Welcome to the world of 'peaceful' Islam

by Shining One 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Carmel

shiny, do you have any idea how much Islamic scholars and scientists contributed to our western "civilization"?
carmel
Abaddon

Rex
Why to go at missing the point.
1/ No matter WHAT the texts of the Christian faith and Islamic faith say, the followers of BOTH religions have behaved in disgraceful, inhuman fashions at various points.
Is this true or false?
**True, but with a caveat: all followers includes those who have no idea that their faith teaches**
Agreed. That would include Muslims "brain-washed" by Immanas who preach a version of Islam repudiated by the majority of Muslims. That would include American Christians sending money to support Christian terrorists in Northern Ireland.
2/ In 1000AD Islam made Christendom look backward and brutal.
Is this true or false?
**false dilemma, this does not have a true or false answer, there are too many variables**
Oh BE HONEST! In the Christian world Jews had a very uncertain existence, as did Muslims. Death, dispossesion, torture and forced conversion were all common.
In the Muslim world Jewish and Christian residents were accepted as people of the book, with rights albeit less than those of Muslims.
In the Christian world superstition ruled over all, whereas the Islamic world kept the brilliance of the Greeks and Romans alive and even extended upon it, as well as developing concepts that arose in the Indian sub-continent.
3/ Now "Christendom" makes parts of Islam look backward and brutal.
Is this true or false?
**Obviously true**
And you say you are not a bigot???!!! Ha! You are so reluctant to criticise co-religionists in the past (ya know, inquisitors, witch burners, lovely bunch of people) you prevaricate and dissemble; "too many variables". If you used the same standards to answer this and the previous question your answer would be the same to both.
Anyway, thus far we are mostly in agreement, and I feel you prevarication on 2/ compared to your eager condemnation in 3/ is pretty transparent to most people.
4/ Yet 200 years ago Christians and the various religions they were members of typically would have been in favour of things we would find totally unacceptable given concepts like human rights.
Is this true or false?
**Alleged (claimed) followers of Christ would, just as there were those who would not.**
Again, evasive and illuminatingly so. You repudiate some people as Christians, or as behaving as Christians should. Just like the majority of the billions of Muslims on this planet repudiate some people as Muslims or as behaving as Muslims should. If you are not a bigot why do you give yourself the right to exclude some claimed Christians, but obviously do not give Muslims the right to exclude some who claims to be a Muslim?
Thus far mostly in agreement apart from the questions where you apply a clear double standard.
5/ You can claim the content is different, go ahead. But can't support with evidence any claim the behviour of the two religions is significantly different if one views the history of each religion over the past 1,000 years.
**Content is different: there are an infinestimal amount of Christians that are terrorists.
Just like there are an infinestesimal amount of Muslims who are terrorists. But I already said you can claim content is different, it's not the point.
Terrorism is often an institution of a culture that is warped by the teachings of caravan robber who revenged himself of the Jews and Christians that did not accept his assertion that he was a prophet. He told a lie so big that he made Hitler look like a 'piker'.
Bigot. I really don't have anything else to say to your hate of an entire religious group, apart from the fact it's amusing you mention Hitler whilst spounding like an anti-semite. Very very sad, but amusing. You also don't answer the actual question; is the behaviour of the two religions significantly different if one views the history of each religion over the past 1,000 years. Now, did you not answer the question cause you got stuck into being bigotted? Or because saying "Yes" (the answer supported by facts) is too traumatic for you?
**You obviously accept my point. My focus is on the immediate followers of Christ who were ‘closest to the vine’ and being martyred for upwards of four centuries by the most brutal empire to have come along.
Accept your point? No, I don't, and anyone reading this would be surprised at your suggestion. You are so eager to attack Islam and 'the immediate followers of Mohammed' it makes you foolish enough to forget Jesus was betrayed by Judas. Talk about self-deception.
This puts you in an embaressing situation. You claim the Bible is, shall we say, a less brutal biook than the Qu'ran?
**I claimed the New Testament is. The Old Testament in content also shows the wrath of God often being carried out by world powers. The Quran is a book that mistranslates the Old Testament and applies Arabian Kingdom law to a cultish religion. It is a large version of the WBTS.**
So you don't accept the OT as god's word? Or you merely find it too difficult to reconsile the OT god with the NT god and therefore have to apply a double standard, whereby you criticise the Qu'ran for content but use special pleading to justify equally objectionable parts of the Bible's content.
Yet despite this it's followers have been just as brutal as the followers of the Qu'ran!
**The followers may or may not have been Christians and we might judge this by their actions though we do not know their hearts. With the Roman Apostacy there was practically NO way for a Christian to know he was being misled.**
Ah.... so it is okay for Christians to do bad things because they are mislead by Satin the Dubble, but if Muslims do bad things and are mislead again you apply a different set of rules? How biased is that!!!???
What does that say about the average Christian and Muslim over the past thousand years? It seems, according to what you say, that Christians have frequently been less peaceable than their text would allow, and the average Muslim has been more peaceful than their source text would ask for, if your claims about the relative content are accepted as true.
**We fall upon the same general assumption that is an erroneous one at that. People are judged by their actions according to what THEY SAY they believe.
People are judged as being hypocrites due to the contrast of action with belief, or when they use a double standard to reach a conclusion. People's 'goodness' is judged by their ACTIONS.
We have an inherent nature and inclination to sin and guess what? Believers are afforded the full attention of the Evil One because those who are not are already perishing (until a Christian is led to witness to them and the person is saved.). The average Muslim is peaceful because he is not in a position to win by force. As long as he is opposed by a force that keeps him in check he is held to account by fear of the sword. Look at the deafening silence from the world's Islamic leaders when terrorism strikes, then look at the Hitlerian goals of the Arabs!
You are off your bloody rocker! You ASSUME (if I can make out that jumbled sentence) that Christians have a hard job of it as they are persecuted by Satan. I suppose Satan kept all the Christians in Germany quiet whilst train load after train load after train load of Jews arttled through the night to their deaths? AGAIN, a massive double standard. "Brain-washed" citizens of a totalitarian and brutal society keep silent as an attrocity is carried out. If they are Christian you exlcude the behaviour from consideration or excuse it. If a Muslim does it you condemn them.
Shock news; Muslims are frequently nicer than their beliefs require them to be but Christians often fall short of the basic requirements of their faith!
**Ah, there you go spouting an assertion that may or may not be true. Christians are held to a higher standard. You still do not account for the fact that a Christian generally behaves like a Christ-follower and not as one who does not know Christ!**
You say "a Christian generally behaves like a Christ-follower and not as one who does not know Christ", I say "there you go spouting an assertion that may or may not be true.". See your double standard yet?
It's the same Bible, the one you describe as the 'text of Christianity'. The same God I assume? Did he go on an anger management course, or what?
**Not knowing theology, I assume you do not know of ‘dispensationalism’ or ‘progressive revelation?**
Knowing ethics, hell, just me being a human being I find bullshit pushed around to try and justify god commanding wholesale slaughter of everyone apart from girls of about 14 and downwards (who instead got to be raped by the men who slaughtered their parents) really, really objectionable.
If you will criticise what you see as offensive/immoral content in the Qu'ran, I think you'd best accept criticism from others about offensive/immoral content in the Bible.
**God does not need me to apologize for Him, I offer you only a reasonable explanation as ‘apologia’.
I agree god should not need anyone to aplogise for him. The very fact one has to be an apologist is due to the lack of absolute determinability on many questions of your (or any) faith.
You see the lack of determinability, and think "I must enter into apologetics as I ASSUME I am right and need to show I am even though I cannot do so in an absolute fashion".
Others see the lack determinability and think "well, how likely is that the claims of the 'true' religion are not easily demonstrable if it IS the 'true' religion"? If the claims are not demonstrable, isn't that more likely to mean they are just empty claims, and no amount of 'clever' apologetics is going to chnage that?
You fail to see that the Jews do not practice the Old Testament standards. Even they recognize that the era has passed. God's wrath is a terrible thing, it is also His right and nowhere does the Lord of Glory, the risen one, call us to convert others by force. He alone has province over judgement.**
Despite this Christianity has frequently been pushed on others by force. Which, again, underlines my whole POINT.
Read the history of the two religions in the immediate times after the death of the spiritual leaders in question.
And? For Christ's sake man; 6/ Jesus was betrayed by one of the Apostles!
Is this true or false?
**First of all, do not slander the name of Jesus. You don't need to stoop to that! Your question may be true, in fulfillment of scripture. Now compare that to the bloodbath of the caravan robber’s cohorts. You cannot be this ignorant of history, can you now? Comparison denotes the stark contrast between cultish behavior and honest persuasion.**
You are insanely hypocritical; you slander another religion's founder in a way an adherent would find offensive yet expect special treatment for your religion. Double standards, AGAIN.
**NO, my ENTIRE POINT IS PROVED as I have refuted you in the above answers!**
No, you either agree with me or display double standards or hypocracy in answering the questions when you don't want to agree with me, as I have illusrated above.
That’s enough for now. I need to get off the ‘merry go round’ for awhile but its been fun.
Ya sure? Sure that there aren't a few neurons back there going "hang on a minute... WHY do I have to have such a massive double standard to defend my beliefs?"
Take care Rex
Shining One

Hi Abaddon,
There is no 'double standard' in my beliefs. I simply try to judge each action/result by the variables that are involved. You cannot see that the teachings that are espoused by the leaders of the religions are the main influence over the culture. You have that backwards.
Can the culture affect the religion as well? Of course it can, but only when the secular teachings overwhelm the religious due to how well each is promoted. Islam has ruled the cultures of the Islamic countries for hundreds of years. If the European crusaders had not turned back Islam in France, then driven them from Spain we would have much more Islamic influence and it would be just as brutal as it is now.
They conquer and subjugate: they have always done so and will keep doing so until we can influence and assist the people into deposing their captors. This has begun in the middle east with the advent of some elected governments. People are already seeing that it is possible to have a voice in their own countries. Did you see how many voted in Iraq despite the threats of death to any and all?
Don't compare the apples and oranges of Ireland with the warfare we see in the middle east. Its just not the same nor, is it of the same degree. As long as you libs make excuses for terrorists and lump Christianity in with a cults that coerce people into obedience and 'conversion' you are 'cutting your own throats'. You had better believe that wherever Islam takes hold and is in the majority that conformity is not far away.
You've no such threat from the Christian right. If the libs would have left marriage alone and supported the war effort (instead of turning traitor for political gain), the hated George W might not have gotten re-elected. Now that is not a comfortable thought to me! LOL
The most conservative, evangelical church in America, the Southern Baptists, have a strong belief in keeping religion out of government and vice versa. They know from church history just how power corrupts and from the example of the Holy Roman empire we see the results. The real changes in that began to develop when the printing presses started turning out Bibles for all to read. This was spurred on by tranlators who often went to their deaths later. When people read the Bible and understand it as a complete revelation they rebel against those who have misled them. This is much like what is happening to the JWs with the internet!
The internet is a threat to all of the despots and thugs, including the liberals who are trying to make everyone conform to their socialist ideas through 'political correctness'. Forums like this would not exist in that world. Sharia law would dominate and the first ones to go will be the secularists. Your notions are a lot more theatening to Islam than they will ever be to my faith.
Rex
tetrapod.sapien
Enigma One

Shining One you are a nasty little one aren't you? Can you spell A.N.G.R.Y. with me? Sheesh!
Enigma One

double post sorry
Abaddon

gumby
Jesus Christ Rex......this statement has got to be the worst out of your mouth.

Yeah gumbster, I can see it, you can see it, I think a lot can... but Rex doesn't or perhaps won't/can't see it. Sad, eh? A big fat double standard; he whacks the Qu'ran for being violent and beastly but sticks his head in a bucket and ignores the Bible can be just as violent and beastly.
He says what he likes about the founder of other faiths, and then whines when people treat the founder of his faith the same way. Not that he has a double standard or anything...
nate
The problem isn't so much with the Quaran (though it is violent and problematic),
Like the Bible
but with the Hadith.
Just as various churches doctrines have been a problem...
The Hadith is regarded as just as sacred as the Quaran,
Just like the pronouncements of various Christian denominations
and it commands Jihad against all 'infidels' and so many anti-social activities I'm too lazy to type them all.
Yeah, well, the Crusades, the conquest of South America... the accusations can neatly and accurately be shown to apply to both
When I was a minister in the Detroit area I became acquainted with a lot of Muslims in Dearborn, which is just outside Detroit. Educated modern people for the most part, the fire of Jihad still ran hot in their veins.
Do you mean Muslims as in 'born and bred' or Muslims as in 'Golly Gee, Islam seems to take my racial denomination more seriously than Christianity so I think it is the true faith' Muslims? Having grown up in a true multi-cultural society (and a black American who has become a Muslim is definately not suddenly from a different culture, anymore than a white American who becomes Muslim is definately not suddenly from a different culture), my experience of Muslims is vastly different.
It is not a peaceful lovey-dovey religion, except for the possible exception of the Sufi.
Yeah, well there's fluffy Christians as well...
Rex
here is no 'double standard' in my beliefs.
Of course not darling...
I simply try to judge each action/result by the variables that are involved.
Yeah, if you say so...
You cannot see that the teachings that are espoused by the leaders of the religions are the main influence over the culture. You have that backwards.
Which is why cultures express religion differently over time, sometimes in total contrast to what is espoused by the leaders of the religion... which is a/ true and b/ proves you wrong, even if you 'ostrich' the issue...
Can the culture affect the religion as well? Of course it can, but only when the secular teachings overwhelm the religious due to how well each is promoted.
Ah, now here you hit the nail on the head as regards why Christianity has changed so much in the past two hundred years... education and culture reached a point where supersticious nonsence was disregarded and Christianity was redefined... it must suck each time you try to prove your point you prove mine...
Islam has ruled the cultures of the Islamic countries for hundreds of years. If the European crusaders had not turned back Islam in France, then driven them from Spain we would have much more Islamic influence and it would be just as brutal as it is now.
No way of knowing. The only thing that stops Christianity being the brutal, oppresive, misogynistic religion it once was is two hundred years plus of steady erosion by secularism and science. As Islam is subjected to the same influences it will change too. If Islam had conquered Europe maybe the secularisation that changed the practise of Christianity would have similarly affected Islam already?
They conquer and subjugate:
Oh yes!! You are so right about those Christians... oh, hang on a minute... you mean Muslims and are *sigh* once again ignoring all the conquering and subjecting Christians have done. Not that you're biased in anyway, LOL
they have always done so and will keep doing so until we can influence and assist the people into deposing their captors. This has begun in the middle east with the advent of some elected governments.
Oh, you mean secularism. You're agreeing with me again!!!
People are already seeing that it is possible to have a voice in their own countries. Did you see how many voted in Iraq despite the threats of death to any and all?
Don't compare the apples and oranges of Ireland
No of course not. No way we could expose your big fat double standard for what it is *snore*
with the warfare we see in the middle east. Its just not the same nor, is it of the same degree.
Oh, I am sure if the American Christians who funded the Irish Christian terrorists had supplied more money even more men, women and children would have died... which again, you ignore... and you also ignore if you just swapped the situation you would have Christian suicide bombers in Palestine and decades of ineffectual waffling by an Islam dominated Western world.
As long as you libs make excuses for terrorists and lump Christianity in with a cults that coerce people into obedience and 'conversion'
Don't be silly. For the majority of its history Christianity HAS "coerce[d] people into obedience and 'conversion'". As long as you Conservative bigots (nasty word but check the dictionary, it is a definiton not an insult) ignore reality "you are 'cutting your own throats'."
You had better believe that wherever Islam takes hold and is in the majority that conformity is not far away.
Lordy, change the Islam for Zionism and you'd sound just like an anti-Semite...
You've no such threat from the Christian right.
No, only the imposition of the standards of bronze-age goatherds on people who don't believe in a supernatural carpenter... curtailment of reproductive rights (I notice you've not taken up the challange I issued you to debate if abortion is specifically outlawed in the Bible, probably because you realise it ISN'T), restrictions on who may love whom and how even if they harm no one else by doing so, the impostion of a science curriculum based upon fairy stories... nothing to fear from the Christian right what-so-ever...
If the libs would have left marriage alone
Silly man. Most of those 'liberals' WERE Christian, it's just you consider YOUR definiton of Chritianity better than anyone elses despite the fact you cannot demonstrate it is better (as in more accurate).
and supported the war effort (instead of turning traitor for political gain), the hated George W might not have gotten re-elected. Now that is not a comfortable thought to me! LOL
What, the war bulit on lies? Do YOU, a Christian, support an administration that has been proven to have lied to the Ameerican public so as to sway public opinion in favour of war???
The most conservative, evangelical church in America, the Southern Baptists, have a strong belief in keeping religion out of government and vice versa.
Oh, they did. Try updating your version of reality. Before Reagan got in many DIDN'T vote. Look at the truely unholy alliance conservative Christians have since formed with neo-cons...
They know from church history just how power corrupts and from the example of the Holy Roman empire we see the results.
Which is why so many vote Republican?
The real changes in that began to develop when the printing presses started turning out Bibles for all to read.
Yup... and began to see it wasn't god's word!
This was spurred on by tranlators who often went to their deaths later. When people read the Bible and understand it as a complete revelation they rebel against those who have misled them. This is much like what is happening to the JWs with the internet!
Oh, I think that most religions will have a lot of problems due to the freedom and ease of access to contrary views on the internet...
The internet is a threat to all of the despots and thugs, including the
conservatives
who are trying to make everyone conform to their
conservative
(and please don;t use the word 'socialist' again until you can answer what are the differences between the socialism of the former Soviet block and that of most European countries... what, you DON'T know the difference?.. figures... )
ideas through 'political correctness'.
What have you got to fear from human rights and mutual respect...?
Forums like this would not exist in that world.
Christian
law would dominate and the first ones to go will be the secularists.
Your notions are a lot more theatening to Islam than they will ever be to my faith.
Your faith so far has been superbly demonstrated by YOU to not be capable of defending itself... AGAIN...
.... not that this comment applies to Christians willing to see god as he might be, rather than as they'd like him to be...
Shining One

Hi Abaddon,
You apparently have a limitless desire to run the merry go round in circles, continuously reaching the opposite conclusions as I espouse. I have explained myself thoroughly in refutaion of your notions. You obviously will never acknowledge the validity of my arguments, nor the evidence in front of you. Like any true propagandist or political philosopher, you stand by your cherished ideas regardless of how they are exposed to be improbable. WE stand in opposition but you are not my enemy. My enemy is behind the lies that have infested our culture and every culture since the fall of man. I see no way that my arguing with you will edify you or I.
Rex
Shining One

HI Tetly,
Do you know the difference between apples and oranges. You must not because you keep making invalid comparisons. What do you call that when you change the facts to make the opponent's position weaker, a straw man argument?
How many thousands of years ago was that judgment from God carried out? What does it have to do with today's world and the teachings of Jesus since His advent freed us from the law and our own sin? Islamic terror goes on daily as it has for the last few years. Are they as afraid of democracy as you are of theocracy? You want no accountability and you also want no definition of evil.
I call it evil when people like you pounce on JWs (who are coming out of a false religion) trying to destroy what faith they have left. That's one reason that I stay here, to keep this bunch accountable and point out that hope springs eternal.
Rex
Abaddon

Rex
I have explained myself thoroughly in refutaion of your notions.
I am glad for your sanity that you appear convinced of this. This is not the same as it being true.
You obviously will never acknowledge the validity of my arguments, nor the evidence in front of you.
More like you consistantly fail to prove your point and (most amusingly) keep on saying things that prove my point... ignore it all you like, I am sure you can type hard enough to drown out reason and decency.
Like any true propagandist or political philosopher, you stand by your cherished ideas regardless of how they are exposed to be improbable.
I didn't know you mwere a proctologist... it's the only explaianation...
WE stand in opposition but you are not my enemy.
WE? Get over yourself and your conceit. You are not my enemy; you have no defensable argument, you're more to be pitied than feared.
My enemy is behind the lies that have infested our culture and every culture since the fall of man.
Religion? Finally we agree on something!!!
I see no way that my arguing with you will edify you or I.
No, and that my friend is the saddest thing. You really can't see it, can you? However, as long as having a decent arguement is seen as different and better than the ability to press 'RETURN', you're an empty vessel... one that still hasn't even deigned to answer questions regarding how they have demonstrably fallen short of Christian standards whilst proclaiming the whole world wrong and themselves right. Fortunately your cult of opinon has very few takers nowadays. Thank god for the internet...

Welcome to the world of 'peaceful' Islam

Share this