Rush Limburger

Originally posted by Wulebgr
Either continue until you have some evidence for:

Originally posted by Iorek
[b]The basis of the entire Islamic religion is death to the infadels. Don't believe me, pick up the Koran and have at.

Or, admit that you do not know what you are talking about.

As for the Bible, do you deny that Joshua 11, for example, advocates genocide?


...[text shortened]... those came from, so don't even start.[/b]

Are there even a million verses in the Qur'an?[/b]

I just gave you some. If those verses aren't enough, then you are indeed blind. There are more if you aren't convinced.

Joshua 11:5 - And when all these kings were met together, they came and pitched together at the waters of Merom, to fight against Israel.

The attacked, not the attackers. He crushed Hazor and his army so they would never be a threat again.😉

Originally posted by nomind
i'm glad to amuse you, but why do all that disagree with me think that it is so witty to point out my screen name? do you think that it was an accident? i agree that the quran is filled with passages that exhort the faithful to kill infidels in the name of allah. many of them, even. maybe even more so than the christian bible, i don't know. nonetheless, c ...[text shortened]... up to your standards but i do appreciate your attempt to help me better myself.

Give me one verse out the Bible where it specifically tells Christians to go out and kill anyone who does not accept God. If you can give me that, I might change my opinion. God says he will smite the unbelievers in the end, but he does not tell his followers to go out on a daily basis and kill them. The Koran does. The two faiths are nowhere near the same and comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges.

Oh yes, I'm happy that my taxes go off to build a brand new 7 million courthouse. I'm happy that my hard earned money goes towards welfare which provides money for those who don't want to work at all. The saying that all good citizens pay taxes is bull crap. Paying enough taxes to provide for the necessities of the country is great, such as funding the military, paying our leaders, and keeping public works going.

And Reaganomics substantially aided the economy.

Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years. -wikipedia.com

Reducing taxes encourages free enterprise which boosts the economy.

Originally posted by Iorek
Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years. -wikipedia.com

Is Wikipedia a credible source.

(Hint: over the past year I've corrected several errors in the article on Ronald Reagan, but there are others yet to be corrected. And others introduce new errors as old ones are corrected.)

I'm not denying all growth during the Reagan years, but your arguments in this thread have been full of gross, easily corrected errors. Do you still maintain that Reaganomics reduced the national debt, for example?

I'm well aware of the data presented in http://www.house.gov/jec/middle/crunch3/fig-2a.gif, but could you address the benefits of Reaganomics in light of the data at http://www.osjspm.org/graphics/IncByClass98.gif?

Please note that as you use the term, "pre-Reagan years" considers only 1979-1980. If you go back to 1970, a somewhat different picture emerges.

Originally posted by Iorek
And Reaganomics substantially aided the economy.

Especially that portion of the economy that manufactures weapons.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
Is Wikipedia a credible source.

(Hint: over the past year I've corrected several errors in the article on Ronald Reagan, but there are others yet to be corrected. And others introduce new errors as old ones are corrected.)

I'm not denying all growth during the Reagan years, but your arguments in this thread have been full of gross, easily corrected err ...[text shortened]... rs" considers only 1979-1980. If you go back to 1970, a somewhat different picture emerges.

I indeed agree that Wikipedia is not as credible as one might be led to believe.

However, I only wish to bring out the benefits of the Reagan era. As with any presidency, there are errors and mistakes. I do not deny Reagan had several. And yes, I've seen graphs showing that after Carter the debt increased. Believe me, I read before I speak.

Originally posted by Iorek
I only wish to bring out the benefits of the Reagan era.

I aim for an accurate assessment of the Reagan era. So, we differ substantially in our goals.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
I aim for an accurate assessment of the Reagan era. So, we differ substantially in our goals.

Right. Okay then.

And your response to my other post?

Originally posted by Iorek
Right. Okay then.

And your response to my other post?

I maintain that you offer a rosy view of the Judeo-Christian tradition based on minimal reading of the Bible (twice is minimal) and none of Western history, while you offer unsupported caricatures of Islam. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all offer theological justification for Holy War. Nevertheless, such war against unbelievers is not the basis of any of these faiths.

Your anti-Islam rants worsen the current problems faced by the United States. We need understanding, not militant propaganda.

Edit: Chess players should at least acknowledge that Europeans learned the game from Muslims. I realize that you are not on this site for the chess, as you timed out in your only game.

Originally posted by Wulebgr
I maintain that you offer a rosy view of the Judeo-Christian tradition based on minimal reading of the Bible (twice is minimal) and none of Western history, while you offer unsupported caricatures of Islam. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all offer theological justification for Holy War. Nevertheless, such war against unbelievers is not the basis of any of ...[text shortened]... lims. I realize that you are not on this site for the chess, as you timed out in your only game.

And there it is. "Understanding". The same thing as reasoning. I'd love to see you reason with a Jihadist having a bomb strapped to his chest. There is no reasoning with them. We've tried and failed. War is sometimes the only solution. It's not pretty, but it's necessary.

Unsupported caricatures? Are you kidding me? I have given direct quotes from the Koran! And I could give more, but it doesn't appear it would do much good. And you only gave one example of "supposed" hatred from the Bible, which I properly discredited. Who needs the education now? Post something of credibility.

Does it really matter if I play chess or not?

Originally posted by rassman987
It is entertaining to follow a persons train of thoughts. Especially someone like nomind that preaches like he knows what is best for the world. Atleast I know I am ignorant and Am fine with it.

knowing that you are ignorant and being fine with it doesn't seem to slow down your preaching any. we are all here giving our views about the world and how we think it should be so don't get too self-rightous, as you seem to have plenty of opinions yourself.

Originally posted by Iorek
Give me one verse out the Bible where it specifically tells Christians to go out and kill anyone who does not accept God. If you can give me that, I might change my opinion. God says he will smite the unbelievers in the end, but he does not tell his followers to go out on a daily basis and kill them. The Koran does. The two faiths are nowhere near the same and years. -wikipedia.com

Reducing taxes encourages free enterprise which boosts the economy.

read the book of dueteronomy in the old testament - especially moses' second sermon maybe? the one that has all the rules. there are plenty of examples where christians are commanded to kill, either non-christians who try to convert them or christians that are breaking certain rules. i don't have a particular verse but there are plenty.

and i'm fine with reducing taxes - progressively, not regressively.

Originally posted by Iorek
Does it really matter if I play chess or not?

yes

Originally posted by Iorek
Having read the Bible twice through, I'd have to say that in every book of the Old Testament, Israel was attacked first and then enslaved. Egypt, Caanan, the Hittites, Persia....all these people oppressed Israel and in every story they are breaking free of this bondage.

Now, how about a few quotes from the Koran for you:

God loves no infidel. 2:276
Men ue it. - Psalms 34:14

How terribly violent! Flee to the hills! The Christians are coming!🙄

God loves no infidel. 2:276

What translation did you find this in? I have four translations, and none of them say this.

The context of this verse is all about usury versus charity. Maulana Muhammad Ali’s translation of this verse reads: “Allah will blot out usury, and He causes charity to prosper. And Allah loves not any ungrateful sinner.” The other translations are similar.

Men are a step above women. 2:228

Read the whole verse. It has to do with the reconciliation after divorce during a three-month waiting period, during which time the divorce can be annulled at the request of the husband, with the agreement of the wife (who may refuse). It also says that women have equal rights to men in this matter; but men “are a degree above them” in that “since it is the husband who is responsible for the maintenance of the family, the first option to rescind a provisional divorce rests with him.” (Commentary by Muhammad Asad, from his translation.)

Not exactly radical feminism, I grant, but then neither is this: “Slaves, accept the authority of your masters with all deference, not only those who are kind and gentle but also those who are harsh.... Wives, in the same way, accept the authority of your husbands...” (1 Peter 2:18 & 3:1)

Say to the infidels: you shall be worsen, and to Hell shall you be gathered together; and wretched the couch! 3:10

I think you meant to cite Surah 3:12: “Say to those who reject Faith: ‘Soon you will be vanquished and gathered together to Hell—and evil bed indeed (to lie on)!’” (Yusuf Ali’s translation.)

Matthew 23:33 You snakes, you brood of vipers! How can you escape being sentenced to hell?

Mark 16:16 The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned.

Matthew 13:41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will collect out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, 42 and they will throw them into the furnace of fire, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Believers! wage war against such of the infidels as are your neighbors, and let them find you rigorous. 9:124

I think you meant to cite Surah 9:123. “O you who believe, fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you and let them find firmness in you. And Know Allah is with those who keep their duty.” (Maulana Ali’s translation.)

In a footnote, Ali implies this is a historical reference: “Because it was they who persecuted the Muslims. The object was to stop persecutions.”

Matthew 10:34 "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; 36 and one's foes will be members of one's own household.

Is this the infamous “sword verse” of the Gospels? 😉

___________________________________________

Here are some more verses on fighting that I found in the Qur’an, and some comments. I have used more than one translation:

Surah 4:101— “And when you journey in the earth, there is no blame on you if you shorten the prayer, if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you trouble. Surely the disbelievers are an open enemy to you.” (Maulana Ali’s translation)

In this case, it is non-Muslims who have declared themselves to be open enemies to the Muslims. Muslims are here permitted to shorten their prayer-time (Muslims pray five times a day) if they fear that their enemies will harass or attack them.

Surah 2:190-195—

“And fight in God’s cause* against those who wage war against you but do not commit aggression, for surely God does not love aggressors.

“And slay them wherever you find them, and drive them out from where they drove you out, for oppression is even worse than killing. And fight not against them near the Inviolable House of Worship unless they fight against you there first; but if they fight against you, slay them: such is the recompense of those who deny the truth.

“But if they desist—behold, God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace.

“Hence, fight against them until there is no more oppression and all worship is devoted to God alone; but if they desist, all hostility shall cease, except against oppressors.

“Fight during the sacred months if you are attacked: for a violation of sanctity is just retribution. Thus, if anyone commits aggression against you, attack him just as he has attacked you—but remain conscious of God, and know that God is with those who are conscious of him.

“And spend in God’s cause, and let not your own hands throw you into destruction; and persevere in doing good: behold, God loves the doers of good.” (Muhammad Asad’s translation)

This seems to be clearly about fighting against aggression, persecution, oppression, to defend your religion, your property, your life. It is not a “hunting license” against unbelievers. If the aggressors cease hostility, so must the Muslims. (The same general thing applies to Surah 4:89-91, except that these verses deal with those who pretended to ally themselves with the Muslims, while plotting against them.)

Also, Surah 22:39, 40—

“Permission is granted those (to take up arms) who fight because they were oppressed. God is certainly able to help those who were driven away from their homes for no other reason than they said: “Our Lord is God.” And if God had not restrained some men through others, monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques, where the name of God is honored most, would have been razed.” (Ahmed Ali’s translation; this may be the chronologically earliest mention of fighting in the Qur’an.)

It should also be noted that the Qur’an is not written as a straightforward narrative text. It often seems to have a kind of dialectical pattern to it, which undoubtedly complicates the nature of “contextuality,” and which I think Islamic exegesis takes into account.

With regard to Hadith, thus far I found these in a disputed wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_war_in_Islam):

• "You are neither hard-hearted nor of fierce character, nor one who shouts in the markets. You do not return evil for evil, but excuse and forgive." - Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 362
• "Do not kill any old person, any child or any woman" (Abu Dawud).
• "Do not kill the monks in monasteries" or "Do not kill the people who are sitting in places of worship" (Musnad of Ibn Hanbal).
Speech by Abu Bakr, Mohammed's closest friend and first successor, to an Islamic army set out for Syria: "Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman, nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock, save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone."


* Maulana Ali, in his translation renders this as “fight in the way of Allah,” and comments that this means strictly defensive fighting; it also includes such things as prohibitions on killing innocents (non-combatants) and a requirement to cease fighting once the aggressors do. Ali says: “It is this defensive fighting which is called fighting in the way of Allah. Fighting for the propagation of the faith is not once mentioned in the whole of the Qur’an.” (italics in original)

____________________________________

Of course, some Muslims may be guilty of reading the Qur’an out of context, and read into it what they want, just like Jews, Christians or anyone else--just as I did with the Gospel verses I quoted?