The future of europe?/Islam threads (Merged)

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by scandium

That article makes the same point I've made here as well:

But this need not be the only way of interpreting these texts. One alternative -- quite common in some faith communities -- might be to decide that these were commands for a very particular set of circumstances, but that they no longer apply to modern believers in this time. Another option, advanced recently by the Turkish scholar Israfil Balci, is to reject the classical interpretations of these commands as a product of the political tensions of the period.

Muslims are not the only scriptural community to face challenges of interpretation. Jews and Christians who regard the Hebrew scriptures as the Word of God must deal with the conquest of Canaan, the commandment of total cherem destruction, the violence of judges like Samson and the bloodshed of kings like David -- among many other materials that suggest Godly approval for aggressive warfare against non-believers.


Conversely, warring Christians who accept the authority of the Gospel must deal with the apparent prohibition of violence in the teachings and life example of Jesus. This discussion has been going on among Christians at least since the Crusades, when critics were heard to say "that it is not in accordance with the Christian religion to shed blood in this way, even that of wicked infidels. For Christ did not act thus."

the article also said that the history of Islam unfortunately has gone against this "tradition". This is what you do not say. It also says that the violent passages are far more attractive especially to younger muslims.

And as I often said myself, the Korn is filled with contradiction that allow Islam to claim one thing while doing another at the same time. Very practical. I myself see the call for violance clearly dominating Hadith (as far as I am aware of them) and Koran when it is about the lands that are not under Islam). And Islamic history proves me right.

you also did not show me where Jesus explicitly commanded and ordered that kind of violance and subjugation that muhammad explicitly has demanded, and practiced himself. You also still avoid the difference between church and Christianity as the tradition of following the Christ. I would also like to know where you see violant Islam in conflict with the example the founder of this religion, Muhammad, has set.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by scandium

And the history of Christianity isn't? As one who lives in a place where the indigenous peoples were regarded as "uncivilized heathen" who were then treated accordingly, I see things differently. But that could be because my civilized and enlightened Christian ancestors had proceeded to treat these indigenous peoples with genocide, committing a 100% extermination of them.

That is about as complete a "constant aggression landtaking, war" as you can get, since it didn't end until there was nobody left to kill off.

And again you illustrate that church and Jesus is one and the same for you. I have explained that five or six times now to you. Won't do it again. Get it or leave it.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Then you will die or become a dhimmie. The choice is yours.

We all die, eventually. But don't let that stop you from such dramatic proclamations, oh Great Seer.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Skybird

And again you illustrate that church and Jesus is one and the same for you. I have explained that five or six times now to you. Won't do it again. Get it or leave it.

It doesn't matter how often you explain how you interpret it, since it is one and the same for me, the same as it is for millions of others who were raised as Catholic and where the Pope is regarded as infallible and Papal Decree as the word of God. You make the mistake instead of interpreting your own (Protestant?) views on chruch and Jesus as being universal when they are not universal.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by scandium

We all die, eventually.

Prematurely? Because a religion will not tolerate your infidelity? That is not the same as "eventually".

But don't let that stop you from such dramatic proclamations, oh Great Seer.

At this point in current events, one does not require prophetic visions to see which direction the world is heading in.

All of your arguments here have been rebutted with quotes, facts, current events, and analysies that make perfect rational sense.

"They have a mouth but do not speak; they have eyes but do not see. They have ears but do not listen; neither is there any breath in their mouth. Like them will be those who make them, all who trust in them.
- Psalm 135:16-18

King David was referring to idolatrous statues in those verses but sometimes people seem to be similarly made of wood and stone.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by scandium

It doesn't matter how often you explain how you interpret it, since it is one and the same for me, the same as it is for millions of others who were raised as Catholic and where the Pope is regarded as infallible and Papal Decree as the word of God. You make the mistake instead of interpreting your own (Protestant?) views on chruch and Jesus as being universal when they are not universal.

You talk about politics then. I talk about religion. Christianity and "Churchism" are not the same. Some of the most original and creative minds that ever appeared during the last two thousand years of "church history" saw it the same, btw. And often came into conflict with the papal system, for that reason, or the followers got wiped out.

The pope: God's representative on earth - what a blasphemy. and you give him as an example of christian teachings deriving from Jesus?

And I am still waiting for your answer to this: you also did not show me where Jesus explicitly commanded and ordered that kind of violance and subjugation that Muhammad explicitly has demanded, and practiced himself. I would also like to know where you see violant Islam in conflict with the example the founder of this religion, Muhammad, has set

[Skybird]

BTW, I am not protestant, nor is my view representative for protestantism. When I attack the church, I mean all churches there are.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Prematurely? Because a religion will not tolerate your infidelity? That is not the same as "eventually".

At this point in current events, one does not require prophetic visions to see which direction the world is heading in.

All of your arguments here have been rebutted with quotes, facts, current events, and analysies that make perfect rational sense.

"They have a mouth but do not speak; they have eyes but do not see. They have ears but do not listen; neither is there any breath in their mouth. Like them will be those who make them, all who trust in them.
- Psalm 135:16-18

King David was referring to idolatrous statues in those verses but sometimes people seem to be similarly made of wood and stone.

I see the trajectory, where we differ is on the causes and solutions. Yours puts the blame for everything on a book, the Koran, which is to me is a ridiculous notion in and of itself, and is naive enough to believe banning Islam would be the solution (because religious persecution has worked so well in the past, right?).

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by scandium

I see the trajectory, where we differ is on the causes and solutions. Yours puts the blame for everything on a book, the Koran, which is to me is a ridiculous notion in and of itself,

Go to Morroco, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Lybia, etc., and stand on a busy street corner holding up a sign saying that.

It makes no difference what you believe. It makes a difference what the world's 1.2 billion plus adherant of Islam believe is the absolute word of god to be carried out and followed through.

and is naive enough to believe banning Islam would be the solution (because religious persecution has worked so well in the past, right?).

While it did a lot of damage and went into unrelated paths, the Crusades did just that and saved the Europe that we've known for centuries from cultural extinction and the persecution of its own religionists.

Now you can't distinquish between aggressors and their victims? All for the glory of some foolish moral equivalence which isn't even there? Now look who's playing with millions of lives, Mr. Condom!

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Skybird

The pope: God's representative on earth - what a blasphemy. and you give him as an example of christian teachings deriving from Jesus?

Not to the millions of Christians who call themselves Catholics, and that is part of my point. Were there no Islam to rally against we would go back to killing each other, as we did in northern Ireland and as we did during the great schisms. Your point seems to be that Christians don't kill anyone over there faith because of Jesus. My point is that Christians have always killed people because of their faith, in spite of Jesus. And on this, regardless of how you think Christians should behave, history is on my side.

And I am still waiting for your answer to this: you also did not show me where Jesus explicitly commanded and ordered that kind of violance and subjugation that Muhammad explicitly has demanded, and practiced himself. I would also like to know where you see violant Islam in conflict with the example the founder of this religion, Muhammad, has set

This isn't relevant to me. Historically, again to go by history and not theology (since only one of these two things is concrete), it hasn't mattered what Jesus or Muhammad preached as any religion can be used to justify (as it always has been) just about anything.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by CCIP

1) It's an unwritten rule of internet debates that anyone who brings up comparisons to Hitler should automatically lose the debate. I tend to agree.

I lose:

The mental path to appeasement

You win! Bask in the glory!

[scandium]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

It makes no difference what you believe. It makes a difference what the world's 1.2 billion plus adherant of Islam believe is the absolute word of god to be carried out and followed through.

And if these 1.2 billion people were the adherents to this religion of 'war and murder' that you make them out to be then we would not be here, would we? That is where reality seems to differ from your perception of it.

While it did a lot of damage and went into unrelated paths, the Crusades did just that and saved the Europe that we've known for centuries from cultural extinction and the persecution of its own religionists.

So says Avon. None of the histories of the period that I've read on this, but I'll take your word for it.

Now you can't distinquish between aggressors and their victims? All for the glory of some foolish moral equivalence which isn't even there? Now look who's playing with millions of lives, Mr. Condom!

Right Avon, I have millions of lives in my hands...

[Skybird]

You evade and distract. Not wanting to answer a question that you cannot answer in a way that pleases your previously stated opinion, you declare it to be "not relevant".

That Islam is historically acting in correspondence with it's founder's intention and commandments, whereas socalled "Christians" (or should I say "Churchianists"?) do not, is not relevant. And that violance in Jesus teachings is not allowed and accepted (and never was practiced neither by Jesus, nor by anyone who seriously was in his following), but in Muhammad's teachings is explicitly demanded, is not relevant. And that Jesus teachings were misinterpreted - I say: ursurped - by the church, whereas the teachings of Muhammad are not abused, but simply practiced to the word: not relevant.



Your indifference is absurd. I see no reason to continue when someone tells me that a historical figure is said to be of zero interest and that all and everything can be taken and twisted just to justify all and everything. That is complete intellectual nihilism: the complete absence of scales for comparing, category, evaluation, value. This is the politics I see at work in the EU, and this is the reason why the West is going down the drain: indifference, and unlimited tolerance on the basis of rejecting any qualities and scales that differ between what is to be tolerated, and what not. This is the total rejection of personal identity, this is anarchy, and I see your understanding of history as anarchic, too.

Forms need borders that define them, else all you have is an empty void.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

I lose:

The mental path to appeasement

You win! Bask in the glory!

I think he meant me.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by scandium

And if these 1.2 billion people were the adherents to this religion of 'war and murder' that you make them out to be then we would not be here, would we? That is where reality seems to differ from your perception of it.

You are forever missing the point. The religion of Islam advocates the subjugation of the world to Islam and to Muslims.

If there were only 10 Muslims who followed Islam's teachings, this thread would not exist. But that's not the situation. There are millions of Muslims throughout the western world who are well aware in general of the ultimate goal of Islam reigning supreme over you and me and our separate ideological and religious beliefs. The Islamic world is pumping billions of dollars worldwide to achieve this goal of an Islamic ruled world.

You have already been targeted. Defend yourself or at least get out of the way so that others can.

So says Avon. None of the histories of the period that I've read on this, but I'll take your word for it.

Next time you're in Rome, don't forget to visit St. Peter's Mosque.

Right Avon, I have millions of lives in my hands...

I'm simply using rhetoric that's the equivalent of yours a page or two back.