You got something wrong. All religions are not like that. There are many religions that is against any kind of violence. Buddhism and Jainism is like that. Hinduism and Sikhism has strict moral code of conduct and will not take up arms because others don't belive in your religion. They are supposed to take up arms if someone attacks you. Like if the Jihadis are attacking you because they don't like you, then you have all the right to take up arms and defend yourself to make sure that Truth, justice and righteousness prevails for a peaceful world. Jewism and Christianity has changed a lot and with each passing day these relgions are becoming more and more progressive because the people are not as religious as before and thought process is given a major share rather than religious books. Especially the world also saw the rise of atheism. All this is a sign of progress of humanity.

A lot of changes has taken in the Islamic world as well, but the foundation is not changed and hence Islam is a big problem. The Wahabbis still call the shots in the Islamic world. Until Mecca and Medina are liberated from the hands of the fundamentalists and handed over to the moderates, you will see a violent Islam. Muslims may be. But they were doing it not because Islam said them to do that but their original faiths (the so called pagan faiths were like that like , pre Islamic Egyptian, Zoroastianism etc) The true version of Islam is the Taliban. That is Islam and what you achieve in an truly Islamic state is this

http://www.afghaninjustice.com/Talib...menInKabul.jpg
http://www.rawa.org/beating5.jpg

These people sure didn't abide by that code. I wouldn't call burning a "witch" after gagging, beating, and stripping her nonviolent:

http://in.reuters.com/article/topNew...33828820080530

Of course, this is quite typical in countries that still have these silly superstitions (Kenya, India, Thailand, Ethiopia . . .).

An Indian woman accused of witchcraft was beaten, gagged and burnt to death in a remote eastern village, police said on Friday.

The woman was dragged out of her home, her hands and legs tied and taken to a crematorium where she was set on fire in front of the village which ignored her screams for help.

Well, so much for that motto.

As long as there is religion, there is no progress. Someone always tries to take hold of power. No two can ever coexist, because it is inevitable, no matter what beliefs they hold, that one will try to destroy the other.

If you had ever read the Qur'an, you would know that it teaches peace, nonviolence, and tolerance to your fellow man. These people who declare Jihads are not true Muslims because the teachings of Muhammad state that anybody who is a non-Muslim is NOT an infidel, they are just lower in the social classes (BUT THEY ARE STILL TO BE TOLERATED).

The foundation of Islam does not need to change; the people do.

Until fundamentalism the world over (in every religion) is wiped out, nobody is safe.

The true version of Islam is NOT what the Taliban promotes. Hatred and violence are not supposed to be part of the Muslim manifesto, and for most it isn't. You only hear the bad about it, but what about the good? What about Saladin, who gave away every last coin in his treasury to the poor and sick and needy? What about Dr. Mohammad Mossadeq, who opposed imperialistic views in government and fought long and hard for the freedom of Iranian industry and trade? What about Samuel Rahbar, who discovered a plasma-detecting form of hemoglobin?

Don't get me wrong. I'm an Atheist, and I will remain that way simply because I've seen what religion can do to people when it's misused (and it's not good), but we have to get our facts straight before we start any religion.

The Hindu scriptures never explains about witches. Witches is non existent in Hinduism. On what basis are you trying to link Hinduism to witchcraft. It's ignorance.

It's an absurd thought that only Atheism leads to progress. Like atheism, certain religion can co-exist with Atheism like other than the religions consider itself to be the only way (which leads to fundamentalism) and the religions that requires only itself to survive by eliminating others (Islam). Coexistence of religion, you can look at India and see. Even Jewism thrived here. The Zoroastarians must have become extinct in Persia but you can see them in India. Hence religions can co-exist. There is no need to destroy the other, if the other is not violent and don't wants you out. Fundamentalism and violence out of religion will lead to peace.

The true version of Islam is what the Taliban propogates. But should we consider it as true is the question? It's violent. Any Muslim can live a moderate life without showing hatred towards the other. But once they start to belive in the Quran word by word, they become Taliban and anti-Human. Don't link scientific inventions, progressive thinking with Islam. It's against Islamic Quran. If Muslims have done it good. It's progressive. I wish they also come up with a Quran that is progressive insted of asking people to be killed because they don't belive in Allah.

This is purely racial and hatred. It talks about someone is below someone just because he don't belive in Allah. This is the problem. Why is human beings not equal. If there is god, then Everyone is equal in front of him/her/something irrespective of any difference including gender.

All religions must accpet these rules. Else it will not be called as religion whereas as a violent ideology against humanity.

Stealth hunter, what I had observed is that especially the Atheist from the western nations tend to support Islam for some unknown reason. The reason may be they want to be seen seperate from Christianity and want to show that they are more progressive and accomodative. My question is should that means Atheists must also embrace violent ideology that atheism opposes. Islamic ideas are stictly against Atheism. No wonder you see Pat can be seen making videos after videos and posting it to explain his viewpoint. It's true that Islam is very violent for centuries. Just because there were some Muslims who were good human beings will not make the ideology of Islam good. It will remain as it is for ever until there is a change to make it progressive by Muslims themselves by moderating the Quran and making it a modern book rather than something meant for violent, ignorant nomads. For your information, I am an Atheist Indian. A non-beliver of god.

Also understand that a ordinary moderate Muslim is not an issue for anyone. Those who call god. Do prayers and live his life without troubling others is not a problem for anyone on this earth. The trouble starts when there is discrimination, hatred, killings because god don't like others. This is the root of all problems and if the source of this is the Quran, then it surely need to be moderated.

I agree that all three desert relgions have violant roots, whcih maybe is no surprise since they all in the end base on Judaism and it'S revenging, tyrannic emperor-god. It took the Jews centuries to find a way to bypass this cruel concepot of god and to turn it into something more humane: by developing a very hairsplitting, highly clever way of finding excuses and "bypasses" that allows them to see the god they believe in to be depicted not as the tyrannic psychopath that indeed he is, but to describe him as more reasonbale, friendly and humane. This is what could be seen as the reason for why Jewish thinking already had the reputation to be so very clever and hairsplitting even already at the age of the roman empire. The Christian religion could be seen as a reformation of the ancient Jewish system, and true Christian religion - not the church but the followers of Jesus who were called "Christ" (thus the term "Christian") - moved the foucs from the ancient old desert god onto the teachings of Jesus, who was building on the old terminolgy, but filled it with a complete different understanding - the devine depicted by him in the four gospels is another picture of a god than the tyrannic god in the old testament. Islam, however, has not seen traditions that would compare to these chnages in Judaism and Christoian relgion, at leats not efforts that were strong enough to really influence the dogmatic view of the traditionalists - and survived that. Islam has been - and is until today! - as ruthless as was the Catholic church in hunting down heretics and preventing different thinlking in the medieval, and it has been far more successful, while the church more or less had to give up. Where modern Judaism and christianity (extremist and fundamentalist sects excluded, of course) have moved on and chnaged, Islam still is stuck in the ohase that compoares to the old testament, or the old Judaic tyrannic emperor-god - it has not seen the kind of reforming and correction as has been seen in ther two older religions.

A consequence of this is where I must reject something that Stealth Hunter said: while the Islamic world of the medieval indeed was superior to the more primitive Europe in science and medicine, with the arrival of the Muhammedan dogma it slowed down and then stopped to develope, falling into stagnation, while after long fights, europe raised and developed a blossomiung culture that finally reached the status of knowledge in the arbaian sphere, and then went beyond it and left it behind by a wide margin. This was only possible because the old dogmas of religion broke up and did not stick eternally with the old tyrannic desert god, but formed a tradition that is more open and humane in thinking, than Islam is. It even overcame the once unshakable power position of the church. But in the medieval, by comparing the status in europe and the Arab peninsula, the latter had the by far better starting conditions. But under theb influence of relgious powers and the fialing or successful fight against them, the one sphere switched off, while the other switched on and started to outshine the first in scientific and cultural developement.

Now that the West seem to have gone beyond its climax, and achievements are so excessively pushed that they start to pervert into their extremes where they do more bad than good anymore, the old unmoved desert dogma in form of islam grows in relative strength again, not by being strong in itself, but becaseu the West becomes weaker again. Even the old church is smelling a chance to lead back to growing reestablishment of it's old dogma of "obedience to the church over spirituality and freedom", and it almost cooperates with islam by opening it doors and ways, to change the cultural climate in favour of people submitting first to Islam's and then to the church's dogmatic ways of living again. People are getting influenced to embrace a deeply totalitarian ideology and mistaking it for freedom and peace, ebcasue this foisters an atmosphere were the church hopes to become strong again by spreading its own dogmatic sermon again: obedience to the church, power to the church. In earlier years, I fought against Islam. I today understood, that the dmeographic facts created by mass migration are here to stay and thus, Islam cannot be chased away anymore, it is here to stay, so ourt only chnace is to fight not only against Islam, but relgion and its vicous ways in general, to force all relgions there are back into their houses and buiodling and deny them - Chriostianity as well as judaism as well as islam - any option to influence public life to change our culture again towards its ancient old desert dogmas beyond which we have grown since then so very far.

Freedom is our most precious good, and no religion's dogma shall be given claim or right to reduce it for it's own powerpolitical interest. Only when freedom is taken away from us, many of us who are used to live in a free world and never experienced how it is to live without freedom, will realise what it is that they have lost - but then they will not have the freedom anymore to change it: then it will be too late. So fight to defend your freedoms while you still can. Do not fall back in the face of religions, do not accept their claims and demands, do not give them the respect they call for but which they did not earn and do not deserve. No religion of these is about your wellbeing, but the wellbeing of it's dogma and powerpolitical self-interest. If you are afraid of conflict and thus step back from the challenge - you already have given up freedom and thus become slaves, rightfully. Do not be afraid of conflict, but accept it and fully embrace it if religion is confronting you and your freedom. Our ancestors have suffered for centuries, miserably, to make possible the freedom we now have in the western world - do not throw it away, do not carelessly give it up, do not ignore its value in favour of being called nice and friendly by religion. When religion calls you nice and friendly and tells you it likes you, you should feel dirty and unclean - like religion itself is.

Religious threads at subsim, may it be bible classes or atheist rants - it's so good to have them, don't you agree. :smug:

What about the modern version of it with the 72. He may not be able to handle the 72. So request the rest be parcelled to me.

Someone said long ago something I agree completely with: "Judaism is the most brilliant defence ever done of something impossible to be morally and rationally defended" :lol:

I don't want to offend anyone, and I respect that anyone is free to believe in what they want; but simply making an objective lecture of the Bible or Quran shows very well that they are religions based on a certain political/social situation in that time, and destined to provide social control. The idea of the chosen nation, and of the terrible God who kills and tortures their enemies and sometimes his own "chosen nation" for its lack of faith is to my eyes simply impossible to sustain. Not to mention the "revelations" that Muhammad received, many of which are contradictory with earlier ones and whose sense and logics dissapeared long ago when society evolved.

But anyway, my main critic to any of those religions remains: They are "revealed" religions, i.e. God told them to the humans. And that is a self-contradiction. A religion is per definition something supposedly valid for any time and any place in the world, yet the revelation happens in a certain place and moment. What happened for all the rest of the world after Muhammad or Moses received their revelations? What happened in China? In Australia? Nothing. The universal and intemporal message of God .... was limited in time and space, and still is. What a contradiction :roll:

Candy! Sweet! Brilliant...!

I find the prospect of Yahweh having a wife to be quite funny:

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archi...8/1679514.aspx

Judaism, in it's true form, is not a monotheistic religion.:rotfl:

I reckon the egyptians had the right idea, their gods only lasted on average 30 or 40 years, and if you didnt like him they just killed thir god and got a new one!:p

On a more serious note tho, interesting that Ahkenaten mandated that the many gods be ignored and only 1 god, Ra, be acknowledged. Monotheism several thousand years before it was the 'in thing'. fascinating.

I make no excuses for the (Roman Catholics) and what they did in the crusades and Inquisitions. Guilty as charged! But you must read your history with regards to the sultans and the havoc they raised in the same time period, but the difference is, is that they have not reformed and continue their fanatical views on the world in our day and time. there is no comparison to what the muslim extremist are doing in Indonesia and Africa today. Not to mention the more news worthy acts of terrorism that we hear of.

another religion thread. F*cking brilliant.

tell you all what, why don't we all save our keyboards a few hundred hits and just dredge up one of the old threads and repost it, because there's nothing new in this one.

1. we are all, with respect to religions other than our own, arguing from a position of ignorance. there's no way i know as much about christianity as frame57. there's no way skybird knows as much about islam as konovalev (or myself). so on, and so forth.

you can read it, you can watch it, but that's not the same as living it.

2. we are all making assumptions based on what we see on tv or have read, which can no way be extrapolated to represent the millions of muslims, christians, hindus, jews, etc. (including atheists) who, i sincerely hope, for the most part wish to live their lives in peace.

3. posts consist of demagoguery, misquotations, fallacious arguments, and poor logic, for the most part.

finally, and most importantly,

4. posting these assumptions and refuting them serves no purpose, because no one ever changes their mind here.

i'm as guilty of feeding the flames as the next guy, i'm just saying don't we all have something more constructive to fdo?

And yet you chose to post in it and in so doing, cause it to rise again right to the top of the first page...:shifty:

sorry couldnt resist :p