Islamism

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
The Iranian govt is run by Islamist clerics with an Islamist cleric as the Supreme Leader. An Islamist totalitarian state, yet you want me to believe that these men do not represent Islam. Fascinating.

They do not encompass the entirety of the religion. In other words, every expert on Islam does not interpret things the same way or agree with them. Even more importantly, every person who follows Islam does not agree with them. Do you not realize that there are different interpretations?

Even in Christianity there are extremists who are officials (priests, etc.) - that does mean they represent the religion or followers of the religion accurately.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
They do not encompass the entirety of the religion. In other words, every expert on Islam does not interpret things the same way or agree with them. Even more importantly, every person who follows Islam does not agree with them. Do you not realize that there are different interpretations?

Even in Christianity there are extremists who are officials (priests, etc.) - that does mean they represent the religion or followers of the religion accurately.

The Quran teaches to not make friends with Christians or Jews and behead the unbeliever. Christianity teaches to love your neighbor, forgiveness, do good to others, etc.. Those are inherent.

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
The Quran teaches to not make friends with Christians or Jews and behead the unbeliever. Christianity teaches to love your neighbor, forgiveness, love and peace. Those are inherent.

No, they really aren't. They are both subject to interpretation- there are plenty of morally questionable things in the Bible too. At the end of the day, most followers of both religions do not follow everything verbatim. And that is why you can't stereotype everyone into one group.

David · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
The Quran teaches to not make friends with Christians or Jews and behead the unbeliever. Christianity teaches to love your neighbor, forgiveness, do good to others, etc.. Those are inherent.

The Q'uran teaches Muslism to die if need be in the defense of Christians and Jews. The interesting thing about the Q'uran is that it was contemporary with the founding of Islam (unlike the Torah and Bible). Read it's passages alongside a history book and you find that the more violent parts coincide with wars while the more peaceful parts coincide with peacetime. You're not going to find anything about hurting Jews or Christians if there weren't Jewish or Roman armies running about when the passage was written.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
No, they really aren't. They are both subject to interpretation- there are plenty of morally questionable things in the Bible too. At the end of the day, most followers of both religions do not follow everything verbatim. And that is why you can't stereotype everyone into one group.

Jesus was a man of love and peace who taught love and forgiveness and peace. The teachings of Jesus are non-violent. Mohammed was a man of war who murdered and his words say "Do not make friends with Christians and Jews". Mohammed also taught to behead the unbeliever. Those teachings are in the Quran. If Christians are murdering in the name of Jesus then are misled by someone or a false teaching. Muslims who are murdering in the name of Allah are following the Quran's teachings.

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
Jesus was a man of love and peace who taught love and forgiveness and peace. The teachings of Jesus are non-violent. Mohammed was a man of war who murdered and his words say "Do not make friends with Christians and Jews". Mohammed also taught to behead the unbeliever. Those teachings are in the Quran. If Christians are murdering in the name of Jesus then are misled by someone or a false teaching. Muslims who are murdering in the name of Allah are following the Quran's teachings.

Oh God (or maybe I should say Oh Universe). I am not going to argue with you which fairy tale is better. Both have questionable things and can be interpreted differently. At the end of the day they are still fairy tales.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

David said:
The Q'uran teaches Muslism to die if need be in the defense of Christians and Jews. The interesting thing about the Q'uran is that it was contemporary with the founding of Islam (unlike the Torah and Bible). Read it's passages alongside a history book and you find that the more violent parts coincide with wars while the more peaceful parts coincide with peacetime. You're not going to find anything about hurting Jews or Christians if there weren't Jewish or Roman armies running about when the passage was written.

There were Roman armies running about when Jesus taught forgiveness, love, and peace while Israel was occupied.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
Oh God (or maybe I should say Oh Universe). I am not going to argue with you which fairy tale is better. Both have questionable things and can be interpreted differently. At the end of the day they are still fairy tales.

That is your opinion. However, the truth is we have an Islamist totalitarian state that is funding terrorism.

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
However, the truth is we have an Islamist totalitarian state that is funding terrorism.

Arguably. But that says very little about Islam as a WHOLE.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
Arguably. But that says very little about Islam as a WHOLE.

Who is funding hamas and hezbollah?

Islam condones wife beating. Is that evil or not?

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
Islam condones wife beating. Is that evil or not?

It really doesn't. And more importantly the vast majority of Muslims do not condone it. And therein lies the problem with your whole argument here. Ironically, you fail to see the potentially similar arguments when it comes to Christianity (which would also be wrong of course).

reader · Jun 26, 2012

who was funding el kaide aganist soviets ?

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
It really doesn't. And more importantly the vast majority of Muslims do not condone it. And therein lies the problem with your whole argument here. Ironically, you fail to see the potentially similar arguments when it comes to Christianity (which would also be wrong of course).

Yes, it really does. You really shoudn't deny things when they are written down for all to see. Chrisitanity does not condone wife beating.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/01/canadian-prof-yes-islam-condones-wife-beatings.html

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

reader said:
who was funding el kaide aganist soviets ?

Who is "el kaide"?

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
Yes, it really does. You really shoudn't deny things when they are written down for all to see. Chrisitanity does not condone wife beating.

Neither does Islam. There are plenty of equally heinous literal writing in the Bible. But a lot followers don't take them literally, just as they don't take the Earth was created in 7 days literally or that the universe is only a few thousand years old. Same principle applies to the Quran.

edit: Let me add that I am not very well versed in the Quran and cannot confirm the wife beating thing, but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. I do know that everyone does not follow it literally though and that there are wicked literal writings in both the Quran and Bible.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
Neither does Islam. There are plenty of equally heinous literal writing in the Bible. But a lot followers don't take them literally, just as they don't take the Earth was created in 7 days literally or that the universe is only a few thousand years old. Same principle applies to the Quran.

Now you're lying.

admonish the rebellious women and banish them, and scourge them (whip them severely to inflict pain) (4:34) . . . smote them (hit or strike with the hand or with a weapon causing pain, beat them . . . (4:62)".

Now show me something similar to that from the words of Jesus or the New Testament.

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Did you just skip the whole part about me saying people don't take it literally? Just as they don't take the Bible literally.

Followers of both religions (and basically all organized religions) have found themselves constantly back-tracking as contemporary morals have changed and as science has disproved certain claims.

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
Did you just skip the whole part about me saying people don't take it literally? Just as they don't take the Bible literally.

Followers of both religions (and basically all organized religions) have found themselves constantly back-tracking as contemporary morals have changed and as science has disproved certain claims.

You said Islam did not condone wife beating. You're a habitual liar.

myp · Jun 26, 2012

Jack Fate said:
You said Islam did not condone wife beating. You're a habitual liar.

You just don't understand the difference between literal and interpretation. Do you believe the Earth in 6000 years old? Do you believe the Earth was created in 7 days? Do you believe man has dominion over his wife (yes, the Bible says that)? And I can go on and on...

Jack Fate · Jun 26, 2012

myp said:
You just don't understand the difference between literal and interpretation. Do you believe the Earth in 6000 years old? Do you believe the Earth was created in 7 days? Do you believe man has dominion over his wife (yes, the Bible says that)? And I can go on and on...

The word dominion in that scripture means man is the spiritual head like Christ is the spiritual head of the church.

Show me some scripture from the New Testament where Jesus condones wife beating or anything else in the New Testament that condones wife beating.

Islamism

Similar threads