For all the turds.............................

[E20]

I think they're called terrorists.

Don't be stupid.

[The Ressurrected One]

I disagree. Out of 350 Million, I'd say it was a tiny fraction of a percent involved in any of this. One thing about any kind of terrorism is that it doesn't take many people to accomplish your goals.

Well, point two makes it possible for this small percentage to rule in places like pre-liberated Afghanistan and Iran and continue to produce more hatred.

I agree with this. However, many of the infuriating things that were quoted from Muslims were hauntingly close to quotes from Fudamentalist Christians regarding abortion clinic bombings (Christian terrorism), things like "I don't support it, but I can understand why they do it." o, you just supported them.

Over the past 5 decades, just how many abortion doctors have been killed and just how many abortion clinics have been bombed?

Then, tell me how many went unprosecuted by the law?

The point is, Christian fundamentalists don't run the ship and, besides, the number of non-fundi Christians, in this country, who would justify or turn a blind eye to such an atrocity is -- proportionally -- much smaller than the number of "ordinary, every day, non-violent" Muslims turning a blind eye to the atrocities of their extremists. In fact, I'd say their numbers just about mirror the number of fundis that would commit such acts.

No contest.

[The Ressurrected One]

I think they're called terrorists.

Don't be stupid.

I see. And, just how many identified global terrorists over the past 40 years have not been Islamic extremists?

[E20]

WTF are you talking about? Most Muslim countries are 3rd world and the people don't even have a voice and usually an oligarchy repersents the whole country.

[The Ressurrected One]

WTF are you talking about? Most Muslim countries are 3rd world and the people don't even have a voice and usually an oligarchy repersents the whole country.

America has a large Muslim contingent. So does Europe and non-third world Asia, and Southeast Asia.

I don't hear much coming from those Muslims...

What's keeping your local mosque from condemning the actions of these barbarians acting in the name of their religion?

[E20]

What do you want them to say they condemn the acts of terrorism done to the religon? If so they already have.

[The Ressurrected One]

What do you want them to say they condemn the acts of terrorism done to the religon? If so they already have.

Really? When?

[E20]

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Mus...gle=1&ei=UTF-8

[E20]

War accroding to the Quran:
http://www.aiipowmia.com/iraq/quranpwrights.html

[dcole50]

terrorists use islam as an excuse. but, sure, go ahead and feel that your religion is superior if you'd like.

[Nbadan]

America has a large Muslim contingent. So does Europe and non-third world Asia, and Southeast Asia.

I don't hear much coming from those Muslims...

What's keeping your local mosque from condemning the actions of these barbarians acting in the name of their religion?

These radicals attacking Western targets aren't just driven by religious hate as TRO would like us to believe. Almost all have been repressed in their homeland by Oligarchies propped up with foreign aid at the behest of the majority - much of this aid from the U.S. Wahabi schools, usually financed by the various Oligarchies throughout the Middle East, focus on blaming the West for their own governmental short-comings to help stay in power.

Islam is a peaceful religion, but it has been abused by the Oligarchs, and Islamic fundamentalist who know that religious zealots can be easily manipulated.

[Duff McCartney]

The point is, Christian fundamentalists don't run the ship

That's hilarious...you're willing to blame the majority on the actions of the few. Yet you can't even look at yourself.

Religion is a joke..it always has been and always will be.

The way you try to make excuses for your religion and condem another is proving my point.

[mookie2001]

well naturally not all muslims are terrorist
just like not all republicans drive Tahoes

[Extra Stout]

There are Muslims all over the world condemning terrorism on a continuous basis... that doesn't mean that American media is going to fall all over itself reporting that. Go request a fatwa from any respected Islamic scholar, and see for yourself.

And the mainstream interpretation of the Quran is that jihad is solely for defensive purposes, and that the bloody conquests of Mohammed and his followers were a special dispensation from Allah in the initial spread of Islam. Muslims today are called to convert through persuasion and example, not the sword.

Islam does not go as far as Christianity, at least in teaching anyway, with regard to the treatment of unbelievers. Islam teaches that while Jews and Christians are deserving of protection, they are not to be treated with the same respect as fellow Muslims. Others, termed "polytheists," even though they coulds be atheists or anything else, are accorded no respect whatsoever.

In the real world, how Muslims treat people just depends. Iraqi Christians are having a hard time because Saddam Hussein protected them, so now they are a target. Iran is more tolerant of the church than one might expect, and regards several old Persian churches as cultural tresures. The Syrians as we all know have a record of oppression against the Maronites in Lebanon. The Turks tried to exterminate the Armenian Christians, but today count their history in the early days of the Christian faith as a cultural treasure, and have made the Hagia Sophia a museum, with the old Byzantine frescoes undergoing restoration.

In Egypt and some other North African countries, as well as places like Jordan and up into Central Asia, Christians and Muslims have lived together for a long time, and Muslims usually don't bother adhering to the distinctions their faith calls for them to make, because the Christians are their friends.

In Palestine, most of the Christians fled in 1948. The few who remain hate Israelis just as much as the Muslims do, and fight side-by-side.

In Sudan, the Arab Muslims in power have been trying to extreminate the African Christians for years, long before the situation in darfur got worldwide attention.

It just depends upon the community. Now that even Arab Christians are being associated with the West, they are facing greater persecution than in the past.

As for Christianity, well, people who are hostile to the faith like to take individual verses from the Bible out of context and throw them in the face of Christians. Then, when Christians respond with an orthodox interpretation of the verses in question, those hostile call it "making excuses." This is because they aren't interested in any kind of legitimate debate. Agnostics and atheists can be dogmatic, just as the religious can.

[The Ressurrected One]

There are Muslims all over the world condemning terrorism on a continuous basis... that doesn't mean that American media is going to fall all over itself reporting that. Go request a fatwa from any respected Islamic scholar, and see for yourself.

And the mainstream interpretation of the Quran is that jihad is solely for defensive purposes, and that the bloody conquests of Mohammed and his followers were a special dispensation from Allah in the initial spread of Islam. Muslims today are called to convert through persuasion and example, not the sword.

Islam does not go as far as Christianity, at least in teaching anyway, with regard to the treatment of unbelievers. Islam teaches that while Jews and Christians are deserving of protection, they are not to be treated with the same respect as fellow Muslims. Others, termed "polytheists," even though they coulds be atheists or anything else, are accorded no respect whatsoever.

In the real world, how Muslims treat people just depends. Iraqi Christians are having a hard time because Saddam Hussein protected them, so now they are a target. Iran is more tolerant of the church than one might expect, and regards several old Persian churches as cultural tresures. The Syrians as we all know have a record of oppression against the Maronites in Lebanon. The Turks tried to exterminate the Armenian Christians, but today count their history in the early days of the Christian faith as a cultural treasure, and have made the Hagia Sophia a museum, with the old Byzantine frescoes undergoing restoration.

In Egypt and some other North African countries, as well as places like Jordan and up into Central Asia, Christians and Muslims have lived together for a long time, and Muslims usually don't bother adhering to the distinctions their faith calls for them to make, because the Christians are their friends.

In Palestine, most of the Christians fled in 1948. The few who remain hate Israelis just as much as the Muslims do, and fight side-by-side.

In Sudan, the Arab Muslims in power have been trying to extreminate the African Christians for years, long before the situation in darfur got worldwide attention.

It just depends upon the community. Now that even Arab Christians are being associated with the West, they are facing greater persecution than in the past.

As for Christianity, well, people who are hostile to the faith like to take individual verses from the Bible out of context and throw them in the face of Christians. Then, when Christians respond with an orthodox interpretation of the verses in question, those hostile call it "making excuses." This is because they aren't interested in any kind of legitimate debate. Agnostics and atheists can be dogmatic, just as the religious can.

Nicely put, ES.

However, I would note your dissertation tends to support the premise that Muslims have to liberally interpret their Koran to avoid the more distasteful or violent aspects of the religion while Christians must do the same in order to justify their more distasteful or violent behaviors.

[Extra Stout]

Nicely put, ES.

However, I would note your dissertation tends to support the premise that Muslims have to liberally interpret their Koran to avoid the more distasteful or violent aspects of the religion while Christians must do the same in order to justify their more distasteful or violent behaviors.

I think to some degree that is correct. But not too much.

The Koran is like the Bible in that there are teachings that appear superficially contradictory that are explained through deeper holistic study. For example, Christians do not adhere to the ceremonial and civil aspects of Levitical law not because they are hypocrites or have selective hearing, but because of the teachings of Jesus that the laws are summed up in loving one's neighbor, the passages in Romans that explain the purpose of those laws in revealing man's futility in meeting God's holy standard, and the passages in Hebrews that explain the completion and abrogation of those laws through Christ.

Likewise, the Koran states both that infidels are to be slaughtered, and that they are to be accorded protection, and that Muslims should enter into treaties with them. Without holistic study of the Koran, it is difficult for us to understand how Muslims work all that out.

The biggest problem I see is that while the OT/NT relationship is widely agreed upon by Christians, differing mainly between dispensational and unified views of God's plan, since the NT is pretty clear on how to treat the OT, the teachings on jihad are vague enough that they are more akin to Christians' disagreements on say, women's covering themselves in the church. So while the majority agrees that the passage in Corinthians is a figure of speech for long hair, which itself is a cultural allusion in Corinth for not dressing like a pros ute, some people will take it literally enough that they think their women have to wear the little doilies, or even the head wraps.

[The Ressurrected One]

I think to some degree that is correct. But not too much.

The Koran is like the Bible in that there are teachings that appear superficially contradictory that are explained through deeper holistic study. For example, Christians do not adhere to the ceremonial and civil aspects of Levitical law not because they are hypocrites or have selective hearing, but because of the teachings of Jesus that the laws are summed up in loving one's neighbor, the passages in Romans that explain the purpose of those laws in revealing man's futility in meeting God's holy standard, and the passages in Hebrews that explain the completion and abrogation of those laws through Christ.

Likewise, the Koran states both that infidels are to be slaughtered, and that they are to be accorded protection, and that Muslims should enter into treaties with them. Without holistic study of the Koran, it is difficult for us to understand how Muslims work all that out.

The biggest problem I see is that while the OT/NT relationship is widely agreed upon by Christians, differing mainly between dispensational and unified views of God's plan, since the NT is pretty clear on how to treat the OT, the teachings on jihad are vague enough that they are more akin to Christians' disagreements on say, women's covering themselves in the church. So while the majority agrees that the passage in Corinthians is a figure of speech for long hair, which itself is a cultural allusion in Corinth for not dressing like a pros ute, some people will take it literally enough that they think their women have to wear the little doilies, or even the head wraps.

You make a compelling argument. However, the construct of both books is entirely and significantly different.

Just as the Koran was the product of one person, Mohammed, and one would only need to discern his intent to understand the underlying meaning of Koran text; the Bible is the product of many, written over the course of thousands of years and obligates the reader to understand the cultural signficance of the periods during which the individual books were written before being able to discern the intent of the author.

Further, mistaking the meaning of a passage in Corinthians that leads to a fairly innocuous religious belief is not the same as misconstruing the meaning of Jihad and murdering thousands ... as did your prophet, Mohammed, the author of same.

It is also telling that you did not pick any passage of the New Testament that has been miscontrued to justify violence...

[Extra Stout]

You make a compelling argument. However, the construct of both books is entirely and significantly different.

Just as the Koran was the product of one person, Mohammed, and one would only need to discern his intent to understand the underlying meaning of Koran text; the Bible is the product of many, written over the course of thousands of years and obligates the reader to understand the cultural signficance of the periods during which the individual books were written before being able to discern the intent of the author.

True. But keep in mind that Mohammed did not write the Quran all in one sitting, but rather wrote it over the course of his adult life, over which his point of view changed.

Further, mistaking the meaning of a passage in Corinthians that leads to a fairly innocuous religious belief is not the same as misconstruing the meaning of Jihad and murdering thousands ... as did your prophet, Mohammed, the author of same.

Indeed, that it is the biggest problem I see. There are legitimate hermeneutics of the Quran that could lead one to believe that a Muslim should fight the United States to the death. It is not a heretical view, merely an unusual one. That a mainstream religion can reasonably be interpreted this way is a huge issue. It could mean there will always be a small contingent of Islamic terrorism. Remember that the United States fought a war against Islamic pirates in the 1790's who had a worldview not unlike modern-day terrorists. Their outlook changed drastically after the U.S. Navy bombed the bejeezus out of Tunis. Suddenly the Barbary Pirates wanted a treaty.

It is also telling that you did not pick any passage of the New Testament that has been miscontrued to justify violence...

There is none of which I know. If anything, NT passages are misconstrued to justify excessive meekness...

[The Ressurrected One]

True. But keep in mind that Mohammed did not write the Quran all in one sitting, but rather wrote it over the course of his adult life, over which his point of view changed.

Still...one man, one lifetime.

Indeed, that it is the biggest problem I see. There are legitimate hermeneutics of the Quran that could lead one to believe that a Muslim should fight the United States to the death. It is not a heretical view, merely an unusual one. That a mainstream religion can reasonably be interpreted this way is a huge issue. It could mean there will always be a small contingent of Islamic terrorism. Remember that the United States fought a war against Islamic pirates in the 1790's who had a worldview not unlike modern-day terrorists. Their outlook changed drastically after the U.S. Navy bombed the bejeezus out of Tunis. Suddenly the Barbary Pirates wanted a treaty.

Bombing the bejeezus out of them again, appears to be the only solution. I guess we'll have to keep it up until they amend the Koran.

There is none of which I know. If anything, NT passages are misconstrued to justify excessive meekness...

Agreed.

[smackdaddy11]

http://memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=669

The following are excerpts from a Friday sermon on Palestinian Authority TV. The preacher is Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris. PA TV aired this sermon on May 13, 2005

I won't bore you with the entire racist Islam is peaceful rant.

Here are some excerpts:

"With the establishment of the state of Israel, the entire Islamic nation was lost, because Israel is a cancer spreading through the body of the Islamic nation, and because the Jews are a virus resembling AIDS, from which the entire world suffers."

Aids. Nice peaceful muslim.

"We have ruled the world before, and by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again. The day will come when we will rule America."

As I have told you ignoramouses over and over and over. This religion wants to rule the world. Millions upon millions of these animals want the destruction of civilization as we know it.

"The day will come when everything will be relived of the Jews - even the stones and trees which were harmed by them. Listen to the Prophet Muhammad, who tells you about the evil end that awaits Jews. The stones and trees will want the Muslims to finish off every Jew."

Wow. Hiteresque don't you think?


I love the flower pitchers who have had no part of this thread. I should have known you pussies who loved to call me out will not even counter the original thread.

BTW, Her is a list of the "peaceful" Muslim groups who endorsed the march:

http://www.freemuslims.org/

On May 14, the Free Muslims and 80 other supporting organizations sent a message to radical Muslims and supporters of terrorism that we reject them and that we will defeat them.

That is almost 1/2 a person per organization. They are everywhere. LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!

[E20]

Geez, he is from Palestine and talking smack about Israel/Jews and the only way he can is by using reliogon , why don't he just say it out:

They took some land from us.

Just like Chapelle:
The man tried to kill my father.

And this is comes from a hadith:
When the bier of anyone passeth by thee, whether Jew, Christian or Muslim, rise to thy feet.

where the does Sheik Ibrahim get his from?

http://www.routledge-ny.com/MiddleAges/Jewish/IslamandJews.pdf#search='Islam%20on%20jews'

[scott]

Wow. Hiteresque don't you think?

First, I'm assuming you meant "Hitleresque"?

And that is a great analogy... Hitler was a radical Christian who preached violence as a means to his ends... Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris is a radical Muslim who preaches voilence as a means to his ends.

Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris represents mainstream Islam as much as Adolf Hitler represented mainstream Christianity.

Your first contribution to real thought. Attaboy, smackdaddy!

45 posts into this topic, and no one has yet provided evidence of the Koran advocating the murder of infidels who refuse to convert and thus accepted my challenge.

[E20]

Who doesn't get the idea:
'There's no compulsion in religon'?

A key thing in all the major religons

[The Ressurrected One]

45 posts into this topic, and no one has yet provided evidence of the Koran advocating the murder of infidels who refuse to convert and thus accepted my challenge.

Sorry, didn't recall there was a challenge...I thought the premise had been stipulated by all involved.

"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you."

It should be clear that this verse commands Muslims to wage war on all non-Muslims around them. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure this out.

"When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly."

That is what I call a harsh religion. You are supposed to strike off the heads of those to whom you evangelize?

"Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another."

"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal sternly with them. shall be their home, evil their fate."

scott, if you can put these in a context that makes Islam look peaceful...be my guest.

[The Ressurrected One]

Who doesn't get the idea:
'There's no compulsion in religon'?

A key thing in all the major religons

I disagree. Christianity is not a compulsory religion.

The concept of religious liberty, in which I as a Christian am a believer, depends upon a particular conception of God, a particular conception of the human person, and a particular conception of liberty. Reaching these conceptions took Jews and Christians many centuries. They had to be learned through failure and sin and error, and at great cost. But they were eventually learned.

This uniquely Judeo-Christian principle, in and of itself, demands that each person’s decision about how (if at all) to worship God is inalienable, for it belongs to each alone in his or her own conscience. Everyone must be free in conscience and in public exercise to accept, or to reject, the Judeo-Christian God. Even if unbelievers choose not to recognize this conception of God, conscience and liberty, but rather to concentrate upon abuses of the principle committed by Christians or others, this particular conception guarantees their freedom of conscience. It is also precious for believers, who are obliged by it to grant to all others exactly the same right to religious liberty that they claim for themselves.

I am called as a Christian to evangelize and spread the Good News. You can either reject or accept my overtures...without penalty.

This is not the case in Islam.