumentation? :drama2:

---

yeah i really dont have trouble with being a man and admitting when i'm wrong. Its kinda an admirable quality, or so i hear.:yes:

You aren't wrong, your assertion that the bible is written in as a collection of events, while the quran is written in imperative is simply true. Of course people say 'god was with us', but that is very different from god saying 'do this'. Old testament has a lot of sick stuff but you know what they say, the past is like a foreign country they do things differently.

Quote:

---

ahhh okay, i guess thats what mislead me to think they were actually legitimate.

---

They are legitimate , in their own way .There is nothing wrong with reading them sites any more than it is wrong reading a newspaper , but you should only believe what is written in either with a very large dose of salt .
A better example of a site to demonstrate the "we are not a hate site" line would be to link to one of the many KKK sites (but I don't wan't the warning points again) where they claim they don't hate , they are not racist and are true christians ...but them damn ******* are a real problem ain't they and white people have gotta get together as true patriots to preserve gods chosen people in their rightful position of dominance .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by makaikhaan

:jawdrop:

Did... did that just happen? No way.... I must be imagining things... can someone else verify this? Did someone in the backroom actually admit to being wrong or out of line? Did someone actually shift a position through argumentation? :drama2:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

You aren't wrong, your assertion that the bible is written in as a collection of events, while the quran is written in imperative is simply true. Of course people say 'god was with us', but that is very different from god saying 'do this'. Old testament has a lot of sick stuff but you know what they say, the past is like a foreign country they do things differently.

---

see yeah, thats why i said i didnt really change my position on it, just that i was saying stuff the wrong way, and it sounded bad. :sweatdrop::wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

see yeah, thats why i said i didnt really change my position on it, just that i was saying stuff the wrong way, and it sounded bad. :sweatdrop::wall:

---

Dang, guess I'm still waiting for that first brave soul.:no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by makaikhaan

:jawdrop:

Did... did that just happen? No way.... I must be imagining things... can someone else verify this? Did someone in the backroom actually admit to being wrong or out of line? Did someone actually shift a position through argumentation? :drama2:

---

Nonononononononononono

My World is coming down around my ears!

Call that trolling, but as a leftist, I think Islam is currently in the hands of a bunch of nutjobs whose main aim is to establish some suck-ass theocraty in the middle east.

Though such event probably aren't representatives of Islam as a whole but only of a minority of idiots, I'm kind of disturbed each time I read "Some author has been killed 'cause he criticized Islam", "A wedding has been canceled cause the wife wasn't actually a virgin".
I'm even more disturbed to see that it's happening more and more often. I mean, about half the topics of this forum are about some crazy stuffs done in the name of Islam.

Then again, I don't have much tolerance for christanity and judaism aswell. But these two just don't appear as threatening to my way of life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

Call that trolling, but as a leftist, I think Islam is currently in the hands of a bunch of nutjobs whose main aim is to establish some suck-ass theocraty in the middle east.

---

It is in the hands of someone? :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

It is in the hands of someone? :inquisitive:

---

Yeah, I found that strange as well.


You will find no spider in that web, Meneldil. Modern Islam is anarchy.


A few people are important enough to provide guidelines, but there is no overall authority, except the holy Qur'an of course. And even that is subject to interpretation.

Quote:

---

And even that is subject to interpretation.

---

But ....but there can be no interpretation its the word of god it can only be taken one way its absolute its ...errr....evil , just look at the quotes provided in the episode of plagarism they show its evil .:yes: A united evil front with a fifth column in our misdt or even a sixth as they are so devious , ready to take over the world and cut our throats and then tax us and make us errrr.....grow beards and love goats .

And a seventh. Remember the converts!

Quote:

---

And a seventh. Remember the converts!

---

See, thats how sneaky them islamisitians are they are everywhare , the seventh column in our midst , its one of the pillars of Islam:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

"A wedding has been canceled cause the wife wasn't actually a virgin".

---

What's wrong with this one? She doesn't deserve to get married to anyone other than the man she was having an affair with.

Boy, when you say "reformation" you really mean that we should ignore/change our religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meneldil

"A wedding has been canceled cause the wife wasn't actually a virgin".

---

However unreasonable, this is one of the few cases where I'll side with the Islamists. In this case she lied to her husband about it, he found out, and got the marriage annulled. He thought it was important enough to do that. If my wife-to-be lied to me about something extremely important to me before the wedding, I would probably call it off as well - trust is fundamental in a relationship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

However unreasonable, this is one of the few cases where I'll side with the Islamists. In this case she lied to her husband about it, he found out, and got the marriage annulled. He thought it was important enough to do that. If my wife-to-be lied to me about something extremely important to me before the wedding, I would probably call it off as well - trust is fundamental in a relationship.

---

Indeedy-doodely. What's the other alternative? Forcing someone who doesn't want to get married to get married anyway?

As much as I think sexual abstinence is ridiculous, and me being a huge fan of hippie free sex, I'm also a big fan of letting people sort out their private life for themselves... What I think of what other people are doing is completely irrelevant and should never affect them in any way whatsoever.

Yuh go away for a few days and so much happens.

Hmmm, what to say? Not much really, I'm heavily biased towards Christianity but I am a bit dissapointed that no one picked up on my point about the formation of the Bible and the Koran. One being explicitely an anthology collected by a bunch of beardy bishops 300 odd years after the fact and the other claimed as a contempory account written or dictated by the Prophet.

Just to answer Fahed's point about whether Jesus could raise an army to the answer within the text is emphatically "yes, but he chose not to" this is one of the central axels around which Chrisrian philosophy turns and is usually expressed as "God chose to deliberately sacrifice his only Son for the Sins of his creation." Among world religions it's an unusual message because of its passive nature.

As regards interpretation of the Koran, if a Muslim believes that the Koran is the Word of God, is infallible, and that he has the right interpretation of that Word, which is to slaughter unbelievers, then he is being entirely reasonable. The problem comes because that's three too many ifs for an atheistic humanist, two too many for a Christian and I suspect one too many for a Muslim.

This is what worries me, the belief some Muslims have that they have a perfect understanding of the Word of God. Islam certainly has elements of conquest within it in a way that they are not presented in, for example, Christianity because they come from a current Muslim covenant while the comparative passages in the Bible come from a covenant not held by Christians. This is something that Sigurd pointed out a few weeks ago to me, in Acts God sends Peter a vision where he commands him to break the Jewish laws regarding clean and unclean food. So, as far as I understand it Muslims are bound by the Koran because it's the manual for abiding by their covenant with God. Interpreting that covenant is one thig but it would seem to me that they are bound by the whole of it without any real grey areas.

This is a major difference with Christianity and the point which I made earlier and Tribesman dissmissed. You can point to the passage in the bible about pigs and say to me "you can't eat pork" but I can then quote Acts to demonstrate that the Law is not valid for me as a Christian. As far as I can see there is no comparable leeway in the Koran, if you can pin down the meaning of a passage a Muslim is bound by that passage and the only debate is about the meaning therin, not the validity of that meaning.

In so far as I am a scholar at all I am a Christian one, not a Muslim, so I may well be off base but that is the impression I have consistantly recieved regarding Islamic scripture.

There are certainly more than enough christians who believe that the bible is written solely by the Holy Spirit and as such is the direct word of god, Philipvs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Indeedy-doodely. What's the other alternative? Forcing someone who doesn't want to get married to get married anyway?

---

Not getting married in the first place and skipping the whole debacle comes immediately to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

There are certainly more than enough christians who believe that the bible is written solely by the Holy Spirit and as such is the direct word of god, Philipvs...

---

There are also christians that realize that it is NOT the direct word of god. Indirect word of god :yes:, Direct word of god :no:.

Its weird. i remember reading a part of the bible where one of the apostles, (i think it was peter) said "what i am about to say is not from god" and some christians say that the passage after that quote comes directly from god. :dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:

BTW...I have read the whole bible before...:book: just not in a while so i'm a little rusty. But i do remember that part.:sweatdrop:




Oh, and also, a lot of the time muslims say that "God cannot reproduce and have a son, so Jesus is not the 'son of god'."

The fact is, the idea that Jesus is the BIOLOGICAL "Son of God" does not sit well with most christians either. Son of God means that Jesus was the first thing that God created,(as the Archangel Michael) before the universe, before the earth, so therefore that makes him His "Son" in a figurative sense. (or at least that was what i was told by my uncle, who's a devout christian and really knows his stuff.)
Again, "Only Begotten Son" was a mistranslation. "only CREATED son" would have been much better. Would that make the idea of Jesus being the "son of god" more acceptable to muslims??? God creating jesus as his first angel would be well within the scope of Allah's power, no? (

Allah has no son, and we believe the first man he created is Adam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

There are certainly more than enough christians who believe that the bible is written solely by the Holy Spirit and as such is the direct word of god, Philipvs...

---

It's an interpretive doctrine that came out of the reformation (Sola Scriptura "Through Scripture Alone" which was one five "Solas" and essentially a propaganda campaign against the Catholic church) it's not itself scripture. There are passages which refer to the direct word of God but they are reported in the Histories of the Old Testemant. As I said, the formation of the Bible is a matter of historical record at the

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

There are also christians that realize that it is NOT the direct word of god. Indirect word of god :yes:, Direct word of god :no:.

Its weird. i remember reading a part of the bible where one of the apostles, (i think it was peter) said "what i am about to say is not from god" and some christians say that the passage after that quote comes directly from god. :dizzy2::dizzy2::dizzy2:

BTW...I have read the whole bible before...:book: just not in a while so i'm a little rusty. But i do remember that part.:sweatdrop:




Oh, and also, a lot of the time muslims say that "God cannot reproduce and have a son, so Jesus is not the 'son of god'."

The fact is, the idea that Jesus is the BIOLOGICAL "Son of God" does not sit well with most christians either. Son of God means that Jesus was the first thing that God created,(as the Archangel Michael) before the universe, before the earth, so therefore that makes him His "Son" in a figurative sense. (or at least that was what i was told by my uncle, who's a devout christian and really knows his stuff.)
Again, "Only Begotten Son" was a mistranslation. "only CREATED son" would have been much better. Would that make the idea of Jesus being the "son of god" more acceptable to muslims??? God creating jesus as his first angel would be well within the scope of Allah's power, no? (

---

No offense to your Uncle but I've come accross a fair few flavours of Christianity and that one's new to me. Certainly in traditional doctrine Michael is not Jesus and in any case Jesus was not created by God he IS God. Or rather, the Son of God is a part of the Triune Godhead which was manifest on Earth as the man Jesus. Jesus was both fully man and fully God. This was one of the issues which Constantine had the Bishops hammer out and so the story goes it took three whole days of theological arguement. In any case the first Angel was Lucifer, the Light Bringer.

We're getting derailed into Christian mysticism.

Fahed, question: Why can't Allah have a son?

Quote:

---

Fahed, question: Why can't Allah have a son?

---

Because allah is wise , he believes in safe sex so you don't get the complications of children .

Quote:

---

The fact is, the idea that Jesus is the BIOLOGICAL "Son of God" does not sit well with most christians either.

---

Yeah, but when did we ever find biology in religion? Science of any kind is not found in any of the Holy Books.