Printable View
Nadeem Elyas has stated that he would do anything to help the release of the German hostage in Iraq Susanne Osthoff, including replacing her has hostage. He further said that "the world expects rightfully of the islamic leaders to condemn unmistakably any kind of violence, terrorism and mistreatment of humans in general and especially of those deeds that happen in the name of Islam."
Unfortunately I only have a German source:
http://www.gmx.net/de/themen/nachric...3881SXjQY.html
From your description, this sounds like a noble and praiseworthy act. He also sounds like a good man, and is spot on with his remark. Too bad there are not more people like him.
Crazed Rabbit
Too bad there are not more people like him.
Yep definately a unique person , so unique that the head of the British council offered to do the same when there were British hostages involved.
Oh right, since hoping for more people like him meant that there are no other people like him at all in the world. Not one, zero, zip, zilch. Thanks for pointing that out to me, since I obviously don't know as well as you do what I'm thinking when I'm writing something. How menancing your arguments are to your own strawmen!
Crazed Rabbit
Gah, you kids need to stop playing with strawmen.
OT: Big f'n deal!
Actually it is a big deal. If the faithful of Islam begin to turn away from those that spout volience and use terrorism in the name of their religion - the ability for the terrorist to use religion to justify his actions are reduced - which will in turn hopefully reduce the draw of the religious into such actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince
Since when did extremists make arguments that made sense dogmatically to begin with?
He represents the majority of the worlds muslims. The whole terrorist thingy is an embarrassement for real muslims.....
They don't - the error of the faithful exists in their lack of public outcry of what the extremists are doing in the name of thier religion. As more and more of the true followers of the religion voice their opposition and their outrage of what is being done in the name of thier religion - the less the terrorist is able to draw upon that message.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince
Too bad that people have to start do this this kind of thing and jeopardize their own lives in order to get respect, not only for them but for an entire culture.:bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus
E: Spelling...
Something expectable from a community where suicide-bombers are so common lately, eh ?Quote:
To bad that people have to start to this this kind of thing and jeopardize their own lives in order to get respect, not only for them but for an entire culture.
P.S. We sometimes must try to believe that people are committing something for only good - I disfavor the opinion that he may be trying to earn any respect from this.
I didn't said it in that way. However one of the side effects is a search for respect and to demonstrate of what humans in general are capable of... Don't misunderstand me LEN, I too think that the man might do this out of corage and compassion, but I was trying to point out what it takes for other people to recognize the value of others. How much it takes for many to say "at least there's some like him".Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine
Unless one of our Muslim patrons corrects me:Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Islam is supposed to be a personal religion, only God can judge whether or not you have been a good muslim and it is not up to men to judge their fellow muslims (on questions of faith).
Of course, this rule gets broken time and time again by the fundamentalists, but this doesn't mean the other muslims have to break it to :bow:
The same can be said of Christianity.Quote:
Originally Posted by doc_bean
Religious Teachers and Leaders serve as exambles. If a teacher/leader condemns the actions - it tells the others that the action is not consistent with the religion.Quote:
Of course, this rule gets broken time and time again by the fundamentalists, but this doesn't mean the other muslims have to break it to :bow:
That's true with Islam. And Redleg already clarified what's about being a "religious figure/teacher"Quote:
Islam is supposed to be a personal religion, only God can judge whether or not you have been a good muslim and it is not up to men to judge their fellow muslims (on questions of faith).
Oh right, since hoping for more people like him meant that there are no other people like him at all in the world. Not one, zero, zip, zilch. Thanks for pointing that out to me, since I obviously don't know as well as you do what I'm thinking when I'm writing something. How menancing your arguments are to your own strawmen!
Oh dear .
What you should be hoping for is not more like him , as there are already billions like him , what you should hope for is less of the nutters .
I'm a Catholic ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Christianity is more about communities and a hierarchical structure imho. In Islam, a Mullah Iman (or whatever) is just someone who studied the Quo'ran (and related things) more, this doesn't mean he's always right or that he bnecessarily knows things better. Compare that to the status of priests, ministers, whatever...
True, I'm just explaining why some were so slow to react, at least my view on why.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
This is a very good point indeed Red. But let me post you a quest: What happens when the premises that lead the extremits to the border of irrationality is in the same "Holy" book that they follow, many at the letter? I always want to see how an still-being-faithful sees this kind of subjects.Quote:
They don't - the error of the faithful exists in their lack of public outcry of what the extremists are doing in the name of thier religion. As more and more of the true followers of the religion voice their opposition and their outrage of what is being done in the name of thier religion - the less the terrorist is able to draw upon that message.
.
That's true for after life treatment. But there are rules for regulating social life as well, such as a complete law system.Quote:
Originally Posted by doc_bean
.
Not an easy question to answer. The extremists have an interpation of the book that is different from the intent of the orginial teachings and messages of the Prophet Muhammad for Islam - and the teachings of Jesus Christ for Christianity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
For instance as a Christian if I just followed the teachings of the Old Testiment - I would be incorrect in my faith - since as a Christian the gospel that is my faith is the word of Jesus in the New Testiment - not the Old Testiment.
Old Testiment teaching would allow me to make certain claims to religious justifications - however they would all be out of context of my proscribed faith - since the New Testiment is the tentant of my faith.
Islam has a history of treating people of other religions with respect, Saladin the supposed enemy of Christendom was far more merciful that the so called Richard the 'lionhearted'.
It is only recently that its got a bad press.
Now this is what I call guts; thumbs up for this man. I hope they will let her go, but these necrophile perverts will probably do what they do best anyway because of germany's undying support to the United States.
oh wait......
Ah who cares as long as you get to cut of heads. Now that I think of it, shouldn't the title be 'Muslim council offers head'?
Yes but what you know of Jesus or Muhammad is in the Holy Books, it's interpretation on itself, because none of them could have expressed themselves about any matter in life even with a general principle. So it's still a matter of interpretation. Many inmoral rules from christian doctrine come from the New Testament as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
So this will justify jews from just punishing anyone that the bible expressely sais so, because they're excused in the reverent fear to God?Quote:
For instance as a Christian if I just followed the teachings of the Old Testiment - I would be incorrect in my faith - since as a Christian the gospel that is my faith is the word of Jesus in the New Testiment - not the Old Testiment.
That maybe truth, however the word of God is composed by the two parts, you cannot simply ignore one of them and follow with the other.Quote:
Old Testiment teaching would allow me to make certain claims to religious justifications - however they would all be out of context of my proscribed faith - since the New Testiment is the tentant of my faith.
Yes they can! That's what the whole scam is about! Jeeeeeeez.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
As regards to Muhammad - you would be incorrect. There are plently of writings on the prophet - that exist from within the time period of his life.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
Now Jesus - his message and existance is contained within the New Testiment - with several historical writings that mention his name but not his history - but they are few - and spread over different time periods.
If the complete work is not used then the unterpretation of the individual is questionable, because the fraility of being man come into play.Quote:
So it's still a matter of interpretation. Many inmoral rules from christian doctrine come from the New Testament as well.
Only as it relates to the text of passage, and only if that individual is jewish - however it doesn't not justify the individual of jewish faith from violating man's laws.Quote:
So this will justify jews from just punishing anyone that the bible expressely sais so, because they're excused in the reverent fear to God?
You don't ignore the Old Testiment - you have to apply the New Testiment to the context of the Old Testiment. When one ignore's the teaching of the New Testiment to follow only the tenants of the Old Testiment that individual is not a Christian - to be a Christian you have to believe in Jesus Christ. By that belief you subscribe to the Good News carried in the New Testiment.Quote:
That maybe truth, however the word of God is composed by the two parts, you cannot simply ignore one of them and follow with the other.
Yes I thought as much, I remembered it later. However they're writings about his phylosophy or his biography?Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
But what if the whole work is questionable?Quote:
If the complete work is not used then the unterpretation of the individual is questionable, because the fraility of being man come into play.
If I believe in a superior being, who will punish me like a tyrant for all the eternity...What will I fear more: the laws of Earth for a period of time or the laws of Heaven? If I were an inteligent man I'll chose the second.Quote:
Only as it relates to the text of passage, and only if that individual is jewish - however it doesn't not justify the individual of jewish faith from violating man's laws.
But Jesus believed in the Old Testament, he respected and followed it in many matters if not all.Quote:
You don't ignore the Old Testiment - you have to apply the New Testiment to the context of the Old Testiment. When one ignore's the teaching of the New Testiment to follow only the tenants of the Old Testiment that individual is not a Christian - to be a Christian you have to believe in Jesus Christ. By that belief you subscribe to the Good News carried in the New Testiment.
Both if I remember correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
Religion like philosophy is a matter of faith.Quote:
But what if the whole work is questionable?
Yep - but that does not get you a pass for violating the laws of man on earth.Quote:
If I believe in a superior being, who will punish me like a tyrant for all the eternity...What will I fear more: the laws of Earth for a period of time or the laws of Heaven? If I were an inteligent man I'll chose the second.
yes he did - but he also added messages to the lessons of the Old Testiment.Quote:
But Jesus believed in the Old Testament, he respected and followed it in many matters if not all.
Yes indeed. But through faith you cannot turn an express truth into a falsehood. If the letter sais exactly that homosexuality is a sin and will lead to hell, then through faith you cannot pretend that it sais the contrary actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Yep- But that will lead to more fundamentalism that one could endure.Quote:
Yep - but that does not get you a pass for violating the laws of man on earth.
Perhaps but some bad things remained the same, not because he wanted, but because he didn't said anything otherwise.Quote:
yes he did - but he also added messages to the lessons of the Old Testiment.
Good thing I have never said otherwise then. However the New Testiment also states to forgive the sinner - and several other things now doesn't?Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
Not necessarily - a passage in the bible states clearly give unto Ceaser's what is his, Give onto God what is his.Quote:
Yep- But that will lead to more fundamentalism that one could endure.
My opinion is different on this.Quote:
Perhaps but some bad things remained the same, not because he wanted, but because he didn't said anything otherwise.
Oh yes but you stated that phylosophy was a matter of faith (I disagree) that will lead me to believe that your interpretation of clear words could be distorted and turned by the magic of faith.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
But the Jews don't follow that part do they?Quote:
Not necessarily - a passage in the bible states clearly give unto Ceaser's what is his, Give onto God what is his.
Ok I'll not bother you then.Quote:
My opinion is different on this.
You might want to check out how the Nazi's distorted the philosophy of Nietzsche.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
I am not Jewish - nor does the Jewish Religion have to follow the tenants of Christianity.Quote:
But the Jews don't follow that part do they?
Is not a bother - just my opinion is different - Jesus by his presence changed a lot of the aspects of the Old Testiment. I have a problem understanding Christians who preach the Old Testiment scripture - but fail to recongize where the New Testiment changed some of that same scripture.Quote:
Ok I'll not bother you then.
That was for political purposes and only demonstrates how words can be turned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Well that's exactly what I said.Quote:
I am not Jewish - nor does the Jewish Religion have to follow the tenants of Christianity.
As I see it, Jesus had a revolutionary line of thoughts. He preached charity, he said that God was in all of us -thus putting all man in an horizontal relationship- (or was it an interpretation of the Church?), he eated with his fellow man and treated him equally and encouraged others through no-violence, but example, to do the same. However he didn't said anything about limit subjects, such as homosexuality or prostitution (because it appears that Magdalena was not a prostitute after all). Jesus did changed the mentality of the old jew society of castes and discrimination, but that was not enough, I think that his message was not well received and certain people distorted it for their own purpose. But even then that's not excuse for distorting clear words of the Bible, in the Old and the New testament, that are supposedly the word of God.Quote:
Is not a bother - just my opinion is different - Jesus by his presence changed a lot of the aspects of the Old Testiment. I have a problem understanding Christians who preach the Old Testiment scripture - but fail to recongize where the New Testiment changed some of that same scripture.
Bingo - give the man a ciger. You can apply the same logical to religion and how some only take portions of the message to fit what they want to believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulforged
But it seems that as a christian you also want me to accept the tenants of the Jewish faith with your comments.Quote:
Well that's exactly what I said.
I agree - one should not distort the words which are contained in the Bible for their own political purposes - either believe or not believe. Picking and chosing is not the way to be a Christian.Quote:
As I see it, Jesus had a revolutionary line of thoughts. He preached charity, he said that God was in all of us -thus putting all man in an horizontal relationship- (or was it an interpretation of the Church?), he eated with his fellow man and treated him equally and encouraged others through no-violence, but example, to do the same. However he didn't said anything about limit subjects, such as homosexuality or prostitution (because it appears that Magdalena was not a prostitute after all). Jesus did changed the mentality of the old jew society of castes and discrimination, but that was not enough, I think that his message was not well received and certain people distorted it for their own purpose. But even then that's not excuse for distorting clear words of the Bible, in the Old and the New testament, that are supposedly the word of God.
I know I was only pointing it out again to make it clear that it will not be good to your point.~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Not at all. I was discussing the jews, the jews take the Old Testament at the letter.Quote:
But it seems that as a christian you also want me to accept the tenants of the Jewish faith with your comments.
Oh but you didn't understand my possition. I'm actually saying that most christian choose the words they like from the absolute word of God. Libertarian christians usually take out the parts condemning homosexuality and sodomy, wich are in the New Testament of course, saying otherwise will be pointless because you can pick words from the Old Testament.Quote:
I agree - one should not distort the words which are contained in the Bible for their own political purposes - either believe or not believe. Picking and chosing is not the way to be a Christian.