58
   

Are there any peaceful muslim nations?

 
 
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 03:16 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Hmmm...then you mistake the purpose of me posting the links. Prior to the links I shared my reason. Just below, I explained to you why I posted them.

(If it helps...the multitude of links is not about any one incident - but the totality- after all, an ideology is only dangerous if in totality it endangers society / societies... and that is to say, by itself, isolated cases of nut jobs don't necessarily reflect on whether or not an ideology is dangerous)

Quote:
When I refer to Islam as a dangerous religion , I am not referring to crime rates, but violence that occurs...done in the name of Islam...that would not occur without the religious influence of Islam....and that there is a breadth & quantity of this type of violence & intolerance...supported by enough muslims...underpinned by their founding prophets behaviour and edicts...to make it a dangerous religion.

The examples of this type of violence is currently frequently ongoing, and I've posted a mass of links to such.

To close your eyes to the plethora of intimidation, violence, and attrocities committed in the name of religion...to close your eyes to the obvious patterns of this violence (found after you look into why)


Quote:
If you are wondering the purpose of my posting links to such things...some time back I said that people ignore the enormous breadth of Islamic violence...that they apologise for it. As they felt that I had no idea what I was talking about ...it was simply easier to post links to the plethora of examples out there.

As a generalisation - anyone that takes times to read through the links will see:
- a staggering geographical breadth of islamic violence
- a staggering quantity of violence
- an escalation to the violence
- a 'restlessness' whereever the religion gains sufficient foothold

Anyone that takes time to read on the founding on Islam, will see similarities in behaviour between todays violence and their prophets behaviour and commands (if you don't follow this, start reading about the founding / founder). That is not to say similarities between the particular destructive methods employed, but the similarities relating to:
- converting when they are the superior force
- what to do if they are faced with a militarily superior foe, etc (behaviour found during the founding/founders time)

Few understand that it is accepted in many parts of Islam that the world is divided into 'the abode of Islam' and 'the abode of war'...even if this isn't accepted by all, it's accepted by plenty.

Few consider what 5-8% extremism means when you have over 1 billion muslims.

Few know of, or consider the percentage of 'sympathisers' in regards to extremists, nor what such percentage of sympathisers means.

Few consider that muslims will happily admit that if you are in a Islamic Country, and you are not muslim, then you will be a second class citizen.

Few understand that the Quran isn't the only Holy book, and that it needs to be read in conjuction with 2 other Holy Books.

However...most aren't interested in looking at those books, the history, and comparing it to what is happening today...

As most want to argue though...it's easier to post the plethora of examples that will keep arising from Islam.


None of that says that muslims commit more crime, nor does it say that the majority of muslims aren't peaceful...though people who are either hateful or apologetic may read such into it.
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 03:21 pm
@vikorr,
I'm not finished reading your last post, but I found this list humorous.
Quote:
As a generalisation - anyone that takes times to read through the links will see:
- a staggering geographical breadth of islamic (American) violence
- a staggering quantity of violence (tens of thousands of innocent people killed by American weapons)
- an escalation to the violence (agent orange in Vietnam)
- a 'restlessness' whereever the religion gains sufficient foothold


America is considered a 'christian' country.
How many illegal wars the US has started; shall we count the ways?
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 03:31 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Hi CI

I acknowledge what you are talking about.

Two things I would like to point out:

1. the evils of one system (or ideology) does not excuse the evils of another. Each system, and each ideology, should be judged on it's own merits.

2. For your comparison, one system creates violence in the name of a religion, while another creates violence in the name of a country (and it's beliefs)...it does not, as you imply, create it in the name of christianity.

If it helps - I consider the American govt to be quite rapacious. I consider that it's 'murdered' millions of people for it's (the country's) own gain, and corruptly endebted & impoverished tens of millions more (I daresay it runs into the hundreds of millions, but I haven't added it up). I find that the general populace appears largely ignorant of it

My own country, Australia, turns a blind eye to atrocities on it's own doorstep (East Timor before independence, and currently still, West Papua), and keeps East Timor impoverished, while we (Australia) gain from it's natural resources...there is no need to keep East Timor impoverished. I know that my countrymen are largely ignorant of this (West Papua may get a page in the news once every few years, and speaking to them, almost all have a blank look on their face to start with).

It's not about using comparison for excuse...but rather, judging a system on it's own merits.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 03:36 pm
@vikorr,
You wrote,
Quote:
2. For your comparison, one system creates violence in the name of a religion, while another creates violence in the name of a country (and it's beliefs)...it does not, as you imply, create it in the name of christianity.


But you're the one identifying Muslims/Islam as the creator of violence. I disagree. It just so happens that they are extremists in Muslim countries. Islam doesn't 'teach' or approve of violence. The same with the US, the majority are christians, but not everyb0dy agrees with what the US does in our aggressive behavior against other sovereign countries - some times illegally.
coldjoint
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 03:57 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Islam doesn't 'teach' or approve of violence.

Can you get any dumber?

Quote:
The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.



Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.



Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."



Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').



Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.



Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"



Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."



Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).



Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?



Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"



Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.



Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."



Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."



Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."



Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."



Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."



Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.



Quran (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."



Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.



Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.


Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"



Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.



Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).


Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.



Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."


Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?



Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."



Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).



Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)



Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"



Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.



Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.



Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle. The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."



Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"



Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.



Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.



Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.



Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.



Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.








http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 04:10 pm
@coldjoint,
The bible has more violence; kill your own family/child as directed by god.

Have you followed his command, or are you a sinner?
Did you stone to death any of your children who misbehaved? If you have, god bless you!
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 04:22 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Islam doesn't 'teach' or approve of violence.
I'm sorry, but as a flat out statement - you are quite wrong. Their own prophet commanded them to it. Have a read into the founding of Islam, how he got kicked out of Mecca, what he did in Medina (which largely didn't involve violence), and how he returned to conquer Mecca, and the subsequent spread of Islam...and while doing that, have a read of how his teachings changed from:
- teaching you must not commit violence for any reason, to
- you can use violence only in self defence, to
- it is your duty to use any means, including violence, to convert people, to (when faced by a militarily superior 'enemy')
- if your enemy is militarily stronger than you, you no longer have to use 'convert by the sword', but must convert by any other means possible until you have the upper hand...

The majority of muslims appear to ignore such, and are peaceful (as the majority of humans are want to be)...but their own prophets behaviour creates huge problems for the religion.

----------------------
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quran_and_violence
Despite all the arguments (URL link relates to arguments) on the Quran etc and whether it calls to violence, it's own founding father creates a problem that the religion does not appear able to sufficiently overcome.

--------------
The Quran & Hadith aren't free of commands to violence either:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htmAlthough I would use another site if they too offered a list, it isn't apparently a subject of sufficient interest to find another. In any event - it is easy to check those versus against http://quran.com/which is where I think the Quran versus are obtained from. A quick check of a number of versus shows they are just cut & paste. A check of surrounding verus will reveal more context.

Much of it has historical context.

The problem is...together with the prophets behaviour...and sufficient versus...it is rather easy to justify violence in the name of Islam (despite versus relating to peace). As we well know, people will read what they want to read...and there are enough muslims reading into their prophets behaviour, and the violent versus, justification for violence in the name of Islam...to make it a dangerous religion...as events display.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 04:28 pm
@vikorr,
That's tame compared to the bible. The bible tells its adherents to kill family and children.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+13
Quote:
6 If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, 7 gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), 8 do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. 9 You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. 10 Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 11 Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 04:35 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I am very familiar with the Bible, as at one stage I did belong to a church...and as I mentioned earlier, comparison should never be used as excuse...each system should be judged on it's own merits.

I am happy to discuss (in another thread) the pitfalls of christianity, or the evils of the US govt, or the blindness of the Australian people to the attrocities on it's doorstep.

If you have an issue with what I wrote (relating to Islam), that is fine.
coldjoint
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 04:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The bible has more violence;


Getting dumber.
Quote:
So why aren’t the Jews and Christians of today doing this?

Well, it's most likely because there aren't any Midianites around, since that was the unfortunate tribe on which this vengeance is specifically commanded - as is obvious from the surrounding verses. Again, this is a historical narration that clearly refers to an obscure tribe, unlike many of the open-ended passages of violence against unbelievers, “idolaters,” polytheists, Jews and Christians found in the Qur’an (verse 9:29 tells Muslims to fight and subjugate non-Muslims simply on the basis of their disbelief)

Contemporary Islamic apologists, such as the author of this American Muslim piece, apparently borrowed the research of secular critics of Christianity, who use passages such as these to make dark insinuations about the character of the god of the Bible and thus bolster their rejection of all religion.

This certainly makes for some strange bedfellows, given that most atheists would concur that the god of Muhammad is far more violent than the god of the New Testament. (Those who may not agree are free to travel to a Muslim country and see how publicly denying Allah there compares to Christian "intolerance" at home, but they may want to make out a will beforehand).

We’ll leave it to the theologians to respond, since the character of God and the nature of progressive revelation falls outside the scope of this discussion. Our only interest here is in the argument that Muslims are trying to make by citing such passages.

Since Muslims do not argue the point that Muhammad commanded the slaughter and enslavement of others at various times in his last ten years (a practice that his followers faithfully apply, even to this very day), their logic here is quite tenuous. At best, these apologists appear to be trying to bring other religions - particularly Christianity - down to the level of Islam.

What makes this noteworthy is that Christians and others do not act as if they need to bring Islam down to their religion of choice. The reason is that no other religion regularly kills members of every other faith explicitly in the name its god. And, on the rare occasions when this does happen, the response is anger and denouncement rather than the general indifference that Muslims have for Islamic terror (aside from the 15% or so who openly endorse it).

Islamic terrorists wage holy war on a daily basis because it is the literal command of the Qur’an. Western Muslim apologists (concerned solely with the image of Islam) window-dress these violent passages through a complex series of appeals to a patchwork of external Muslim sources. Then, after delicately arranging the products of this Herculean charade in such a way as to convince the rest of us that these Qur’anic verses of violence are not what they appear, the apologist steps back, wipes the sweat from his brow and says, “See how clear it is? No Muslim could possibly interpret this command to kill as a command to kill.”

Well, why are these verses in the Qur’an at all, then? If they are supposed to be history, then why do they appear as imperative? Why isn’t the context right there in the text as it is in the Old Testament?

After all, this is supposed to be Allah’s perfect book. How is it that it is so vulnerable to the worst sort of "misinterpretation"?

Lacking a decent answer to these questions, Muslims attack the Bible instead.


Try reading, maybe you can learn something, though I doubt it.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Bible-Quran-Violence.htm


0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 05:05 pm
@vikorr,
No, but the koran is a 'copy' of the bible in many ways. The bible was written by the apostles. After all, the koran was written 600 years after the bible. The similarities of the important issues are similar more than independent ideas.

vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 05:19 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
The similarities of the important issues are similar more than independent ideas.
Yes, similarities are useful for understanding, empathy, devolving of fear....and for comparison - just not as an excuse for the outcomes of any religion, or ideology, or other system.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 05:32 pm
@vikorr,
Let's face it; most big organizations developed for the 'betterment' of society hasn't been all that successful - politically or religious-wise. Maybe, capitalism may be the only proof that is somewhat successful. However of late, we see more inequality in wealth under all economic systems.
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 06:07 pm
@cicerone imposter,
It is indeed a complex area, and most systems have failings. The question that arise are:
- are the degree of failings acceptable
- are the severity of the failings acceptable
- are the quantify of failings acceptable
- do the failings put society as risk / what degree of risk
- how many societies are at risk / what degree of risk
- should the failings be spoken about, or hushed
- is there a way to change the failings
- no doubt other questions arise too

And like most things..until the failings are openly discussed, and not excused...then you face the possibility of:
- nothing changing, and/or
- making decisions based on severe ignorance, and/or
- the failings becoming more pervasive / more severe, and/or
- other repercussions

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 06:13 pm
@vikorr,
Failings is a fact of life; it's a natural outcome of human behavior.

There is no one, not even the many gods men have created to stop human failings.

All any one person can do is to live the kind of life he/she would expect from others. That's the buddhist way; improve yourself.
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 06:30 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Failings is a fact of life; it's a natural outcome of human behavior.
While true - In the context of this thread, it creates misleading connections (even while being true). It implies that we should accept failings (not a bad thing)...(except in the context of this thread) leaving unfinished 'no matter the severity, not mater the quantity, no matter how wide spread' etc.

Quote:
All any one person can do is to live the kind of life he/she would expect from others.
As a philosophy, I prefer that we live lives we expect of ourselves. ie. that we seek, find & test our principles, then stick to them...even while acknowledging that information or experience may modify them. But that belongs to a different forum.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 06:36 pm
@vikorr,
It's not so much that we accept failings, but that we have absolutely no control over them.

You are welcome to do good works towards man if that's what you believe will help mankind. That's the only power you have, unless you become influential like Gandhi; Martin Luther King, Jr; or Mandela.

If you decide to go on 'this' road to save humanity, let me know how I can help.
vikorr
 
  2  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 06:45 pm
@cicerone imposter,
I should also point that that you are talking about human failings, while I am talking about a system of ideologies failings...they aren't the same type of animal.

Quote:
It's not so much that we accept failings, but that we have absolutely no control over them.
This isn't true with systems (though it's largely true with people).

Workplace Health & Safety is a prime example of this...not perfect, but vastly improved on it's failings from 100 years ago. Our road system is the same. Ideology is of course a much more complex system than either of those two.

So yes, people will always be subject to failings...but this thread is talking about systems (in this case, the Islamic Religion).

Quote:
If you decide to go on 'this' road to save humanity, let me know how I can help.
Not going to happen. All I've been doing here is pointing out that Islam is a dangerous religion (and how people excuse it). Quite frankly, I don't see Islam changing.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 06:55 pm
Islamic religion? Not my favorite, but I don't like the one I was born to either.

People vary, thank goodness.

Don't just slam all of them as solidified.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  1  
Fri 5 Sep, 2014 08:52 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
If you decide to go on 'this' road to save humanity, let me know how I can help.

Stop posting.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 08:42:30