What you said was, objectively, a product of serious delusion - including the baseless supposition of "hate", a motive so commonly ascribed to objectors by fundies one begins to suspect a mistaken empathy is at the root.
Ah yes, you have now made 2 assumptions about me in 2 posts! That must be some kind of record! Gz! Here, have a cookie!
Before we move on though, can you tell me your objective reasoning behind your conclusion that I am seriously deluded? Surely, you must have taken some factors into account and at least investigated whether my accusation could have any inkling of truth in it? I sincerely hope you have but unfortunately I don’t think so. Because if you had you would have seen the obvious evidence before you.
Let’s start with Geoffs post up top. From that ridiculous cartoon he notes that the Quranic verse commands Muslims to kill non-believers. From the Biblical verse he notes that it says that God will do it and therefore Christians are peaceful. That is the only thing he notes. If he had any ounce of objectivity he would have asked why the creator of that cartoon did not take a Biblical verse that talks about fighting? It’s not like there aren’t any. But no, Geoff doesn’t see that, all he wants to point out is that the Quranic verse commands killing all non-believers.
Let’s move on. One of the popular quotes on FFI is that “When Christians don’t follow the Bible, they do evil things. When Muslims follow the Quran, they do evil things.” Now that’s objective reasoning! Surely you did not miss that?
And then there’s Mr. Wilders, who wants to block or ban anything related to Islam yet happily proclaims that Dutch law should be a Leitkultur of Christian and Jewish teachings. Oh yes, very objective! I bet you didn’t miss that!
You described me as a fundie. Because my definition of a fundamentalist differs from yours, I am flattered. But that doesn’t take away from the fact that you have done no objective reasoning whatsoever. Instead, you’ve just proven me right, again. Instead of going out and checking whether I may be right in some way, you’ve just resorted to putting on your shades of hate which label me as a moronic, ranting fundie and blurted out the usual we can expect from you.
Thumbs up!
\sarcasm
Come to think of it, I have run into something similar: Christian fundies claiming atheists are attacking Christianity while defending Islam. It was just surprising to see it put the other way, and from someone outside my own culture and not betrayed in any way.
Cool! Could you give me a link? That would be nice. Thanks in advance.
Arsalan,
No, I always say Xtianity and Islam are as two peas in a pod. Virtually identical except the Xian religion has the doctrine of 'forgiveness' which is a huge psychological factor and easily evident in it's theology.
And of course there isn’t anything in Islamic teaching that provides a gateway to higher understanding of the world around us... Strange how you have picked up the doctrine of forgiveness for Christianity, but dismissed it in any other religion, including Islam.
Strange that you have still not acknowledged that the concept of Universality as presented by Islamic teaching is so beautiful and satisfying, that it is one of the best ways to reconcile people from different religions. That it brings the message of hope, peace and harmony between mankind.
Strange that you have not acknowledged other teachings of Islam, empiricism for example, which have a profound effect on our lives nowadays and are responsible for among others the modern scientific method, experimental science and experimental physics, all of which were introduced by that old friend of ours, Ibn Haytham, who, as you know, of course, attributed it to Islamic teaching, i.e. The Quran.
But no, of course you won’t acknowledge any of those positives coming from Islamic teaching. Nope.
Now the question you need to ask yourself is: “Why? Why won’t I accept the positives coming from Islamic teaching?”
Understand now?
IMO Islam goes for more of a blunt approach - regulated behavior, sometimes name change and tries to 'intellectualize' absurdity. All these techniques are used in 'cults'.
Can you tell me exactly where regulated behaviour is forced on to people? Or name change? Or where does Islam try to intellectualize absurdity? I would like proof please.
Lets face it, if you went to a Scientology 'revival' and saw new members fainting as the Ki of Xenu entered their body and saw them change their name to 'Binky alpha 9' afterwards and then spent years in serious study of the writings of The Last Prophet Hubbard kept in the Perfect Book of 'Qur'anic-Entanglement' while praying 25 times a day towards the alpha quadrant and no longer eating the same foods - yeah, you'd see a mirror of Xianity and Islam.
It's just kind of hard to see it while your name is still 'Binky alpha 9'
Ah yes, your pathetic old argument that Islam is just a copy of Christianity. Once again, you prove that you have not picked up any of what I have said previously on this subject and you resort to your age old, tired and frankly invalid argument. You conveniently dismiss Islam’s claim of
NOT being a new religion and not a revival either.
Also conveniently dismissing that the Prophet was seen as a righteous and truthful man all of his life by everyone. That only changed when he told them off Islam. Now why would a man who cannot read and write, who has not told a single lie all of his life, who is called in to be the judge in almost all matters, suddenly start lying, copy a religion which was already known to the residents of that city and country and oppose the established might of Arabia? And succeed may I add.
Now why would a man, who his future enemies, the Meccans, testified that he always told the truth, suddenly do this?
The holes in your “plagiarism” theory are incredible and yet you still hang on to it. Now why would you hang onto a negative theory for Islam and a positive one for Christianity?
That, my friend, is the million dollar question.
No, it's dead on. "Cut off their fingertips" is an order. It doesn't mean "I will do this for you". I think you should reread the sources again; I don't think you're totally familiar with them.
I am quite familiar with that verse. It is usually touted by anti-Islamists as one of the verses that command me to kill anyone who isn’t a Muslim. And yet, having the knowledge I do about the source, I disagree. But the question is do you have the knowledge? Do you know what the verse is about? Do you know the context? I think we can safely assume you do not. Hence that makes your “incredibly picky note” total bullshit. Let me enlighten you on these verses.
The verses in question are:
When you implored the assistance of your Lord, and He answered you, saying, ‘I will assist you with a thousand of the angels, following one another.’
And Allah made it only as glad tidings, and that your hearts might thereby be set at rest. But help comes from Allah alone; surely, Allah is Mighty, Wise.
When He caused sleep to come upon you as a sign of security from Him, and He sent down water upon you from the clouds, that thereby He might purify you, and remove from you the filth of Satan, and that he might strengthen your hearts and make your steps firm therewith.
When thy Lord revealed to the Angels, saying, ‘I am with you; so give firmness to those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Smite, then, the upper parts of their necks, and smite of all finger-tips.’
That is because they have opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoso opposes Allah and His Messenger, then Allah is surely severe in retribution.
That is your punishment, taste it then; and know that for disbelievers there is the punishment of Fire.’
O ye who believe! When you meet those who disbelieve, advancing in force, turn not your backs to them.
And whoso turns his back to them on such a day, unless manoeuvring for battle or turning to join another company, he indeed draws upon himself the wrath of Allah, and Hell shall be his abode. And an evil resort it is.
So you killed them not, but it was Allah who killed them. And thou threwest not when thou didst throw, but it was Allah Who threw, that he might overthrow the disbelievers and that He might confer on the believers a great favour from Himself. Surely, Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.
That is what happened; and know that Allah is He Who weakens the designs of the disbelievers.
If you sought a judgement, then judgement has indeed come to you. And if you desist, it will be better for you; but if you return to hostility, We too will return. And your party shall be of no avail at all to you, however numerous it be, and know that Allah is with the believers. (8:10-20)
Am I right that you never even read these verses? Of course you didn’t. And this is the main reason that Imams are needed. These verses are all about context. And what is the context of these verses I hear you ask? The Battle of Badr. Yes, that point in Islamic history when the Meccans were coming to completely wipe out Islam, that means slaughter every single Muslim, be they man, woman or child. That is the context of these verses and therefore these verses are about a time when Muslims have to defend themselves physically from an enemy that wants to kill them, i.e. wartime.
So once again, we have verses which are meant for a time of war and not everyday life which have been completely ripped out of context (as if Muslims just read 1 verse at a time) in the hope that this twisting of the verses may give rise to anti-Islamic sentiment. But anyone who has an ounce of objectivity in them will read the preceding and succeeding verses and come to the conclusion that your conclusion is total bullshit. And they won’t miss out on that small little verse 8:20 which says that when hostilities are over there is to be no fighting. Oh, I guess you missed that one as well eh.... What a surprise...
One thing though, can you tell me what the international law or any law says regarding self-defence in a time of war. Just curious like...
