View Full Version : Islam's half-hearted opposition to mass murder
ibrodsky
10-12-2002, 04:49 AM
We are often told that Islam -- true Islam -- has nothing to do with homicide bombing and according to Islamic belief homicide bombers end up in Hell.
Yet for some reason the Islamic world can't seem to bring itself to the point of completely repudiating homicide bombers and everything they stand for.
This suggests two serious problems for Islam as a religion.
One reason for this reluctance is the popular sentiment in the Islamic world that Jews invaded an Islamic country, stole the land from Muslims, and continue to oppress Muslims on the West Bank and in Gaza.
Unfortunately, as we have seen time and time again, there are many Muslims (and non-Muslim Palestinian supporters) who pay no regard to historical fact. They refuse to admit that prior to the arrival of Zionists in the late 19th century Palestine was sparsely inhabited. This was noted by observers, such as Mark Twain, who had no possible motivation for distorting the facts.
Muslims also show profound disrepect and enmity for Judaism and Jews when they insist that Jerusalem, which was founded as the capital of ancient Israel and has had a Jewish majority since the 1850s, is their "third holiest city" -- despite the fact that it is not mentioned by name even once in the Koran.
To add insult to injury, Muslims built a mosque on the ruins of the second temple and insist that no non-Muslims be permitted to walk anywhere near the mosque -- denying Jews the right to visit the Temple Mount. In fact, Muslims have a nasty habit of building mosques atop ruined synagogues.
The other problem for Islam is one that gets almost no notice. If Islam absolutely forbids homicide bombing why is there not a sense of urgency within Muslim circles to do everything possible to stop Muslims from committing such acts and to denounce in the clearest possible terms all groups and individuals involved in terrorism?
If Islamic belief opposes terrorism against civilians and considers it evil, why do we not see leading Muslims all over the world mobilizing their congregations to end Muslim involvement in such activities? One would think that if Islamic belief prohibits terrorist bombings it would be incumbent on good Muslims to not merely say a few words against it, but to join together to uproot it.
Unfortunately, one could reasonably conclude that while Muslims do not want to be held responsible for terrorism, they secretly (and often not so secretly) feel sympathy with the terrorists. Whenever their is talk hinting of a link between terrorism and Islam, Muslims immediately raise their voices in defense of Islam. But they are much less animated in denouncing specific terrorist attacks, and show almost no interest in preventing further attacks.
All too often, Muslims argue that the only way to prevent terrorist attacks is to change U.S. and/or Israeli policy. In other words, they excuse the murder of innocent civilians as an unfortunate but apparently necessary method of political discourse.
At best, the popular Islamic response to terrorism is that it is evil but the Jews (or "Israel" or "Zionists") deserve it. This should raise questions among all students of religion about the moral clarity, or lack of moral clarity, in Islam.
Simon
10-12-2002, 10:03 AM
In fact, Muslims have a nasty habit of building mosques atop ruined synagogues.
Ibrodsky: This particular practice of the murderous muslims is not restricted to synagogues. Numerous famous temples and buddhist monasteries have been razed and vile mosques built in their stead.
This filthy practice of muslims of desecrating others' places of worship and then building their own there has been going on ever since this evil was born on the face of this earth.
Originally posted by Simon
This is what their Koran teaches: "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people".
Or here is another favorite: " And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers"
I guess nothing can be said after these well-said words. I also don't think that 6-line quote from Koran can be considered taken out of context!
ibrodsky, I can't imagine a single person who can believe that Islam has nothing to do with killing.
How about:
North America:
Sep 11, 2001 events
South America
Blasting of the Jewish Temple in Argentina by Muslims
Africa:
Killing of Christians in Nigeria
Organized killing of non-Muslims in South Sudan by Muslims
Organized killing of non-Muslims in South Egypt by Muslims
Sponsoring Islamic terrorist in Libya
Killing civilians by Islamic groups in Algeria
Europe:
Frequent Jihad calls by the Islamic community in Britain
Asia:
No comment! Don't have time to mention all of them!
I really wish that someone can make a small statistic about the number of planes that were kidnapped or blasted and tell us how many times were Islamic groups involved!
IlyaFurman
10-13-2002, 02:36 AM
this is the original quote -
And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you
out, For persecution is worse than slaughter and fight
not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if
you attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
I used to think this was for all people, but after learing all religions I learned you got to them them in context of the whole message. The neo nazis took quotes from the talmud out of context and look how they made them to be.
This is how to handle your self in war, in the koran, not everyday life, the 'muslims' are supposed to follow this only if they are persecuted or pushed away from the land where the non belivers pushed them out off, notice how the quote you posted is INCORRECT,
that passages clearly states dont attack 'them' meaning non muslims in their place of worhship unless the non muslims attack you in your place of worship first
for example if I as a jew were to follow this passage and suppose the nazis were slaughtering my people and persecuting them I am supposed to kill them and slay them, CAUSE PERSECUTION IS WORST THAN SLAUGHTER, i belive that sounds rite
ibrodsky
10-13-2002, 04:10 AM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
for example if I as a jew were to follow this passage and suppose the nazis were slaughtering my people and persecuting them I am supposed to kill them and slay them, CAUSE PERSECUTION IS WORST THAN SLAUGHTER, i belive that sounds rite
How is "persecution worse than slaughter"?
The point of my original post is not that Islam is necessarily evil. The point of my post is that today's Muslims have failed to fully repudiate terrorism. Apparently, the injunctions to fight non-Muslims are too strong to overcome whatever moral prohibition there is against terrorism.
My impression is that many Muslims feel that if Muslims perceive they have been wronged or persecuted as a group, then they are obligated to fight until they destroy the enemy. The problem is that many Muslims also feel Muslims have been "wronged" because the Islamic world has been eclipsed by the predominantly Christian world.
IlyaFurman
10-13-2002, 06:09 AM
Originally posted by ibrodsky
How is "persecution worse than slaughter"?
The point of my original post is not that Islam is necessarily evil. The point of my post is that today's Muslims have failed to fully repudiate terrorism. Apparently, the injunctions to fight non-Muslims are too strong to overcome whatever moral prohibition there is against terrorism.
My impression is that many Muslims feel that if Muslims perceive they have been wronged or persecuted as a group, then they are obligated to fight until they destroy the enemy. The problem is that many Muslims also feel Muslims have been "wronged" because the Islamic world has been eclipsed by the predominantly Christian world.
i agree with you there, but about the 'persecution is worse than slaugheter' quote, depends on the situation, often persectuion leads to slaughter, bear in mind that quote is taken how muslims should act military, thats the 'problem' with islam in my opiniion, they have economic, military, and way of life, and everthing else ruled by the koran,
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
this is the original quote -
And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you
out, For persecution is worse than slaughter and fight
not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if
you attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.
I used to think this was for all people, but after learing all religions I learned you got to them them in context of the whole message. The neo nazis took quotes from the talmud out of context and look how they made them to be.
This is how to handle your self in war, in the koran, not everyday life, the 'muslims' are supposed to follow this only if they are persecuted or pushed away from the land where the non belivers pushed them out off, notice how the quote you posted is INCORRECT,
that passages clearly states dont attack 'them' meaning non muslims in their place of worhship unless the non muslims attack you in your place of worship first
for example if I as a jew were to follow this passage and suppose the nazis were slaughtering my people and persecuting them I am supposed to kill them and slay them, CAUSE PERSECUTION IS WORST THAN SLAUGHTER, i belive that sounds rite
Have you ever read the original Koran (in Arabic)? You seem you did since you talk in a very knowledgeable tone!
IlyaFurman
10-13-2002, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
Have you ever read the original Koran (in Arabic)? You seem you did since you talk in a very knowledgeable tone!
yes i have i spent 3 years studying hebrew and the judaec holy book, 3 years learning arabic and the koran, and christianity, and even versions of taoism and mayana buddhism. I study religion for a living.
Mediocrates
10-13-2002, 05:03 PM
Oh good then you can answer this. I asked before but received no answer. What are the criteria for conversion to Islam or the versions of Islam you are familiar with? What is the process.
I know what Conservative Judaism requires. I know what some Orthodox requires. I know what some Protestants and Baptists require. How does one become muslim and are there different 'degrees' depending on stricture?
I'm not an expert but, to become a muslim I think you must reapeat certain phrases in front of a witness. Once you have done this you become a muslim for life.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
yes i have i spent 3 years studying hebrew and the judaec holy book, 3 years learning arabic and the koran, and christianity, and even versions of taoism and mayana buddhism. I study religion for a living.
Great, so I can quote the verses I need in Arabic Language with no problems.
IlyaFurman
10-14-2002, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Mediocrates
Oh good then you can answer this. I asked before but received no answer. What are the criteria for conversion to Islam or the versions of Islam you are familiar with? What is the process.
I know what Conservative Judaism requires. I know what some Orthodox requires. I know what some Protestants and Baptists require. How does one become muslim and are there different 'degrees' depending on stricture?
I was suprised to learn that to become muslim all you have to recite is the words " La ilaha Ill Allah " in front of 4 witnesses i belive, and after that point its up to you to decide how much you want to practice the religion, where it be a strict muslim better chances of going to heaven or a bad muslim less chances of goin to heaven.
IlyaFurman
10-14-2002, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by jcsd
I'm not an expert but, to become a muslim I think you must reapeat certain phrases in front of a witness. Once you have done this you become a muslim for life.
exactly, dont read the phrase by mistake or your doomed, lol
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
I was suprised to learn that to become muslim all you have to recite is the words " La ilaha Ill Allah " in front of 4 witnesses i belive, and after that point its up to you to decide how much you want to practice the religion, where it be a strict muslim better chances of going to heaven or a bad muslim less chances of goin to heaven.
Surprised??????????????????? And you call yourself an expert in religions??????????? This is something a first grade student learns in Islam!
And by the way, you have to say the whole phrase: La Elah Ella Allah, Muhammad Rasool Allah.
IlyaFurman
10-15-2002, 09:43 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Surprised??????????????????? And you call yourself an expert in religions??????????? This is something a first grade student learns in Islam!
And by the way, you have to say the whole phrase: La Elah Ella Allah, Muhammad Rasool Allah.
your rite finally after all your garbage you have something useful to present, i was thinking of what jewish people, christian people, and moslem people belive in the phrase "la ilaha ill allah"
but muslims are supposed to say what she said, "there is only one god allah, and mohammed is his prophet" thats all
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
your rite finally after all your garbage you have something useful to present, i was thinking of what jewish people, christian people, and moslem people belive in the phrase "la ilaha ill allah"
but muslims are supposed to say what she said, "there is only one god allah, and mohammed is his prophet" thats all
Wooow.. And you knew that by yourself?
What kind of expert are you? In toilets?
Sometimes I wonder (and I'm sure that a lot share with me the same wondering) about your true identity...
reason
10-16-2002, 06:10 AM
To become a muslim you need to recite this phrase "there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet" you dont need witnesses since its between you and god.
There is alot of wrong in the Islamic countries, mainly due to lack of education and poverty but Islam itself tolerant to the extreme. Ezara I am an American-Egyptian and I know for a fact that not all Copts have your ideas, because my best friend happens to be a Copt.
These Quranic verses have been taken out of context , these verses address Mohammed and Mohammed alone they dont relate to us or our time, notice the "you" in these verses.The verse , dont take christians and jews as your friends, is a bad translation (The translation of the Quran is NOT the Quran, because translation errors are very common). I believe the better translation would be, dont take them as your benefactors or protectors (note it is also talking to Mohammed dosnt pertain to this time period).
Ezra I agree with you that some copts in Egypt dont have their full rights and it is a sad situation, but Islam is not the reason, rather the ignorance and corruption that has become Egypts goverment.
Shalom/Salam
-----------------------
And yes God Bless America...
IlyaFurman
10-16-2002, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Wooow.. And you knew that by yourself?
What kind of expert are you? In toilets?
Sometimes I wonder (and I'm sure that a lot share with me the same wondering) about your true identity...
lol, Where did I say im an "Islamic Expert" lol, change my words around, I said I studied it for 2 years, thats all, I have ways to go, I still dont understand judaism, so I will never understand Islam.
IlyaFurman
10-16-2002, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by reason
To become a muslim you need to recite this phrase "there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet" you dont need witnesses since its between you and god.
I belive you need witnesses, can you check that up, you must know better though.
reason
10-16-2002, 11:51 AM
No need for witnesses because when you excersie your religion publicly every body is a witness. Example is going to a mosque to pray, everybody there now knows you are a muslim.You dont have to recite the phrase infront of witnesses because as i said it is between you and god, nobody else.
Originally posted by reason
These Quranic verses have been taken out of context , these verses address Mohammed and Mohammed alone they dont relate to us or our time,
Woooooooow! Would you dare to say that In Egypt?
Farag Fodah said 1% of that, do you know what happened to him? Fine fine. They were "extremists" !!!
Nasr Abo Zeid.. ! What did Al-Azhar did to him ?
reason
10-18-2002, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Woooooooow! Would you dare to say that In Egypt?
Farag Fodah said 1% of that, do you know what happened to him? Fine fine. They were "extremists" !!!
Nasr Abo Zeid.. ! What did Al-Azhar did to him ?
Yes I do say that in Egypt, in public places and in many discussions.And please dont take Islam for what muslims do or say. Because I could also conclude that because most germans during WWII were brutes for wanting to kill jews then most christrians are savages, dont fall in that trap because by far the most bloody people were of the followers of christianity (christianity is tolerant in my opinion).
Originally posted by reason
Yes I do say that in Egypt, in public places and in many discussions.And please dont take Islam for what muslims do or say. Because I could also conclude that because most germans during WWII were brutes for wanting to kill jews then most christrians are savages, dont fall in that trap because by far the most bloody people were of the followers of christianity (christianity is tolerant in my opinion).
Don't lie to yourself. I can get you 10000000 Koranic verses from the books of these killers, where you can't get me a single Biblical verse in the writings of Hitler! Your friend "Illy" tried that before and he failed and got stuck. Would you like to give it a try?
IlyaFurman
10-19-2002, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
Don't lie to yourself. I can get you 10000000 Koranic verses from the books of these killers, where you can't get me a single Biblical verse in the writings of Hitler! Your friend "Illy" tried that before and he failed and got stuck. Would you like to give it a try?
ILYA not illy damnit. Hilter was the greatest christian terriorist in my opinion.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
ILYA not illy damnit. Hilter was the greatest christian terriorist in my opinion.
Ahhhhhh.. The same stupid old story that we have been going around since a month no!
Sometimes I suspect that you are blind:
PROVE HE USED BIBLICAL VERSES IN HIS ACTS OR SHUT UP.
IlyaFurman
10-20-2002, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Ahhhhhh.. The same stupid old story that we have been going around since a month no!
Sometimes I suspect that you are blind:
PROVE HE USED BIBLICAL VERSES IN HIS ACTS OR SHUT UP.
PROVE OSAMA USED QURANIC VERSES TO KILL INNOCENT OR SHUT UP, osama and hilter are the same, they use religion to gain more supporteers for their cause, i guess you dont understand that.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
PROVE OSAMA USED QURANIC VERSES TO KILL INNOCENT OR SHUT UP, osama and hilter are the same, they use religion to gain more supporteers for their cause, i guess you dont understand that.
haaaaa ?????????? haven't you seen the +20 verses mentioned in his talks and speechs I just posted???????????
reason
10-21-2002, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
haaaaa ?????????? haven't you seen the +20 verses mentioned in his talks and speechs I just posted???????????
Here, of course, we encounter the objection of the modern pacifist, as truly Jewish in its effrontery as it is stupid! 'Man's role is to overcome Nature!'
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(Man's dominion over earth appears in Genesis 1:26)
...the fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his expulsion.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(See Genesis Chapter 3)
...that is why the prophet seldom has any honor in his own country.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
("For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country." John 4:44)
First, therefore, he goes about making up to the people for his previous sins against them. He begins his career as the 'benefactor' of mankind. Since his new benevolence has a practical foundation, that the left hand should not know what the right hand giveth; no, whether he likes it or not, he must reconcile himself to letting as many people as possible know how deeply he feels the sufferings of the masses and all the sacrifices that he himself is making to combat them.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(The left/right hand paraphrase come from Matthew 6:3)
I am sorry for posting some of mein kampf here, it is strictly for ezra to see that chrstianity was used for justification for murdering 6 million jews.I apologize before hand.
Dantheman
10-21-2002, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by reason
Here, of course, we encounter the objection of the modern pacifist, as truly Jewish in its effrontery as it is stupid! 'Man's role is to overcome Nature!'
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(Man's dominion over earth appears in Genesis 1:26)
...the fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his expulsion.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(See Genesis Chapter 3)
...that is why the prophet seldom has any honor in his own country.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
("For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country." John 4:44)
First, therefore, he goes about making up to the people for his previous sins against them. He begins his career as the 'benefactor' of mankind. Since his new benevolence has a practical foundation, that the left hand should not know what the right hand giveth; no, whether he likes it or not, he must reconcile himself to letting as many people as possible know how deeply he feels the sufferings of the masses and all the sacrifices that he himself is making to combat them.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(The left/right hand paraphrase come from Matthew 6:3)
I am sorry for posting some of mein kampf here, it is strictly for ezra to see that chrstianity was used for justification for murdering 6 million jews.I apologize before hand.
I still don't see how this makes Hitler a Christian. Did he ever say publically that he had accepted Jesus Christ as his savior? I've heard hundreds, maybe thousands of non-christians throughout my life use biblical references for many different reasons. Did Hitler claim that he lived the Christian life? I have to see some proof before I'll believe someone is a Christian just because they made some remarks that are based on biblical writings.
reason
10-21-2002, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by Dantheman
I still don't see how this makes Hitler a Christian. Did he ever say publically that he had accepted Jesus Christ as his savior? I've heard hundreds, maybe thousands of non-christians throughout my life use biblical references for many different reasons. Did Hitler claim that he lived the Christian life? I have to see some proof before I'll believe someone is a Christian just because they made some remarks that are based on biblical writings.
I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: *by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.*
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted to live at this time.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
All I am trying to say is that Islam like all other religions shouldnt be judged by its followers but by what it really stands for.Humans are always going to be bloody murderers , what ever religion they follow.I hope I made my point clear.
Dantheman
10-21-2002, 10:30 AM
Originally posted by reason
I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: *by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.*
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted to live at this time.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
All I am trying to say is that Islam like all other religions shouldnt be judged by its followers but by what it really stands for.Humans are always going to be bloody murderers , what ever religion they follow.I hope I made my point clear.
That still doesn't prove Hitler was a Christian. However, I do see your point.
Originally posted by Dantheman
That still doesn't prove Hitler was a Christian. However, I do see your point.
Well, Osama's rantings don't really prove that he's a Muslim, either.
Dantheman
10-22-2002, 02:13 PM
Originally posted by elke
Well, Osama's rantings don't really prove that he's a Muslim, either.
OBL uses the Quaran to push his Ideals, he also claims that he is fighting for 'Allah'. But you are correct, that doesn't prove that he is a Muslim any more than Hitlers words prove that he was a Christian. However, OBL did claim publicly to be a Muslim, Hitler did not claim to be a Christian.
The way I see it is this:
Islam is 1500 or so years old. It has produced a major civilization. It could neither survive as long as it has, nor produce what it produced, if it was as "evil" at its core as existence of Osama and Co. seems to suggest. Therefore, it's really not productive for us to focus on Islam per se in trying to discern what is really going on with the militant Islam.
In this context, I don't really see much relevance in proving or disproving that Hitler was a Christian. Hitler - maybe not; but Torquemada, Cortez, Tsar Nicholas I - and II, KKK members, and thousands upon thousands of other similar characters indeed were, as were numerous "Hitler's willing executioners". Truly, it has taken humankind thousands of years to just come to a tenuous consensus that killing for religion is morally wrong!
IMO, it is fairly obvious that the problem is not with any particular religion, but rather with something within the human psyche. Religion in this sense is nothing but a tool, a rallying cry for whatever philosophy is being peddled. It appeals to the inchoate - whether fear, wounded pride, or other human emotions, - and used as rationalization for them and the acts that the person(s) want to perpetrate.
No, Islam cannot be ignored in the current situation, because it's being used to commit murder. However, by blaming these atrocities on religion rather than on people who perpetrate them, we are absolving these individuals of their guilt.
Dantheman
10-22-2002, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by elke
The way I see it is this:
No, Islam cannot be ignored in the current situation, because it's being used to commit murder. However, by blaming these atrocities on religion rather than on people who perpetrate them, we are absolving these individuals of their guilt.
That's all fine and dandy, but why, if terrorism is so wrong in the eyes of most Muslims, has there not been a thunderous outcry of condemnation by the 'true' Muslim people? Why is it still tolerated by most Muslim leaders around the globe? or am I way off base?
Originally posted by Dantheman
That's all fine and dandy, but why, if terrorism is so wrong in the eyes of most Muslims, has there not been a thunderous outcry of condemnation by the 'true' Muslim people? Why is it still tolerated by most Muslim leaders around the globe? or am I way off base?
No, you are not off base, IMO. That's actually the most baffling part of the whole thing, and a very good question to ask someone like Reason or Ayesha. Quite honestly, I haven't seen a satisfying explanation to similar questions, except that Ayesha has pointed out that she and her friends are quite active in this regard, but do not get adequate media coverage of their efforts.
However, I still believe that by concentrating on the religious precepts of Islam we are going off in a direction that will not produce desired results. For one thing, even if we decide that Islam is to blame - then what? Force-convert all 1.2 billion Muslims to Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or Buddhism? Is that logistically possible, let alone desirable? Can we, Christians, Jews, and Hindus change Islam to something it is not? I don't believe that we could do that either. Therefore, we must look to other avenues of action, which brings us back to where we started: namely, analyze the situation realistically and fight the violent manifestations of this ideology, while trying to attract normal people of all faiths to our side - something we cannot really do if we are antagonizing the normal Muslims by attacking their religion.
Dantheman
10-22-2002, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by elke
However, I still believe that by concentrating on the religious precepts of Islam we are going off in a direction that will not produce desired results. For one thing, even if we decide that Islam is to blame - then what? Force-convert all 1.2 billion Muslims to Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or Buddhism? Is that logistically possible, let alone desirable? Can we, Christians, Jews, and Hindus change Islam to something it is not? I don't believe that we could do that either. Therefore, we must look to other avenues of action, which brings us back to where we started: namely, analyze the situation realistically and fight the violent manifestations of this ideology, while trying to attract normal people of all faiths to our side - something we cannot really do if we are antagonizing the normal Muslims by attacking their religion.
I'm not advocating we attemt to stifle or convert Muslims to another religion, that's not possible. I would never be persuaded to become a Muslim, so why would I think a Muslim would be any different?
Maybe I should have made myself clearer. I don't think most Muslims are terrorists, but every Muslim I've ever talked with, when Isreal was mentioned, would say the same thing. A true Muslim hates Jews and Israel. Period. That leads me to believe that Muslims are Racists. However, I believe in freedom of religion. Believe whatever you want to. Worship who you will. But if someone is going to act on a religious belief that they are to kill another in the name of their god, that presents a problem. Erradicate Islam? No. Erradicate terrorism? Absolutely. If that means that most of those affected are Muslims, so be it.
Originally posted by Dantheman
...Erradicate Islam? No. Erradicate terrorism? Absolutely. If that means that most of those affected are Muslims, so be it.
Well, yes. I agree with you on this, completely. I actually have met Muslims who do not hate Israel or Jews, but not very many. :(
ayesha
10-23-2002, 06:39 AM
Originally posted by elke
Well, yes. I agree with you on this, completely. I actually have met Muslims who do not hate Israel or Jews, but not very many. :(
if ul excuse my rude intrusion, even if a muslim/arab is in favour or accepts israel then they arent likely to be publicizing it-especially if they live in a so-called muslim country, as i imagine theyd be subject to extensive 'death fatwas'. when i go back to lebanon and complain that i cant visit my closest friend (who is a jewish convert and now lives in Netanya) because of this whole passport stamping thing i get shouted down about israel this and israel that. a lot of them dont have a clue what they're talking about, so when i correct their misconceptions i just get the dumbass answer of 'oh well whatever, we still have to fight them'. fight who? and for what? they follow like blind mice without questioning for one moment their plight. the fact that maybe we r going about the whole thing wrong does not occur to them. it's impossible. and i guess thats one of the reasons its hard to accept. (there's also the whole violent israeli incursion issue too but thats another point they raise).
having a problem with some of israel's policies is not wrong, but having a problem with israel is and i think a lot of the people (arabs and non arabs) allow the two to get mixed up. all they need is a little education, but there are those suicide bombing fanatics that just need hanging from their nuts, talking to them is worthless.
ayesha
10-23-2002, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by reason
No need for witnesses because when you excersie your religion publicly every body is a witness. Example is going to a mosque to pray, everybody there now knows you are a muslim.You dont have to recite the phrase infront of witnesses because as i said it is between you and god, nobody else.
Hi reason
im sorry but u r wrong there u need 2-4 witnesses who are mature/sane and meet other criteria and the witness are of equal number of gender. no witnesses, then u r not officially a muslim - which u may need to prove in court etc if u have a complaint
reason
10-23-2002, 07:22 AM
Originally posted by Dantheman
I'm not advocating we attemt to stifle or convert Muslims to another religion, that's not possible. I would never be persuaded to become a Muslim, so why would I think a Muslim would be any different?
Maybe I should have made myself clearer. I don't think most Muslims are terrorists, but every Muslim I've ever talked with, when Isreal was mentioned, would say the same thing. A true Muslim hates Jews and Israel. Period. That leads me to believe that Muslims are Racists. However, I believe in freedom of religion. Believe whatever you want to. Worship who you will. But if someone is going to act on a religious belief that they are to kill another in the name of their god, that presents a problem. Erradicate Islam? No. Erradicate terrorism? Absolutely. If that means that most of those affected are Muslims, so be it.
A true muslim dosnt hate Jews, or any body else for that matter.Yes you will find racist Muslims, who hate jews, but you will find jews who hate arabs and christians (KKK) who hate all non wasps.Its human nature not a religious doctrine.
Lets put Islam aside for now as it is irrelevant , and let me answer your question regarding the lack of outcry against terrorism from the many muslim "leaders".The sad fact is most muslims live in poor 3rd world countries, they live under a dictatorship of some kind and are searching for someone or something to blame for their backwardness. Here is the problem at its core, these people instead of blaming their goverments are tricked by the state owned media into blaming Israel this is ofcourse , to shift the blame away from them.For this reason no Arab goverment can condemn terrorism , because if they do then Israel will seize to be the reason for the misery and people will come to realize that their goverments and indeed themselves are the sole reason.People have been living a goverment lie for over 50 years now, even educated ones have become entagled.
Thus far, it seems like it a poltical problem not a religious one, so how does Islam come into it and where is the link?I dont have a definate answer for this but the creation of a Jewish state (although it didnt start it) definately accelerated the process because a Jewish state warranted an Islamic state .The failure of Pan-Arab nationalism propogated by Nasser is certainly another reason.Some people go as far back as the Crusades to find the link but Im not certain anyone knows for sure.
Misery/hatred overide religion, and eventhough it states clearly in Quran that terrorisim is not acceptable ,people will turn a blind eye.This seems to be a mind plague that has affects alot of muslims, and the cure is Democracy and freedom of speech.I hope I answered your question, I would be glad to answer any more .
reason
10-23-2002, 07:28 AM
Originally posted by ayesha
Hi reason
im sorry but u r wrong there u need 2-4 witnesses who are mature/sane and meet other criteria and the witness are of equal number of gender. no witnesses, then u r not officially a muslim - which u may need to prove in court etc if u have a complaint
Im sure ayesha that you dont need any, there is a very small possiblity I could be wrong, but I believe you only need witnesses to prove it to the goverment, for legal purposes just live marriage.But not for god.
IlyaFurman
10-23-2002, 11:26 AM
Thats crazy, think about it all religions compete with each other, in my opinion all religions are "racist" to the other religion, some more accepting than others at differnt times, but saying judaism is the most rascist or islam is the most racist is stupid cause they are all against each other, all reiligion is basically a GANG, and gang warfare, people claminig sides people clamining terriority, thats all it is.
Reason and Ayesha, I can't really explain to you just what it means to me to have you here, discussing these subjects calmly and rationally, the way they should be discussed.
Your "intrusion" is not only not rude, but it is greatly appreciated! You guys are the hope for the future, and the reason to be optimistic about it. Keep up the great work!
ayesha
10-24-2002, 03:04 AM
Originally posted by reason
Im sure ayesha that you dont need any, there is a very small possiblity I could be wrong, but I believe you only need witnesses to prove it to the goverment, for legal purposes just live marriage.But not for god.
reason :) for whatever legal purpose you may need it, how are you going to prove you are a muslim? and what if your case is thrown out because you cant prove how long you've been muslim etc etc.
No honestly reason, I am more than sure about this one. I have been present at several conversions, seen the same procedure practiced, and read about it when I studied Shari'a Law. I can see where you are coming from -from a religious point of view there is no need for witnesses, just you confirming your conviction to yourself and God. However, for a person from a non-muslim background to be recognised as a muslim, s/he must officially register their acceptance of islam so as to be recognised as a muslim in all aspects of life, such as civic and personal matters. this is especially important in non-muslim countries. i am aware of the case if an elderly, hospitalised muslim man who had embraced islam shortly before he passed away. nearly all his visitors during this period were muslims, but because his conversion was not recorded officially, his body was handed over to his immediate family who carried out the funeral procedures according to non islamic ways.
ayesha
10-24-2002, 03:09 AM
Originally posted by elke
Reason and Ayesha, I can't really explain to you just what it means to me to have you here, discussing these subjects calmly and rationally, the way they should be discussed.
Your "intrusion" is not only not rude, but it is greatly appreciated! You guys are the hope for the future, and the reason to be optimistic about it. Keep up the great work!
Your kind and my kind will overcome the hate eventually! :)
reason
10-24-2002, 10:56 AM
"However, for a person from a non-muslim background to be recognised as a muslim, s/he must officially register their acceptance of islam so as to be recognised as a muslim in all aspects of life, such as civic and personal matters. this is especially important in non-muslim countries."
I dont have to be recognized by other muslims as a muslim to be a muslim.Its between a person and god, he knows what lays in our hearts, he is the last judge and only he needs to recognize it, as nor you or any other muslim can grant me salvation.It makes sense for muslims to require witnesses because of certain, goverment , legal issues, but its not required by god.
Here, of course, we encounter the objection of the modern pacifist, as truly Jewish in its effrontery as it is stupid! 'Man's role is to overcome Nature!'
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(Man's dominion over earth appears in Genesis 1:26)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish?????
...the fall of man in paradise has always been followed by his expulsion.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(See Genesis Chapter 3)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish?????
...that is why the prophet seldom has any honor in his own country.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
("For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath no honour in his own country." John 4:44)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????
First, therefore, he goes about making up to the people for his previous sins against them. He begins his career as the 'benefactor' of mankind. Since his new benevolence has a practical foundation, that the left hand should not know what the right hand giveth; no, whether he likes it or not, he must reconcile himself to letting as many people as possible know how deeply he feels the sufferings of the masses and all the sacrifices that he himself is making to combat them.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
(The left/right hand paraphrase come from Matthew 6:3)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish?????
I am sorry for posting some of mein kampf here, it is strictly for ezra to see that chrstianity was used for justification for murdering 6 million jews.I apologize before hand.
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish?????
I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: *by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.*
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
Even today I am not ashamed to say that, overpowered by stormy enthusiasm, I fell down on my knees and thanked Heaven from an overflowing heart for granting me the good fortune of being permitted to live at this time.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
All I am trying to say is that Islam like all other religions shouldnt be judged by its followers but by what it really stands for.Humans are always going to be bloody murderers , what ever religion they follow.I hope I made my point clear.
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
Originally posted by ayesha
if ul excuse my rude intrusion, even if a muslim/arab is in favour or accepts israel then they arent likely to be publicizing it-especially if they live in a so-called muslim country, as i imagine theyd be subject to extensive 'death fatwas'.
And these death Fatwas came from the highest authorities of Islam. It didn't came from Bin Laden, it came from the highest authorities of Islam.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Thats crazy, think about it all religions compete with each other, in my opinion all religions are "racist" to the other religion, some more accepting than others at differnt times, but saying judaism is the most rascist or islam is the most racist is stupid cause they are all against each other, all reiligion is basically a GANG, and gang warfare, people claminig sides people clamining terriority, thats all it is.
Ok, the question is what are the allowed weapon(s) for each religion from its prospective! I can definitely tell you about the weapons of Islam and Christianity, and leave the Jewish to the more expert people.
Originally posted by reason
"However, for a person from a non-muslim background to be recognised as a muslim, s/he must officially register their acceptance of islam so as to be recognised as a muslim in all aspects of life, such as civic and personal matters. this is especially important in non-muslim countries."
I dont have to be recognized by other muslims as a muslim to be a muslim.Its between a person and god, he knows what lays in our hearts, he is the last judge and only he needs to recognize it, as nor you or any other muslim can grant me salvation.It makes sense for muslims to require witnesses because of certain, goverment , legal issues, but its not required by god.
If it is between the person and his God, why did Al-Azhar announced Prof. Nasr Abo Zeid infidel because of his opinions and ordered the separation between him and his wife and forced him to ask for asylum in the Netherlands till this moment? And please don't say it's a mistake because obviously it's nonsense to claim you know more about Islam than Al-Azhar and O'olamaa Al-Azhar!
reason
10-25-2002, 07:16 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
Where is the justification to kill the Jewish????? This is the whole discussion here!!!!
His whole book was justification to kill the jews, he used some bible quotes to advance it.Im not saying his justification is warranted, but he used religion.
reason
10-25-2002, 07:19 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
If it is between the person and his God, why did Al-Azhar announced Prof. Nasr Abo Zeid infidel because of his opinions and ordered the separation between him and his wife and forced him to ask for asylum in the Netherlands till this moment? And please don't say it's a mistake because obviously it's nonsense to claim you know more about Islam than Al-Azhar and O'olamaa Al-Azhar!
Why did the church burn copernicus?Why did the salem witch hunts take place? What about the inquisitions. You claim you know more about christianity than the church?To be frank with you ezra your posts have been nothing more than anger and bitterness.You just make me repeat myself over and over. I will not respond to any more of your emotional outbreaks.
reason
10-25-2002, 07:24 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
And these death Fatwas came from the highest authorities of Islam. It didn't came from Bin Laden, it came from the highest authorities of Islam.
I already said that Islam dosnt have a high authority, I already told you why .
ibrodsky
10-25-2002, 07:48 AM
This thread is supposed to be about Islam's half-hearted opposition to terrorism.
IMO, this is a very serious problem that is only getting worse.
I have a question on that score: does anyone know of a predominantly Muslim discussion board where the majority of participants don't think Israel was behind the 9/11/01 attacks?
The bottom line: in the aftermath of 9/11, the US government made it very clear that we are not trying to make this a war of civilizations.
But when you look at the DC sniper attacks, the Bali bombing, the Moscow hostage crisis, incessant claims that Israel is the "terrorist," etc. it is clear that there is a pro-terrorist movement that pervades Islam. I have seen a couple of Muslim discussion boards now where threads about how Israel destroyed the WTC seem quite reasonable to most of the participants -- the few voices debunking such theories seem to be non-Muslim guests.
When, if ever, will the Islamic world join the fight against terrorism? Or are Muslims too committed to Palestinians, regardless of their tactics, to take a firm stand?
Originally posted by reason
His whole book was justification to kill the jews, he used some bible quotes to advance it.Im not saying his justification is warranted, but he used religion.
So where is this "advancing" ??????????????????
Your quotes tried only to show that Hitler was a Christian fellow! This is not the issue here. The whole issue is that did Hitler was able to use the Bible as a justification to killing Jewish?
Till now, you didn't even prove 0.001% of that!
Originally posted by reason
Why did the church burn copernicus?Why did the salem witch hunts take place? What about the inquisitions. You claim you know more about christianity than the church?To be frank with you ezra your posts have been nothing more than anger and bitterness.You just make me repeat myself over and over. I will not respond to any more of your emotional outbreaks.
Copernicus died with cerebral haemorrhage. (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Copernicus.html). Anyway, this is not the issue here. When I claim that Christianity is a relation between a person and his God, you can always mention your stories.
Now, you already claimed that in islam it's a relation between the person and his God. BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID, I mentioned a story of a Muslim professor who was announced infidel because of his opinions and ordered the separation between him and his wife and forced him to ask for asylum in the Netherlands till this moment, all by the Azhar.
So, please clarify this apparent contradiction between what you just said and between the orders of the highest and most respected Islamic Gathering of Muslim Olamaa.
Dantheman
10-25-2002, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by reason
Lets put Islam aside for now as it is irrelevant....
...the creation of a Jewish state (although it didnt start it) definately accelerated the process because a Jewish state warranted an Islamic state.
First off, I think Islam is very relevent to this discussion.
So is this a jealousy thing? (They got a state, so where's ours?) I still don't see it. I think it pathetic the way most 'leaders' of the Islamic world are fully supporting terrorism. It may be political, as you've suggested, but why is Islam always at the core? Why is there never a Bhuddist group claiming responsibility for a suicide bombing in where ever? Why is it always someone killing innocent civilians in the name of Muhammed or Allah? Maybe I'm just frustrated. I've got 4 small children. What kind of world are they going to have to live in? 95% of the time they hear the word 'Islamic' it's followed by the word 'Terrorist'. I'm the one who has to try to explain to them that Islam is a 'peaceful' religion, but it's getting almost impossible to do that anymore.
IlyaFurman
10-27-2002, 03:18 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
So where is this "advancing" ??????????????????
Your quotes tried only to show that Hitler was a Christian fellow! This is not the issue here. The whole issue is that did Hitler was able to use the Bible as a justification to killing Jewish?
Till now, you didn't even prove 0.001% of that!
is the bible anti-semtic or more specifically anti-jewish? YES/NO
and arent jewish people gonna suffer till eternity for the killing of jesus? lol
Outsider
10-27-2002, 06:13 AM
How unfortunate that both the snipers in Washington and the Chechens in Moscow seemed to have links with the "religion of peace".
IlyaFurman
10-27-2002, 06:19 AM
they said that john allen mohammed wasnt religious, he was always a criminal,
and by the way lee malvo was christian!!
Outsider
10-27-2002, 06:24 AM
Ilya, John Allen Muhammad's most obvious link is his last name.
IlyaFurman
10-27-2002, 06:40 AM
Originally posted by Outsider
Ilya, John Allen Muhammad's most obvious link is his last name.
John Allen was influenced by the real islam as much as the 'son of sam' was influced by judaism, they were just messed up in the head.
But muhammeds partner in crime was a christian jamican fellow.
Mediocrates
10-27-2002, 06:55 AM
Louis Farakhan stated this morning that Mr. Muhammed was a member of the Nation of Islam since 1997. Make of that what you want.
Dantheman
10-27-2002, 07:17 AM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
is the bible anti-semtic or more specifically anti-jewish? YES/NO
and arent jewish people gonna suffer till eternity for the killing of jesus? lol
Neither.
No. your ignorence of the Bible is very apparent. The Jews didn't kill Jesus. According to the NT, Jesus 'laid down His life'. He gave His life for mankind. If we used your logic, then Romans would 'suffer till eternity' for nailing Him to the cross.
IlyaFurman
10-27-2002, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by Dantheman
Neither.
No. your ignorence of the Bible is very apparent. The Jews didn't kill Jesus. According to the NT, Jesus 'laid down His life'. He gave His life for mankind. If we used your logic, then Romans would 'suffer till eternity' for nailing Him to the cross.
Since you like the new testament so much here are some things you should know
The new testament is extremely anti-Jewish. It is true that some Christians maintain that the New Testament attack on the Jews is quite mild. Yet, how mild is the "bloody commission," a statement that places upon the Jews guilt for all the righteous blood ever shed upon the earth (Matthew 23:35), or a spurious self-condemnation whereby the Jewish people supposedly take upon themselves and their offspring an eternal blame for the death of Jesus (Matthew 27:25), or a declaration that the Jews are the children of the devil (John 8:44) and that the Jews are a "synagogue of Satan" (Revelation 2:9, 3:9). Paul summed up the denunciation of the Jews with the inflammatory declaration that the Jews are "hostile to all men" (1 Thessalonians 2:15).
The New Testament was written by-and-large for Gentiles and institutionalized an anti-Judaic theme for its audience. It distorted and fictionalized events in order to portray the Jews, all Jews who do not accept Jesus, as evil and responsible for his death. The attitude of the New Testament authors toward the Jews is very clear.
Dantheman
10-27-2002, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Since you like the new testament so much here are some things you should know
The new testament is extremely anti-Jewish. It is true that some Christians maintain that the New Testament attack on the Jews is quite mild. Yet, how mild is the "bloody commission," a statement that places upon the Jews guilt for all the righteous blood ever shed upon the earth (Matthew 23:35), or a spurious self-condemnation whereby the Jewish people supposedly take upon themselves and their offspring an eternal blame for the death of Jesus (Matthew 27:25), or a declaration that the Jews are the children of the devil (John 8:44) and that the Jews are a "synagogue of Satan" (Revelation 2:9, 3:9). Paul summed up the denunciation of the Jews with the inflammatory declaration that the Jews are "hostile to all men" (1 Thessalonians 2:15).
The New Testament was written by-and-large for Gentiles and institutionalized an anti-Judaic theme for its audience. It distorted and fictionalized events in order to portray the Jews, all Jews who do not accept Jesus, as evil and responsible for his death. The attitude of the New Testament authors toward the Jews is very clear.
Every one of your references were taken out of context. I would suggest you go back and research it further. As far as your statement ''The New Testament was written by-and-large for Gentiles and institutionalized an anti-Judaic theme for its audience. It distorted and fictionalized events in order to portray the Jews, all Jews who do not accept Jesus, as evil and responsible for his death', that is simply your biased and uneducated opinion.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
is the bible anti-semtic or more specifically anti-jewish? YES/NO
and arent jewish people gonna suffer till eternity for the killing of jesus? lol
As usual you are so ignorant but just waste our time with your BS.
have you ever read a bible before?
Can you give us any quotes that support your as-usual-BS?
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Since you like the new testament so much here are some things you should know
The new testament is extremely anti-Jewish. It is true that some Christians maintain that the New Testament attack on the Jews is quite mild. Yet, how mild is the "bloody commission," a statement that places upon the Jews guilt for all the righteous blood ever shed upon the earth (Matthew 23:35), or a spurious self-condemnation whereby the Jewish people supposedly take upon themselves and their offspring an eternal blame for the death of Jesus (Matthew 27:25), or a declaration that the Jews are the children of the devil (John 8:44) and that the Jews are a "synagogue of Satan" (Revelation 2:9, 3:9). Paul summed up the denunciation of the Jews with the inflammatory declaration that the Jews are "hostile to all men" (1 Thessalonians 2:15).
The New Testament was written by-and-large for Gentiles and institutionalized an anti-Judaic theme for its audience. It distorted and fictionalized events in order to portray the Jews, all Jews who do not accept Jesus, as evil and responsible for his death. The attitude of the New Testament authors toward the Jews is very clear.
Don't you have the courage to mention the real quotes?
reason
10-28-2002, 07:26 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
As usual you are so ignorant but just waste our time with your BS.
have you ever read a bible before?
Can you give us any quotes that support your as-usual-BS?
Ezra you should not be talking this way. Because eventhough you have shown your ignorance of Islam I have tried to keep my threads civil with you and tried to educate you further.Calling things BS with out any support is not the way to refute claims. She brought up some points I would like to see answered.
Dantheman
10-28-2002, 07:55 AM
Originally posted by reason
Ezra you should not be talking this way. Because eventhough you have shown your ignorance of Islam I have tried to keep my threads civil with you and tried to educate you further.Calling things BS with out any support is not the way to refute claims. She brought up some points I would like to see answered.
I believe I already did.
IlyaFurman
10-28-2002, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
Don't you have the courage to mention the real quotes?
those are real, go read those quotes, stop denying the bad things in you religion, its typical for christians to attack others when there religion is most brutal of all, just look at the old testament.
Dantheman
10-28-2002, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
those are real, go read those quotes, stop denying the bad things in you religion, its typical for christians to attack others when there religion is most brutal of all, just look at the old testament.
uhh....Christians use the New Testament. I think you've just proved your own ignorance. Take your own advice, and read the verses in context for yourself.
IlyaFurman
10-28-2002, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by Dantheman
uhh....Christians use the New Testament. I think you've just proved your own ignorance. Take your own advice, and read the verses in context for yourself.
really? i hope you know many christians still follow the old testmament??
"Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 'The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.' (Matthew 23:1-3)"
Dantheman
10-28-2002, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
really? i hope you know many christians still follow the old testmament??
"Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 'The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.' (Matthew 23:1-3)"
The Law (ten commandments) are still in effect. What you are missing is the fact that Christians believe Jesus is the Messiah and He fulfilled the law by living a sinless life. The OT is used mainly for historical purposes. Christians believe they are under Grace, not Law.
Originally posted by reason
Ezra you should not be talking this way. Because eventhough you have shown your ignorance of Islam I have tried to keep my threads civil with you and tried to educate you further.Calling things BS with out any support is not the way to refute claims. She brought up some points I would like to see answered.
Look who's back!
I'm so surprised you dared to come back after we all discovered your lies especially after you refused my VERY generous offer of verifying your false opinions through a high Islamic Authority!
Be ashame of yourself!
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
those are real, go read those quotes, stop denying the bad things in you religion, its typical for christians to attack others when there religion is most brutal of all, just look at the old testament.
You are the one who mentioned the location. Are you afraid you mention the verses itself? Are you afraid they would burn you?
ibrodsky
10-29-2002, 08:46 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Look who's back!
I'm so surprised you dared to come back after we all discovered your lies especially after you refused my VERY generous offer of verifying your false opinions through a high Islamic Authority!
Be ashame of yourself!
From what I have seen, reason engages in civil discussion and has nothing to be ashamed of.
I can't say the same for you, Ezra. All three of the religions discussed here are based on texts subject to interpretation. What's important is how people interpret them.
You seem bent on proving that Islam is inherently evil and that any attempt to interpret it otherwise is just a ruse. Instead, you should be welcoming more tolerant and moral interpretations of Islam.
reason
10-29-2002, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Look who's back!
I'm so surprised you dared to come back after we all discovered your lies especially after you refused my VERY generous offer of verifying your false opinions through a high Islamic Authority!
Be ashame of yourself!
lol I go away for a weekend, and its held against me.Ezra, your anger , hatred and bitterness are what is really driving you, dont claim its logic because where there is emotions there is no logic.
Originally posted by ibrodsky
From what I have seen, reason engages in civil discussion and has nothing to be ashamed of.
I can't say the same for you, Ezra. All three of the religions discussed here are based on texts subject to interpretation. What's important is how people interpret them.
You seem bent on proving that Islam is inherently evil and that any attempt to interpret it otherwise is just a ruse. Instead, you should be welcoming more tolerant and moral interpretations of Islam.
Because I know what "moderate" interpretation is. There is a huge difference between a Muslim who says "Yes, I know that these are the teaches of Koraan that are well established since 1400 years and can NOT be altered, but I'm not convinced with it from my humanly point of view", and a Muslim who says "Guys, you are interpreting Koraan wrong, and here is the moderate interpretation for it".
For the first type, I can say, "Welcome and we can talk about how we can live together". As for the second one, the only I can tell him is "Go to hell, because you are a liar. I know very well the so-called moderate interpretation of Koraan and I know that it hasn't changed since 1400 years now".
And since we might have different opinions about what to consider miss-interpretations and what to consider lies, I asked Mr. Reason to join me to verify his opinions through the Highest Islamic Reference (which is considered VERY moderate) that hundred of millions are following their interpretation but he refused. What more generous offer do you want me to offer?
Originally posted by reason
lol I go away for a weekend, and its held against me.Ezra, your anger , hatred and bitterness are what is really driving you, dont claim its logic because where there is emotions there is no logic.
Emotion?
Ok ok ok. Assume that I'm full of hatred as you claim. And since this "hatred" will not allow me to see the beautiful and peaceful nature of Islam in your posts, I asked you to make a debate with the highest Islamic Reference (Al-Azhar or Dar El-Eftaa) to verify your opinions and prove that it's lies, and YOU REFUSED .
Are you claiming I'm full of hatred?
Then I can simply claim that you are a liar!
reason
10-30-2002, 07:44 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Because I know what "moderate" interpretation is. There is a huge difference between a Muslim who says "Yes, I know that these are the teaches of Koraan that are well established since 1400 years and can NOT be altered, but I'm not convinced with it from my humanly point of view", and a Muslim who says "Guys, you are interpreting Koraan wrong, and here is the moderate interpretation for it".
For the first type, I can say, "Welcome and we can talk about how we can live together". As for the second one, the only I can tell him is "Go to hell, because you are a liar. I know very well the so-called moderate interpretation of Koraan and I know that it hasn't changed since 1400 years now".
And since we might have different opinions about what to consider miss-interpretations and what to consider lies, I asked Mr. Reason to join me to verify his opinions through the Highest Islamic Reference (which is considered VERY moderate) that hundred of millions are following their interpretation but he refused. What more generous offer do you want me to offer?
I already told you they are wrong. They are stupid, ignorant and fools.I explained why, I also provided my interpretation of these verses which you ignored.In reality the Azhar is another puppet for Mubarak, he uses it for political reasons, you would be mistaken to think otherwise.You claim to know alot of things ezra, but I dont think anyone really cares, unless you provide support.I know it hopeless trying to explain to you that your opinions are not facts, because you have not provided any.
I give up, You win, kudos to you.Everytime I read your posts it fills me with grief that a person could be this full of hate towards me, and my religion.
ibrodsky
10-30-2002, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Because I know what "moderate" interpretation is. There is a huge difference between a Muslim who says "Yes, I know that these are the teaches of Koraan that are well established since 1400 years and can NOT be altered, but I'm not convinced with it from my humanly point of view", and a Muslim who says "Guys, you are interpreting Koraan wrong, and here is the moderate interpretation for it".
For the first type, I can say, "Welcome and we can talk about how we can live together". As for the second one, the only I can tell him is "Go to hell, because you are a liar. I know very well the so-called moderate interpretation of Koraan and I know that it hasn't changed since 1400 years now".
No, the only thing you should be concerned about is how reason and other moderates interpret Islam today. Whether a moderate interpretation requires denying or illuminating the original text is six of one or a half-dozen of the other.
And since we might have different opinions about what to consider miss-interpretations and what to consider lies, I asked Mr. Reason to join me to verify his opinions through the Highest Islamic Reference (which is considered VERY moderate) that hundred of millions are following their interpretation but he refused. What more generous offer do you want me to offer?
What if I were to tell you I could show you flaws (as I see them) in Christianity? What if I were to tell you that other Christian sects consider your interpretation to be incorrect?
If you are trying to be generous, you would give reason a little slack. He is not attacking anyone else's religion. And he is arguing that Islam should be used as a force for good. How can you oppose that?
Originally posted by reason
I already told you they are wrong. They are stupid, ignorant and fools.I explained why, I also provided my interpretation of these verses which you ignored.In reality the Azhar is another puppet for Mubarak, he uses it for political reasons, you would be mistaken to think otherwise.You claim to know alot of things ezra, but I dont think anyone really cares, unless you provide support.I know it hopeless trying to explain to you that your opinions are not facts, because you have not provided any.
I give up, You win, kudos to you.Everytime I read your posts it fills me with grief that a person could be this full of hate towards me, and my religion.
Ahhhh.. Don't call them stupid, ignorant, and fools. Because everyone of them has spent maybe twice your age in studying all sorts of Islamic Studies from Koraan, Feqh, Sharee'a,..etc. They probably know Islam more than you do ten times.
Don't try to deceive us by saying that what we are writing here is actually the interpretation of the extremists, because I know very well (as you know also very well) that this interpretation you are calling extremist is actually the most moderate interpretation of Koraan. And offered you to debate in front of Al-Azhar or Dar El-Efta to prove you that the interpretation I'm mentioning is actually the most moderate interpretation of Koraan, but you refused. Your unreasonable refusal was the biggest support to my argument.
Now, if you really want to start discussion to see how we can live together, you should, first of all, admit clearly that the interpretation I mentioned is actually the interpretations used in moderate Islamic society. Whether you or me like this interpretation, is another issue and won't change anything from the fact that this interpretation is the one taught in Egypt, Jordon,..etc and all the so-called moderate Islamic nations.
After you do so, we can start discussing your PERSONAL interpretation based on the fact that it's YOUR PERSONAL interpretation and we can discuss how we can spread such interpretation among Islamic societies given the fact that it will contradict many of the already established rules of Islam.
What do you think?
Originally posted by reason
I give up, You win, kudos to you.Everytime I read your posts it fills me with grief that a person could be this full of hate towards me, and my religion.
I told you before that I hate Islam as a bloody ideology but I don't hate Muslims. I also hate lying VERY MUCH. I hate the person who comes and says "Everyone in Islamic world loves Christians and Jews because our religion is bla bla bla". This is clear deceiving because I know very well how Islamic societies hates everything non-Muslims. My rule is so simple: No Lies. You are more than welcome to come and say, for example, "Guys I know that Koraan says we should hate non-Muslims" but I'm not convinced with that because I think the Earth is large enough to fit us all. Now, I can welcome you very much and start dialogue between us. But if anyone came and start spreading lies about Islam just to polish its face, I'll definitely be here for him because I know very well what is Islam; and not my own version of Islam, it's the version of Islam that everyone in Islamic society learns.
No, the only thing you should be concerned about is how reason and other moderates interpret Islam today. Whether a moderate interpretation requires denying or illuminating the original text is six of one or a half-dozen of the other.
I definitely agree on that. I definitely love the way Reason interprets Islam. But I oppose trying to convince us that this is the "normal moderate" interpretation of Islam. I oppose trying to convince us that moderate Muslims in ANY Islamic society think like that, because simply this is NOT true. Thinking like this in any Islamic society will very easily lead you to be executed for infidelity. If Reason came and started saying "I know the moderate Muslims interpret Koran in the way you mentioned, but here is my PERSONAL interpretation" I would have welcomed him very much and we could have started discussing how to overcome the obstacles of the well-established rules of Islam to spreading Reason's interpretation. But of course starting the discussion by saying "No, this is the extremists interpretation of Koraan", this is completely refused from my point of view because I know very well that what I mention is the MOST moderate interpretation of Koraan.
What if I were to tell you I could show you flaws (as I see them) in Christianity? What if I were to tell you that other Christian sects consider your interpretation to be incorrect?
I'll be very happy to discuss this with you. Although I'm not sure why you want that? Have you been attacked based on your "flaws in Christianity"? Did any terrorist group come based on your "flaws in Christianity"? Did 3000 of your people die because of your "flaws in Christianity"? What did these "flaws in Christianity" harmed you in? Why do you see it very dangerous and needs to be cleared at once?
If you are trying to be generous, you would give reason a little slack. He is not attacking anyone else's religion. And he is arguing that Islam should be used as a force for good. How can you oppose that?
I said that I don't oppose that. I oppose his attempt to convince us that his personal very-peaceful interpretation of Koraan is actually the very "common, normal, and moderate" interpretation of Koraan among Islamic societies.
Islam
has always been working for, and the relations of Muslims with others are primarily based on peace and confidence. Islam refuses the killing of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does it allow Muslims to fight against those who disagree with them on religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people kindly:
Islam permits fighting in self-defense, in defense of religion, or on the part of those who have been expelled forcibly from their homes. It lays down strict rules of combat that include prohibitions against harming civilians and against destroying crops, trees and livestock. As Muslims see it, injustice would be triumphant in the world if good people were not prepared to risk their lives in a righteous cause.
War is therefore the last resort, and is subject to the rigorous conditions laid down by the sacred law. The often misunderstood and overused term jihad literally means "struggle" and not "holy war" (a term not found anywhere in the Qur'an). Jihad, as an Islamic concept, can be on a personal level--inner struggle against evil within oneself; struggle for decency and goodness on the social level; and struggle on the battlefield, if and when necessary.
This is what Islam has always been working for, and the relations of Muslims with others are primarily based on peace and confidence. Islam refuses the killing of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does it allow Muslims to fight against those who disagree with them on religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people kindly
Translation from Qur'an
"God forbiddeth you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. God loveth those who are just" (60:8).
"If the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God" (8:61).
: "If they withdraw from you and fight you not, but (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then God alloweth no way for you (to war against them)" (4:90).
"If they seek peace, then you seek peace. And trust in God for He is the One that hears and knows all things." (Qur'an 8:61)
: "Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress limits. God does not love transgressors." (Qur'an 2:190)
"And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers." (Qur'an 2:193)
IlyaFurman
10-31-2002, 08:10 PM
Great post dodo.
And Ezra is speaking cause she had a bad exprience in egypt, the copts are treated harshly in egypt I know this, there are some copts that I speak with, are were religious in christianity, and hate "muslims" cause what they did to them, asking a copt to like a muslim is like asking a jewish person to like a nazi.
They are not treated nice, and that is the peoples fault, they do it out of ego, and try to gain numbers of supports against the copts or the jews by looking at some texts in the koran that can be twisted around to fit the power hungry masses.
I see where the anger is coming from, but its baseless.
Originally posted by dodo
Islam
has always been working for, and the relations of Muslims with others are primarily based on peace and confidence. Islam refuses the killing of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does it allow Muslims to fight against those who disagree with them on religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people kindly:
Islam permits fighting in self-defense, in defense of religion, or on the part of those who have been expelled forcibly from their homes. It lays down strict rules of combat that include prohibitions against harming civilians and against destroying crops, trees and livestock. As Muslims see it, injustice would be triumphant in the world if good people were not prepared to risk their lives in a righteous cause.
War is therefore the last resort, and is subject to the rigorous conditions laid down by the sacred law. The often misunderstood and overused term jihad literally means "struggle" and not "holy war" (a term not found anywhere in the Qur'an). Jihad, as an Islamic concept, can be on a personal level--inner struggle against evil within oneself; struggle for decency and goodness on the social level; and struggle on the battlefield, if and when necessary.
This is what Islam has always been working for, and the relations of Muslims with others are primarily based on peace and confidence. Islam refuses the killing of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does it allow Muslims to fight against those who disagree with them on religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people kindly
Translation from Qur'an
"God forbiddeth you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them. God loveth those who are just" (60:8).
"If the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in God" (8:61).
: "If they withdraw from you and fight you not, but (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then God alloweth no way for you (to war against them)" (4:90).
"If they seek peace, then you seek peace. And trust in God for He is the One that hears and knows all things." (Qur'an 8:61)
: "Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress limits. God does not love transgressors." (Qur'an 2:190)
"And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for God. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers." (Qur'an 2:193)
Don't waste out time. Please read all previous posts first. All your posts have already been replied to. Go and find the verses in Koraan that no one could interpret them a peacful interpretation, reply to them, and then we can talk.
Also, let me know is you believe in Hadith or no.
Originally posted by dodo
Islam refuses the killing of people merely because they embrace a different faith, nor does it allow Muslims to fight against those who disagree with them on religious questions. It urges its followers to treat such people kindly
This is just a quick reply to the "kind" word.
[2:120] Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of Allah, that is the (only) Guidance," wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor Helper against Allah.
[5:51] O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors; they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
[5:64] The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay both His hands are widely outstretched: He giveth and spendeth (of His bounty) as He pleaseth. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them We have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief.
[5:82] Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans;
[9:30] The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Al-Masih the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the Unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
Now please, this thread was dedicated to the discussion with Mr. Reason and ibrodsky. if you want to continue discussion of what you are saying, I'll appreaciatelet it if you open a new thread so that we don't disturb the already going discussion. Thank you.
reason
11-01-2002, 07:20 AM
"Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of Allah, that is the (only) Guidance," wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor Helper against Allah."
This verse is talking to the prophet, it dosnt apply now, but even if it did how is this verse inciting muslims on killing anyone?I dont see why this verse is even being used in this discussion.
[5:51] O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors; they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.
No awliya in arabic is protectors, it is not friends.The prophet was married to a christian, so its okay to marry one but not okay to be friends with one?This is a case of bad translation.
[5:64] The Jews say: "Allah's hand is tied up." Be their hands tied up and be they accursed for the (blasphemy) they utter. Nay both His hands are widely outstretched: He giveth and spendeth (of His bounty) as He pleaseth. But the revelation that cometh to thee from Allah increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Amongst them We have placed enmity and hatred till the Day of Judgment. Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; but they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief.
This is the verse that comes after it "If only the people of the scripture believe and lead a righteous life, we will then remit their sins, and admit them into gardens of bliss."
[5:69] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the converts, and the Christians; any of them who (1) believe in GOD and (2) believe in the Last Day, and (3) lead a righteous life, have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.
Its clear now god wasnt talking about all jews, he was talking about the jews that say "Allah's hand is tied up".As you can see, Islam provides salvation to even those who are not muslims, I dont think christianity or judaism can claim that.If this is not tolerance I dont know what is.
[5:82] Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans;
Please finish the verse,[5:82] You will find that the worst enemies of the believers are the Jews and the idol worshipers. And you will find that the closest people in friendship to the believers are those who say, "We are Christian." This is because they have priests and monks among them, and they are not arrogant.
The jews are the jews who say "Allahs hand is tied", not all jews and not all christians.And as you can see we can be friends with christians so this further proves the other verse was a mistranslation.
[9:30] The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Al-Masih the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the Unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
I already answered this verse, the cursed ones are the people who disbelieved before not the jews and christians.
"Now please, this thread was dedicated to the discussion with Mr. Reason and ibrodsky. if you want to continue discussion of what you are saying, I'll appreaciatelet it if you open a new thread so that we don't disturb the already going discussion. Thank you."
I would appreciate it if you actually read my previous posts, because some of the verses here I already answered.I replied to you this time because eventhough most your sources were taken out of context , you bothered to add some, which I think is a big step.
reason
11-01-2002, 07:33 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Don't waste out time. Please read all previous posts first. All your posts have already been replied to. Go and find the verses in Koraan that no one could interpret them a peacful interpretation, reply to them, and then we can talk.
Also, let me know is you believe in Hadith or no.
No they have not been replied to. He brings up some verses that are very relevant to this discussion. These verses are almost always after the verses you claim to be against other religions.You claim that Islam is not tolerant, yet in Islam YOU EZRA CAN GO TO HEAVEN, can you claim the same for me or anybody else who is non christian?How can this be a non tolerant religion if even non muslims can share our heaven?Some of the verses when taken out of context seem very harsh, but that can be said for any religion.
In closing, Islam provides even non-muslims salvation , they are to be treated kindly, with respect , tolerance and furthermore like friends.
Ezra
These verses all you mentioned were for special cases and special people at the time of our prophet during war against earlier Muslems
They were instant and periodic orders from the God to his prophet Mohammed (ASS)
These verses are not generalised for Jews or Christians now to days
regard's
reason
11-01-2002, 07:56 AM
Originally posted by dodo
Ezra
These verses all you mentioned were for special cases and special people at the time of our prophet during war against earlier Muslems
They were instant and periodic orders from the God to his prophet Mohammed (ASS)
These verses are not generalised for Jews or Christians now to days
regard's
I agree completely dodo.
Dodo is further proof that , My interpration is not a minority.
Dantheman
11-01-2002, 07:58 AM
Originally posted by dodo
Ezra
These verses all you mentioned were for special cases and special people at the time of our prophet during war against earlier Muslems
Tell that to Osama and his crowd.
Mediocrates
11-01-2002, 08:39 AM
On another board I came across a question from a young muslim who had posted a piece that in the US the 'opinion' of muslims and/or Islam is worsening. And the question was why.
My response was partially that in the US given there are in fact so few muslims the opinion we form is shaped by muslim opinion leaders themselves. And that whenever we hear a qualified "well of course we condemn their acts, but not them" that simply is a spin that doesn't sit well with most Americans. We want to hear an unqualified disgust with these acts. Public opion really has little to do with you think but about what the target audience believes. If muslims want to avoid the stigma they see attaching to them then they have to make statements that non muslims understand and appreciate.
IlyaFurman
11-01-2002, 01:09 PM
Yeap thats what I like in Islam non muslims can go to heaven, but in Christianity only christians can go to heaven. Most muslims belive in the moderate version of Islam.
Originally posted by dodo
Ezra
These verses all you mentioned were for special cases and special people at the time of our prophet during war against earlier Muslems
They were instant and periodic orders from the God to his prophet Mohammed (ASS)
These verses are not generalised for Jews or Christians now to days
regard's
Here is what Mr. "dodo" wrote in his Arabic forum he is participating in. (And by the way, "dodo" was here before by the name "fair", so why did you change your ID Mr. Dodo, or shall I say Mr. fair?):
ÌÇÒÇß
Çááå ÎíÑÇ íÇÕÇæì
ßäÊ ãÒäæÞ Ýì ßÇã ÓæÑÉ ãä ÇáÞÑÂä ÇáßÑíã ãÊÑÌãÉ
ÃÑÏ ÈíåÇ Ýì ÚÔ ÇáÏÈÇÈíÑ ÇáãäÊÏì ÇáÇÓÑÇÆíáì
ææÌÏÊåÇ Ýì åÐÇ ÇáãæÞÚ ÇáÐì ÃÔÑÊ Úáíå
æäÒáÊåÇ ÈÇÓã ÏæÏæ
ÔßÑÇ
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php3?s=&postid=31839#post31839
Here is the translation:
God bless you Mr. Sawy.
I was stuck in some translated verses in the Holy Koraan to answer with it in the "BUGS NEST" in the Israeli forum.
I found it in the site you mentioned and posted it under the name Dodo. Thanks.
The link for the original message is:
http://www.egyptiantalks.org/phpBB2Plus/viewtopic.php?p=34903#34903
NOW MR. DODO, OR WHATEVER YOU REAL NAME IS, IF YOU ARE SAYING CHRISTIANS AND JEWS ARE FRIENDS, WHY DID YOU CALL THEM "BUGS NEST", HA?
Ezra
First of all
it's non your business that i wrote here or there
second
You twisted and mistranslated my words
I said wasps nest in Israely forums like you and all who hate arabs and Islam not jews or christians as you twisted ,
I didn't say bug nest , there are much differences between bugs and wasps nest
third
It's better to reply my post directly , not to distort us out of the subject
four
I know that you are racist zionest , hate Islam and Arabs but it,s non my busness too
regard's
Dantheman
11-02-2002, 10:29 AM
Ezra,
It sounds like you need to get a job with the FBI! :D :D :D
Originally posted by dodo
Ezra
First of all
it's non your business that i wrote here or there
second
You twisted and mistranslated my words
I said wasps nest in Israely forums like you and all who hate arabs and Islam not jews or christians as you twisted ,
I didn't say bug nest , there are much differences between bugs and wasps nest
Hahahah.. No comment. I rest my case.
Bandalore
11-02-2002, 07:43 PM
Uhhh...I don't really understand Arabic so I can't comment on the accuracy of either translation but if he did say wasps nest then I don't see the problem. Its a fairly accepted expression and I can see why it could be applied to this board.
On the other hand if it is bugs nest then there's a pretty big compromise in his whole case, though personally I think wasps nest sounds more likely. I mean some on bugs nest? People can come up with far better insults than that.
You sure are a "pedantic fellow", Bandalore! ;)
Mediocrates
11-02-2002, 07:59 PM
I can say that on ummah.com I have seen the bugs nest phrase repeatedly.
So, anyone still think that claims from Muslims that Islam is a peaceful and honest religion should be trusted or believed?
I conclude this discussion with another translation from this "very moderate" Arabic forum:
http://www.egyptiantalks.org/phpBB2Plus/viewtopic.php?t=3134
Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2002 9:39 am Cleo Advanced Member
ÇáÚÏÇÁ Èíä ÇáãÓáãíä æ ÇáíåæÏ ÌÒÁ ÃÓÇÓì ãä ÚÞíÏÊäÇ æ ÇáÏáíá Ãä ÃíÉ ÇäÊåÇÁ Çáßæä åæ ÇäÊÕÇÑ ÇáãÓáãíä Úáì ÇáíåæÏ Ýì ãÚÑßÉ ßÈÑì... æ ãÍÇæáÇÊåã ÞÊá ÇáÃäÈíÇ Úáì ãÑ ÇáÊÇÑíÎ æ ÊÃãÑåã Úáì ÞÊá ÇáÑÓæá æ ÚáÇÁåã æ ÅÝÓÇÏåã Ýì ÇáÃÑÖ ..... æáÞÏ ÔÑÈäÇ äÍä åÐå ÇáãÈÇÏÆ ãäÐ äÚæãÉ ÃÙÇÝÑäÇ Ýì ÇáãÏÇÑÓ æ ÏÑæÓ ÇáÞÑÂä ÇáßÑíã æ ÎØÈ ÇáÌãÚÉ (ÇáÊì ÇÞÊÕÑ ÏæÑåÇ ÃíÖÇ ÈäÇÁ Úáì ÊæÌíåÇÊ Çááå ÃÚáã ãíä - ÈÃä ÊÞÊÕÑ åì ÃíÖÇ Úáì ÇáÚÈÇÏÇÊ Ïæä ÇáÓíÇÓÉ... (íÈÞì ãÔ åíØÈÞ äÝÓ ÇáßáÇã Úáì ÏÑæÓ ÇáÏíä Ýì ÇáãÏÇÑÓ¿¿¿) æ áåÐÇ æÌÈ Úáíåã Ãä íÞÖæÇ Úáì äÙÑÊäÇ ÇáãÊÍÝÒÉ áåã æ íÞÊáæÇ åÐå ÇáÈÐÑÉ ÝíäÇ ãäÐ äÚæãÉ ÃÙÇÝÑäÇ.... Ãì ÊÌÝíÝ ÇáãäÈÚ Òì ãÇ ÈíÞæá ÇáÃÎ æÓÇã...
"Hostility (war/hateness) between the Muslims and Jews is an essential (principal) part of our belief (dogma/ideology) and the proof is that the mark (indication) of the end of the days (universe) is the defeat of Jews by Muslims in a huge (big) war (battle). And their attempts to kill prophets along history and their conspiracy to kill The Prophet and their bumptiousness and ruining the earth. We have drank these principles since the softness of our nails (childhood) in Schools and Holy Koraan lessons and Friday speeches (Khotba) ..." (still 2 not essential sentences.)"
So, if Mr. Dodo is a real friend of Christians and Jews, why didn't he reply to this lady and told her what he just told us that these verses are not applicable now?
P.S. To verify the translation, open any Arabic site to install Arabic font, look for any online Arabic-English translator, copy and paste the Arabic text and press translate.
IlyaFurman
11-03-2002, 03:39 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
So, anyone still think that claims from Muslims that Islam is a peaceful and honest religion should be trusted or believed?
[/I]
If I think your not peaceful and not honest, so does that mean all christians are like that??? lol
NOPE
IlyaFurman
11-03-2002, 03:44 AM
If anyone wants to see that ISLAM really is tolerante of other religions look at the "constitution of madina", which was the basis of the first islamic state, the treaty between mohammed and the jewish people, then you will see the real islam. Where Mohammed treated the jewish people as if they were like the muslim people, and gave them equal rites and protection. Let them practice religion, and said they were part of the Ummah or state.
Too Bad todays muslims are not following these things.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
If anyone wants to see that ISLAM really is tolerante of other religions look at the "constitution of madina", which was the basis of the first islamic state, the treaty between mohammed and the jewish people, then you will see the real islam. Where Mohammed treated the jewish people as if they were like the muslim people, and gave them equal rites and protection. Let them practice religion, and said they were part of the Ummah or state.
Too Bad todays muslims are not following these things.
Yeh sure sure..
So, anyone still think that claims from Muslims that Islam is a peaceful and honest religion should be trusted or believed?
I conclude this discussion with another translation from this "very moderate" Arabic forum:
http://www.egyptiantalks.org/phpBB2Plus/viewtopic.php?t=3134
Posted: Thu Oct 31, 2002 9:39 am Cleo Advanced Member
ÇáÚÏÇÁ Èíä ÇáãÓáãíä æ ÇáíåæÏ ÌÒÁ ÃÓÇÓì ãä ÚÞíÏÊäÇ æ ÇáÏáíá Ãä ÃíÉ ÇäÊåÇÁ Çáßæä åæ ÇäÊÕÇÑ ÇáãÓáãíä Úáì ÇáíåæÏ Ýì ãÚÑßÉ ßÈÑì... æ ãÍÇæáÇÊåã ÞÊá ÇáÃäÈíÇ Úáì ãÑ ÇáÊÇÑíÎ æ ÊÃãÑåã Úáì ÞÊá ÇáÑÓæá æ ÚáÇÁåã æ ÅÝÓÇÏåã Ýì ÇáÃÑÖ ..... æáÞÏ ÔÑÈäÇ äÍä åÐå ÇáãÈÇÏÆ ãäÐ äÚæãÉ ÃÙÇÝÑäÇ Ýì ÇáãÏÇÑÓ æ ÏÑæÓ ÇáÞÑÂä ÇáßÑíã æ ÎØÈ ÇáÌãÚÉ (ÇáÊì ÇÞÊÕÑ ÏæÑåÇ ÃíÖÇ ÈäÇÁ Úáì ÊæÌíåÇÊ Çááå ÃÚáã ãíä - ÈÃä ÊÞÊÕÑ åì ÃíÖÇ Úáì ÇáÚÈÇÏÇÊ Ïæä ÇáÓíÇÓÉ... (íÈÞì ãÔ åíØÈÞ äÝÓ ÇáßáÇã Úáì ÏÑæÓ ÇáÏíä Ýì ÇáãÏÇÑÓ¿¿¿) æ áåÐÇ æÌÈ Úáíåã Ãä íÞÖæÇ Úáì äÙÑÊäÇ ÇáãÊÍÝÒÉ áåã æ íÞÊáæÇ åÐå ÇáÈÐÑÉ ÝíäÇ ãäÐ äÚæãÉ ÃÙÇÝÑäÇ.... Ãì ÊÌÝíÝ ÇáãäÈÚ Òì ãÇ ÈíÞæá ÇáÃÎ æÓÇã...
"Hostility (war/hateness) between the Muslims and Jews is an essential (principal) part of our belief (dogma/ideology) and the proof is that the mark (indication) of the end of the days (universe) is the defeat of Jews by Muslims in a huge (big) war (battle). And their attempts to kill prophets along history and their conspiracy to kill The Prophet and their bumptiousness and ruining the earth. We have drank these principles since the softness of our nails (childhood) in Schools and Holy Koraan lessons and Friday speeches (Khotba) ..." (still 2 not essential sentences.)"
So, if Mr. Dodo is a real friend of Christians and Jews, why didn't he reply to this lady and told her what he just told us that these verses are not applicable now?
P.S. To verify the translation, open any Arabic site to install Arabic font, look for any online Arabic-English translator, copy and paste the Arabic text and press translate.
IlyaFurman
11-03-2002, 06:47 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Yeh sure sure..
instead of saying "sure sure" to a thing you have no idea about how about you go read the "constitution of medina" by mohammed and his treaty with the jews first.
IlyaFurman
11-03-2002, 06:58 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
So, anyone still think that claims from Muslims that Islam is a peaceful and honest religion should be trusted or believed?
[
this post of yours is so funny, for example look at what you posted
Originally posted by Ezra
Wrong Mr. Reason. With one nuclear bomb, your 1 billion freinds would be fried chickens now! You should be thanksfull that Jews and Christians don't kill non-Jews and non-Christians.
Now im gonna say, So, anyone still think that claims from Christians that Christianity is a peacful and honest religion should be trusted or belived?
Show some facts not what others posted please.
ÇáÚÏÇÁ Èíä ÇáãÓáãíä æ ÇáíåæÏ ÌÒÁ ÃÓÇÓì ãä ÚÞíÏÊäÇ æ ÇáÏáíá Ãä ÃíÉ ÇäÊåÇÁ Çáßæä åæ ÇäÊÕÇÑ ÇáãÓáãíä Úáì ÇáíåæÏ Ýì ãÚÑßÉ ßÈÑì... æ ãÍÇæáÇÊåã ÞÊá ÇáÃäÈíÇ Úáì ãÑ ÇáÊÇÑíÎ æ ÊÃãÑåã Úáì ÞÊá ÇáÑÓæá æ ÚáÇÁåã æ ÅÝÓÇÏåã Ýì ÇáÃÑÖ ..... æáÞÏ ÔÑÈäÇ äÍä åÐå ÇáãÈÇÏÆ ãäÐ äÚæãÉ ÃÙÇÝÑäÇ Ýì ÇáãÏÇÑÓ æ ÏÑæÓ ÇáÞÑÂä ÇáßÑíã æ ÎØÈ ÇáÌãÚÉ (ÇáÊì ÇÞÊÕÑ ÏæÑåÇ ÃíÖÇ ÈäÇÁ Úáì ÊæÌíåÇÊ Çááå ÃÚáã ãíä - ÈÃä ÊÞÊÕÑ åì ÃíÖÇ Úáì ÇáÚÈÇÏÇÊ Ïæä ÇáÓíÇÓÉ
Ezra
WE are debating religion not opinion of persons
There are various oppinions in the same religion
There are fanatics Muslems and Jews and nonfanatics too
do you like to post what Obadia Yousif or Mr liberman have said
Do you think that these unlogic fanatic people resemble or assimilate all jews
also bin ladin , hitler and Msoliny did't resimble there religion nation
Be wise
and don't urge just for urge
Originally posted by dodo
Ezra
WE are debating religion not opinion of persons
There are various oppinions in the same religion
There are fanatics Muslems and Jews and nonfanatics too
do you like to post what Obadia Yousif or Mr liberman have said
Do you think that these unlogic fanatic people resemble or assimilate all jews
also bin ladin , hitler and Msoliny did't resimble there religion nation
Be wise
and don't urge just for urge
Great words!
So, you are suggesting that these words came from fanatics Muslims?
From what I understand, if I saw someone from my religion who has wrong or fanatic view, I would definitely discuss it with him and try to correct them from him.
Now, if you are convinced that you have a correct and true opinion about Islam, would you kindly translate the above message and post it to Ms. Cleo in your Arabic forum so that you help correcting her wrong views?
Would you also translate your previous words and post them in your Arabic forum since they are very nice and moderate and reveal the true and peaceful face of Islam:
Ezra
These verses all you mentioned were for special cases and special people at the time of our prophet during war against earlier Muslems
They were instant and periodic orders from the God to his prophet Mohammed (ASS)
These verses are not generalised for Jews or Christians now to days
P.S. You don't have to translate the verses I mentioned if you want, you can just mention their location.
Mr. Dodo. We are still waiting?
Originally posted by dodo
Ezra
WE are debating religion not opinion of persons
There are various oppinions in the same religion
There are fanatics Muslems and Jews and nonfanatics too
do you like to post what Obadia Yousif or Mr liberman have said
Do you think that these unlogic fanatic people resemble or assimilate all jews
also bin ladin , hitler and Msoliny did't resimble there religion nation
Be wise
and don't urge just for urge
Great words!
So, you are suggesting that these words came from fanatics Muslims?
From what I understand, if I saw someone from my religion who has wrong or fanatic view, I would definitely discuss it with him and try to correct them from him.
Now, if you are convinced that you have a correct and true opinion about Islam, would you kindly translate the above message and post it to Ms. Cleo in your Arabic forum so that you help correcting her wrong views?
Would you also translate your previous words and post them in your Arabic forum since they are very nice and moderate and reveal the true and peaceful face of Islam:
Ezra
These verses all you mentioned were for special cases and special people at the time of our prophet during war against earlier Muslems
They were instant and periodic orders from the God to his prophet Mohammed (ASS)
These verses are not generalised for Jews or Christians now to days
P.S. You don't have to translate the verses I mentioned if you want, you can just mention their location.
reason
11-05-2002, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Mr. Dodo. We are still waiting?
Great words!
So, you are suggesting that these words came from fanatics Muslims?
From what I understand, if I saw someone from my religion who has wrong or fanatic view, I would definitely discuss it with him and try to correct them from him.
Now, if you are convinced that you have a correct and true opinion about Islam, would you kindly translate the above message and post it to Ms. Cleo in your Arabic forum so that you help correcting her wrong views?
Would you also translate your previous words and post them in your Arabic forum since they are very nice and moderate and reveal the true and peaceful face of Islam:
P.S. You don't have to translate the verses I mentioned if you want, you can just mention their location.
Then you might want to forward your views to your fellow christians at these websites.
http://aryan-nations.org/index-E.html
http://www.televar.com/~vb11thhr/index.html
http://user.txcyber.com/~thatcher/
http://www.kkkk.net/framepage1.htm
http://www.kukluxklan.net/
http://www.americannaziparty.com/
Again I apologize for posting these fill hate ignorant websites.Ill gladly delete them if any one is offended.
IlyaFurman
11-05-2002, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by reason
Then you might want to forward your views to your fellow christians at these websites.
http://aryan-nations.org/index-E.html
http://www.televar.com/~vb11thhr/index.html
http://user.txcyber.com/~thatcher/
http://www.kkkk.net/framepage1.htm
http://www.kukluxklan.net/
http://www.americannaziparty.com/
Again I apologize for posting these fill hate ignorant websites.Ill gladly delete them if any one is offended.
wow, I didnt know these guys were that "christian" in their beliefs, I though they were atheistic, if one looks at their sites, you will find out its clearly supposed to based on christianiaty, a twisted version of it.
for example look at this from the first link
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
AND THEY DONT USE BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO SUPPORT THEM??? GIVE ME A BREAK, there founder is a pastor for gods sake !!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a twisted sick and disgusting part of christianity.
Dantheman
11-05-2002, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
wow, I didnt know these guys were that "christian" in their beliefs, I though they were atheistic, if one looks at their sites, you will find out its clearly supposed to based on christianiaty, a twisted version of it.
for example look at this from the first link
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
AND THEY DONT USE BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO SUPPORT THEM??? GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a twisted sick and disgusting part of christianity.
This is no part of Christianity. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.
Before I would show them where thier scripture refs are not even close to proving their point, I'd ask them one quick question:
How can the decendants of Satan, the Jews as they claim, exist after the flood? God put Noah and his family (blameless before God) into the ark. Cains decendants would have all died in the flood.
NEXT!! :cool:
Originally posted by reason
Then you might want to forward your views to your fellow christians at these websites.
http://aryan-nations.org/index-E.html
http://www.televar.com/~vb11thhr/index.html
http://user.txcyber.com/~thatcher/
http://www.kkkk.net/framepage1.htm
http://www.kukluxklan.net/
http://www.americannaziparty.com/
Again I apologize for posting these fill hate ignorant websites.Ill gladly delete them if any one is offended.
Are these the most "moderate" christian sites?
Because the Islamic forum I mentioned is considered the most moderate. So if you want to compare, mention some "moderate" christian sites. Otherwise, we will start debating the contents of jihad.com as well.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
wow, I didnt know these guys were that "christian" in their beliefs, I though they were atheistic, if one looks at their sites, you will find out its clearly supposed to based on christianiaty, a twisted version of it.
for example look at this from the first link
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
AND THEY DONT USE BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO SUPPORT THEM??? GIVE ME A BREAK, there founder is a pastor for gods sake !!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is a twisted sick and disgusting part of christianity.
This is really hilarious!
Where are these biblical references?
This is the only quote I saw: "chosen and faithful." !!!!
IlyaFurman
11-05-2002, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Dantheman
This is no part of Christianity. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.
Before I would show them where thier scripture refs are not even close to proving their point, I'd ask them one quick question:
How can the decendants of Satan, the Jews as they claim, exist after the flood? God put Noah and his family (blameless before God) into the ark. Cains decendants would have all died in the flood.
NEXT!! :cool:
Hey your making it seem like Im making up all this stuff, they themselves say this, maybe you should go to them and ask them.
They claim to be christian, and a pure form of Christianity, and they belive it.
IlyaFurman
11-05-2002, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
This is really hilarious!
Where are these biblical references?
This is the only quote I saw: "chosen and faithful." !!!!
If you are really interested check those extremist christianity sites out, they have tons of quotes, those sites make me sick.
Dantheman
11-05-2002, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Hey your making it seem like Im making up all this stuff, they themselves say this, maybe you should go to them and ask them.
They claim to be christian, and a pure form of Christianity, and they belive it.
If you were making it up, I'd laugh in your cyber face. :D
I am well aware of these groups, and I agree, they make me sick too. Sorry if I made it seem like I didn't believe you. I didn't mean to.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
If you are really interested check those extremist christianity sites out, they have tons of quotes, those sites make me sick.
I checked and couldn't find any biblical support for their opinion. Please help me.
IlyaFurman
11-06-2002, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
I checked and couldn't find any biblical support for their opinion. Please help me.
Im sorry thats too funny, haha, their whole site is filled with christian methodology, and beliefs, heres one -
WE BELIEVE in an existing being known as the Devil or Satan and called the Serpent (Gen. 3:1; Rev. 12:9), who has a literal "seed" or posterity in the earth (Gen. 3:15) commonly called Jews today (Rev. 2:9; 3:9; Isa. 65:15). These children of Satan (John 8:44-47; Matt. 13:38; John 8:23) through Cain (I John 2:22, 4:3) who have throughout history always been a curse to true Israel, the Children of God, because of a natural enmity between the two races (Gen. 3:15), because they do the works of their father the Devil (John 8:38-44), and because they please not God, and are contrary to all men (I Thes. 2:14-15), though they often pose as ministers of righteousness (II Cor. 11:13-15). The ultimate end of this evil race whose hands bear the blood of our Savior (Matt. 27:25) and all the righteous slain upon the earth (Matt. 23:35), is Divine judgment (Matt. 13:38-42, 15:13; Zech. 14:21).
If you look at that, there are tons of Biblical references, and your gonna say oh thats little, or just this and that, I dont care, they are twisting around the words of the bible to suit their needs. Heres the Link for a whole PAGE OF THIS STUFF.
http://www.kkkk.net/doctrinalstatements.htm
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Im sorry thats too funny, haha, their whole site is filled with christian methodology, and beliefs, heres one -
WE BELIEVE in an existing being known as the Devil or Satan and called the Serpent (Gen. 3:1; Rev. 12:9), who has a literal "seed" or posterity in the earth (Gen. 3:15) commonly called Jews today (Rev. 2:9; 3:9; Isa. 65:15). These children of Satan (John 8:44-47; Matt. 13:38; John 8:23) through Cain (I John 2:22, 4:3) who have throughout history always been a curse to true Israel, the Children of God, because of a natural enmity between the two races (Gen. 3:15), because they do the works of their father the Devil (John 8:38-44), and because they please not God, and are contrary to all men (I Thes. 2:14-15), though they often pose as ministers of righteousness (II Cor. 11:13-15). The ultimate end of this evil race whose hands bear the blood of our Savior (Matt. 27:25) and all the righteous slain upon the earth (Matt. 23:35), is Divine judgment (Matt. 13:38-42, 15:13; Zech. 14:21).
If you look at that, there are tons of Biblical references, and your gonna say oh thats little, or just this and that, I dont care, they are twisting around the words of the bible to suit their needs. Heres the Link for a whole PAGE OF THIS STUFF.
http://www.kkkk.net/doctrinalstatements.htm
But I looked at these verses and couldn't find any relation between these verses and the text above.
Would you kindly mention the exact quote for the above verse locations?
IlyaFurman
11-07-2002, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
But I looked at these verses and couldn't find any relation between these verses and the text above.
Would you kindly mention the exact quote for the above verse locations?
They mentioned the verses NOT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, if you want to know why they justify their behavior USING THE BIBLE, send them an email, and cc it to me. Cause their LEADER IS A CHRISTIAN PASTOR, and thier BELIEFS ARE MAJOR IN CHRISTIAN BELIEFS AND THE SITE IS FULL OF BIBLICAL REFERENCES, email them.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
They mentioned the verses NOT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, if you want to know why they justify their behavior USING THE BIBLE, send them an email, and cc it to me. Cause their LEADER IS A CHRISTIAN PASTOR, and thier BELIEFS ARE MAJOR IN CHRISTIAN BELIEFS AND THE SITE IS FULL OF BIBLICAL REFERENCES, email them.
I thought you understand the thing before you post it, not just post blindly or based on what you hear!
IlyaFurman
11-08-2002, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
I thought you understand the thing before you post it, not just post blindly or based on what you hear!
They use biblical sources to JUSTIFY their racism and HORRIFIC CRIMES, the leader is A CHRISTIAN PASTOR.
Stop wrting stuff that doesnt add to the discussion.
thanks.
reason
11-08-2002, 10:49 AM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
They use biblical sources to JUSTIFY their racism and HORRIFIC CRIMES, the leader is A CHRISTIAN PASTOR.
Stop wrting stuff that doesnt add to the discussion.
thanks.
Ilya give up on Ezra, he is just in a denial phase. He didnt accept proof even when the Pope went to Isreal an apologized for the church's behaviour during WWII.Ezra is one of the most hate filled people I have seen in my life.His faulty logic is inspired by his utmost hate .Dont try to make sense of what he posts because he has none.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
They use biblical sources to JUSTIFY their racism and HORRIFIC CRIMES, the leader is A CHRISTIAN PASTOR.
Stop wrting stuff that doesnt add to the discussion.
thanks.
And I said show me because I couldn't find any thing from what you said!
You said they proved that only whites are Christians and they proved that from the bible and I couldn't find that!
You mentioned a paragraph saying here are the quotes from the Bible and I only found two irrelevant words!
You mentioned a parapgrph with location of verses, and I found the verses irrelevant!
So, I'm asking please mention the verse along with its location, and tell us their interpretation!
Why are you afraid of doing that?
Am I asking too much?
IlyaFurman
11-08-2002, 01:34 PM
And I said show me because I couldn't find any thing from what you said!
I pasted tons of biblcical references they used, They are a christian extermist group, THEY SAY IT, I WONDER WHY YOUR DEFENING THEM?
You said they proved that only whites are Christians and they proved that from the bible and I couldn't find that!
They said it not ME, ask them why the justify racsim using the bible
You mentioned a paragraph saying here are the quotes from the Bible and I only found two irrelevant words!
Irelavant? I guess you meant revelant, ask them that again, EMAIL THEM, according to you they are twisting around the words of the bible?
You mentioned a parapgrph with location of verses, and I found the verses irrelevant!
They DONT THINK SO!!!
So, I'm asking please mention the verse along with its location, and tell us their interpretation!
Ask them, THEY PUT IT UP THERE NOT ME!!!!
Why are you afraid of doing that?
Am I asking too much?
No, your just defeding the neo nazis,
IlyaFurman
11-08-2002, 01:39 PM
HERE TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY!!!!
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
abu afak
11-08-2002, 02:27 PM
""...“Ah, but you are confusing Islam with Islamic fundamentalism. The Real Islam has nothing to do with violence,” apologists of Islam argue.
There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate. There is no difference between Islam and Islamic fundamentalism: at most there is a difference of degree but not of kind. All the tenets of Islamic fundamentalism are derived from the Qur’an, the Sunna, and the Hadith – Islamic fundamentalism is a totalitarian construct derived by Muslim jurists from the fundamental and defining texts of Islam. The fundamentalists, with greater logic and coherence than so-called moderate or liberal Muslims, have made Islam the basis of a radical utopian ideology that aims to replace capitalism and democracy as the reigning world system. Islamism accounts for the anti-American hatred to be found in places far from the Arab-Israeli conflict, like Nigeria and Afghanistan, demonstrating that the Middle East conflict cannot legitimately be used to explain this phenomenon called Islamism. A Palestinian involved in the WTC bombings would be seen as a martyr to the Palestinian cause, but even more as a martyr to Islam.
“Ah, but Islamic fundamentalism is like any other kind of fundamentalism, one must not demonise it. It is the result of political, social grievances. It must be explained in terms of economics and not religion,” continue the apologists of Islam.
There are enormous differences between Islamic fundamentalism and any other kind of modern fundamentalism. It is true that Hindu, Jewish, and Christian fundamentalists have been responsible for acts of violence, but these have been confined to particular countries and regions. Islamic fundamentalism has global aspirations: the submission of the entire world to the all-embracing Shari’a, Islamic Law, a fascist system of dictates designed to control every single act of all individuals. Nor do Hindus or Jews seek to convert the world to their religion. Christians do indulge in proselytism but no longer use acts of violence or international terrorism to achieve their aims.
Only Islam treats non-believers as inferior beings who are expendable in the drive to world hegemony. Islam justifies any means to achieve the end of establishing an Islamic world.
Islamic fundamentalists recruit among Muslim populations, they appeal to Islamic religious symbols, and they motivate their recruits with Islamic doctrine derived from the Qur’an. Economic poverty alone cannot explain the phenomenon of Islamism. Poverty in Brazil or Mexico has not resulted in Christian fundamentalist acts of international terror. Islamists are against what they see as western materialism itself. Their choice is clear: Islam or jahiliyya. The latter term is redefined to mean modern-style jahiliyya of modern, democratic, industrialised societies of Europe and America, where man is under the dominion of man rather than Allah. They totally reject the values of the West, which they feel are poisoning Islamic culture. So, it is not just a question of economics, but of an entirely different worldview, which they wish to impose on the whole world. Sayyid Qutb, the very influential Egyptian Muslim thinker, said that “dominion should be reverted to Allah alone, namely to Islam, that holistic system He conferred upon men. An all-out offensive, a jihad, should be waged against modernity so that this moral rearmament could take place. The ultimate objective is to re-establish the Kingdom of Allah upon earth...”
http://www.secularislam.org/articles/wtc.htm
I pasted tons of biblcical references they used, They are a christian extermist group, THEY SAY IT, I WONDER WHY YOUR DEFENING THEM?
I'm not defending, I'm just pointing out that the verses mentioned are irrelevant. So, I assumed that you research the thing before posting not just blindly copy and paste.
They said it not ME, ask them why the justify racsim using the bible
And you just copy and paste without understanding?
Irelavant? I guess you meant revelant, ask them that again, EMAIL THEM, according to you they are twisting around the words of the bible?
Again, I thought you already got these verses and researched them first.
They DONT THINK SO!!!
I'm asking YOU. You are the one who copied and pasted them so obviously you saw that they have some sort of point. Obviously you just blindly copied and pasted them.
Ask them, THEY PUT IT UP THERE NOT ME!!!!
But you posted them here, so obviously you saw the verses and thought they have some point.
No, your just defeding the neo nazis,
I'm just showing how ignorant you are. You don't even boter researching the issue before posting!
IlyaFurman
11-08-2002, 03:27 PM
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
AND THEY DONT USE BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO SUPPORT THEM??? GIVE ME A BREAK,
there founder is a christian pastor for gods sake !!!!!!!!!!!!!
heres is the leaders few lines of his bio, for those too lazy to click
Who are we, and who is Richard G. Butler? We are the continuing direct-line Church of Jesus Christ Christian as originally founded by Dr. Wesley Swift of Lancaster, California. After Dr. Swift's death, the church has been carried on by Richard G. Butler. The Church of Jesus Christ Christian is the true Church of Christ, teaching not the "doctrines of men" - but rather the doctrines of the Prophets and Jesus The Christ, Yahweh Yahshua....
NEXT QUESTION
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
AND THEY DONT USE BIBLICAL REFERENCES TO SUPPORT THEM??? GIVE ME A BREAK,
there founder is a christian pastor for gods sake !!!!!!!!!!!!!
heres is the leaders few lines of his bio, for those too lazy to click
Who are we, and who is Richard G. Butler? We are the continuing direct-line Church of Jesus Christ Christian as originally founded by Dr. Wesley Swift of Lancaster, California. After Dr. Swift's death, the church has been carried on by Richard G. Butler. The Church of Jesus Christ Christian is the true Church of Christ, teaching not the "doctrines of men" - but rather the doctrines of the Prophets and Jesus The Christ, Yahweh Yahshua....
NEXT QUESTION
Just a very simple question. Have you tried to look up the verses that their locations were mentioned here (yes/no).
IlyaFurman
11-09-2002, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by Ezra
Just a very simple question. Have you tried to look up the verses that their locations were mentioned here (yes/no).
Does it matter????? Nope, there are using it, arent they? Dont change the subject with your yes/no question.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
Does it matter????? Nope, there are using it, arent they? Dont change the subject with your yes/no question.
So, they maybe put any irrelevant verses locations and you won't know, since you just copied and pasted with trying to understand, right?
IlyaFurman
11-10-2002, 07:18 PM
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
There you again in case your missed it.
reason
11-11-2002, 06:41 AM
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
There you again in case your missed it.
Ezra, your evasive tactics wont work, because Im gonna bump this thread till you admit it :).
Originally posted by reason
Ezra, your evasive tactics wont work, because Im gonna bump this thread till you admit it :).
Please do!
But still why neither of you dared to get the exact quotes for the verses mentioned?
When I talk about Koraan I mention the whole verse, why are you afraid to do the same here?
Go on, don't be afraid. It won't burn you.
Don't neither of you have a Bible? There are many online...
Why are you afraid of doing so?
IlyaFurman
11-11-2002, 06:50 PM
Almost every single Christian is going to hell according to the Bible!!
You might think you're going to Heaven when you're not!
It's ironic how Christians constantly repeat the following nonsense: "If you believe that Jesus died on the cross for your sins, and that he is your savior, then you will go to Heaven."
I heard this phrase from almost every single Christian missionary that I debated. Let us see how truthful this claim really is:
"Many will say to me (Jesus) on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 7:22-23)"
These verses clearly prove that believing in Jesus as the "Savior" who died on the cross for our sins may not necessarily really save us, hence this refutes the nonsense that the Christian missionaries keep repeating, because they themselves may not be saved and are going to Hell without even knowing it.
Let us look at further verses from the Bible that prove that most Christians are going to Hell:
Adultery is prohibited in the Bible, and that's perfectly fine with me:
Deuteronomy 22:22 "If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die."
Leviticus 20:10 "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."
Proverbs 6:32 "But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself." He destroys himself by being put to death as shown above.
But here comes the part that will cause most Christians of today to go to Hell:
Matthew 19:9 "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
Mark 10:11 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her."
Mark 10:12 "And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."
Luke 16:18 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."
Since adultery is clearly prohibited in the Bible, and since most Western Christians today are divorced and are either living with their boyfriends/girlfriends or married to other people, wouldn't that cause for them to be thrown in Hell? After all, most Western Christians according to the Bible are committing adultery!
So to all of you divorced (except for marital unfaithfulness) Christians out there, YOU ARE ALL GOING TO HELL!
Why do I think that adultery in the Bible would cause a person to go to Hell? Read the following:
Let us look at further verses from the Bible that prove that most Christians are going to Hell:
"If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 5:29)"
As a Muslim, I can appreciate putting laws against sexual sinning and adultery. But the above verse is quite ironic! It clearly states that if any Christian (including our missionary friends) sins, even by looking at another human being lustfully, he/she better get rid of the body part that sinned instead of suffering the Eternal torture of Hell.
Come on now! To all of you Christian men and women out there, including your priests and ministers (who on many occasions end up raping and child molesting), how many times did you "masturbate"?! Oh well, I hate to break the bad news to you, but YOU'RE ALL GOING TO HELL ACCORDING TO YOUR BIBLE!
A Christian got so freaked out from the above verse, that he decided to slice off his penis.
lol.
Important Note: The reasons that a person would get tortured in Hell for eternity in the Bible are quite ridiculous! You don't have to be an atheist to suffer the torture of Hell in the Bible. Just be a normal human being is all what it takes!
A "normal human being" that I am referring to is not someone who is sexually sinful as the Westerners are today with their illegal sex without marriage cultural practices (from boyfriends and girlfriends living together, to one-night stand sex, to pornography, etc...). No, a "normal human being" in my definition is one who tries to avoid sins as much as possible, but still falls into doing few of them every once in a while, and always regrets and seeks Allah Almighty's forgiveness and mercy for doing them.
reason
11-12-2002, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Please do!
But still why neither of you dared to get the exact quotes for the verses mentioned?
When I talk about Koraan I mention the whole verse, why are you afraid to do the same here?
Go on, don't be afraid. It won't burn you.
Don't neither of you have a Bible? There are many online...
Why are you afraid of doing so?
"When I talk about Koraan I mention the whole verse, why are you afraid to do the same here?"
I laughed so much at the above quote, you have not once posted a verse either as a whole or in context, now try again. And yes you will burn me with your smell if you dont start taking bath ;).
Originally posted by reason
"When I talk about Koraan I mention the whole verse, why are you afraid to do the same here?"
I laughed so much at the above quote, you have not once posted a verse either as a whole or in context, now try again. And yes you will burn me with your smell if you dont start taking bath ;).
Yeh sure sure.
Originally posted by IlyaFurman
WE BELIEVE that the Cananite Jew is the natural enemy of our Aryan (White) Race. This is attested by scripture and all secular history. The Jew is like a destroying virus that attacks our racial body to destroy our Aryan culture and the purity of our Race. Those of our Race who resist these attacks are called "chosen and faithful."
John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14
WE BELIEVE that there are literal children of Satan in the world today. These children are the descendants of Cain, who was a result of Eve's original sin, her physical seduction by Satan. We know that because of this sin there is a battle and a natural enmity between the children of Satan and the children of The Most High God (Yahweh).
Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12
WE BELIEVE that there is a battle being fought this day between the children of darkness (today known as Jews) and the children of light (Yahweh, The Everliving God), the Aryan Race, the true Israel of the bible. Revelations 12:10-11
There you again in case your missed it.
Still waiting for the text of the verses mentioned!
reason
11-12-2002, 08:36 AM
Originally posted by Ezra
Still waiting for the text of the verses mentioned!
Ezra if you remove that sleep crust from your eyes (which by the way is easily removable if you wash your face) you could see that the verses were provided previously .
Originally posted by reason
Ezra if you remove that sleep crust from your eyes (which by the way is easily removable if you wash your face) you could see that the verses were provided previously .
Really? Can you show me?
These are the verses your tail copied from the article: John 8:44; 1 Thessalonians 2:15; Revelations 17:14; Genesis 3:15; 1 John 3:12; Revelations 12:10-11
Where was their text mentioned? Please show them to me?.. Or you can remove the crust from your mind.
ibrodsky
11-12-2002, 08:13 PM
The topic of this thread is support and opposition to terrorism in the Islamic world. It is not meant to condemn Islam or any other religion, but rather to discuss whether today's Muslims are opposing terrorism as consistently and forcefully as they should.
Mediocrates
11-16-2002, 07:41 AM
http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_4_the_reform_islam.html
We are engaged in a struggle to defeat terrorism. I have no advice on how to win that struggle, but I have some thoughts as to why it exists. It is not, I think, because Islam is at war with the West or because Palestinians are trying to displace Israelis. The struggle exists, I think, because the West has mastered the problem of reconciling religion and freedom, while several Middle Eastern nations have not. The story of that mastery and that failure occupies several centuries of human history, in which one dominant culture, the world of Islam, was displaced by a new culture, that of the West.
Reconciling religion and freedom has been the most difficult political task most nations have faced. It is not hard to see why. People who believe that there is one set of moral rules superior to all others, laid down by God and sometimes enforced by the fear of eternal punishment, will understandably expect their nation to observe and impose these rules; to do otherwise would be to repudiate deeply held convictions, offend a divine being, and corrupt society. This is the view of many Muslims; it was also the view of Pope Leo XIII—who said in 1888 that men find freedom in obedience to the authority of God—and of the provost of Oriel College, Oxford, who wrote to a faculty member in 1848 that “you were not born for speculation” but to “serve God and serve man.” If you think that there is one God who expects people to confess beliefs, say prayers, observe fasts, and obtain sacraments, it would be impious, indeed scandalously wrong, to permit the state to ignore beliefs, prayers, fasts, and sacraments.
In furtherance of these views, Queen Mary executed 300 Protestants, England and France expelled Jews, Ferdinand and Isabella expelled from Spain both Moors and Jews, the Spanish Inquisition tortured and executed a few thousand alleged heretics, and books were destroyed and scholars threatened for advancing theologically incorrect theories.
During this time, Islam was a vast empire stretching from western Africa into India—an empire that valued learning, prized scholars, maintained great libraries, and preserved the works of many ancient writers. But within three centuries, this greatest civilization on the face of the earth was in retreat, and the West was rising to produce a civilization renowned for its commitment to personal liberty, scientific expertise, political democracy, and free markets.
Freedom of conscience has made the difference. In an old world where knowledge came from libraries, and scientific experiments were rare, freedom would not be so important. But in the new world, knowledge and all that it can produce come from the sharp challenge of competing ideas tested by standards of objective evidence. In Istanbul, Muslims printed no book until 1729, and thereafter only occasionally. By contrast, the West became a world in which books were published starting three centuries earlier and where doubt and self-criticism were important. Of course, doubt and self-criticism can become, as William Bennett has observed, a self-destructive fetish, but short of that calamity, they are the source of human progress.
The central question is not why freedom of conscience failed to come to much of Islam but why it came at all to the West. Though Westerners will conventionally assign great weight to the arguments made by the defenders of freedom, I do not think that the ideas of Milton, Locke, Erasmus, and Spinoza—though important—were decisive.
What made religious toleration and later freedom of conscience possible in England was not theoretical argument but political necessity. It was necessary, first in England and later in America and much of Europe, because rulers trying to govern nations could not do so without granting freedom to people of different faiths. In the words of Herbert Butterfield, toleration was “the last policy that remained when it had proved impossible to go on fighting any longer.”
The fighting occurred because different religions struggled to control nations. Here lay the chief difference between Islam and the West: Islam was a land of one religion and few states, while the West was a land of many states that were acquiring many religions. In the sixteenth century, people in England thought of themselves chiefly as Englishmen before they thought of themselves as Protestants, and those in France saw themselves as Frenchmen before they saw themselves as Catholics. In most of Islam—in Arabia and northern Africa, certainly—people saw themselves as Muslims before they thought of themselves as members of any state; indeed, states hardly existed in this world until European colonial powers created them by drawing somewhat arbitrary lines on a map.
The Muslim faith was divided into the Sunni and the Shiite; but Christianity was soon divided into four branches. The Protestant Reformation created not only Lutheranism but its archrival, Calvinism, which now joined the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches.
Lutherans, like Catholics, were governed by a priesthood, but Calvinists were ruled by congregations, and so they proclaimed not only a sterner faith but a distinctive political philosophy. The followers of Luther and Calvin had little interest in religious liberty; they wanted to replace a church they detested with one that they admired. But in doing so, they helped bring about religious wars. Lutheran mobs attacked Calvinist groups in the streets of Berlin, and thousands of Calvinists were murdered in the streets of Paris. In 1555, the Peace of Augsburg settled the religious wars briefly with the phrase cuius regio, eius religio—meaning that people in each state or principality would have the religion of their ruler. If you didn’t like your prince’s religion, you had to move somewhere else.
But the problem grew worse as more dissident groups appeared. To the quarrels between Catholics, Calvinists, and Lutherans were added challenges from Anabaptists, Quakers, and Unitarians. These sects had their own passionate defenders, and they helped start many struggles. And so wars broke out again, all advancing religious claims overlaid with imperial, dynastic, and material objectives.
In France, Catholics killed 20,000 Huguenots, 3,000 in Paris alone. When the Peace of Westphalia settled the wars of the sixteenth century in 1648, it reaffirmed the old doctrine of following the religion of your ruler, but added an odd new doctrine that required some liberty of conscience. As C. V. Wedgwood put it, men had begun to grasp “the essential futility of putting the beliefs of the mind to the judgment of the sword.”
In England, people were both exhausted by war and worried about following a ruler’s orders on matters of faith. Oliver Cromwell, the leader of the successful Presbyterian revolt against the king, was a stern believer in his own faith, but he recognized that his beliefs alone would not enable him to govern; he had to have allies of other faiths. He persuaded Parliament to allow liberty “to all who fear God,” provided they did not disturb the peace, and he took steps to readmit Jews into the country and to moderate attacks on the Quakers.
When Cromwell’s era ended and Charles II took the throne, he brought back with him his Anglican faith, and challenged this arrangement. After he died, James II came to the throne and tried to reestablish Roman Catholicism. When William of Orange invaded the country from Holland in 1688, James II fled, and in time William and his wife, Mary, became rulers. Mary, a Protestant, was the daughter of James II, a Catholic. A lot of English people must have wondered how they were supposed to cope with religious choice if a father and daughter in the royal family could not get the matter straight.
The following year, Parliament passed the Toleration Act, allowing dissident Protestant sects to practice their religion. Their members still could not hold government office, but at least they would not be hanged. The Toleration Act did not help Catholics and Unitarians, but as is so often the case in British law, their religious practices, while not protected by formal law, were allowed by administrative discretion.
Even so, the idea of a free conscience did not advance very much; after all, “toleration” meant that a preferred or established religion, out of its own kindness, allowed other religions to exist—but not to do much more. And William’s support for the Toleration Act probably had a lot to do with economic motives. Tolerance, he is supposed to have said, was essential to commercial success: England would acquire traders, including many Jews, from nations that still practiced persecution.
The Toleration Act began a slow process of moderating the political impact of organized religion. Half a century before it was passed, Galileo, tried by the Roman Inquisition for believing that Earth moved around the Sun, was sentenced to house arrest. But less than a century after the law was adopted, Adam Smith wrote a much praised book on morality that scarcely mentioned God, and less than a century after that, Charles Darwin published books that denied God a role in human evolution, a claim that profoundly disturbed his religious critics but neither prevented his books from being wildly popular nor deterred the Royal Society of London from bestowing on him its royal medal.
Mediocrates
11-16-2002, 07:43 AM
Toleration in the American colonies began slowly but accelerated rapidly when our country had to form a nation out of diverse states. The migration of religious sects to America made the colonies a natural breeding ground for religious freedom, but only up to a point. Though Rhode Island under the leadership of Roger Williams had become a religiously free colony, six colonies required their voters to be Protestants, four asked citizens to believe in the divine inspiration of the Bible, one required belief in the Trinity and two in heaven and hell, and five had an officially established church. Massachusetts was a theocracy that punished (and on a few occasions executed) Quakers. Maryland was created as a haven for Catholics, but their freedom began to evaporate as Protestants slowly gained the upper hand.
America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries had many religions and some tolerance for dissenting views, but not until the colonists tried to form a national union did they squarely face the problem of religious freedom. The 13 colonies, in order to become a nation, had to decide how to manage the extraordinary diversity of the country. The colonists did so largely by writing a constitution that was silent on the question of religion, except to ban any “religious test” as a requirement for holding federal office.
When the first Congress adopted the Bill of Rights, it included the odd and much disputed ban on passing a law “respecting an establishment of religion.” The meaning of that phrase is a matter of scholarly speculation. James Madison’s original proposal was that the First Amendment ban “any national religion,” and in their first drafts the House and Senate agreed. But when the two branches of Congress turned over their slightly different language to a conference committee, its members, for reasons that no one has satisfactorily explained, chose to ban Congress from passing a law “respecting” a religion.
The wall between church and state, as Jefferson called it in a letter he wrote many years later, turned out to be controversial and porous, as Philip Hamburger’s masterful new book, The Separation of Church and State, shows. But it did guarantee that in time American politics would largely become a secular matter. And that is the essence of the issue. Politics made it necessary to establish free consciences in America, just as it had in England. This profound change in the relationship between governance and spirituality was greatly helped by John Locke’s writings in England and James Madison’s in America, but I suspect it would have occurred if neither of these men had ever lived.
There is no similar story to be told in the Middle Eastern parts of the Muslim world. With the exception of Turkey (and, for a while, Lebanon), every country there has been ruled either by a radical Islamic sect (as with the Taliban in Afghanistan and the mullahs in Iran) or by an autocrat who uses military power to enforce his authority in a nation that could not separate religion and politics or by a traditional tribal chieftain, for whom the distinction between church and state was meaningless. And the failure to make a theocracy work is evident in the vast popular resistance to the Taliban and the Iranian mullahs.
But where Muslims have had to end colonial rule and build their own nation, national identity has trumped religious uniformity. When the Indonesians threw off Dutch rule and later struggled to end communist influence, they did so in a way that made the creation and maintenance of an Indonesian nation more important than religious or political identity. India, home to more Muslims than much of the Middle East, also relied on nationalism and overcoming British rule to insist on the creation of one nation. Its constitution prohibits discrimination based on religion and promises the free exercise of religious belief.
In the Middle East, nations are either of recent origin or uncertain boundaries. Iraq, once the center of great ancient civilizations, was conquered by the Mongols and the Ottoman Turks, then occupied by the British during the First World War, became a League of Nations protectorate, was convulsed by internal wars with the Kurds, torn apart by military coups, and immersed in a long war with Iran. Syria, a land with often-changing borders, was occupied by an endless series of other powers—the Hittites, Egyptians, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Mongols, Ottoman Turks, and the French. After Syria became a self-governing nation in 1944, it was, like Iraq, preoccupied with a series of military coups, repeated wars with Israel, and then, in 1991, with Iraq. Meanwhile, Lebanon, once part of Syria, became an independent nation, though it later fell again under Syrian domination.
These countries today are about where England was in the eleventh century, lacking much in the way of a clear national history or stable government. To manage religion and freedom, they have yet to acquire regimes in which one set of leaders could be replaced in an orderly fashion with a new set, an accomplishment that in the West required almost a millennium. Though many Middle Eastern countries are divided between two Muslim sects, the Sunni and the Shiites, coping with this diversity has so far been vastly less important than the still-incomplete task of finding some basis for asserting and maintaining national government.
Moreover, the Muslim religion is quite different from Christianity. The Qur’an and the hadith contain a vast collection of sacred laws, which Muslims call shari’a, that regulates many details of the public as well as private lives of believers. It sets down rules governing charity, marriage, orphans, fasting, gambling, vanity, pilgrimages, infidelity, polygamy, incest, divorce, modesty, inheritances, prostitution, alcohol consumption, collecting interest, and female dress.
By contrast, the Christian New Testament has rather few secular rules, and these are best remembered as a reaffirmation of the Ten Commandments as modified by the Sermon on the Mount. One can grasp the whole of Jesus’ moral teachings by recalling only two things: love God, and love your neighbor as yourself.
As Bernard Lewis has pointed out, the differences between the legal teachings of the two religions may have derived from, and were certainly reinforced by, the differences between Muhammad and Jesus. In the seventh century, Muhammad was invited to rule Medina and then, after a failed effort to conquer Mecca, finally entered that city as its ruler. He was not only a prophet but also a soldier, judge, and governor. Jesus, by contrast, was an outsider, who neither conquered nor governed anyone, and who was put to death by Roman rulers. Christianity was not recognized until Emperor Constantine adopted it, but Muhammad, in Lewis’s words, was his own Constantine.
Jesus asked Christians to distinguish between what belonged to God and what belonged to Caesar. Islam made no such distinction; to it, Allah prescribed the rules for all of life, encompassing what we now call the religious and the secular spheres. If a Christian nation fails, we look to its political and economic system for an explanation, but when a Muslim state fails, it is only because, as V. S. Naipaul put it, “men had failed the faith.” Disaster in a Christian nation leads to a search for a new political form; disaster in a Muslim one leads to a reinvigoration of the faith.
Mediocrates
11-16-2002, 07:45 AM
Christianity began as a persecuted sect, became a tolerated deviance, and then joined with political powers to become, for well over a thousand years, an official religion that persecuted its rivals. But when officially recognized religions stood in the way of maintaining successful nations, Christianity slipped back to what it had once been: an important faith without political power. And in these extraordinary changes, little in the religion was altered, because almost none of it imposed secular rules.
Judaism differs from Christianity in that it supplies its followers with a religious doctrine replete with secular rules. In the first five books of the Bible and in the Talmud, many of these rules are set forth as part of a desire, as stated in Exodus, to create “a holy nation” based on a “kingdom of priests.” In the five books of Moses and the Talmud are rules governing slavery, diet, bribery, incest, marriage, hygiene, and crime and punishment. And many of the earliest Jewish leaders, like Muhammad later, were political and military leaders. But as Daniel Pipes has noted, for two millennia Jews had no country to rule and hence no place in which to let religion govern the state. And by the time Israel was created, the secular rules of the Old Testament and the desire to create “a holy nation” had lost their appeal to most Jews; for them, politics had simply become a matter of survival. Jews may once have been attracted to theocracy, but they learned from experience that powerful states were dangerous ones.
Like the Old Testament, the Qur’an is hard to interpret. One can find phrases that urge Muslims to “fight and slay the pagans” and also passages that say there should be “no compulsion in religion.” The Arabic word jihad means “striving in the path of God,” but it can also mean a holy war against infidels and apostates.
Until the rise of modern Islamic fundamentalism, there were efforts by many scholars to modernize the Qur’an by emphasizing its broadest themes more than its narrow rules. Fazlur Rahman, a leading Islamic scholar, sought in the late 1970s and early 1980s to establish a view of the Qur’an based on Muhammad’s teaching that “differences among my community are a source of blessing.” The basic requirement of the Qur’an, Rahman wrote, is the establishment of a social order on a moral foundation that would aim at the realization of egalitarian values. And there is much in the Qur’an to support this view: it constrained the rules permitting polygamy, moderated slavery, banned infanticide, required fair shares for wives and daughters in bequests, and allowed slaves to buy their freedom—all this in the name of the central Islamic rule: command good and forbid evil.
But many traditional Islamic scholars insist that only the shari’a can govern men, even though it is impossible to manage a modern economy and sustain scientific development on the basis of principles set down in the seventh century. Bernard Lewis tells the story of a Muslim, Mirza Abu Talib, who traveled to England in the late eighteenth century. When he visited the House of Commons, he was astonished to discover that it debated and promulgated laws and set the penalties for criminals. He wrote back to his Muslim brethren that the English, not having accepted the divine law, had to make their own.
Of course, Muslim nations do legislate, but in many of them it is done furtively, with jurists describing their decisions as “customs,” “regulations,” or “interpretations.” And in other nations, the legislature is but an amplification of the orders of a military autocrat, whose power, though often defended in religious terms, comes more from the barrel of a gun than from the teachings of the prophet.
All this makes even more remarkable the extraordinary transformation of Turkey from the headquarters of the Ottoman Empire to the place where Muslims are governed by Western law. Mustafa Kemal, now known as Atatürk, came to power after the First World War as a result of his success in helping defeat the British at Gallipoli and attacking other invading forces. For years, he had been sympathetic to the pro-Western views of many friends; when he became leader of the country, he argued that it could not duplicate the success of the West simply by buying Western arms and machines. The nation had to become Western itself.
Over the course of a decade or so, Atatürk proclaimed a new constitution, created a national legislature, abolished the sultan and caliph, required Muslims to pray in Turkish and not Arabic, urged the study of science, created a secular public education system, abolished religious courts, imposed the Latin alphabet, ended the practice of allowing divorce simply at the husband’s request, gave women the vote, adopted the Christian calendar, did away with the University of Istanbul’s theology faculty, created commercial legal codes by copying German and Swiss models, stated that every person was free to choose his own religion, authorized the erection of statues with human likenesses, ended the ban on alcohol (Atatürk liked to drink), converted the mosque of Hagia Sophia into a secular museum, authorized the election of the first Turkish beauty queen, and banned the wearing of the fez.
You may imagine that this last decision was over a trivial matter, but you would be wrong. The fez, the red cap worn by many Turks, conveyed social standing and, because it lacked a brim, made it possible for its wearer to touch the ground with his forehead when saying prayers. Western hats, equipped with brims, made this impossible. When the ban on the fez was announced, riots erupted in many Turkish cities, and some 20 leaders were executed.
Atatürk created the machinery (though not the fact) of democracy and made it clear that he wanted a thoroughly secular state. After his death, real democratic politics began to be practiced, as a result of which some of the anti-Islam laws were modified. Even so, no other Middle Eastern Muslim nation has undergone as dramatic a change. In the rest of the region, autocrats still rule; they deal with religion by either buying it off or allowing it to dominate the spiritual order, provided it keeps its hands off real power.
On occasion, a fundamentalist Islamic regime comes to power, as happened in Iran, Afghanistan, and the Sudan. But these regimes have failed, ousted from Afghanistan by Western military power and declining in Iran and Sudan owing to economic incompetence and cultural rigidity.
The touchstones for Western success in reconciling religion and freedom were nationalism and Christianity, two doctrines that today many sophisticated people either ignore or distrust. But then they did not have to spend four centuries establishing freedom of conscience. We are being optimistic if we think that, absent a unique ruler such as Atatürk and a rare opportunity such as a world war, the Middle East will be able to accomplish this much faster.
Both the West and Islam face major challenges that emerge from their ruling principles. When the West reconciled religion and freedom, it did so by making the individual the focus of society, and the price it has paid has been individualism run rampant, in the form of weak marriages, high rates of crime, and alienated personalities. When Islam kept religion at the expense of freedom, it did so by making the individual subordinate to society, and the price it has paid has been autocratic governments, religious intolerance, and little personal freedom.
I believe that in time Islam will become modern, because without religious freedom, modern government is impossible. I hope that in time the West will reaffirm social contracts, because without them a decent life is impossible. But in the near term, Islam will be on the defensive culturally—which means it will be on the offensive politically. And the West will be on the offensive culturally, which I suspect means it will be on the defensive morally.
If the Middle East is to encounter and not merely resist modernity, it would best if it did this before it runs out of oil.
What an awesome article, Mediocrates! :cool:
ibrodsky
11-17-2002, 08:24 AM
Very interesting article.
I think that the problem is more than just a conflict between Islam and freedom, though. Muslims are taught that Islam provides all of the answers, and that everything in the universe should be viewed through an Islamic lense.
It's really a conflict between Islam, which like other religions claims to provide all of the answers, and human inquiry and reason, which threaten to undermine that claim.
Islam opposes freedom (as zealous followers of other religions often do) because freedom opens the door to questioning, challenging, revising, and rejecting. People who convince themselves they have found the answers to all of life's questions no doubt take great comfort in that belief. Armed with that conviction, they fear nothing -- not even death. But freedom, democracy, tolerance, and separation of church and state are all things that threaten that sense of comfort.
So I think the conflict with freedom is perhaps the greatest symptom of a broader conflict -- a conflict with the search for truth. Because to uncover the truth, you have to be willing to accept what you find, regardless of what it does to accepted beliefs.
This explains why Islamists (followers of militant Islam) are among the world's leading proponents of wacky conspiracy theories, and are today's foremost producers of the Big Lie. Because for them, their understanding of Islam is everything... and the truth is nothing if it doesn't enhance the status of their version of Islam.
abu afak
11-17-2002, 08:29 AM
Ex from Letter to Editor WSJ
""...In 1990, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, I was watching TV with some non-Arab Muslims. When they saw Saddam's tanks roll into Kuwait, they cheered. I'm not easily shocked by the inanities of Muslims (I've seen too much of them in my lifetime), but this was too much even for me. I screamed, "What the hell is wrong with you? He's just invaded a Muslim country and is slaughtering its inhabitants!"
That didn't matter. What mattered was that Big Daddy Saddam, the new Saladin, was sticking it to the Crusaders. And criticisms like mine were fit only for--that's right, quislings.
So: A pseudo-Muslim Arab leader invades an Arab Muslim country, rapes and slaughters its inhabitants, and plunders its wealth. Meanwhile, non-Arab Muslims cheer him on, as though he were Saladin (the Kurd). Of course, after the war, Saddam goes out and annihilates the Muslim population of Kurds....."""
Irfan Khawaja - Princeton, N.J.
PS-Palestinians and alot of the 'Arab Street' were also Cheering
abu afak
12-04-2002, 11:53 AM
""... However, to pretend that Islam has nothing to do with Terrorist Tuesday is to wilfully ignore the obvious and to forever misinterpret events. Without Islam the long-term strategy and individual acts of violence by Usama bin Laden and his followers make little sense. The West needs to understand them in order to be able to deal with them and avoid past mistakes. We are confronted with Islamic terrorists and must take seriously the Islamic component. Westerners in general, and Americans in particular, do not understand the passionate, religious, and anti-western convictions of Islamic terrorists. These God-intoxicated fanatics blindly throw away their lives in return for the Paradise of Seventy Two Virgins offered Muslim martyrs killed in the Holy War against all infidels.
Jihad is “a religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of the Prophet Muhammad [the Prophet]. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Qur’an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam and repelling evil from Muslims”[1].
The world is divided into two spheres, Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. The latter, the Land of Warfare, is a country belonging to infidels which has not been subdued by Islam. The Dar al-Harb becomes the Dar-al Islam, the Land of Islam, upon the promulgation of the edicts of Islam. Thus the totalitarian nature of Islam is nowhere more apparent than in the concept of Jihad, the Holy War, whose ultimate aim is to conquer the entire world and submit it to the one true faith, to the law of Allah. To Islam alone has been granted the truth: there is no possibility of salvation outside it. Muslims must fight and kill in the name of Allah. ..."""
http://www.secularislam.org/articles/wtc.htm
andak01
01-12-2003, 02:42 AM
Can't anyone here get this correct? This is Islam 101.
There is none worthy of worship but Allah (God),
And Muhammad is His slave and messenger.
Abduhu (his slave)
Rasooluhu (his messenger)
We see the word abd in the name Abdul. Abd ul RaHeem, Abd ul Kabiir, Abd ul RaHman... whenever someone is named for one of the names (asmaa) of Allah, the word Abd must accompany it. Otherwise, since these are the names of Allah, it would be like calling that person God. So, if we relegate Muhammad (SAW) the role of a slave, it is clear that we do not worship him. He was a man and we do not say otherwise.
*SAW is short for Sullalahu Allahi Wa salaam (Peace and Blessings be upon him).
andak01
01-12-2003, 02:58 AM
http://www.iranmania.com/news/currentaffairs/images/330demousattacks2.jpg
Thousands of Iranians protesting the death sentence against a history professor. Note the women in hijabs in the background. They are protesting the unjust rulings of the Mullahs, not calling for an end to Islam.
http://www.justsaygo.com/lenscape/dallasrally.html
Thousands of Muslims hold an anti-terrorism demonstration. Where were the TV cameras??? This is what we keep hearing never happened. And this isn't the only example. There were many speeches and articles written by Muslims against terrorism. Yet I still hear that there weren't any. Why???
http://www.justsaygo.com/lenscape/images/dallasrally2.jpg
http://www.justsaygo.com/lenscape/images/dallasrally1.jpg
http://www.justsaygo.com/lenscape/images/dallasrally3.jpg
http://www.matusa.org/home.asp
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.