Isis,

[ebia]

I don't think that either Joshua or David represent "major religious figures". Neither of them started a religion or were the founder of a religious movement. And no religion explicitly seeks to worship, follow or emulate them as a central figure to their religious doctrine.

You grossly underestimated the importance both David and Joshua have had on Jewish and Christian thinking.

As I said before, both the Quran and Bible have nasty bits. But it is the fact that Mohammad is the central and primary figure of Islam which, to me, is somewhat worrisome. It is Mohammad's biography external from the Quran which is more concerning to me than what is contained within the Quran.

Islam, though, is the ultimate religion of the book.
Mohammed is revered as the medium through which Quran is delivered not in himself. It's the reverse of christianity where the bible is just the medium and Jesus is the revelation.

If Christianity's primary figure to worship, follow or emulate was Joshua or David, then the world may very well be a different place and we may be having a very different discussion.

You very much seem to be selecting the evidence to fit your hypothesis.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

You grossly underestimated the importance both David and Joshua have had on Jewish and Christian thinking.

I'm not sure if you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, but you can't possibly tell me that you believe that Joshua and David are on par with Jesus, Mohammad and Buddha in terms of religious importance.

I'm not saying that David and Joshua are unimportant, but I'm saying that it is blatantly obvious that they are less important than the founders of the two largest religions in the world.

Islam, though, is the ultimate religion of the book.
Mohammed is revered as the medium through which Quran is delivered not in himself. It's the reverse of christianity where the bible is just the medium and Jesus is the revelation.

I don't know what this has to do with anything.

You very much seem to be selecting the evidence to fit your hypothesis.

I'm not making some earth-shattering hypothesis. Its a very simple claim: Islam is not bad in-and-of-itself, but the man from whom Islam finds its source lead a life which could not be considered peaceful, compassionate or loving by any standard.

So, I find it rather ironic when Islam is said to be "the religion of peace" when its own founder didn't really do such a great job at promoting peace. It's like a bankrupted, homeless man giving financial advice; it raises questions and makes you skeptical.

 

[ebia]

I'm not sure if you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, but you can't possibly tell me that you believe that Joshua and David are on par with Jesus, Mohammad and Buddha in terms of religious importance.

They are vital to Judaism and from which Christianity develops.

Look at it this way, in a recent ranking of the 100 most influential people in history, Mohammad, Jesus and Buddha ranked 1st, 3rd and 4th, respectively. David and Joshua did not make the list. These lists are always controversial and subjective, but I've looked and cannot find a single "influential person in the world"-style list which contains either Joshua or David. The only Old Testament figure I found was Moses (#15 on the list linked above).

I wouldn't give such lists the time of day, myself.

I don't know what this has to do with anything.

Islam doesn't centre around mohammed in the sense you think it does.
You are projecting the centrality of person from Christianity onto islam.

I'm not making some earth-shattering hypothesis. Its a very simple claim: Islam is not bad in-and-of-itself, but the man from whom Islam finds its source lead a life which could not be considered peaceful, compassionate or loving by any standard.

by the standard of most of the world for most of history he comes out okay.
By modern western sensibilities where all the nasty stuff of real life is out of sight maybe...

The last century saw the "civilised" west commit the holocaust, build and use weapons of mass destruction and other horrors that make Mohammad's life seem like a children's tea party.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

They are vital to Judaism and from which Christianity develops.

Jesus, Mohammad and Buddha are more important religious figures than David or Joshua.

Islam doesn't centre around mohammed in the sense you think it does.
You are projecting the centrality of person from Christianity onto islam.

No I am not. Islam does not "center around" Mohammad, but Mohammad is certainly important to Muslims.

Or do you think Mohammad isn't an important figure in Islam?

by the standard of most of the world for most of history he comes out okay.
By modern western sensibilities where all the nasty stuff of real life is out of sight maybe...

The last century saw the "civilised" west commit the holocaust, build and use weapons of mass destruction and other horrors that make Mohammad's life seem like a children's tea party.

Yes, but 1 billion people today aren't following the teachings of Adolf Hitler or Harry S. Truman.

On the other hand, 1 billion people today are following Muhammad's teachings, writings and revelations.

So that would be a red herring.

 

[ebia]

Jesus, Mohammad and Buddha are more important religious figures than David or Joshua.

I really don't know how you decide that.
Without Joshua there is no story to continue
Without David there is no story to continue
And one way or another you've got to deal with the fact that the bible attributes their attrocities to the command of the God we see in Jesus.

No I am not. Islam does not "center around" Mohammad, but Mohammad is certainly important to Muslims.

Or do you think Mohammad isn't an important figure in Islam?

Of course he's important.

Yes, but 1 billion people today aren't following the teachings of Adolf Hitler or Harry S. Truman.

You tried to imply that Mohammed's wars were spectacularly horrific.
the reality is they were not. They were quite a bit less horrific than a lot of other similar wars and massively less horrific than the wars our culture has perpetuated, often with full support of christians.

If you want to see his compassion I suggest you read the Quran, reflectively and with charity, preferably in a good modern translation like Haleem's

 

[DogmaHunter]

If they had the right God, they wouldn't be chopping off the heads of innocent people. I think you'll agree with that.

No, not at all.

 

[DogmaHunter]

The creator of the universe knows who is guilty and who is innocent. Were you there, and did you know those people back in Joshua's time? You wouldn't even know today amongst "thousands of people" who is innocent and who is guilty more than God would. Yet you judge God and Joshua as if you know better than they did.

Seriously, that takes a level of arrogance that's off the charts!

Allah knows who is guilty and who is innocent.

2 can play that game.

See, this is the problem when you let everything in your life (including your morality) being defined by your dogmatic religion.

You don't have an actual argument against islamists who carry out what they believe is their holy duty.

All you can say is that they are putting their blind faith in the "wrong" religion. And your only foundation for that statement is the fact that you put blind faith in another religion.

It's not that you have an actual argument against these guys.
Every argument you give in defense of Joshua types is equally applicable to islamists. If you can't see the problem in this, then there's not much I can tell you.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Allah knows who is guilty and who is innocent.

2 can play that game.

See, this is the problem when you let everything in your life (including your morality) being defined by your dogmatic religion.

You don't have an actual argument against islamists who carry out what they believe is their holy duty.

All you can say is that they are putting their blind faith in the "wrong" religion. And your only foundation for that statement is the fact that you put blind faith in another religion.

It's not that you have an actual argument against these guys.
Every argument you give in defense of Joshua types is equally applicable to islamists. If you can't see the problem in this, then there's not much I can tell you.

I mean,, without sounding like a butthole, we are at a set of Christian forums, where the majority of people here, sort of do worship the Christian God, to expect a Christian, to send out a non Christian message, especially about a religious topic, its like expecting someone to deny their beliefs to please the masses,,,

To heck with what the masses say, these are Christian forums and i'm Christian,

Allah isnt real, its a crock witchcraft belief that twists and perverts Jehovah GodS true Christian words,

Shall we Christians be gullible sheep and please the masses by making them comfortable?


I dont know, cause this is a joke post, and its fun to mess with dogmahunter, lol, just teasin ya bro,, lol

 

[bhsmte]

I mean,, without sounding like a butthole, we are at a set of Christian forums, where the majority of people here, sort of do worship the Christian God, to expect a Christian, to send out a non Christian message, especially about a religious topic, its like expecting someone to deny their beliefs to please the masses,,,

To heck with what the masses say, these are Christian forums and i'm Christian,

Allah isnt real, its a crock witchcraft belief that twists and perverts Jehovah GodS true Christian words,

Shall we Christians be gullible sheep and please the masses by making them comfortable?


I dont know, cause this is a joke post, and its fun to mess with dogmahunter, lol, just teasin ya bro,, lol

Are people who believe in a different God then you and or have different religious beliefs, also considered; "spiritually sick", by you?

 

[Strathos]

I wonder if Aldebaran realizes his name comes from the same language the Quran was written in...

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I really don't know how you decide that.

I didn't decide it. People did. I challenge you to find a poll, list or group of people who would agree with you that David and Joshua are more important than Jesus or Mohammad in terms of religious influence upon our modern world.

Without Joshua there is no story to continue
Without David there is no story to continue

Every character in a story is necessary for the story to continue. That doesn't mean that some characters aren't "more important" or "significant" than others.

For example, who is more important in the play "Romeo and Juliet", Romeo or Mercutio? Mercutio influences the course of the play and has lines that add to the story, but he is not the "most important" or "significant" figure in the play.

Jesus > David > Joshua in terms of significance.

And one way or another you've got to deal with the fact that the bible attributes their attrocities to the command of the God we see in Jesus.

Yup, it was a barbaric, tribal culture. You also realize that Islam places high importance on the Jewish scriptures as well, right? They follow David's name with a "pbuh" because they regard him as a prophet.

So, both Islam and Christianity share those barbaric, tribal bits of the Bible together.

Then, both Islam and Christianity expanded upon those Jewish scriptures. Christianity expanded upon it with what appears to be somewhat of a moral evolution with Pauline Christianity spreading via testimony, witness, healings, helping the poor, etc. Mohammad's Islam expanded upon it with what appears to be essentially identical moral status: spreading by war and violence.

BTW, I think Paul and Mohammad have a more analogous relationship to their religions than comparing Jesus and Mohammad.

You tried to imply that Mohammed's wars were spectacularly horrific.
the reality is they were not. They were quite a bit less horrific than a lot of other similar wars and massively less horrific than the wars our culture has perpetuated, often with full support of christians.

If you want to see his compassion I suggest you read the Quran, reflectively and with charity, preferably in a good modern translation like Haleem's

If a man in one breath writes about compassion and in the next raises an army which kills thousands, it somewhat cheapens his writings, don't you think? He does indeed say good things in the Quran, but, when push comes to shove, a Muslim has two options: violence or non-violence. I think it is easier to justify violence in Islam than in other major religions. This is evidenced by Islamic fundamentalism which is generally characterized by violence.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Are people who believe in a different God then you and or have different religious beliefs, also considered; "spiritually sick", by you?

Ironically no. My own personal opinion is, if somebody believes in something, anything is better then having absolutely no belief at all.


I look at it this way, i would sooner trust an individual that believes they answer to a higher power then someone who believes that they answer to no one for their trespasses.

But thats just my personal preference, you know, some people like their breakfast hot, some people like coffee instead of tea, i personally like my associates to not be Godless heathens, potato pototo,, ya know?

 

[Skavau]

Ironically no. My own personal opinion is, if somebody believes in something, anything is better then having absolutely no belief at all.


I look at it this way, i would sooner trust an individual that believes they answer to a higher power then someone who believes that they answer to no one for their trespasses.

But thats just my personal preference, you know, some people like their breakfast hot, some people like coffee instead of tea, i personally like my associates to not be Godless heathens, potato pototo,, ya know?

The notion that "Godless heathens" think they answer to no-one is absurd. I answer to my friends, my family, my colleagues and society in general when I err.

 

[Shadowprophet]

The notion that "Godless heathens" think they answer to no-one is absurd. I answer to my friends, my family, my colleagues and society in general when I err.

I get your subliminal message, i wont win any beauty contests with my attitude towards atheists,,, However, atheists truly do upset me at times, they crave this solid evidence that the Christian God is real, yet,just as faith demands it, they deserve no proof, proof makes Faith unnecessary, and we need Faith, if for no other reason then not allowing someone to come along and tamper with our beliefs.


But atheists do upset me, with the things they will stand behind, without the slightest shred of evidence.

You say you dont believe in God, you must have proof, please,, share with us your proof God isnt real?

 

[ebia]

I mean,, without sounding like a butthole, we are at a set of Christian forums, where the majority of people here, sort of do worship the Christian God, to expect a Christian, to send out a non Christian message, especially about a religious topic, its like expecting someone to deny their beliefs to please the masses,,,

Would it not be reasonable to expect people to engage in fair comparison without constant recourse to double standards, ad-hoc arguments, no true Scotsman fallacies, etc?

 

[ebia]

You say you dont believe in God, you pefect minded genius you,, share with us your proof God isnt real?

Since CF. abolished its general apologetics forum there is no part of CF where atheists can legitimately engage in that debate.

 

[Skavau]

I get your subliminal message, i wont win any beauty contests with my attitude towards atheists,,,

What "subliminal message?"

However, atheists truly do upset me at times, they crave this solid evidence that the Christian God is real, yet,just as faith demands it, they deserve none, Faith is necessary, if for no other reason then not allowing someone to come along and convince one of anything.

It is not my problem that you make a virtue out of faith.

But atheists do upset me, with the things they will stand behind, without the slightest shred of evidence.

What is it you think atheists stand behind?

You say you dont believe in God, you pefect minded genius you,, share with us your proof God isnt real?

This is off-topic and I've never claimed myself to be a "perfect minded genius".

 

[ebia]

Then, both Islam and Christianity expanded upon those Jewish scriptures. Christianity expanded upon it with what appears to be somewhat of a moral evolution with Pauline Christianity spreading via testimony, witness, healings, helping the poor, etc. Mohammad's Islam expanded upon it with what appears to be essentially identical moral status: spreading by war and violence.

So Islam is no worse than our story was before Jesus.
You can't condemn it for that.

If a man in one breath writes about compassion and in the next raises an army which kills thousands, it somewhat cheapens his writings, don't you think?

I'm pretty much a pacifist. And I certainly condemn David's womanising.
But i still pray the psalms.

He does indeed say good things in the Quran, but, when push comes to shove, a Muslim has two options: violence or non-violence. I think it is easier to justify violence in Islam than in other major religions. This is evidenced by Islamic fundamentalism which is generally characterized by violence.

Why pick this moment in time to look at comparative behaviours for evidence?
Why not pick behaviour over the longer span of history?
Most likely because our attention happens to be focused on the Middle East now. Even though that's a historical recent brand of Islam.
While we think of bhuddism (say) as nice and fluffy because our media never reports the attrocities in Burma and Sri Lanka.

When violence happens at home we call it an aboration.
When it happens in the Middle East we say it's inherent to islam
There's a double standard.

The line between good and evil is not between us and them but runs right down the middle of each one of us.

 

[Shadowprophet]

Since CF. abolished its general apologetics forum there is no part of CF where atheists can legitimately engage in that debate.

Your kidding? Uh,, apologies, that, seems kind of unfair to them. I had no idea their hands where tied,,, i apologize to all non believers, i truly thought you had the right to fairly debate this,, its not good sport to engage atheists in debates they can't properly defend.

 

[Aldebaran]

The notion that "Godless heathens" think they answer to no-one is absurd. I answer to my friends, my family, my colleagues and society in general when I err.

Unless you can avoid doing so, right?