- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 7,025
- Reaction score
- 2,896
- Location
- Deep in the Heart of Texas
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Please refrain from discussion of the Old Testament, this thread is about Islamic text
The Sword verses of the Qu'ran
Qur'an 9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."
Qur'an 9:112 "The Believers fight in Allah's Cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed."
Qur'an 9:29 "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission."
Qur'an 8:39 "Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah."
Qur'an 8:39 "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)."
These are but a few of the verses that refer to fighting jihad in Allahs cause. Notice in many places they refer to fighting non believers until they submit to Allah. This is part of the mission for Islamist around the world. Submition, subjugation or death of non believers (infidels)
There are many other verses that refer to fighting to spread Islam. I will post them later.
Please refrain from discussion of the Old Testament, this thread is about Islamic text
In other words, their religion's exhortations to violence and conquest are relevant, but your religion's are not.
Well, you heard the man, folks. Let's not talk about how his religion can be used to justify violence, terrorism and intolerance just as easily as Islam. That would be off-topic.
Well, if you point out that the dominant religion of our group has the same kind of language, that takes some of the force out of the OP's goal of demonizing Muslims, doesn't it.
In other words, their religion's exhortations to violence and conquest are relevant, but your religion's are not.
Well, you heard the man, folks. Let's not talk about how his religion can be used to justify violence, terrorism and intolerance just as easily as Islam. That would be off-topic.
c. What about the violent passages in the Bible?
First, violent Biblical passages are irrelevant to the question of whether Islam is violent.
Second, the violent passages in the Bible certainly do no amount to a standing order to commit violence against the rest of the world.
Unlike the Quran, the Bible is a huge collection of documents written by different people at different times in different contexts, which allows for much greater interpretative freedom.
The Quran, on the other hand, comes exclusively from one source: Muhammad. It is through the life of Muhammad that the Quran must be understood, as the Quran itself says. His wars and killings both reflect and inform the meaning of the Quran.
Furthermore, the strict literalism of the Quran means that there is no room for interpretation when it comes to its violent injunctions. As it is through the example of Christ, the "Prince of Peace," that Christianity interprets its scriptures, so it is through the example of the warlord and despot Muhammad that Muslims understand the Quran.
Jihad Watch: Islam 101
Pointing out another's misbehavior is no excuse.
Look, Timmy, we are here, in the principal's office, to talk about what Timmy did, not what you may have seen Billy do the other day.
Scapegoating Christianity in a thread about Islam is a red herring tactic, attempted by those who cannot stay on topic.
Don't you think the OP is actually just trying to warn those who might be unaware of the threat of Islam to Infidels and our current government and way of life?
You'd agree that Islam does not condone much of what we consider proper?
Like our view of the equality of men and women of all races.
Should infidels remain unaware of Islam's view of racism, for example?
Believers are told to study the example of Muhammad as a way of understanding the Koran. To further explain the religion Muhammad's words and deeds are studied in the Hadith.
A casual perusal will show that in addition to being kind and compassionate at times, Muhammad was also quite ruthless and violent and killed many times.
Compare the example of Muhammad with the example of Jesus Christ, whose example Christians are told to emulate.
Life of Muhammad = Peaceful & Violent. Many Killings.
Life of Jesus Christ = Peaceful & Loving. No Killings.
Muhammad preached, 'slay infidels til they recognize Allah.'
Jesus Christ preached, 'love your neighbor, even your enemy.'
We are talking about words in holy text, not behavior.
Look, Timmy, we are here, in the principal's office, to talk about what Timmy did, not what you may have seen Billy do the other day.
A particular "holy" text, the Quran. Attempts to derail the discussion with red herring mentions of the wrong book, are just that.
The thread title is particular.
Traditional or fundamental Christians adopt the OT as a fundamental part of the religion, the OT is as much God's word as the NT.
I agree Jesus was a man of peace, forgiveness, and understanding more so than my understanding of Mohammed.
Unfortunately, many folks who claim to be followers of Jesus Christ in the religion established in his name frequently don't follow His teachings, and promote hatred, bigotry, and violence.
Nice post!
So, does that mean you support the Evangelicals who might want to make Christianity a compulsory part of the government?
I wonder how righteous Muslims would be if there was no enforcement of compliance (social or organized) with the Koran and Hadith.
If Muslims had the same kind of rules and restrictions as Christians, how devoted would they be after 40 years? (It's been appx. 40 years since prayer was banned in schools and you see how things have gone down in this country.)
In other words, their religion's exhortations to violence and conquest are relevant, but your religion's are not.
Well, you heard the man, folks. Let's not talk about how his religion can be used to justify violence, terrorism and intolerance just as easily as Islam. That would be off-topic.
It is completely relevant to consider means of interpretation of holy text as done by the dominant religion in our culture to discuss appropriate means of interpretations of other holy texts.
The "violence intrinsic to Islamic jihad is not an aberration.
Unlike Christ’s repudiation of faith-propagating violence - “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would fight” (John 18: 36),
Muhammad urges his followers to slay the enemies of Allah - “slay the idolaters wherever you find them” (Sura 9: 5).
While medieval so-called Christian violence [in reality Roman Catholic e.g. the Crusades] was a lapse from Christ’s methods and thus condemned by the New Testament, Islamic violence is in perfect accord with Muhammad’s hostile directives."
Christianity, Islam and British Politics
Wrong, I do not want to discuss the old testament, the crusades, or any of the inquistions of the past. I want to discuss the Islamic text and how they are being used by Islamist to justify there jihad against the west TODAY. Every time I post a thread like this the usual apologist attempt to derail the thread by bringing up things that Christains have done in the past that are totally irrelevant to the subject at hand. Its a diversion tactic.
Wrong, I do not want to discuss the old testament, the crusades, or any of the inquistions of the past. I want to discuss the Islamic text and how they are being used by Islamist to justify there jihad against the west TODAY. Every time I post a thread like this the usual apologist attempt to derail the thread by bringing up things that Christains have done in the past that are totally irrelevant to the subject at hand. Its a diversion tactic.
Why would you possibly deduce that?
bhkad said:I wonder how righteous Muslims would be if there was no enforcement of compliance (social or organized) with the Koran and Hadith.
I have no idea. Who are righteous Muslims?
bhkad said:If Muslims had the same kind of rules and restrictions as Christians, how devoted would they be after 40 years? (It's been appx. 40 years since prayer was banned in schools and you see how things have gone down in this country.)
When you say rules and restrictions, you mean no prayer in school? How is that a Christian rule? Many Christians want prayers in school!
How have things gone down in this country over the past 40 years? You mean because our government attacks nations on pretext and locks people away without trials?
That's simply a matter of interpretation, isn't it? Isn't it fair to say that many who committed violence in the name of or on behalf of Christianity did so under the belief that their acts were in perfect accord with the Bible?
Why is it their interpretation is necessarily wrong?
If Christianity was adhered to like Islam is it would be if it were part of the government and woven into the day to day fabric of American life. Then Christians might better follow the rules of Christianity.
When Christians commit violence it is against the teachings of Jesus. If we were all Evangelical maybe we would be more Christ-like.
There are rules that Christians must not do this or that. And Christianity is being assaulted right and left in this society. Prayer in the school is the most painful and obvious hole in our societal dike.
As a nation and as a people we have always done what we needed to do to feel safe and mete out justice. The last 40 years have brought on a new kind of religion. Secular humanism. It substitutes an inferior ideology for Christianity and what we see in America that doesn't work well or that which sickens us is due to the LACK of Christianity.
By the way, hypocrisy is not such a bad thing when you study what it means in practical terms in a Democracy.
End of derail.
Because the story of the Bible leaves us with a Hero and a message to mankind.
It would be like saying that the purpose of the Bible was to teach Christians to be killers and be like the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah when any learned person will tell you that the point of the Bible is Jesus and the miracle of His life and death and resurrection.
Putting him on a lower level of priority would be disrespectful.
It is completely relevant to consider means of interpretation of holy text as done by the dominant religion in our culture to discuss appropriate means of interpretations of other holy texts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?