Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
"Islam: What the West needs to know"
Comments
-
-
Ill be honest and say that for any statements Ive heard from violent "extremists" Ive only heard a fraction as many from peaceful muslims. Maybe its just my selective hearing or a media conspiracy to highlight violent fundamentalism.0
-
Ill be honest and say that for any statements Ive heard from violent "extremists" Ive only heard a fraction as many from peaceful muslims. Maybe its just my selective hearing or a media conspiracy to highlight violent fundamentalism.
Violence makes headlines as do extremes, ordinary people going about their lives don't.
Was this headline news?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/16/islam-synagogue-arson-gaza-antisemitism0 -
Well the quotes from the Quaran speak for themselves , saying Islam is a religion of peace is not true - it's all there in black and white, yes there are pretty bad passages in the bible but I'm pretty sure it doesn't say go out and kill everyone who isn't Christian.0
-
Well the quotes from the Quaran speak for themselves , saying Islam is a religion of peace is not true - it's all there in black and white, yes there are pretty bad passages in the bible but I'm pretty sure it doesn't say go out and kill everyone who isn't Christian.
....but, as the majority don't, then obviously taking those quotes at face value would be incorrect.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well the quotes from the Quaran speak for themselves , saying Islam is a religion of peace is not true - it's all there in black and white, yes there are pretty bad passages in the bible but I'm pretty sure it doesn't say go out and kill everyone who isn't Christian.
Have you read a Bible? Plenty of violence in there as well, that easily matches what in the Koran and surpasses it in some cases.
Now of course, most Christians don't run out and kill people, but there are passages that could be seen to advocate extreme violence, if taken the wrong way. Much the same way with the Koran.
**EDIT**
In fact a lot of stuff from the Koran is similar to what you see in the Bible.0 -
Have you read a Bible? Plenty of violence in there as well, that easily matches what in the Koran and surpasses it in some cases.
Now of course, most Christians don't run out and kill people, but there are passages that could be seen to advocate extreme violence, if taken the wrong way. Much the same way with the Koran.
Virtually all the violent passages in the Bible are in the Old Testament. The New Testament preaches a religion of peace (though perhaps some of the passages in the Book of Revelation run against this). Violence is done to Jesus and his disciples, rather than by them (the episode during the betrayal of Jesus reported in Matthew 26:51-52, where "one of those with Jesus put his hand on his sword, drew it, and struck the slave of the high priest, cutting off his ear", is significantly shown to be unacceptable to Jesus, who is reported as saying "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword"). A frequently quoted verse that seems to contradict this message of peace is 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". However, by studying the context of this verse, and the parallel verse Luke 12:51: "Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!", it is reasonable to conclude that the use of "sword" in Matthew 10:34 is metaphorical, indicating that choosing to follow Jesus could lead to families' becoming divided.
Just as it is appropriate to look at context to understand the "sword verse" in Matthew's Gospel, so we can consider context in reading the "sword verse" in the Qur'an (Sura At-Tawbah 9:5). In the Yusuf Ali translation, this reads:But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every strategem (of war); but if they repent, and establishe regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them; for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
The context of the verse makes it clear that it refers to polytheist tribes in Arabia who had entered into treaties with Muhammad that they would accept Islam, but who had then reneged on their treaties and worked against the Muslim community. I don't want to deny that Sura At-Tawbah discusses jihad at length, and contains very strong language, such as verse 123: "O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about; and let them find firmness in you, and know that Allah is with those who fear him", and verse 29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day; nor hold that forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the jizyah [poll tax levied on non-Muslims] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
It is certainly the case that some, though not all, Muslim scholars of both the medieval and modern periods, have interpreted Surah At-Tawbah as justifying, indeed requiring, war between Islam and non-Muslims. Indeed, some scholars have claimed that the "sword verse" abrogates all the more peaceful and tolerant verses (as many as 140 verses according to some) in the Qur'an.0 -
Have you read a Bible? Plenty of violence in there as well, that easily matches what in the Koran and surpasses it in some cases.
Now of course, most Christians don't run out and kill people, but there are passages that could be seen to advocate extreme violence, if taken the wrong way. Much the same way with the Koran.
**EDIT**
In fact a lot of stuff from the Koran is similar to what you see in the Bible.
if taken the wrong way ? whats the right way to take these quotes then
Koran 4.56: “Those who have disbelieved our signs, we shall roast them in fire. Whenever their skins are cooked to a turn, we shall substitute new skins for them, that they may feel the punishment; verily, Allah is sublime and wise.”
Koran 47.4: “Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when you have caused a bloodbath among them, bind a bond firmly on them.”
Koran 8.39: “Fight them until there is no dissension and the religion is entirely Allah’s.”
yes there's a lot of crazy stuff in the bible but it's pretty much exclusively old testament - Jesus was all lovey dovey, Jesus told the disciples to spread the word not kill non believers. The thing about the bible is it was written by men so you can take and leave what you want, the Qur’an was not written by men, the Qur’an is the actual words of Allah, the actual words of Allah - the whole thing was told to muhammed by the angel Gabriel - this stuff came straight down from heaven
If you are a Muslim you have a direct commandment from Allah - in his own words, to kill non muslims !
I'm not Christian myself but it's fairly benign as far as religions go , homophobia being about the worst of it's crimes. You just can't say that about Islam - lots of people kill in it's name and they are 100% backed up by the Qu'ran, they really are doing the bidding of Allah !0 -
If you are a Muslim you have a direct commandment from Allah - in his own words, to kill non muslims !
I'm not Christian myself but it's fairly benign as far as religions go , homophobia being about the worst of it's crimes. You just can't say that about Islam - lots of people kill in it's name and they are 100% backed up by the Qu'ran, they really are doing the bidding of Allah !
....but given the numbers of muslim in world, and the relative rarity of that kind of thing, logically it must be more complex than that. Or does reality not count?0 -
....but given the numbers of muslim in world, and the relative rarity of that kind of thing, logically it must be more complex than that. Or does reality not count?
well most people are generally decent so they don't go around killing people but that doesn't excuse the Qur’an, it is an incitement to murder.0 -
Advertisement
-
I also have to take issue with Islams attitude towars women.It seems really sexist to me, I can't think of any god reason for not allowing women to drive or for banning them from going anywhere by themselves.0
-
well most people are generally decent so they don't go around killing people but that doesn't excuse the Qur’an, it is an incitement to murder.
Given the level of influence of the Koran on muslims, the fact that they don't as a rule "go around killing people" whould indicate that the simplistic reading of it you suggest is not held by the vast majority.0 -
Virtually all the violent passages in the Bible are in the Old Testament. The New Testament preaches a religion of peace (though perhaps some of the passages in the Book of Revelation run against this). Violence is done to Jesus and his disciples, rather than by them (the episode during the betrayal of Jesus reported in Matthew 26:51-52, where "one of those with Jesus put his hand on his sword, drew it, and struck the slave of the high priest, cutting off his ear", is significantly shown to be unacceptable to Jesus, who is reported as saying "Put your sword back into its place; for all who take the sword will perish by the sword"). A frequently quoted verse that seems to contradict this message of peace is 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". However, by studying the context of this verse, and the parallel verse Luke 12:51: "Do you think that I have come to bring peace to the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division!", it is reasonable to conclude that the use of "sword" in Matthew 10:34 is metaphorical, indicating that choosing to follow Jesus could lead to families' becoming divided.
Just as it is appropriate to look at context to understand the "sword verse" in Matthew's Gospel, so we can consider context in reading the "sword verse" in the Qur'an (Sura At-Tawbah 9:5). In the Yusuf Ali translation, this reads:
The context of the verse makes it clear that it refers to polytheist tribes in Arabia who had entered into treaties with Muhammad that they would accept Islam, but who had then reneged on their treaties and worked against the Muslim community. I don't want to deny that Sura At-Tawbah discusses jihad at length, and contains very strong language, such as verse 123: "O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who gird you about; and let them find firmness in you, and know that Allah is with those who fear him", and verse 29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day; nor hold that forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the jizyah [poll tax levied on non-Muslims] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."
It is certainly the case that some, though not all, Muslim scholars of both the medieval and modern periods, have interpreted Surah At-Tawbah as justifying, indeed requiring, war between Islam and non-Muslims. Indeed, some scholars have claimed that the "sword verse" abrogates all the more peaceful and tolerant verses (as many as 140 verses according to some) in the Qur'an.
The old testament is part of the Bible. So what your saying doesn't matter, it a part of the book and we are comparing texts. Trying to disregard a huge part of one of the texts is laughable.
Also, the bits in the Bible calling for genocide, we should ignore them, as there in the old testament. So why is the old testament included at all? I was comparing texts and you seem to think we should ignore a huge part of the one of the texts, to try and excuse the violence with in.0 -
if taken the wrong way ? whats the right way to take these quotes then
Koran 4.56: “Those who have disbelieved our signs, we shall roast them in fire. Whenever their skins are cooked to a turn, we shall substitute new skins for them, that they may feel the punishment; verily, Allah is sublime and wise.”
Koran 47.4: “Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks and when you have caused a bloodbath among them, bind a bond firmly on them.”
Koran 8.39: “Fight them until there is no dissension and the religion is entirely Allah’s.”
yes there's a lot of crazy stuff in the bible but it's pretty much exclusively old testament - Jesus was all lovey dovey, Jesus told the disciples to spread the word not kill non believers. The thing about the bible is it was written by men so you can take and leave what you want, the Qur’an was not written by men, the Qur’an is the actual words of Allah, the actual words of Allah - the whole thing was told to muhammed by the angel Gabriel - this stuff came straight down from heaven
If you are a Muslim you have a direct commandment from Allah - in his own words, to kill non muslims !
I'm not Christian myself but it's fairly benign as far as religions go , homophobia being about the worst of it's crimes. You just can't say that about Islam - lots of people kill in it's name and they are 100% backed up by the Qu'ran, they really are doing the bidding of Allah !
So the bits of the Bible calling for Genocide, so we should ignore those then? You were comparing texts and I pointed out the Bible is full of all kinds of violence, but please ignore huge chunks of the book and pretend there not there.
See its very simple, the Old testament is a part of the Bible. Trying to excuse it by saying the New testament is far nicer, is rubbish, you were directly comparing 2 texts in the post I replied to and have decided to disregard a huge chunk of one of the texts, which is ridiculous. Simply put, if the old testament had no merit in Christianity, it would simply not be part of there Bible, but it is, so it has to be considered. Also, when comparing to texts, to ignore a huge chunk of one of them is ridiculous.
As for the Bible not being the word of God. Is this a mainstream Christian opinion? I was very much under the impression it would not be.
**EDIT**
You mentioned Homophobia, you do realize, that the bits of the Bible used to justify this is in the Old Testament, right? Seems to me that the Old Testament isn't disregarded by at least some Christians.
Of course, I know the Old Testament is huge inconvenience to your argument, of the Koran being more violent than the Bible, but your complete disregard of a huge chunk of one of the texts being discussed is puzzling, do you really think that your comparison is in anyway valid, when you ignore it? I would say trying to ignore it, invalidates your comparison.0 -
So the bits of the Bible calling for Genocide, so we should ignore those then? You were comparing texts and I pointed out the Bible is full of all kinds of violence, but please ignore huge chunks of the book and pretend there not there.
So your point is yes the Qu'ran is incitement to murder but so's the bible so thats all right. Well that argument just doesn't fly - like I said I'm not a christian so I am not familiar with the bible, I'm just going by what I see around me and I don't see priests ranting and raving and calling for heads to be chopped off and I also don't see christian suicide bombers running about the place - I do see muslim religious figures calling for murder and I do see muslim suicide bombers and I do see muslims rioting over cartoons and muslims killing authors over their writings and muslims killing family in "honour killings" and I do see muslims treating woman horendously.
but I guess thats all right because there's bad stuff in the bible too right ?.
Bottom line is the Qu'ran is incitement to murder and if you are a muslim then this should bother you greatly and give you reason to consider if you really want to follow this "faith"0 -
So your point is yes the Qu'ran is incitement to murder but so's the bible so thats all right. Well that argument just doesn't fly
Actually, thats not my point at all.
I was replying to your post where you compared 2 texts. You decided to ignore a huge part of one of them, which is an argument that doesn't fly. That was my point.- like I said I'm not a christian so I am not familiar with the bible, I'm just going by what I see around me and I don't see priests ranting and raving and calling for heads to be chopped off and I also don't see christian suicide bombers running about the place - I do see muslim religious figures calling for murder and I do see muslim suicide bombers and I do see muslims rioting over cartoons and muslims killing authors over their writings and muslims killing family in "honour killings" and I do see muslims treating woman horendously.
So why did you mention the 2 books then? You made a claim, and I replied to this. How does anything you mention above change whats in those 2 books?
You were comparing 2 texts. Thats what I replied to. All the stuff you mention means nothing, as you compared 2 books. What matters in such a comparison is the text of each book.
You were saying the Bible is less violent than the Koran, but now you admit to not being familiar with it? I was talking about the texts, you admit to not knowing about at least one of them, so I see no point on taking your comparison seriously.but I guess thats all right because there's bad stuff in the bible too right ?.
Of course not, but it seems ok to disregard huge sections of book in a comparison, as it inconvenient to your argument. Do you really think people wouldn't notice something so blatant?Bottom line is the Qu'ran is incitement to murder and if you are a muslim then this should bother you greatly and give you reason to consider if you really want to follow this "faith"
Bottom line, is that you compared 2 texts, and claimed one is more violent than the other. This is what I replied too. You have admitted to not knowing much about at least one of them. You disregarded a huge section of one of those texts, as it was inconvenient to you. You are trying to get away from this, but this is what I was talking about and what I replied to.0 -
Of course, I know the Old Testament is huge inconvenience to your argument, of the Koran being more violent than the Bible, but your complete disregard of a huge chunk of one of the texts being discussed is puzzling, do you really think that your comparison is in anyway valid, when you ignore it? I would say trying to ignore it, invalidates your comparison.
Therefore, you do not have to discuss the rabidly violent nature of the Koran. Is that what you're saying?
The bottom line is how many christians fly planes into buildings and blow up trains killing innocent people? Answer: none.
And before you start quoting the War in Iraq, I am utterly against the murder of innocent civilians in any shape or form, I just find the fact that the ultimate goal of certain followers of the undoubtedly repressive religion that is Islam, is to fornicate with innumerable virgins with allah's blessing.0 -
ironingbored wrote: »Therefore, you do not have to discuss the rabidly violent nature of the Koran. Is that what you're saying?
No, and I already answered a very similar question above.
Still, it strange that you have no problem with people ignoring huge chunks of the Bible in there comparison, but seem to be trying to do your best to put words in my mouth.ironingbored wrote: »The bottom line is how many christians fly planes into buildings and blow up trains killing innocent people? Answer: none.
I replied to a post comparing 2 texts. Your trying to change the subject.
So your bottom line means nothing, as I was talking about something else.ironingbored wrote: »And before you start quoting the War in Iraq, I am utterly against the murder of innocent civilians in any shape or form, I just find the fact that the ultimate goal of certain followers of the undoubtedly repressive religion that is Islam, is to fornicate with innumerable virgins with allah's blessing.
So, we should ignore the Iraq. Pretty funny that you can bring up 9/11, but I can't bring up the Iraq war. Why can't I bring it up exactly? Is it because, it show other people engaging in violence in this world? Your condemnation means less than nothing, as the Iraq war still happened and the people behind it and there buddies are very rich men, but I forget, when the West does something, it should be forgotten about asap.
You clearly wish to ignore the simple fact that I replied to someone comparing 2 books, and I pointed out the comparison was inaccurate.0 -
Still, it strange that you have no problem with people ignoring huge chunks of the Bible
My problem is that they don't ignore enough of the BibleSo, we should ignore the Iraq. Pretty funny that you can bring up 9/11, but I can't bring up the Iraq war. Why can't I bring it up exactly? Is it because, it show other people engaging in violence in this world? Your condemnation means less than nothing, as the Iraq war still happened and the people behind it and there buddies are very rich men, but I forget, when the West does something, it should be forgotten about asap.
I didn't say we should ignore Iraq. I tried to preempt your response which in hindsight turns out to be exactly as I thought it would be.as the Iraq war still happened and the people behind it and there buddies are very rich men, but I forget, when the West does something, it should be forgotten about asap.
Would these be the rich dictators, sheiks and mullahs who have always played ball with the US when it suited while using Islam as a tool to suppress natural development and progress?0 -
ironingbored wrote: »My problem is that they don't ignore enough of the Bible
What are you talking about? I was talking about poster in this thread making a comparison to 2 books and they decided to ignore a huge chunk of one of those, while making there comparison.ironingbored wrote: »I didn't say we should ignore Iraq. I tried to preempt your response which in hindsight turns out to be exactly as I thought it would be.
You said I shouldn't quote Iraq, as you condemn it. Seem very clear to me. I was not going to bring up Iraq. I have not brought it up so far, as I was talking about something else.
You brought up Iraq and not me. I just replied to what you said. If you read my posts, I never mentioned Iraq in this thread or Western violence, as I was not talking about that. You brought up Iraq, as you wanted a response on it and you got it. Don't try and pretend that I was going to bring it up regardless of what you posted. My reply about Iraq, was due to you bringing it up.ironingbored wrote: »Would these be the rich dictators, sheiks and mullahs who have always played ball with the US when it suited while using Islam as a tool to suppress natural development and progress?
Yes, they would be one group. The rest being the likes of Bush and his cronies, but for some reason, you don't mention them. Strange how you don't mention them.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
ironingbored wrote: »I just said I totally disagree with the Iraq war. If it makes you feel better; I hated GW Bush and his lapdog Blair.
Apologies, then I misunderstood you.0 -
Actually, thats not my point at all.
I was replying to your post where you compared 2 texts. You decided to ignore a huge part of one of them, which is an argument that doesn't fly. That was my point.
you brought the bible into it, but fine lets forget about the bible because it's not relevant whats relevant is the Qu'ran is an incitement to hatred and murder0 -
you brought the bible into it, but fine lets forget about the bible because it's not relevant whats relevant is the Qu'ran is an incitement to hatred and murder
You brought the Bible up. I replied to your post:Well the quotes from the Quaran speak for themselves , saying Islam is a religion of peace is not true - it's all there in black and white, yes there are pretty bad passages in the bible but I'm pretty sure it doesn't say go out and kill everyone who isn't Christian.
I replied to the above post. You bring up the Bible in this post. You trying to say I brought it up is hilarious, when I clearly was replying to you.
I replied to that in Post 37.
So once again, I was discussing your comparison. Trying to make it out, that I brought up the Bible first is nonsense. You made the comparison, not me. I replied to it. If you didn't want to discuss the Bible, you should not have brought it up, but you did, so it perfectly valid for me to discuss it now. Its valid, as you brought it up and not me.0 -
-
you brought the bible into it :rolleyes:
You have got to be joking. I quoted your own post, that mentioned the Bible. I replied to that. You denial is nothing short of ridiculous.
In my first reply to you in this thread, I quote you and in that you mention the Bible. Honestly, your denial is puzzling. I even quote you above and you mention the Bible.
Your post #35, mentioned the Bible.
My post #37, which quotes your post #35, which mentions the Bible, which is why I brought it up. Your post was clearly before mine, as we all know 35 comes before 37. The fact that I quote your post, should be more than enough to show this as well.
Honestly, you are clearly getting more and more desperate, since you are trying to deny what you posted earlier in this thread. What do you think you will achieve by denying what you posted in post #35, in this thread?0 -
lol so I did, my mistake
Like I said I'm not a christian, the bible is rubbish as far as I'm concerned but I felt it was a safe bet to say it didn't incite murder seeing as there's no christians out there screaming god is great as they saw someones head off, so maybe it was a bad comparison,
but whether it is doesn't really matter , the matter in hand is the Qu'ran, so we'll just leave it at the Qu'ran is an incitement to murder0 -
So your point is yes the Qu'ran is incitement to murder but so's the bible so thats all right. "
As far as I understand it, his argument is that if one is, then the other is. Seeing as thats obviously not true in any simplistic sense, then no, the Koran is not 'incitement to murder'.ironingbored wrote:The bottom line is how many christians fly planes into buildings and blow up trains killing innocent people? Answer: none.
No christian ever took up arms or became a terrorist? This is news to me.but I felt it was a safe bet to say it didn't incite murder seeing as there's no christians out there screaming god is great as they saw someones head off, so maybe it was a bad comparison,
Yet christians have justified wars and killing, by using the bible on occassion. Apartheid, for instance, was given a Biblical 'seal of approval'. Yet you seem to focus on muslim extremists.0 -
ironingbored wrote: »Therefore, you do not have to discuss the rabidly violent nature of the Koran. Is that what you're saying?
No he is saying you aren't taking the whole text in context I believe.ironingbored wrote: »many christians fly planes into buildings and blow up trains killing innocent people?
See, a bit like that.0 -
Advertisement
-
Like I said I'm not a christian, the bible is rubbish as far as I'm concerned but I felt it was a safe bet to say it didn't incite murder seeing as there's no christians out there screaming god is great as they saw someones head off, so maybe it was a bad comparison,
but whether it is doesn't really matter , the matter in hand is the Qu'ran, so we'll just leave it at the Qur'an is an incitement to murder.
I certainly don't want to defend the Qur'an, but there's a very relevant passage in the New Testament, Matthew 7:1-5:Do not judge so that you may not be judged. For with the judgement you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbour's eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbour, "Let me take the speck out of your eye", while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbour's.[NRSV, Anglicized Edition]
There may not be much evidence of Christians killing in the name of Christianity today (though some might suggest that religion was one of several factors in the various wars in the former Yugoslavia), but it's impossible to think of the history of Christianity without remembering the slaughter of "heretics" in the 4th and 5th centuries, the Inquisition, the Wars of Religion in the 16th and 17th centuries, and the many atrocities involved in bringing Christianity to Africa and Central and South America.0
Advertisement