Agreed. This is a disagreement between someone who has mixed humanism with a bit of pseudoChristian lingo and people who are knowledgeable about the Word of God.HappyFlappyDeist wrote:What an entertaining debate.
Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:Agreed. This is a disagreement between someone who has mixed humanism with a bit of pseudoChristian lingo and people who are knowledgeable about the Word of God.HappyFlappyDeist wrote:What an entertaining debate.
In case you are interested, The Generous Qur'an by Usama Dakdok is an English translation of the Koran that doesn't whitewash the vileness of the original Arabic.
FL
Decide for yourself: The Qur'an contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.I am not saying there are not problematic passages within it, just saying we may not have all the facts and that all this bull about it being a religion of violence is just crapola.
They were called to war because they kept getting invaded, other than that they are meant to be peaceful, they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.Philip wrote:Here's where it went off the rails!Decide for yourself: The Qur'an contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.I am not saying there are not problematic passages within it, just saying we may not have all the facts and that all this bull about it being a religion of violence is just crapola.
Yeah, Islam just teaches it's followers to be a bunch of peace-loving hippies: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran ... olence.htm
And so, Daniel, they were called to war by WHOM? Some god named Allah? So you're defending what the Qur'an states Allah - a false god - says? Do you realize the unbelievable carnage these teachings have wreaked and continue to?!!! And to compare these to the Bible and what the Lord commanded? That's indefensible! Notice that the teachings of Allah even say no mercy is to be shown to the People of the Book (Christians!). That's what you are defending? You're comparing Scripture to some made-up, demonic teachings in a false religion?They were called to war because they kept getting invaded, other than that they are meant to be peaceful, they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.
I never said war was good, I think all war is abhorrent, I am not defending Muhammed's actions, I am just saying that the Koran was written at a time of war, which gives context to the passages and most Muslims realise this and that is why they are peaceful people. If they were being invaded then well I guess they wouldn't be so peaceful now, would they. Just the same as when the US invades people, it is disgusting and shouldn't be tolerated, it is not a right action.Philip wrote:And so, Daniel, they were called to war by WHOM? Some god named Allah? So you're defending what the Qur'an states Allah - a false god - says? Do you realize the unbelievable carnage these teachings have wreaked and continue to?!!! And to compare these to the Bible and what the Lord commanded? That's indefensible! Notice that the teachings of Allah even say no mercy is to be shown to the People of the Book (Christians!). That's what you are defending? You're comparing Scripture to some made-up, demonic teachings in a false religion?They were called to war because they kept getting invaded, other than that they are meant to be peaceful, they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.
Ah, the great lie . . . you do know that Mohammad spread Islam by the sword, right, and that he and his followers for the next hundred years were the ones invading the people around them, right?Danieltwotwenty wrote:they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
Keh? I never said they taught it in response to western aggression, it was in response to the wars raging with the surrounding nations. I think you may have misunderstood what I was saying.Jac3510 wrote:Ah, the great lie . . . you do know that Mohammad spread Islam by the sword, right, and that he and his followers for the next hundred years were the ones invading the people around them, right?Danieltwotwenty wrote:they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.
I don't doubt that there are peaceful Muslims and that some, if not most, Muslims interpret their holy book to teach peace and non-violence. But to suggest that Islamists only interpret the Koran in a militant way in response to western aggression is just to be badly misinformed. And, unfortunately, it's that kind of rhetoric that is getting people--Christians, in particular--murdered every day.
I hope you reconsider your position.
And even before that, you said this:I am not saying there are not problematic passages within it, just saying we may not have all the facts and that all this bull about it being a religion of violence is just crapola.
And you also said this:Sorry Paul this is blatantly false, the problem we have is that there is no internal context to the Koran from which we can decide on how to interpret passages, the Bible is just as violent and bloody, but we have internal context that gives us a grounding for correct interpretation. I would suggest a book called "The Eternal Message of the Prophet Muhammed", it is a book written by a lay Muslim just after WW11 for new Muslims to the faith, very interesting and eye opening book into the world of the Muslim faith.
I tell you what, if I am ever so misinformed, and flat out wrong on an issue, as you are on this issue, I pray that you all here respect me enough to show he the truth!Why do you think people kill people Rick, they kill because of hatred, they kill because they do not try to understand and accept others, what you guys are promoting is only the start of it, but it will eventually grow from there as it always does.
In the context of the period and events, Muhammed was not violent and whether Aisha was 9 is in dispute, so he probably was not a paedophile, and you are reading it with modern glasses.
RickD wrote:Daniel,
We are going only on the words you posted. We added nothing to your own words!
As Philip pointed out, You said this:And even before that, you said this:I am not saying there are not problematic passages within it, just saying we may not have all the facts and that all this bull about it being a religion of violence is just crapola.And you also said this:Sorry Paul this is blatantly false, the problem we have is that there is no internal context to the Koran from which we can decide on how to interpret passages, the Bible is just as violent and bloody, but we have internal context that gives us a grounding for correct interpretation. I would suggest a book called "The Eternal Message of the Prophet Muhammed", it is a book written by a lay Muslim just after WW11 for new Muslims to the faith, very interesting and eye opening book into the world of the Muslim faith.I tell you what, if I am ever so misinformed, and flat out wrong on an issue, as you are on this issue, I pray that you all here respect me enough to show he the truth!Why do you think people kill people Rick, they kill because of hatred, they kill because they do not try to understand and accept others, what you guys are promoting is only the start of it, but it will eventually grow from there as it always does.
In the context of the period and events, Muhammed was not violent and whether Aisha was 9 is in dispute, so he probably was not a paedophile, and you are reading it with modern glasses.
Dan,
As a brother in Christ, you are so wrong on this. And I pray that you see where you are wrong, instead of blaming others for showing you that you're wrong.
Dan,Danieltwotwenty wrote:RickD wrote:Daniel,
We are going only on the words you posted. We added nothing to your own words!
As Philip pointed out, You said this:And even before that, you said this:I am not saying there are not problematic passages within it, just saying we may not have all the facts and that all this bull about it being a religion of violence is just crapola.And you also said this:Sorry Paul this is blatantly false, the problem we have is that there is no internal context to the Koran from which we can decide on how to interpret passages, the Bible is just as violent and bloody, but we have internal context that gives us a grounding for correct interpretation. I would suggest a book called "The Eternal Message of the Prophet Muhammed", it is a book written by a lay Muslim just after WW11 for new Muslims to the faith, very interesting and eye opening book into the world of the Muslim faith.I tell you what, if I am ever so misinformed, and flat out wrong on an issue, as you are on this issue, I pray that you all here respect me enough to show he the truth!Why do you think people kill people Rick, they kill because of hatred, they kill because they do not try to understand and accept others, what you guys are promoting is only the start of it, but it will eventually grow from there as it always does.
In the context of the period and events, Muhammed was not violent and whether Aisha was 9 is in dispute, so he probably was not a paedophile, and you are reading it with modern glasses.
Dan,
As a brother in Christ, you are so wrong on this. And I pray that you see where you are wrong, instead of blaming others for showing you that you're wrong.
I think you are wrong brother, you haven't shown me I am wrong in any way but have instead tried to confuse the situation with allegations about me which are not true and I will pray for you also, that you may see that hatred is not the path of a Christian and that understanding people and loving them is the path of the righteousness.
But, Dan, these are YOUR words:Daniel: I am getting really tired of you and others putting words in my mouth, I find it really un-Christ like and not something Christians should do, it is basically lying and misrepresentation of a brother in Christ.
What is written in the Quran, the passages my linked info detailed, is indefensible. Not to mention that Muhammad lied and said they were from god himself. And you are asserting that it had to do them being invaded. Well, clearly those paying obedient attention to those words are killing and have killed countless thousands precisely due to the teachings in the Qur'an. And they did it LONG after Muhammad wrote those words. And yet you defend the words by saying they were merely meant to be defensive and that the words in the Qur'an are basically peaceful. But those words are evil, no matter who wrote them or why. And your words ("... they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.") - well, some were killed defensively, but make no mistake, they also killed then as much as they do now, largely because of the evil instructions in the Qur'an - let's not forget that the Muslim killing fields did not end with the conquests of Muhammad. And he did not stop at defensive actions - that's revisionist crapola!They were called to war because they kept getting invaded, other than that they are meant to be peaceful, they only killed infidels because they wouldn't leave them alone.
Daniel: The Koran was written at a time of war, which gives context to the passages and most Muslims realize this and that is why they are peaceful people.
