Originally posted by beermaestroThis is Sharia; some of it is specified in the Koran and the Hadith, the rest has been arrived at by some kind of interpretation (generally over areas where the original sources are ambiguous), so you can see why Muslims would want to follow it. The problems are that it will inevitably be imposed on non-Muslims as well, and the interpretations can vary greatly. What we have seen recently is that some Muslim countries have taken up much stricter interpretations of Sharia, with deplorable consequences. However, the law has to derive its legitimacy from somewhere, and most Muslim countries were ruled at one time or another by an imperial power, so their legal precedent carries little weight in the eyes of the people, whereas Sharia seems like a good starting point, at least. If Israel became dominated by ultra-Orthodox Jews, I wouldn't be at all suprised if their government started enacting Biblical laws on what you can't do on the Sabbath, for example.
2) Rule of law is strongly, if not entirely influenced, by Islamic tenets.
I agree that much of the world's anti-Jewish propaganda is produced by Muslims (Arabs are Semites so it would be a bit daft for them to be anti-Semitic); but then you'll find much anti-Catholic propaganda in the literature of the Orangemen of Northern Ireland. In both cases the bile these people issue is motivated by politics, not religion.
Islamism is simultaneously modern and backward, and in my opinion something to be dealt with, all in the same way that fascism is (neither actually represents a return to earlier times, even though they claim to). But equating jihad with warfare is like equating the swastika with the Nazis: lots of people do it to try to criticise the extremists, but in doing so they actually accept the extremists' appropriation of these words. (Another Nazi example is Aryan; you'll find people consistenly assume the word means what Hitler said it meant) In a religious context jihad means the fight against sin - now that could be the sins of others, or sin in your own actions, but even in the former case, it doesn't necessarily mean killing the infidels. Muslims do believe that not being a Muslim is sinful, so they will try to convert people, and this I also find unpleasant; but don't strict Christians believe that everyone who isn't a Christian is going to hell unless they pray for forgiveness and repent of their sins? Islam and Christianity have much in common.
Originally posted by chancremechanicDo you think I hate Americans just because I critisize your government and engage in a little bit of banter?
Yo, Ian..who the hell are you to tell me that I'm full of hate after your anti-American diatribe posts? Don't you think you're being hypocritical? There may be millions of peace-loving Muslims but there are also millions of Muslims who are silent about the actions of the militant Muslims and their anti-Infidel excursions. By the way, how does my simply telling the truth in my last post indicate that I'm full of hate? 🙄😲
Have you ever stopped to consider that just because someone lives in a muslim country doesn't mean that they are a true muslim - in the same way that members of the catholic IRA could hardly be considered as Christian.
Originally posted by AcolyteAcolyte: " Islamism is simultaneously modern and backward ..... "
This is Sharia; some of it is specified in the Koran and the Hadith, the rest has been arrived at by some kind of interpretation (generally over areas where the original sources are ambiguous), so you can see why Muslims would want to follo ...[text shortened]... repent of their sins? Islam and Christianity have much in common.
Can you explain please why you think Islamism is modern ?
Originally posted by AcolyteAcolyte: " ...... but don't strict Christians believe that everyone who isn't a Christian is going to hell unless they pray for forgiveness and repent of their sins? Islam and Christianity have much in common."
This is Sharia; some of it is specified in the Koran and the Hadith, the rest has been arrived at by some kind of interpretation (generally over areas where the original sources are ambiguous), so you can see why Muslims would want to follo ...[text shortened]... repent of their sins? Islam and Christianity have much in common.
Roman Catholics are not allowed to state or believe that someone, believer or non-believer, is or will be in hell. That decision is Gods not ours.
Ok. I read the whole thread and have a couple of "impressions" or thoughts.
Thought one... as to Joe's original post... but maybe then again the reason they eat more plants is because if you live in the desert your animal diet consists of eating Ram, Lamb, Sheep Or Mutton. Or your car...(sometimes called "camel"😉
I can't remember who said it, but someone implied that "not thinking like you do, doesn't make them evil." This is quite right. But "Not Thinking" does.
One of religions faults has to do with the title of my book on Politics that I am going to write one day whose title I guess... will be, "Religion, Politics And The Military... Why Everyone Wants To Be The Pope During The Rebirth" They all become inseperable at some point. Now just happens to be the time for Islam. It will fade after it's brief flirtation... just as happens with all religions.
That said. Nuff said.
??? Why does an ancient text refer to Christians and Jews as if they were (nearly) the same?
I'm just saying... the text of the Qu'Ran, as translated into english (http://www.quran.ca) Refers to Christians, even as relating to Abraham as well as (the time of) Moses.
This is 2.62, which is immediately after the re-telling of Moses and the people being hungry (2.61):
2. 62. Lo! those who believe ( in that which is revealed unto thee , Muhammad ) , and those who are Jews , and Christians , and Sabaeans whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right surely their reward is with their Lord , and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve .
But, Later,
22. 17. Lo! those who believe ( this Revelation ) , and those who are Jews , and the Sabaeans and the Christians and the Magians and the idolaters . Lo! Allah will decide between them on the Day of Resurrection . Lo! Allah is Witness over all things .
Jew, Christians, and idolaters are listed in the same breath.
What should I take from this?
The Qu'ran is translated to English in the time of Christianity, and/or the source of the Qu'ran has either prescient knowledge of Christianity as a religion, or the Qu'ran was written post AD33 (about the time Christians started calling themselfs that name).
The startling thing about the translation is how many times the Qu'ran, in different Suras: 2,3,5,9, and 22 mention the term Christian.
Something of specific note:
5. 14. And with those who say : "Lo! we are Christians , " We made a covenant , but they forgot a part of that whereof they were admonished . Therefor We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection , when Allah will inform them of their handiwork .
Anyone notice the tone of the Qu'ran, though? As I'm parsing the Qu'ran for the first time, it appears to be more of an instructional text, perhaps as to be presented as from a teacher to a student, rather than a [depending on your point of view] historical and informational document.
Reading through Sura 2, there is a lot of WE will tell you what ALLAH means type things. It doesn't seem to be as much a personal document that the devout should read inasmuch as being told what it says by a higher position, almost as if it is a script for the reader.
Admittedly, this is after about 5 minutes of browsing, and only one Sura, but I'm offering this without judgement on the religion itself, whether ISLAM or MUSLIM.
FWIW: I believe that there can't be more than one religion. I believe that there is only one post-mortem processing facility for all people. And all religions don't end up in the same place. I believe that nearly all religions are based upon the actions of the believer relative to the whims of the Supreme (individual or collective). Except:
God loved the world so much that He gave His One and Only Son, that whoever believed in Him should not perish, but live forever.
Whatever you want to say about it, it's not what you do, but who loves you, and what you do with that love.
Originally posted by crythiasExcellent post. I admire your effort and the fact that you are not adverse to work.
??? Why does an ancient text refer to Christians and Jews as if they were (nearly) the same?
I'm just saying... the text of the Qu'Ran, as translated into english (http://www.quran.ca) Refers to Christians, even as relating to Abraham ...[text shortened]... ot what you do, but who loves you, and what you do with that love.
The punch line needs be, however that "all religion" is the "only true religion"... as you imply.
Don't take me wrong. I admire a 'current christian' view as much as the next guy. I believe we are all in search of peace. just realize that Islam at it's current state is where Christianity was 700 years ago... you guessed it... the inquisitions and the crusades.
The good news is... we have to wait 1300 more years to see what violence and stupidity the Greens and Vegans bring into the world.
Mike
Originally posted by crythiasThe Qu'ran was written in the 7th Century CE.
[bThe Qu'ran is translated to English in the time of Christianity, and/or the source of the Qu'ran has either prescient knowledge of Christianity as a religion, or the Qu'ran was written post AD33 (about the time Christians started calling themselfs that name).[/b]
Originally posted by ianpickeringNo you just hate Americans.
Do you think I hate Americans just because I critisize your government and engage in a little bit of banter?
Have you ever stopped to consider that just because someone lives in a muslim country doesn't mean that they are a true muslim - in the same way that members of the catholic IRA could hardly be considered as Christian.
From long discussion I used to have with a moslem friend (I have been vegetarian many years), I gathered that vegetarianism was not common in Islam.
She told me that the Koran said that god made animals specifically for the use by humans, and that not eating animals was a snub to god. Obviously there are different moslem viewpoints, though.
About Islam in general. I have read snippets of the Koran. There are some extremely violent and hateful passages in there, especially regarding non-believers and women. Undoubtedly there are 'controversial' passages in the bible, too.
The way I see it, christians were a lot more violent and fundamental 500+ years ago when the were taking the bible seriously. Now they appear to ignore anything that doesn't fit in the modern world and are much more mellowed. Plenty of moslems are still at the stage where they are taking the Koran literally, that's why they are 500+ years behind the christians in terms of being civilised. I hope they catch up.
And about anti-semitism: I read with concern that there is a general increase in anti-jewishness in Europe. Apparently this correlates directly with the increase of moslems in Europe.
[Many controversial viewpoints included:]
You know what's wild (change of topic)? In America, it seems it's only anti-semitism if it's done by Christians. Which is weird, because Christianity owes a lot to Judaism for its foundation. I'm a Christian. I decry the slaughter of people for their religious beliefs, even if it was clear in the Old Testament. The New Testament teaches that the greatest commandment is to love your neaighbor as yourself, and that your neighbor isn't necessarily the people who go to church with you.
However, the NT also says to give [government] what is [government]'s and God what is God's. More, the government does not bear the sword in vain. Personally, I believe that means that Capital Punishment and a Military are both legitimate parts of government.
I also believe the push for tolerance in the US is equivalent to censorship in some respects: "You must tolerate our beliefs, values, etc., and you mustn't disagree with them or you are a hater." How does that follow? Since when do I lose my 1st Ammendment rights because you're of a religion/social group of which I disagree? I don't hate. and I'm not a hate monger. I just have a different opinion than you, and wish to be able to express it politely without censorship.
Ooh, one more thing. I wonder how the NAACP likes the Qu'ran repeatedly using the word "niggardly", even though the word has nothing to do with people of color.
Originally posted by Varg
From long discussion I used to have with a moslem friend (I have been vegetarian many years), I gathered that vegetarianism was not common in Islam.
She told me that the Koran said that god made animals specifically for the use by humans, and that not eating animals was a snub to god. Obviously there are different moslem viewpoints, though.
About Islam in gen ...[text shortened]... ewishness in Europe. Apparently this correlates directly with the increase of moslems in Europe.
Check out the thread "Hizb-ut-Tahrir and the world Caliphate"
Hizb-ut-Tahrir is just one of the many Islamist organisations. Their plans are really hairraising, but they mean what they say and what's more important they are working very hard to realise their plans.
.
Originally posted by slimjimThe above recently directed towards ianpickering...
No you just hate Americans.
Don't worry ian. When Americans criticize their own government and demand accountability, they're called America-haters too. Thinking, rational people are apparently not capable of being good patriots. Shame.
Originally posted by ivanhoeIslamism is modern in that it didn't really exist in its current form until the 20th century. Likewise I said fascism was modern - that doesn't make it good!
Acolyte: " Islamism is simultaneously modern and backward ..... "
Can you explain please why you think Islamism is modern ?