On this you and I agree bohm
Number of Muslims protesting London terrorist attack = ZERO. Number of Muslims protesting forced Mosque closure in France = HUNDREDS
by kpop 233 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Simon
Does a Christian have to choose between supporting LBGT rights and being a good Christian?
Yes. I applaud people who chose common sense civility over the bigotry from ancient religious books but let's be honest, they are not following those books.
One useful feature of Christianity is the ability to stop Islam. Atheists must consider this. The threat of Islam is real.
No, far from it. Most "christians" are more concerned with freedom of religion (all religion) than the welfare of humankind and so often want to side with Islam and earn virtu-signal bonus points by appearing "inclusive".
I just think it's idiotic. If someone is vowing to kill you and thinks you should be wiped out, I am all for shooting them in their beardy faces first.
Well, the question is not which standards some people use, but which standards we should use.
Wow, so you get to appoint yourself head of all Islam to decide everything? Good for you!
If you bother to educate yourself, you will see that Islam is very, very, very clear on what being "a good muslim" entails. That is one of the problems, it's impossible to re-write or re-interpret as it's so simple:
Kill any non-believers. Rape their women, take as many as you want. Humiliate them. Butcher them. Wage Jihad.
Anyone not doing those things is pretend Muslims, thank god there are plenty of them, but don't pretend that those following the teachings are not real Muslims or the most real.
Here's a question that should be easy for you to answer:
Explain why ISIS are not real Muslims. What is it that they are doing that goes against the teachings?
-
bohm
Simon:
Does a Christian have to choose between supporting LBGT rights and being a good Christian?
Yes. I applaud people who chose common sense civility over the bigotry from ancient religious books but let's be honest, they are not following those books.Well, I agree, you aren't following the simplest interpretation of the bible if you are a Christian and support LGBT rights. But this still does not answer my question: Can a person support LGBT rights and still be a good Christians?
I believe so...
Well, the question is not which standards some people use, but which standards we should use.
Wow, so you get to appoint yourself head of all Islam to decide everything? Good for you!Where did I do that? Can you quote me?
I believe you are the one on this thread who is explaining me what "a good Muslim" is.
If you bother to educate yourself, you will see that Islam is very, very, very clear on what being "a good muslim" entails. That is one of the problems, it's impossible to re-write or re-interpret as it's so simple:
Kill any non-believers. Rape their women, take as many as you want. Humiliate them. Butcher them. Wage Jihad.Well, I have read the Quran so there..
The bible is also clear on the LGBT issue and it takes a lot of gymnastics to get around that. I don't believe that means you can't be a "good christian" and support gay rights.
If you accept that you can't be "a good Muslim" and read the Quran according to a literal, bloodthirsty interpretation according to which someone like Majiid Newaz is a poor Muslim then, well, I disagree with you similar to how I believe you can be a "good jew" without being orthodox...
This idea, that the hard-core muslims are the real muslims, is an important part of ISIS propaganda as well as the idea that a Muslim without veil is not a "real" muslim... I think ISIS is wrong on that too.
-
Nathan Natas
...and if you say they're not peaceful, they'll kill you.
Which leads me to wonder if there is an Arabic word for irony.
-
Simon
They can only be considered a good Christian upto a point because the definition is rather vague and wishy washy and there is a prevalence among other "Christians" not to judge / to be tolerant etc... It's why Christians are far more benign as a whole than Muslims.
Now, tell me why ISIS aren't actually the purest and most impeccable followers of Islam.
When Obama says "we know they don't represent Islam because ..." what is the explanation. Not some made up "blah blah religion of peace blah blah" but actual following of the teachings of the prophet Mohammed and being Muslim.
Point me to "the most Muslim" people on the planet, who are living the dream, walking the walk.
Are Muslims who hack apostates to death good or bad Muslims, given that the teaching is that true Muslims should kill apostates? Explain how doing the opposite to the teachings makes you a good follower of them but following them impeccably, like ISIS do, makes you non-representative and a perverter of the religion.
-
bohm
They can only be considered a good Christian upto a point because the definition is rather vague and wishy washy and their is a prevalence among other "Christians" not to judge / to be tolerant etc... It's why Christians are far more benign as a whole than Muslims.
Well, a very conservative Christian would say that it is exactly the "poor Christians" who are desperately hanging onto the vishy-vashy part and he follows the real teachings of Paul according to which homosexuality is a sin. Does that mean the more liberal Christians are not "good Christians"? I don't think so.
Now, tell me why ISIS aren't actually the purest and most impeccable followers of Islam.
To cut through all of this: To make any such claim you got to assume that there is a particular way we ought to follow Islam. That Ought must follow from some "is"'s about what is written in books, practices, history, etc. etc.
My argument is going to be that I don't think this is a case where you can go from an ought to an is and someone who is making a claim that Muslims "ought" to be some way is claiming to do exactly that -- something I would like to see him do before I accept it.
If we accept there is no way Muslims ought to behave that can be derived from "is"'s about the Quran, I don't think we can say there is a single way to be a "good Muslim" because "good" is classical "ought"-language.
Alternatively, if you believe there is such a thing as a single way to be a "good Muslim", but that is separate from anything a Muslim ought to do, I think a Muslim (or me) can just reject it because it does not have to do with how a Muslim ought to behave, which is surely what we are concerned about.
Where is the error in the above argument?
-
bohm
Point me to "the most Muslim" people on the planet, who are living the dream, walking the walk.
I am not the person who claims to have discovered what it means to be a "good Muslim", or be "the most Muslim"! I am exactly questioning if you or ISIS or anyone else have!
-
Simon
Where is the error in the above argument?
I am not the person who claims to have discovered what it means to be a "good Muslim", or be "the most Muslim"! I am exactly questioning if you or ISIS or anyone else have!
It is a basic principle of Islam that a Muslim should follow the example of the Prophet Mohammad.
I notice you didn't actually come up with any reason why ISIS were not following or were even violating the teachings of Islam. You just waved your arms about and waffled about the meaning of words.
Can you come up with anything at all? Even an attempt?
Or could you just accept it and admit that ISIS is Islam and Islam is ISIS and that is one of the two biggest problems facing mankind right now (and at least with climate change we have the hope of technical solutions).
Because after all, no one has ever offered up and explanation. World leaders and politicians shit the diarrhea that Islam is the religion of peace but they never, ever, try to explain how or why ISIS aren't real followers. What do all the leaders in the Islamic world say? Where are the leaders saying "cut this out, these people are apostates and should be killed"?
Why are you trying to defined this crap? Are you so well conditioned that you feel you have to defend Islam against criticism?
Why?
-
bohm
Simon: I will give examples if you answer my question..
Can we agree that to say someone is a "good Muslim" only if he follows the rules laid out by ISIS (or something very similar), we are making a claim about how that person "ought" to behave and that "ought" must necessarily be derived from some "is"'s about facts of the world (such as the things Muhammed is supposed to have said)
In other words, this is what you claim to be able to do?
Alternatively, is your notion of "a good muslim" unrelated to how a muslim ought to behave?
-
bohm
Why are you trying to defined this crap? Are you so well conditioned that you feel you have to defend Islam against criticism?
Certainly not. I think I extensively laid out my reasons for thinking Islam is not a good religion a few days ago and my thinking has not changed. In fact, I think you told me that some of my reasons for thinking Islam was bad were wrong so if anything my critique of Islam went too far...
I am trying to "define this crap" because I think ISIS/the Saudis, etc. are wrong on this issue as well and I think it is important to point that out. The idea that women can't be Muslim unless they cover their hair or wear garments that cover all of their bodies is IMO helping hardline Islamists. Jews and Christians solved that problem (of hardcore literalism) and I think the solution is worth advertising.
This is not my argument, other reformers of Islam (both current and former Muslims) are pointing this out.