Head of Muslim counsel offers himself as hostage

[A.Saturnus]

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

[Crazed Rabbit]

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

[Tribesman]

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.

[Crazed Rabbit]

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

[Byzantine Prince]

Gah, you kids need to stop playing with strawmen.

OT: Big f'n deal!

[Redleg]

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.

[Byzantine Prince]

Since when did extremists make arguments that made sense dogmatically to begin with?

[bmolsson]

He represents the majority of the worlds muslims. The whole terrorist thingy is an embarrassement for real muslims.....

[Redleg]

Since when did extremists make arguments that made sense dogmatically to begin with?

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.

[Soulforged]

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."

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.

E: Spelling...

[LeftEyeNine]

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.

Something expectable from a community where suicide-bombers are so common lately, eh ?

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.

[Soulforged]

Something expectable from a community where suicide-bombers are so common lately, eh ?
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".

[doc_bean]

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.

Unless one of our Muslim patrons corrects me:

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

[Redleg]

Unless one of our Muslim patrons corrects me:

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).

The same can be said of Christianity.

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

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.

[LeftEyeNine]

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).

That's true with Islam. And Redleg already clarified what's about being a "religious figure/teacher"

[Tribesman]

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 .

[doc_bean]

The same can be said of Christianity.

I'm a Catholic
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...

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.

True, I'm just explaining why some were so slow to react, at least my view on why.

[Soulforged]

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.

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.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.

Unless one of our Muslim patrons corrects me:

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).

That's true for after life treatment. But there are rules for regulating social life as well, such as a complete law system.
.

[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.

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.

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.

[Byzantine Mercenary]

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.

[Fragony]

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'?

[Soulforged]

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

[Byzantine Prince]

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 they can! That's what the whole scam is about! Jeeeeeeez.

[Redleg]

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.

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.

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.

So it's still a matter of interpretation. Many inmoral rules from christian doctrine come from the New Testament as well.

If the complete work is not used then the unterpretation of the individual is questionable, because the fraility of being man come into play.

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?

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.

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.

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.

[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.

Yes I thought as much, I remembered it later. However they're writings about his phylosophy or his biography?

If the complete work is not used then the unterpretation of the individual is questionable, because the fraility of being man come into play.

But what if the whole work is questionable?

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.

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.

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.

But Jesus believed in the Old Testament, he respected and followed it in many matters if not all.

[Redleg]

Yes I thought as much, I remembered it later. However they're writings about his phylosophy or his biography?

Both if I remember correctly.

But what if the whole work is questionable?

Religion like philosophy is a matter of faith.

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.

Yep - but that does not get you a pass for violating the laws of man on earth.

But Jesus believed in the Old Testament, he respected and followed it in many matters if not all.

yes he did - but he also added messages to the lessons of the Old Testiment.

[Soulforged]

Religion like philosophy is a matter of faith.

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.

Yep - but that does not get you a pass for violating the laws of man on earth.

Yep- But that will lead to more fundamentalism that one could endure.

yes he did - but he also added messages to the lessons of the Old Testiment.

Perhaps but some bad things remained the same, not because he wanted, but because he didn't said anything otherwise.

[Redleg]

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.

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?

Yep- But that will lead to more fundamentalism that one could endure.

Not necessarily - a passage in the bible states clearly give unto Ceaser's what is his, Give onto God what is his.

Perhaps but some bad things remained the same, not because he wanted, but because he didn't said anything otherwise.

My opinion is different on this.

[Soulforged]

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?

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.

Not necessarily - a passage in the bible states clearly give unto Ceaser's what is his, Give onto God what is his.

But the Jews don't follow that part do they?

My opinion is different on this.

Ok I'll not bother you then.