Just making sure what im reading is right...

[Randarkmaan]

This maltreatment of the Coptic majority (at the time) in Egypt wasn't that under the so called "Mad Caliph" rather than immdiately after the Arab conquest? Because before the Abbassid Caliphate Islam was largely viewed, by Arabs, as the religion of the Arab ruling class rather than as the religion of the masses. And regarding the Copts in Egypt they only really started to become a minority in Egypt after the so called "Mad Caliph" who wanted to forcefully convert all christians and jews in his realm, and they did not become a minority in Egypt until the late 12th century, 400 years after they were conquered by the Arabs.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Jesus said to love your neighbor and in the next breath he tells you all non-christians should be regarded as enemies.

Care to share the verse(s) on that last bit?

[Spetulhu]

Jesus said to love your neighbor and in the next breath he tells you all non-christians should be regarded as enemies.

Care to share the verse(s) on that last bit?

Try Matthew, Mark, Luke and John for starters.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I don't remember the "all non-christians should be regarded as enemies" bit - though I haven't really read my Bible at all.

I do remember Jesus being big on the whole "love your neighbor" thing though.

[Spetulhu]

I don't remember the "all non-christians should be regarded as enemies" bit - though I haven't really read my Bible at all.

I do remember Jesus being big on the whole "love your neighbor" thing though.

Reading the bible is a good cure for christianity. Reasonable people bash cultish churches for the way they freeze out even family members who don't bow to Jesus, but they're only following the example set by the same.

The church wants people to join and stay. These days it's Love Thy Neighbor that sells, at least better than Kill All Non-believers.

[Ser Clegane]

Try Matthew, Mark, Luke and John for starters

I do not want to be picky, but I think you should provide a bit more to back up your previous statement, as I personally do not recall the "non-Christians should be regarded as enemies" part either ... of course I am open to being educated

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Still vague and unhelpful, Spetulhu!

[Spetulhu]

Still vague and unhelpful, Spetulhu!

He does call people enemies for not believing. Or rather for not bowing to him.

Luk 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me.


As for shunning unbelievers he leaves his own mother outside when she comes calling!
Matthew:
12:46 While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.
12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
12:48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?
12:49 And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
12:50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

Nope, this is not the kind of example I'd wish to follow.

[Pannonian]

This maltreatment of the Coptic majority (at the time) in Egypt wasn't that under the so called "Mad Caliph" rather than immdiately after the Arab conquest? Because before the Abbassid Caliphate Islam was largely viewed, by Arabs, as the religion of the Arab ruling class rather than as the religion of the masses. And regarding the Copts in Egypt they only really started to become a minority in Egypt after the so called "Mad Caliph" who wanted to forcefully convert all christians and jews in his realm, and they did not become a minority in Egypt until the late 12th century, 400 years after they were conquered by the Arabs.

Was that the chap who scolded Muhammad for being lax in his observance of the religion?

[Kanamori]

Those people believe muhammed???? It's no wonder I think that they should all die and are all scumbags.

[Randarkmaan]

Was that the chap who scolded Muhammad for being lax in his observance of the religion?

I don't think so, the "mad caliph" (Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah) was just a little mad... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_Caliph Here's his wikipedia entry.
He was not very nice towards christians, he for an example made them wear black hats and they had to wear one meter-long crosses on their backs.

[Orb]

On the first post.

Didn't the Jews also try to assassinate Muhammed?

I don't agree with Islam, but that writer seems fairly biased.

[Patriarch of Constantinople]

Those people believe muhammed???? It's no wonder I think that they should all die and are all scumbags.

Every religion had/has violence. Christianity: Crusades, killing Muslims in the name of God. Jews: Destroying the walls of Jericho and continuing fighting tribes for unity. Muslims: Mohammeds coquest of Mecca, and today's terrorist bombings.

But, I hope you don't think all Muslims are terrorists.

[BDC]

Muslims have quoted the "Quraysh Model" as justification for many deceptive treaties. It means, "Negotiate 'peace' with your enemy until you become strong enough to annihilate him"

That's hardly exactly a Muslim thing. Pretty sure that's how most of the world was conquered by Europeans.

[Pannonian]

quote=holybandit
Muslims have quoted the "Quraysh Model" as justification for many deceptive treaties. It means, "Negotiate 'peace' with your enemy until you become strong enough to annihilate him"

That's hardly exactly a Muslim thing. Pretty sure that's how most of the world was conquered by Europeans.

Most notably America. The conquest of the American wilds is possibly the most sustained campaign of treachery and broken promises in recorded history. Even the Mongols tended only to break their oaths to open a campaign, not repeatedly make, ignore and void treaties.

[Kanamori]

Every religion had/has violence. Christianity: Crusades, killing Muslims in the name of God. Jews: Destroying the walls of Jericho and continuing fighting tribes for unity. Muslims: Mohammeds coquest of Mecca, and today's terrorist bombings.

But, I hope you don't think all Muslims are terrorists.

I don't actually hate or love muslims for being muslims. It was a statement on the ridiculousness of implying anything about modern day muslims based on what mohammed did; first, they are not him and haven't done any of those things; second, his teachings are separate from his supposed actions, and many people interpret his teachings differently; fourth, the sequence of interpreting islamic history tends to go: I already dislike muslims -----> look at these (vague interpretations of) events in history, mohammed was a bastard (conclusion reached because of hasty interpretation based on previous hatred)-----> muslims beleive in mohammed, and think these evil things are OK -----> Aha, muslims really are scum... not many people actually invest the time to get many sources of information or construct a clear idea of all that actually happened -- eg of imporance Jill shot Jack in the face ---> ah, Jill is bad ... but actually, Jack first attacked Jill with a machete... people leave out, or miss out of ignorance, vital information for making a correct judgment... You can usually tell the sources are biased off their rockers when they are harsh and vague about things that are important for judgment.

They go into the whole thing with an incredibly colored perception of reality, use it to justify some conclusion based on way too little information, and then from that justify their twisted idea of things that they always had.

But yes, most every religion has its violent adherents: people, even common murderers and rapists, tend to think that they are justified, ie based on some personal belief, in harming others when they do it.