Ever heard the Christian depiction of Satan?
He’s describe a lot like Jesus probably actually LOOKED like.
Get over yourself, both religions suck ass at being tolerant.
(Oh, and so I don’t get called an apologist, fuck Islam. It’s a backwards, horrible institution, just like the rest of them).
As I’m sure few of you have a copy of the Quran handy, here:
http://www.submission.org/suras/sura9.htm
http://submission.org/quran/reader/arabic/sura009.html
Check out 9:61.
This disinformation is getting absolutely absurd.
I should also note that one of the first Muslims, and certainly the first Muezzin (which is a very prominent position in a Muslim community) was a black dude that went by the name of Bilal ibn Rabah.
But the hilarious part, is that the idiot who fabricated the verse, doesn’t seem to realize that the Sudanese are all black to start with.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Ever heard the Christian depiction of Satan?
He’s describe a lot like Jesus probably actually LOOKED like.
Get over yourself, both religions suck ass at being tolerant.
(Oh, and so I don’t get called an apologist, fuck Islam. It’s a backwards, horrible institution, just like the rest of them).[/quote]
I wouldn’t say you’re an Islam apologist, necessarily, but I do find your habit of immediately attacking Christianity whenever Islam is questioned peculiar to say the least.
Especially so, since you’re often the first person to even bring up Christianity in these threads and it’s a complete non-sequitur.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Check out 9:61.[/quote]
I’m more interested by 9:5
…If we all agree that all the religions suck, then these threads wouldn’t be necessary now would they?
All of the Islam-hating is quite obviously in comparison to Christianity, trying to insinuate that one is morally superior to the other, with is basically bull shit.
Even if Islam uses worse language (something I don’t really believe), a pile of horse shit and a pile of donkey shit smell just about as bad.
Here’s Pickthall’s translation of 9:61:
Isn’t Ibn Ishaq referencing 9:61?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
All of the Islam-hating is quite obviously in comparison to Christianity, trying to insinuate that one is morally superior to the other, with is basically bull shit.[/quote]
I disagree.
I find the teachings of Jesus, on the whole, to be a lot less offensive than those of Muhammad. The main problem is that most Christians do not follow them.
Other religions, like Jainism for example, might be complete hogwash as well, but they at least prone non-violence, tolerance and human cooperation.
So while I agree that we’d be a lot better off without religions; as long as we’re stuck with them, it’s dangerous to ignore what they teaches when dealing with numerous adherents.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
…If we all agree that all the religions suck, then these threads wouldn’t be necessary now would they?[/quote]
Well hell, why don’t you all just agree with me, and then we can do away with this whole forum?
Why would we agree that all religions suck?
Considering that the two religions, Islam and Christianity, do not teach the same values, it is possible for a person to claim that one is morally superior over the other. Someone else might claim otherwise. It depends on how much you agree with the basic tenets of the religions. But since they are not identical and interchangeable, there’s no requirement that you hold them in equivalent esteem.
Again, you seem to be confused that all religions are interchangeable. That is incorrect.
See, this is where you veer off course again. They’re not equal; they don’t teach the same values. They’re not two different piles of the same shit. Given that you have a habit of posting Old Testament scripture as proof that Christianity is violent and oppressive, you’re not in a good position to be making value judgments of the teachings of Christianity anyway. If you make that mistake - which you do, continuously - you’ve missed the boat entirely.
We get it, you don’t like Christianity. That’s well and good, but it spreads a perception that you’ve got a serious stick up your ass w.r.t. Christianity when you start attacking it, and only it, in every single thread about Islam.
If you feel that Islam is being unfairly picked on, then defend it – while keeping in mind that bashing Christianity is not a proper defense of Islam. If you feel that Christianity is being unfairly acquitted, then start another thread and flail away.
But coming on to every Islam thread and trying to be “fair and PC” by attacking Christianity is horseshit. Or donkey shit. Take your pick.
Allow me to rephrase.
Attacking Islam is pointless if people from both religions act equally morally repugnant throughout history. The text does not matter if the people’s interpretations lead to bad things.
Happy?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Allow me to rephrase.
Attacking Islam is pointless if people from both religions act equally morally repugnant throughout history. The text does not matter if the people’s interpretations lead to bad things.
Happy?[/quote]
I suppose we should avoid politics and economics also? How many have died in the name of capitalism, socialism, communism, democracy, patriotism, nationalism. I’m sure though that the religious minorties, heretics, women, and yes even reformist minded muslims would rather the debate not be silenced.
Doesn’t do the people of Sudan much good to ignore the issue, now does it? Or gays in Iran? Or, the Copts in Egypt? The Eastern Orthodox and evangelicals in Turkey? And etc. But noooooooooooo, we should all ignore a very real problem that exists today. And if we can’t ignore it, you’ll gladly muddy up the debate.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Allow me to rephrase.
Attacking Islam is pointless if people from both religions act equally morally repugnant throughout history. The text does not matter if the people’s interpretations lead to bad things.
Happy?
I suppose we should avoid politics and economics also? How many have died in the name of capitalism, socialism, communism, democracy, patriotism, nationalism. I’m sure though that the religious minorties, heretics, women, and yes even reformist minded muslims would rather the debate not be silenced.
Doesn’t do the people of Sudan much good to ignore the issue, now does it? Or gays in Iran? Or, the Copts in Egypt? The Eastern Orthodox and evangelicals in Turkey? And etc. But noooooooooooo, we should all ignore a very real problem that exists today. And if we can’t ignore it, you’ll gladly muddy up the debate.[/quote]
…You’ve misinterpreted. I’m not saying religious debate is bad, I’m saying debating a SINGLE religions INNATE morality is basically pointless. Unless you can prove otherwise…? (There are a few arguements you could make in favor, all we’ll have to agree to disagree on, unless you have one I can’t think of).
Can we please get back to the people fabricating Quranic verses?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Allow me to rephrase.
Attacking Islam is pointless if people from both religions act equally morally repugnant throughout history. The text does not matter if the people’s interpretations lead to bad things.
Happy?[/quote]
There is a legitimate question as to whether or not Islamic text tacitly approves of violent behavior. Thus, the text itself does matter. There are highly educated people on both sides of the fence, so the matter isn’t settled by any means.
That is what is often being discussed before you dive in and bring up Christianity. And that is wholly irrelevant to the discussion because it’s very clear that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not approve of any sort of violence.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Can we please get back to the people fabricating Quranic verses?[/quote]
Why are you upset a thread went off topic? How soon until it turns into an Anti-American thread?
Did they fabricate it, or take it out of context? Or not translate it correctly? That’s usually what the apologists say when something like this is brought up.
So, which is it? Totally fabricated out of the air? Based on a real text, but mistranslated or taken out of context?
If it was mistranslated, what does it really say? (This may have already been addressed, if so, pardon me).
If it was taken out of context, what is the context of the quote? Why and when was it written during Muhammad’s life?
And if Gabriel was telling him what to write, why would it matter what was going on in Muhammad’s life as to effect the context? I do not understand why it would.
[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
There are highly educated people on both sides of the fence, so the matter isn’t settled by any means.[/quote]
Once again, the OP’s verse is made up!
[quote]lixy wrote:
Once again, the OP’s verse is made up![/quote]
These, from your first posted link, aren’t:
[i]
[9:1] An ultimatum is herein issued from GOD and His messenger to the idol worshipers who enter into a treaty with you.
[9:2] Therefore, roam the earth freely for four months, and know that you cannot escape from GOD, and that GOD humiliates the disbelievers.
[9:3] A proclamation is herein issued from GOD and His messenger to all the people on the great day of pilgrimage, that GOD has disowned the idol worshipers, and so did His messenger. Thus, if you repent, it would be better for you. But if you turn away, then know that you can never escape from GOD. Promise those who disbelieve a painful retribution.
[9:4] If the idol worshipers sign a peace treaty with you, and do not violate it, nor band together with others against you, you shall fulfill your treaty with them until the expiration date. GOD loves the righteous.
[9:5] Once the Sacred Months are past, (and they refuse to make peace) you may kill the idol worshipers when you encounter them, punish them, and resist every move they make. If they repent and observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and give the obligatory charity (Zakat), you shall let them go. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
[9:6] If one of the idol worshipers sought safe passage with you, you shall grant him safe passage, so that he can hear the word of GOD, then send him back to his place of security. That is because they are people who do not know.[/i]
Let’s see…
An ultimatum? A demand backed up by a threat in case of non-compliance? That sounds peaceful.
GOD humiliates the disbelievers? That’s pretty big of him.
If I repent, it would be better for me? What, threats again?
Promise the disbelievers a painful retribution? Damn, Allah sure knows how to sweeten the pot, doesn’t he? I’m so close to prostrating myself on my welcome mat… if only I knew which way Mecca was.
Out of curiosity, what happens after the treaty’s expiration date?
Oh. Killing and punishing and so on. Should’ve guessed. Unless I submit and pay the tithe, right? Allah is apparently appeased by dishonest faith coerced at gunpoint, as long as the moolah rolls in.
I’m glad to learn that the Koran spells out that “idol worshipers” should avail themselves of “a place of security” when dealing with muslims.
And all that from “the Religion of Peace.” I guess that appellation is to be taken in the 1984 sense, right?
[quote]tGunslinger wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Allow me to rephrase.
Attacking Islam is pointless if people from both religions act equally morally repugnant throughout history. The text does not matter if the people’s interpretations lead to bad things.
Happy?
There is a legitimate question as to whether or not Islamic text tacitly approves of violent behavior. Thus, the text itself does matter. There are highly educated people on both sides of the fence, so the matter isn’t settled by any means.
That is what is often being discussed before you dive in and bring up Christianity. And that is wholly irrelevant to the discussion because it’s very clear that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not approve of any sort of violence.
[/quote]
But if Christians are equally as violent throughout history, even though “Jesus says it is wrong,” than what the hell does it matter?
Plus, whether or not either book supports anything is basically all up to translation and interpretation.
[quote]pookie wrote:
lixy wrote:
Once again, the OP’s verse is made up!
These, from your first posted link, aren’t:
[i]
[9:1] An ultimatum is herein issued from GOD and His messenger to the idol worshipers who enter into a treaty with you.
[9:2] Therefore, roam the earth freely for four months, and know that you cannot escape from GOD, and that GOD humiliates the disbelievers.
[9:3] A proclamation is herein issued from GOD and His messenger to all the people on the great day of pilgrimage, that GOD has disowned the idol worshipers, and so did His messenger. Thus, if you repent, it would be better for you. But if you turn away, then know that you can never escape from GOD. Promise those who disbelieve a painful retribution.
[9:4] If the idol worshipers sign a peace treaty with you, and do not violate it, nor band together with others against you, you shall fulfill your treaty with them until the expiration date. GOD loves the righteous.
[9:5] Once the Sacred Months are past, (and they refuse to make peace) you may kill the idol worshipers when you encounter them, punish them, and resist every move they make. If they repent and observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and give the obligatory charity (Zakat), you shall let them go. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
[9:6] If one of the idol worshipers sought safe passage with you, you shall grant him safe passage, so that he can hear the word of GOD, then send him back to his place of security. That is because they are people who do not know.[/i]
Let’s see…
An ultimatum? A demand backed up by a threat in case of non-compliance? That sounds peaceful.
GOD humiliates the disbelievers? That’s pretty big of him.
If I repent, it would be better for me? What, threats again?
Promise the disbelievers a painful retribution? Damn, Allah sure knows how to sweeten the pot, doesn’t he? I’m so close to prostrating myself on my welcome mat… if only I knew which way Mecca was.
Out of curiosity, what happens after the treaty’s expiration date?
Oh. Killing and punishing and so on. Should’ve guessed. Unless I submit and pay the tithe, right? Allah is apparently appeased by dishonest faith coerced at gunpoint, as long as the moolah rolls in.
I’m glad to learn that the Koran spells out that “idol worshipers” should avail themselves of “a place of security” when dealing with muslims.
And all that from “the Religion of Peace.” I guess that appellation is to be taken in the 1984 sense, right?
[/quote]
Err… these passages sound like they’re saying “non-believers will be punished by god.” That’s pretty standard in almost every religion.
Though I don’t really believe religion is naturally peaceful anyway…
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
tGunslinger wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Allow me to rephrase.
Attacking Islam is pointless if people from both religions act equally morally repugnant throughout history. The text does not matter if the people’s interpretations lead to bad things.
Happy?
There is a legitimate question as to whether or not Islamic text tacitly approves of violent behavior. Thus, the text itself does matter. There are highly educated people on both sides of the fence, so the matter isn’t settled by any means.
That is what is often being discussed before you dive in and bring up Christianity. And that is wholly irrelevant to the discussion because it’s very clear that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not approve of any sort of violence.
But if Christians are equally as violent throughout history, even though “Jesus says it is wrong,” than what the hell does it matter?
Plus, whether or not either book supports anything is basically all up to translation and interpretation.[/quote]
So words don’t mean things? If I read Moby Dick, I can make it to say whatever I want? How is communication possible then?