BF2S Forums religions of violence

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

I don't single any out for a particular hate either, I will hate ANY religion that teaches violence as a resolution, teaches violence to conquer the minds and force non-believers into submission, also add that hatred to any religion whose violent action is done in its name against my country as it is taught.

That's where you're wrong because Mohammed specifically preaches peace and tolerance to others at various points of the Quran. As such the only way one could take Islam and use it for violent purposes was if you were to selectively interpret the Quran in a particular manner, ignoring these sections. It would have to be the work of the individual.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Muhammad teaches peace and tolerance to those woh convert or succumb to Islam as superior, there is a difference. Also his actions during his life would suggest he does not believe what you say he preached.

No he doesn't he offers it to 'People of the Book' too, without need for conversion. You can pretend he doesn't if you want, but he does, it's there in black and fucking white. Again, interpretation comes into play, your selective interpretation in this case. Man, you're entrenched and reality-averse.

"Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve."

"And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit."

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

You really wanna get into a quoting contest now?

explained here   

"Muslim apologists in the West present the kinder verses of the Quran or what is known as the Early Revelation. While Islamic scholars, when have only Muslims as their audience, say that those softer verses of the Quran were abrogated and supplanted by harsher ones. The reason given is, as Al Maudoody puts it, "Mohammad became strong enough to move from the stage of weakness to the stage of Jihad"."

taken from http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/113386

Afraid not lowing. I own a copy of the Quran and know that it is not in chronological order. The only way anyone can say anything supplants anything else is through their own choice. Their own interpretation. This mans comments don't stand the most cursory of tests when we look at the 99% of Imams who don't emphasise any adversial suras.

Like I said, time and time again, INTERPRETATION. Bury your head in the sand or in the opinion of a man who has on occasion been described as having an "obsessive hatred of all things Muslim" (sounds like someone I know) if you want. A man who "confuses scholarship with propaganda" and "pursues petty vendettas with scant regard for objectivity." Read the Quran, ask your local Imam what he thinks and then come back to the land of reality.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Wow you own a copy of the Quran, was it a gift from Al Jeezera for your guest spot? I own a copy of the bible, does that all of a sudden make me an authority as apparently your ownership of the Quran seems to make you?

It wasn't actually. I also own a bible and several hundred other books including Buddhist sciptures and some Hindu epics. I'm not expert on any of them. At least I actually know something about them however i.e., that is more than nothing. Like how certain suras don't supplant others - that all words in the Quran are rather ridiculously meant to be the actual words of God as related through Muhammed.

lowing wrote:

Lets face it Cam, you will forgive everything negative regarding Islam while dismissing the actions it invokes. I am in a world of reality, and I see what happened and is happening in the name of furthering Islam's foothold on the world.

No I won't. I won't forgive those Muslims that take a violent interpretation of Islam, not for one microsecond. Not for one nanosecond. Keep digging your lonely little reality vacuum hole in the ground, I on the other hand will head off to Egypt to check out the pyramids, temples, mosques and Coptic cathedrals with no obsessive complexes or paranoid delusions just like the millions of other tourists who do likewise every year.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

1. yeah and his personality has been well documented in the Koran so you know what I am talking about, when I mention his killing of over 600 people and his child molestation, and various other things, good to see.

Lots of that shit in the Old Testament too, ye know - Christian canon. But like I said, it's all down to interpretation and selectivity.

lowing wrote:

2. Actually Cam i am not alone, as proven in the Neitherlands recently when they kicked out a women for just wearing a 'burkini" ( spelling). Westerners are sick of this religion and what it represents.

Go have fun, I am sure these people took some great pictures and can't wait until their next trip there.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7629171.stm

Erm, what has your link got to do with Islam? The likelihood of me getting caught up with criminal activity is statistically slim. I would be more likely to be kidnapped on a holiday to Colombia. And yes you are not alone - there are other people with the same irrational fear as you too.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

1. but the messenger Christ is not among it is he? Not in the OT or in the NT.

Irrelevant in the context of my arguments of how religions are practiced on the basis of how religious doctrine is interpreted. In reality, Christianity does not start and end with Christ, hence the fact the bible contains the Old Testament and numerous other books written long after him.

lowing wrote:

2. Can't really agree that we are all crazy and you are the enlightened one, given all that happens all around us.

Well you're in the minority so it isn't exactly me versus the world. Even taking this forum as a rough unscientific international cross-section yardstick you're in a very distinct minority.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Not irrlelevent considering my argument regarding Islam and Christianity are the 2 messengers of each faith, their lives and their actions during their lives. and no Christianity did not start before Christ. sorry.

That's not what I'm arguing. Hence the irrelevance. And the faith commonly known as Christianity regards the Old Testament, what preceded Christ, as canon - the word of God.

lowing wrote:

Yeah a forum made up of apologist socialist Europeans, I am quite sure I am in the minority, something I can live with.

Isn't Obama in power in the US with a Dem landslide in Congress and Senate - oh yeah, you're in the minority alright....

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

It is what I was arguing and the very point in which you chimed into this thread. The fact that Christianity recognizes the OT does little to prove that the Ot is the BASE of Christianity over the life death and resurrection of Christ.


Yup, I can also live with that knowledge as well.

I don't find your argument terribly relevant, hence the angle/argument I was pushing. Yours was a semantic argument designed in such a way that you could characterise people on the basis of exaggerated and incorrect generalisations.

And lowing go talk to a fucking priest, I suffered enough in school and at mass to know that Christianity and Christian churches regard the whole shebang as the word of God. Or did I just imagine the Pope condemning homosexuality....

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

So you had Christianity before you had Christ. got it.

Already acknowledged that Christians recognize the OT Cam, it however is not the basis on which Christianity was founded. You kinda need a Christ for that.

An irrelevance. The only thing that matters is how Christianity is practiced. Christianity is a product of the treaty of Nicaea - not of Christ, whose true teachings are probably largely lost in the mists of time. Your own narrow view of what Christianity actually amounts to does not mesh with established Christian churches the length and breadth of the world. You're plugging an irrelevant point over and over.

lowing wrote:

So you go talk to him and see how far Christianity would have gone with Christ, I am curious to see what his answer will be.

I don't know, he's probably busy fucking little boys up the rectum.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

1. irrelevant only to you and those who need to dismiss anything that puts Christianity in a favorable light over Islam.

No it's not. The only thing that is relevant are peoples actions and how they affect others. And like I said, that's entirely dependent on their interpretation of contradictory nonsense in dusty old books.

lowing wrote:

You want to dismiss the teachings of Christ over Muhammad as irrelevant? You're nuts!! Sorry Cam I am not going to let you do that when comparing these 2 religions and the actions committed in the name of both of them..

I dismissed what now? Over who now? There is very little actual historical information on Jesus. The book 'Jesus' by A.N. Wilson attempts to piece together the facts from the accounts of contemporary historians and other sources. It would seem likely that Jesus was an ascetic who adhered to and co-led an extremely strict Jewish sect with his brother James at Qumran in the western desert of Judaea and came to purge the Judaism of the big cities, like Jerusalem (throwing out the moneylenders from the temple, etc.), of all its waywardness and debauchery. In so doing he incurred the wrath of the imperial overlords of the time and of the head honchos of Judaism in Jerusalem (the Pharisees) who were content on their little power trip and complicit with the Romans. Jesus was hailed as a freedom fighter and the Romans made an example of him. A lot of hist story was back-engineered but that's what probably actually happened. What was written in books and what was decided at the council of Nicaea was probably a vague glamorised impression of the reality, especially given the amount of time that had passed.

The only thing Jesus (or possibly his biographers) contributed over and above the Ten Commandments was the concept of forgiveness.

Are you telling me you think Jesus walked on water, turned water into wine and cured leprosy? Because I don't think that Muhammed flew to heaven on a golden horse ftr...

lowing wrote:

Nope I don't, I am telling you what is written and believed and is worshipped by his faithful. What he actually did is what is not relevant. what he is believed to have done is what is relevant. What Muhammad is believed to have done is what is relevant. Problem here is, the molester really was a murderer.

Jesus wrote:

3:10/11/12 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.  ... he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: The appearance of Christ to the people
Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

5:29/30  And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

10:33/34/35/36/37  But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. A man's foes shall be they of his own household." For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2009-08-17 11:48:53)

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

Nope I don't, I am telling you what is written and believed and is worshipped by his faithful. What he actually did is what is not relevant. what he is believed to have done is what is relevant. What Muhammad is believed to have done is what is relevant. Problem here is, the molester really was a murderer.

You seem to forget that Jesus probably had a wife aged 13 and that his own mother probably gave birth to him shortly after commencement of menstruation. You tend to focus only on Muhammed. The only relevant thing, as I have always stated, is how you interpret the teachings of any religious figure and how selectively you do that.  What book are the following quotes taken from?

Jesus wrote:

3:10/11/12 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.  ... he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: The appearance of Christ to the people
Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

5:29/30  And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

10:33/34/35/36/37  But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. A man's foes shall be they of his own household." For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

If I were a Christian I'd be setting up an Inquisition on the basis of this lot, to purge out all those nasty heretics (depending on how I choose to interpret it of course). Aw shucks I just trounced your peaceful hippy image of the bearded one. It's amazing what you can find in these dusty old books. You can dredge all sorts of shit up and given that it is presented in parable form you can take whatever meaning you want from it. So forgive me while I kill my brother for not following Jesus' teachings and my sister for cursing my father because she didn't want to eat up her dinner....

Of course his teachings contradict other teachings elsewhere in the same books but that's kind of exactly my point - what you choose to focus on, what you choose to take in isolation and how you choose to interpret these words is up to the individual (unless you're a Catholic, in which case mere mortals are not allowed to - the meaning must be relayed to them by an ordained priest).