Islam a religion of peace/violence...?

[statrei]

I assume the book to which you are referring Christianity is based on is the Bible. If so, what information within it is wrong concerning God the Creator ???



Ray

Throughout the Old Testament the ancients had false views of the Creator. This is why He had to come to reveal Himself and even then Jesus had to complain that they still did not understand. We have this view that the people in the Bible had it all together. They did not. In many respects, if we were not so unwise, we could have a better understanding of Him than they did. For starters, no one today believes that when a volcano erupts that it is God speaking or that the clouds are the dust from His feet.

 

[Athanasian Creed]

Throughout the Old Testament the ancients had false views of the Creator. This is why He had to come to reveal Himself and even then Jesus had to complain that they still did not understand. We have this view that the people in the Bible had it all together. They did not. In many respects, if we were not so unwise, we could have a better understanding of Him than they did. For starters, no one today believes that when a volcano erupts that it is God speaking or that the clouds are the dust from His feet.

OK - i see what you are saying but that was the exception not the rule. Methinks Moses, David, the Prophets had a good handle on Who God was and what He was trying to accomplish. It is by them we have the Old Testament.

And i agree that even the best men (and women) in the Bible did not "have it all together." That makes the Bible all more credible to me - the writers of both the OT and the NT (and the Holy Spirit) did not gloss over or cover up the instances where men (and women) of God "screwed up." It just goes to prove that man is completely fallible and needs Jesus !!


Ray

 

[statrei]

And i agree that even the best men (and women) in the Bible did not "have it all together." That makes the Bible all more credible to me - the writers of both the OT and the NT (and the Holy Spirit) did not gloss over or cover up the instances where men (and women) of God "screwed up." It just goes to prove that man is completely fallible and needs Jesus !!


Ray

Well said.

 

[ebia]

islam centers around the quaran as does christianity the bible.

Um. No and No.

Islam centres around God. Christianity centres around God.

in the quaran they are commanded to make us convert or die, if they do not slaughter and kill other people, they are not real muslims, and they do not follow their religion correctly.

Book of Joshua anyone?

if a muslim gets raped, shes labled a harlot, and shun from her family.

All very similar to Old Testament teaching.

To call this a religion of peace would be a logical fallacy,

Then the same must be true of Christianity.

the people may be different from the religion, but the religion is definitely of war.
am i wrong?

Yes.

 

[ebia]

True enough, but we let God do the destroying. Islam believes they are responsible for doing that part.

Only a tiny minority of Muslims believe this - most Muslims do not. What gives you the right to determine what Muslims should believe? Would you allow a Muslim to tell you how to interpret the bible?

 

[indra_fanatic]

Since you make this distinction I would remind you that Christianity has the same goal; become one of us our our god will destroy you in a lake of fire. Just a variation on the same theme, and some of us add in eternal torment to "sweeten the pot."

Depends on the denomination. There are no denominations of Christianity that would assert that it is our job to remove unbelievers from this life--maybe a small number of pseudo-Christian cults with tiny followings, but nothing with even a remote resemblance to the mainstream "religious right". America's most infamous abortion-clinic attacker, survivalist/white supremacist Eric Robert Rudolph, was essentially a lone wolf whose sociopathy led him to an entire life of hiding in the woods and living off of the land as a homeless man.

If you want to assert that there are judgmental, arrogant pricks in America coming in "the name of God", then we can both talk for ages, but the difference is that none of those nutty legalists are demanding that their supporters go out and harm the targets of their ramblings, much less claiming that they will receive eternal rewards for doing so. Example: I have never heard any "quiver-full" adherents or hardcore Messianists, however extreme, ever assert that people having less than six children or people believing that Jesus ended the mandate of Mosaic law are targeted for death.

Devout, fundamentalist Muslims deeply resent and despise the state of Israel, those who are seen as supporting it, and foreign (particularly Western or Christian) troops on their lands, which according to their faith are waqfs, or sacred trusts that are defiled by the presence of unbelievers. These statements are no more overly general or discriminatory than saying that devout, fundamentalist Christians resent and despise legalized abortion and the secularization of American culture.

What is the meaning of this? A minority of Muslims engage in terroristic acts, but no Bible-believing Christians in any orthodox sense do--much less attempt to explain them away.

 

[ebia]

A "Christian" is one that obeys God and His Word. Where in God's Word does it say that one should blow up an abortion clinic or to kill baby murderers ????

Guess what - there is no basis for such actions in the Bible. As that is the case, please learn what constitutes what a "real" Christian is before you lump the lunatic fringe in with true Christianity !


Ray

The "lunatic fringe" of Christianity believe they are true christians, just as the "lunatic fringe" of Islam does.

NO, NO, NO you are 100% right. That exactly is the Islam that Mohammed preached !!!

See http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kills.htm for more info. on this so-called religion of "peace" - Islam and peace together is an oxymoron !

Why should I believe an fundamentalist Christian website has a better understanding of Islam than Muslims do? That makes as much sense as getting my Christian doctrines by visiting a madrassa.

 

[indra_fanatic]

Why should I believe an fundamentalist Christian website has a better understanding of Islam than Muslims do? That makes as much sense as getting my Christian doctrines by visiting a madrassa.

To get a sense of "hardcore Christianity", wouldn't you want to visit a fundamentalist Christian university like Biola, Liberty, or Wheaton? If a Westerner wanted to get a sense of real, nitty-gritty Islam the way the devout practice it, wouldn't he or she visit a madrasa?

Is that not just common sense?

 

[ebia]

What is the meaning of this? A minority of Muslims engage in terroristic acts, but no Bible-believing Christians in any orthodox sense do--much less attempt to explain them away.

I thought we had already mentioned Northern Ireland. Then we could mention Serbian attrocities in Bosnia.

But mostly, Christians don't need to use terrorism. They are the ones who have the power and wealth - they use national armies and multinational companies to do their dirty work. Terrorism is the tool of the poor and the weak.

 

[gnine]

This is where I get hacked off again. Most Muslims don't do anything of the sort. Most Muslims are just trying to get on with their lives. Even in fanatical, fundamentalist, NWFP, the vast majority are decent, friendly, honorable people.

I didn't say that resentment would necessarily translate into violence - however, I reckon if you wore a T-Shirt emblazoned with "Onward Zion's Soldiers" through the streets of Islamabad you wouldn't live to see tomorrow (and it would be a hazardous thing to do in downtown Lakemba, Sydney)

 

[ebia]

I didn't say that resentment would necessarily translate into violence - however, I reckon if you wore a T-Shirt emblazoned with "Onward Zion's Soldiers" through the streets of Islamabad you wouldn't live to see tomorrow (and it would be a hazardous thing to do in downtown Lakemba, Sydney)

Senselessly offensive and provoking people is pointless in any environment. I could come up with a slogan I don't think I could get away with wearing through certain nominally "Christian" dominated city areas or non-Western cities.

Your average Muslim is no more filled with hatred or resentment than anyone else living in similar circumstances. To claim they are without providing some pretty serious, concrete, evidence is offensive.

 

[statrei]

Depends on the denomination. There are no denominations of Christianity that would assert that it is our job to remove unbelievers from this life--

What do you think hell fire is? Strange reasoning that concludes that it is all right for your god to do it Himself but there is great evil if their god asks them to do it in His name. The result is the same. Do you think it is less than murder if I poison you over three months but only murder if I shoot you in the head?

 

[indra_fanatic]

What do you think hell fire is? Strange reasoning that concludes that it is all right for your god to do it Himself but there is great evil if their god asks them to do it in His name. The result is the same. Do you think it is less than murder if I poison you over three months but only murder if I shoot you in the head?

What Christians are slowly poisoning their victims? I don't quite know what you are trying to demonstrate.

 

[indra_fanatic]

I thought we had already mentioned Northern Ireland.

While religious rhetoric has been used in that war, at heart it was a purely ethnic war for both sides. The British, in their colonial insanity, justified their occupation by painting the Irish as subhuman. The Irish retaliated in order to gain their freedom and homeland back.

Then we could mention Serbian attrocities in Bosnia.

This statement is akin to saying "Israeli atrocities in Palestine"--it is profoundly useless because it omits at least half of the story. Do you know any of the history of Yugoslavia--particularly from the '40s on? Did you know that the Grand Mufti of Sarajevo aligned himself with Hitler and personally oversaw the recruitment of the Balkan SS Handschar division? Did you know that there was an enormous religious revival--including wahhabiism--among Bosnian Muslims when Tito died?

In any circumstance, all evangelical Christians unequivocally condemned the Serbian actions.

But mostly, Christians don't need to use terrorism. They are the ones who have the power and wealth - they use national armies and multinational companies to do their dirty work.

Huh? Who are these powerful Christians who have power, money, and militaries? There are two factions of the Republican party--social conservatives and business-oriented capitalists. Although social conservatives (read Christian rightists) make up at least half of Republican voters, it is the second category that has the real money and influence in America. Our president, GWB, falls into the latter.

If right-wing fundamentalist Christians really had all the power you seem to believe they do, how come abortion is legal? How come gay marriage is being gradually legalized? How come Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was removed? How come we are being slowly bled to death in Iraq?

Terrorism is the tool of the poor and the weak.

I have heard this kind of statement time and time again, and each time I am even more convinced than the last that it is a tired cliche. The poor and weak do not have the resources to put together credible terrorist attacks. Terrorism operations need either a stable reserve of wealth or a thriving network of international support. All 19 hijackers on 9/11 came from the upper classes of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, and they were all financed by members of Saudi Arabia's ruling, landed elite (the bin Laden family and various other sheiks). Israeli Arab terrorists in Israel/Palestine, likewise, derive at least 50% of their funding from Saudi and Kuwaiti oil sheiks who host telethons in their honor on state-controlled television, and obtain the majority of their arms from either Soviet sources (prior to 1990) or from regional Islamic fundamentalist superpowers (i.e. Iran).

 

[statrei]

What Christians are slowly poisoning their victims? I don't quite know what you are trying to demonstrate.

I was illustrating the difference between the mode of death.

 

[Athanasian Creed]

The "lunatic fringe" of Christianity believe they are true christians, just as the "lunatic fringe" of Islam does.


Why should I believe an fundamentalist Christian website has a better understanding of Islam than Muslims do? That makes as much sense as getting my Christian doctrines by visiting a madrassa.

So....my point is, since you obviously didn't get it previously, SAYING one is a Christian is MUCH different then actually backing it up by your actions. ANYONE can say they are a Christian...the proof is in the pudding or in the fruit produced in their lives.

And...just because it is a "fundamentalist Christian website" does that necessarily mean that what they say about Islam is wrong ?? I don't think so !! Prove that what they say about Islam is wrong before you dismiss it outright !


Ray

 

[TheDag]

And...just because it is a "fundamentalist Christian website" does that necessarily mean that what they say about Islam is wrong ?? I don't think so !! Prove that what they say about Islam is wrong before you dismiss it outright !

As they said previously if you want it to be accurate then go speak to muslims rather than christians. I personally have found that christians who explain muslim beliefs generally get part of it wrong and muslims who explain christianity get part of it wrong. So rather than risk getting a bit wrong why not go to the source.
One could also ask you to prove that what was said is right considering you posted that as if it was fact.

 

[statrei]

As they said previously if you want it to be accurate then go speak to muslims rather than christians. I personally have found that christians who explain muslim beliefs generally get part of it wrong and muslims who explain christianity get part of it wrong. So rather than risk getting a bit wrong why not go to the source.

But in an antagonistic situation neither side tells the truth about itself, mostly because of self-deception. The first casualty of any war is truth.

 

[indra_fanatic]

But in an antagonistic situation neither side tells the truth about itself, mostly because of self-deception. The first casualty of any war is truth.

The only way around this is to see for oneself what each religion teaches. I invite people to go spend some time at, or at least do a good deal of online research on, a fundamentalist Christian university in this country that teaches that all of Scripture is inerrant and literally scientifically, practically, and morally accurate, and then spend some time at, or at least research, a fundamentalist Islamic university in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, or the territories of Israel.

 

[ebia]

While religious rhetoric has been used in that war, at heart it was a purely ethnic war for both sides. The British, in their colonial insanity, justified their occupation by painting the Irish as subhuman. The Irish retaliated in order to gain their freedom and homeland back.

Who said I was refering to the IRA?

While it is true to say that the troubles are not primarily a religious issue, religion certainly plays a part - just try reading some of Ian Paisley's material sometime.

This statement is akin to saying "Israeli atrocities in Palestine"--it is profoundly useless because it omits at least half of the story. Do you know any of the history of Yugoslavia--particularly from the '40s on? Did you know that the Grand Mufti of Sarajevo aligned himself with Hitler and personally oversaw the recruitment of the Balkan SS Handschar division? Did you know that there was an enormous religious revival--including wahhabiism--among Bosnian Muslims when Tito died?

All that is beside the point. It was claimed in earlier posts that Christians didn't resort to terror tactics. Sebia and it's ilk demonstrate that isn't true - dreadful attrocities were committed, with the full backing of the Serbian Church. Whether or not you can find an excuse in history for those actions is irrelevent.

In any circumstance, all evangelical Christians unequivocally condemned the Serbian actions.

Ah, so now it's only Evangelical Christians that are free from the use of terror? Now perhaps you would like to explain away Ian Paisley, not to mention all the Church leaders in Rwanda who did nothing to attempt to stop the attrocities there (unlike their Muslim counterparts).

Huh? Who are these powerful Christians who have power, money, and militaries? There are two factions of the Republican party--social conservatives and business-oriented capitalists. Although social conservatives (read Christian rightists) make up at least half of Republican voters, it is the second category that has the real money and influence in America. Our president, GWB, falls into the latter.

We do. We have far more control over the behaviour of our countries, our leaders, and our companies than virtually any Muslims do over theirs. In fact, in some cases we have more control over their countries than they do. All 3 main world leaders who sent armies into Iraq to sort out our problems (supposedly) are practicing Christians who profess to having their faith inform their decisions.

If right-wing fundamentalist Christians really had all the power you seem to believe they do, how come abortion is legal?

Suddenly only right-wing fundamentalist Christianity counts as Christianity? And suddenly power only counts if it is absolute?

I have heard this kind of statement time and time again, and each time I am even more convinced than the last that it is a tired cliche. The poor and weak do not have the resources to put together credible terrorist attacks.

The cost of a terror campaign is miniscule compared with the cost of conventional warfare.