Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5356|London, England
I don't think it's reasonable to compare the reformation and crusades, which happened between 16 and 24 generations ago, with what is happening here today in the 21st century. Christian past violence used to be one of my go-to's when justifying my atheism to christians, but comparing them to islamist extremists isn't at all fair. Evangelical christians are annoying, not dangerous.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3718
For a brief moment I am going to take off my troll hat and put on my historian robe.

As Uzi said, each religion developed in a different context. For Christianity, it arose during a period of Roman occupation of Palestine and after a failed Jewish rebellion where the Jews were punished pretty harshly. Nietzsche's theory on Christianity is that many of its values were created out of resentment for Roman values. The whole master-slave thing went into how Roman values were life affirming and celebratory while Christians cherished meekness. Any way, after the death of Jesus, his apostles spread throughout the Roman empire and preached Christianity. It became popular with the various people who also subjects of Rome. In the bible, it goes into how the early non-Jewish adopters of Christianity weren't interested in Jewish customs like circumcision and not eating pork so it was agreed upon that Christians didn't have to follow Jewish customary law. Christianity spread and eventually and what we know as the bible was compiled and edited for a few hundred years after the death of Jesus.

What does this have to do with Islam being a  violent religion?

Mohammed used Islam to unify the various Arab tribes. At the time of his death, the East Roman Empire, and Persian empire (I am not looking up how to spell their specific names), had just concluded a 30 year long war with each other. Many Arabs returned to Arabia after serving as mercenaries for those empires. The demographics of Arabia combined with the depopulated middle east meant that Arab tribes and armies were going to stomp through the middle east in some form or another to the detriment of Christians, Jews, and others already there.  It was Omar, Mohammad's immediate successor and a former warrior, who started the conquest of non-Arab land.

The Koran was compiled while Mohammad was alive. That is where a lot of Sharia is extrapolated from. But the secondary and much larger group of sources is the hadith which was compiled hundreds of years after the death of Mohammed by scholars working for the Arabian successor empires. A lot of the hadith is sayings and people mentioning seeing things. Most are innocuous like
The Prophet in his fatal illness, called his daughter Fatima and told her a secret because of which she started weeping. Then he called her and told her another secret, and she started laughing. When I asked her about that, she replied, "The Prophet told me that he would die in his fatal illness, and so I wept, but then he secretly told me that from amongst his family, I would be the first to join him, and so I laughed."
So much of what people think Islam is and sharia itself isn't derived directly from Mohammad, the same way a lot of Christian law and ideology didn't come from Jesus.



I will link this to ISIS and modern times a little later today if anyone cares.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Jay wrote:

I don't think it's reasonable to compare the reformation and crusades, which happened between 16 and 24 generations ago, with what is happening here today in the 21st century. Christian past violence used to be one of my go-to's when justifying my atheism to christians, but comparing them to islamist extremists isn't at all fair. Evangelical christians are annoying, not dangerous.
evangelical christians were dangerous though, not so long ago. i hate the idea of universalist history, as if every civilisation is developing on the same timeline. it isn't. the tolerance and open-mindedness of the west has come after 4-5 centuries of pretty much unchallenged supremacy. material prosperity and the ability to turn the entire globe into an imperial/post-imperial sweatshop produce the luxury of patient thinking, who knew? extremism in the middle-east isn't 'the west's fault', per se, as some ultra-liberals would have it. but extremism in general is a bit like drug addiction in poor neighbourhoods: it's a symptom of an underlying malaise. so to say 'oh well, we grew out of that stuff 16 generations ago' is a) factually incorrect and b) portrays a piss poor understanding of the way history unfolds. when islam owned half of the known world, it went through a period of relative stability and peace, too. a period of great scholarship, preserving ancient texts and transmitting knowledge. a renaissance of sorts, in fact. who knew that being a world power leads to these benefits? make u think

this is why i always cross-compare religious violence with all forms of religious violence. because people love to be smug and talk about how we're so much more advanced and sophisticated now. no. we were on top for a few centuries and now we have some wiseguy ideas about tolerance and pluralism (which we only conveniently developed after several hundred years of pretty much mercilessly raping the shit out of everyone else and considering ourselves natural supremacists). the barbarism and the selfishness and the petty greed and envy and hatred are only a few economic downturns away. in fact, europe and the west have become measurably more intolerant and extremist since the recent economic downturn. everyone's little fascist comes out when the times get tough. everyone hates immigrants, refugees, other creeds. this isn't even fucking complicated. it's why i can't stand some smug twat in texas talking about 'muslim barbarians' or americans tut-tutting and saying 'well, you let these savages in'. as if their armchair magnanimity wasn't earned by several decades of international brutality elsewhere, whilst pax americana was busily feathering its nest.

read a book etc.

Last edited by uziq (2015-11-14 10:44:25)

coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6707|England. Stoke

uziq wrote:

read a book etc.
Surely you mean "do a research noob!"?
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5356|London, England

SuperJail Warden wrote:

For a brief moment I am going to take off my troll hat and put on my historian robe.
I read this much and started laughing. No need to eat the rest.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5356|London, England

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

I don't think it's reasonable to compare the reformation and crusades, which happened between 16 and 24 generations ago, with what is happening here today in the 21st century. Christian past violence used to be one of my go-to's when justifying my atheism to christians, but comparing them to islamist extremists isn't at all fair. Evangelical christians are annoying, not dangerous.
evangelical christians were dangerous though, not so long ago. i hate the idea of universalist history, as if every civilisation is developing on the same timeline. it isn't. the tolerance and open-mindedness of the west has come after 4-5 centuries of pretty much unchallenged supremacy. material prosperity and the ability to turn the entire globe into an imperial/post-imperial sweatshop produce the luxury of patient thinking, who knew? extremism in the middle-east isn't 'the west's fault', per se, as some ultra-liberals would have it. but extremism in general is a bit like drug addiction in poor neighbourhoods: it's a symptom of an underlying malaise. so to say 'oh well, we grew out of that stuff 16 generations ago' is a) factually incorrect and b) portrays a piss poor understanding of the way history unfolds. when islam owned half of the known world, it went through a period of relative stability and peace, too. a period of great scholarship, preserving ancient texts and transmitting knowledge. a renaissance of sorts, in fact. who knew that being a world power leads to these benefits? make u think

this is why i always cross-compare religious violence with all forms of religious violence. because people love to be smug and talk about how we're so much more advanced and sophisticated now. no. we were on top for a few centuries and now we have some wiseguy ideas about tolerance and pluralism (which we only conveniently developed after several hundred years of pretty much mercilessly raping the shit out of everyone else and considering ourselves natural supremacists). the barbarism and the selfishness and the petty greed and envy and hatred are only a few economic downturns away. in fact, europe and the west have become measurably more intolerant and extremist since the recent economic downturn. everyone's little fascist comes out when the times get tough. everyone hates immigrants, refugees, other creeds. this isn't even fucking complicated. it's why i can't stand some smug twat in texas talking about 'muslim barbarians' or americans tut-tutting and saying 'well, you let these savages in'. as if their armchair magnanimity wasn't earned by several decades of international brutality elsewhere, whilst pax americana was busily feathering its nest.

read a book etc.
No one is committing acts of terror on behalf of Vishnu, Buddha, or Jesus. Are white Europeans the only christians?    Nope. North America,  South America,  Africa, Pacific Islands... I don't see any of them looking to kill others in the name of their religion. Don't simply be a contrarIan like so many jackass liberals are. There's something deeply flawed with this particular religion that makes its coexistence with the modern world untenable.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3718

Jay wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

For a brief moment I am going to take off my troll hat and put on my historian robe.
I read this much and started laughing. No need to eat the rest.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Dx9JZB0t0Ao/hqdefault.jpg

I fucking love writing long winded history post.

Last edited by SuperJail Warden (2015-11-14 13:07:04)

https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+492|3451
you basically just repeated exactly what i said in my post.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3718
I really elaborated on the Islamic side of it.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3718
Those almost never get reported on in major American media. New York Times might run a small article or the Atlantic have a short piece in passing but you won't see that stuff show up on CNN and it if does, it's a CNN International segment.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+492|3451

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

Jay wrote:

I don't think it's reasonable to compare the reformation and crusades, which happened between 16 and 24 generations ago, with what is happening here today in the 21st century. Christian past violence used to be one of my go-to's when justifying my atheism to christians, but comparing them to islamist extremists isn't at all fair. Evangelical christians are annoying, not dangerous.
evangelical christians were dangerous though, not so long ago. i hate the idea of universalist history, as if every civilisation is developing on the same timeline. it isn't. the tolerance and open-mindedness of the west has come after 4-5 centuries of pretty much unchallenged supremacy. material prosperity and the ability to turn the entire globe into an imperial/post-imperial sweatshop produce the luxury of patient thinking, who knew? extremism in the middle-east isn't 'the west's fault', per se, as some ultra-liberals would have it. but extremism in general is a bit like drug addiction in poor neighbourhoods: it's a symptom of an underlying malaise. so to say 'oh well, we grew out of that stuff 16 generations ago' is a) factually incorrect and b) portrays a piss poor understanding of the way history unfolds. when islam owned half of the known world, it went through a period of relative stability and peace, too. a period of great scholarship, preserving ancient texts and transmitting knowledge. a renaissance of sorts, in fact. who knew that being a world power leads to these benefits? make u think

this is why i always cross-compare religious violence with all forms of religious violence. because people love to be smug and talk about how we're so much more advanced and sophisticated now. no. we were on top for a few centuries and now we have some wiseguy ideas about tolerance and pluralism (which we only conveniently developed after several hundred years of pretty much mercilessly raping the shit out of everyone else and considering ourselves natural supremacists). the barbarism and the selfishness and the petty greed and envy and hatred are only a few economic downturns away. in fact, europe and the west have become measurably more intolerant and extremist since the recent economic downturn. everyone's little fascist comes out when the times get tough. everyone hates immigrants, refugees, other creeds. this isn't even fucking complicated. it's why i can't stand some smug twat in texas talking about 'muslim barbarians' or americans tut-tutting and saying 'well, you let these savages in'. as if their armchair magnanimity wasn't earned by several decades of international brutality elsewhere, whilst pax americana was busily feathering its nest.

read a book etc.
No one is committing acts of terror on behalf of Vishnu, Buddha, or Jesus. Are white Europeans the only christians?    Nope. North America,  South America,  Africa, Pacific Islands... I don't see any of them looking to kill others in the name of their religion. Don't simply be a contrarIan like so many jackass liberals are. There's something deeply flawed with this particular religion that makes its coexistence with the modern world untenable.
i have no words for how fucking stupid and sheltered you are sometimes. you've fought in an international conflict and you think islam is the only religion to ever commit atrocities or inspire killing?

read
a
fucking
book

and not those smug, shitty, economics-for-dummies crap that you pride yourself on chewing like a cow on cud.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3718
There was a drug cartel in Mexico that had Christianity as a major part of their business.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Famili … o_religion

The leader wrote and distributed his own bible. He based it off a American Christian self help author. Made every new recruit read the bible. Everyone had a code of Christian conduct to follow and had to go to church and bible study. His wife ran self help meetings. He paid teachers to teach Christian self help from that American author. He is treated as a saint by locals because he built schools, fixed churches, and did other stuff for the locals. He even sorta rose from the dead. It would all be really cute if his group didn't behead rival cartels and call it "divine justice".

His cartel currently survives as the Knights Templar Cartel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Templar_Cartel

There is probably a lot of crazy Catholic shit going on in South America we don't even hear about.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+492|3451
apparently to half of america, 'having historical knowledge' = 'being a liberal'.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5356|London, England

uziq wrote:

apparently to half of america, 'having historical knowledge' = 'being a liberal'.
You're just severely biased due to your need to be contrarian. Why would you think that getting shot at by Muslims would endear them to me? I've stayed out of these discussions over the years because I know I'm biased, and I really have tried hard to see the best side, but attacks like yesterday make our desire for tolerance seem as misguided as an ancap preaching the NAP as a solution.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6770|PNW

Is this thread title legitimate, or just a rhetorical question used to front a personal rant platform.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6104|eXtreme to the maX

Jay wrote:

Evangelical christians are annoying, not dangerous.
Because they are getting what they want - Israel planted in the ME to bring about the second coming. They aren't directly dangerous to you though - unless you include your brief trip to the sand-box.

Its been shown enough times that when any nutty supremacist cult is denied what they have decided is their due then they go on the rampage, slaughtering anyone they see as threat to them or beneath them or usually both.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, Aryans, Boers, Republicans, Japs, Stalinists, 'Freedom Loving Americans' etc etc etc.

No brand of racial/cultural/religious supremacy is any less dangerous than another.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2015-11-15 01:14:32)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6104|eXtreme to the maX

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Those almost never get reported on in major American media. New York Times might run a small article or the Atlantic have a short piece in passing but you won't see that stuff show up on CNN and it if does, it's a CNN International segment.
Because America has focused all its energy on destroying Islam to assist the Jews.

Boy am I tired of having the world fucked up thanks to the squabbling of millennia-old brain-washing cults.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
globefish23
sophisticated slacker
+334|6322|Graz, Austria

Dilbert_X wrote:

Boy am I tired of having the world fucked up thanks to the squabbling of millennia-old brain-washing cults.
True.
Unfortunately, Skynet has failed us so far and the machines haven't wiped out humanity yet.
jsnipy
...
+3,276|6521|...

Buddhists terrorist, that would be a great skit
uziq
Member
+492|3451

jsnipy wrote:

Buddhists terrorist, that would be a great skit


buddhism has great PR in the west. it's because it has only been dabbled in by rich middle-class liberals who cherrypicked the nice parts of it whilst backpacking around in the hippie era. buddhism is responsible for keeping huge populations of rural peasants in their poverty and place – a lot like the medieval christian church helped to maintain a strictly feudal system. buddhism also has a lot of other weird superstitious quirks, like for instance thinking blind or deaf or lame people are somehow 'cursed', and being outwardly vile towards them in the street. religion of peace.
jsnipy
...
+3,276|6521|...

For some reason i had that tagged with Shinto in my head
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6715

uziq wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

Buddhists terrorist, that would be a great skit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMWSGwtZslo

buddhism has great PR in the west. it's because it has only been dabbled in by rich middle-class liberals who cherrypicked the nice parts of it whilst backpacking around in the hippie era. buddhism is responsible for keeping huge populations of rural peasants in their poverty and place – a lot like the medieval christian church helped to maintain a strictly feudal system. buddhism also has a lot of other weird superstitious quirks, like for instance thinking blind or deaf or lame people are somehow 'cursed', and being outwardly vile towards them in the street. religion of peace.
Fucking right. Buddhism is fucking weird. They believe every life should be dear (my Buddhist boss wouldn't even kill ants or bugs) but believe the death penalty is A-ok.

"However, although "severe punishments in chaotic time (亂世用重典)" do not necessarily have effects in stopping crimes, abolishing capital punishment is not valid according to the laws of karma and vipāka in Buddhism, because "a karma as such induces a vipāka as such (如是因,招感如是果)"; having committed a karma without experiencing the vipāka is not compatible with reason. Hence, we can wish to reduce the capital punishment, not to recur to the capital punishment, to substitute the capital punishment by other measures, but we do not claim for the abolishment of the capital punishment."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_p … _attitudes

Buddhism is a shit fucking religion. In Taiwan they RARELY do anything charitable to help the poor especially in comparison to christian organizations. I guess it's the whole 'reincarnation' shit that if you live a shit life you probably were a shit person in your previous life and got down graded. They have massive fuck off temples buying massive fuck off statutes, incense pots, art etc yet they do nothing to help anyone.

My family makes buddhist pots, statues, furniture and shit mostly for temples and retailers.

https://scontent.fmel1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/230174_102134726544056_1209992_n.jpg?oh=120eb4c79da717929d6abac7903f4e39&oe=56EBA9AF

That big piece in the middle, around 3,000 USD. That's not even our most expensive product. Buddhist monks come in our factory and order the most expensive shit. Living frugal and humble my fucking arse. A lot of the temples are used as money laundering operations for the gangs in Taiwan.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+635|3718
Jihadists commit terrorist attacks in western countries in order to provoke a response and have them seriously hurt Muslims in those places and abroad. The idea is that the response will cause more Muslims to join out of anger and cause a clash of civilizations type conflict between Islam and the west. Thereby every Muslim will be forced to make a choice between joining the Islamist or dying.

Every Muslim living in a western country should be treated with the same kindness and respect that is given to native citizens and other immigrant groups. But we need to take a look at the intelligence of continuing our current immigration patterns from MENA countries.

In the meantime, our countries need to take extra steps to integrate and westernize our Muslim population and other groups too. After school classes should be required for recent immigrants that will introduce them to past western popular culture so that they have some degree of commanlity with native populations especially older ones. We can have fairs and festivals with the specific goal of introducing them to westerners who are happy to befriend them and introduce them to cultural aspects that they could adopt or aspire to that they wouldn't have contact with in their ethnic ghettos. I am sure there are other things that multiculturalist would find problematic and racist that could be done to westernize these people in a gentle and benevolent way. I would even be comfortable with the government providing avenues for Christian groups to convert and recruit them into their churches. The correct Christians though. No Mormons.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
globefish23
sophisticated slacker
+334|6322|Graz, Austria

SuperJail Warden wrote:

The correct Christians though.
White Anglo-Saxon Protestants only, huh?

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard