Islamic Iconoclasm - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-27-2006, 07:26 PM   #106
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:08 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
^ but don't you see AEON? you're putting these passages into context because you know the context.

perhaps if you knew more about Islam, then you'd be able to understand the context of what you've labled a "convert or die" command from the Koran.

basically, you're making accusations about the Koran that could be just as easily leveled against the NT. however, because you've spent time learning about the NT, you are able to defend it from such accusations using the same methods as anyone else who's called upon to defend their religion.

perhaps if you knew more about the Koran, you'd be able to defend it from precisely the same charges you've leveled at it.

You know, you are right! Seriously, I am admitting you are right. Essentially, because there are no "experts" on the Quran it is virtually impossible to put the "convert or die" into context in this forum.

Man, I can really get sucked into these things once I start...
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 07:28 PM   #107
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:08 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON

The thing is - people hate my premise. I hate it. So I am either wrong (which is entirely possible) or I am right. If I am wrong, then hey, I am wrong and I will admit it. If I am right, well, everyone who is reading this needs to consider this discussion within their own hearts and minds and draw their own conclusion.
It has nothing to do with emotion, in fact the beginning of your posting has been the most emotional any of this has gotten. The essence of the problem is you did in fact take your position as truth without any true context, you did this over and over. I was just pointing out how dangerous this line of logic is.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-27-2006, 08:52 PM   #108
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:08 AM
Just for the record - emphasis does not always translate into emotion. I understand that it is very difficult to tell the difference in a forum. I can usually tell when someone doesn't like my post by the little vomitting emoticons
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 09:18 PM   #109
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:08 AM
And just for the record - you are the one that admitted to becoming a monster.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-27-2006, 09:44 PM   #110
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:08 AM
Why does Ann Coulter think that Jesus Christ smelled bad?

I wrote this several months ago in response to Ann Coulter's column entitled The passion of the liberal:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think the most ironic thing about Ann Coulter's implication that Muslims "smell bad" (i.e. "...kill everyone who doesn't smell bad...") is that it was made in regards to a movie which contained quite a number of sweaty, dirty, olive-skinned Middle Easterners wearing robes and head scarves—one of whom was playing the role of Ann's own "Lord and Savior Jesus Christ". An obvious conclusion that can be drawn from this is that if Ann Coulter could ever be submitted to a double-blind smell test, which contained her stereotypical Muslim and Jesus Christ, she would conclude that Jesus Christ smells bad, since he too was an olive-skinned, dark-haired Middle Easterner speaking a guttural Semitic language.

Well I guess it's pretty clear that Ann didn't realize the implications of her racist diatribe. It seems that columnists who gained their fame by spewing hate and ideological bias rather than insightful thought tend to get in a lot of trouble—and Ann certainly has a knack for doing that. I'd just love to know which Muslims Ann thinks "smell bad". Is it the white Muslims, the black Muslims, the Asian Muslims or only the Arab Muslims—which make up only about 15% of the world's Muslim population? If she picks one or more of these ethnic groups, then is she willing to explain why she should not be labeled a racist? If she picks all of them, well then, I guess she must "smell bad" along with all of the Caucasians that happen to be Muslim (and there are quite a number of them). The fact that Ann's logic stinks doesn't count in this regard. Anyway, Ann's hateful statement, along with other hateful statements that she's made, only make it obvious that she still perceives adherence to the religion of Islam in racist terms. She obviously doesn't get the idea that Islam is a world religion which, like Christianity, embraces peoples of all ethnic groups and races. I'd be willing to guess that Ann might be surprised to know that in spite of the blonde-haired and blue-eyed Jesus that is shown in some Hollywood movies, and some Bibles as well, Christianity is not just a white man's religion—even though some who aren't much further right than Ann would seemingly like to have it that way.

In her The passion of the liberal column, Ann remains true to form in exposing both her ignorance of history and of religion. Her knowledge, if you can call it that, seems to be based on popular myths and media propaganda rather than any respectable scholarly sources. For example, the idea to "kill everyone" was an idea that the Old Testament brought to the Middle East long before Muslims showed up. I wonder if Ann has ever read the Old Testament? Hasn't Ann Coulter ever heard of the Crusades? As far as I know, the only religious text which contains a story of a God-approved murder-suicide of civilians is the story of Samson in the Bible (Judges 16:23-30). Even in recent times, the largest massacre of civilians in the Middle East was carried out by Philangist Meronite Christians in Lebanon (with Israeli assistance, of course). This more than proves my case, since Ann didn't present any evidence to support hers. In regards to religions who like to "kill everyone", dare I mention the fact that the Hutus and Tutsis, who savagely massacred each other several years ago, were overwhelmingly Christians who lived in a country which contained Africa's highest percentage of Christians? Need I mention the blood thirsty Serbs who used a three-fingered Trinitarian salute when massacring tens of thousands of Bosnian Muslims?

Needless to say, and this might stretch Ann's ability to reason to the limit, if the Muslims had "killed everyone" when they conquered the Middle East, the Lebanese Christians who massacred about 1,800 Palestinians back in 1982 would not even have existed. Perhaps Ann would enjoy reading what happened to non-Christians and non-Christian religions that refused to accept Christianity back during the Dark Ages. It might ease her conscious to know that these forced conversions and massacres were sometimes based on St. Augustine's understanding of Luke 14:23 "...compel them to come in, that my house may be filled". Ultimately, however, I don't base my conclusions on Jesus, his teachings or the beliefs of the majority of Christians on the actions of a few seemingly misguided and fanatical Christians. Conservatives please take note that if Ann was honest enough to adhere to the same approach in regards to Islam, this wouldn't make her a liberal. Rather it would simply make her intellectually honest. Don't hold your breath…

Even Ann's crassly worded summary of Jesus' message is off the mark—and off of Matthew too. When asked directly how to achieve eternal life, Jesus—being the great teacher that he was—gave a rather clear and unambiguous answer: Love God with all your heart and love your neighbor as you love yourself (Matthew 19:16). No need for bloody atoning deaths and triune Godheads, but rather the simple Semitic monotheism of Abraham. Likewise, those lofty and wise words of Jesus are a pretty good summary of the teachings of Islam. Ann might be able to see this if she could just stop being so hateful and bigoted for just a second or two. She seems as full of bigotry, rage and distorted thinking as the fanatical militants that she seemingly loves to hate. It's disturbing to know that Ann resorts to four letter words even when it comes to explaining the message of Jesus. Is nothing sacred anymore? Seemingly not to Ann.

In spite of all of these shortcomings, I think the most noteworthy part of Ann's recent column is her selective use of verses from the Bible and Qur'an. Nothing shows her intellectual dishonestly, double standards and shallow intellect more than this. Is Ann completely unaware of some of the verses of the Bible, including the New Testament, that have been used to inspire violence? Does she think that it's intellectually honest to take a portion of a verse, such as "slay the enemy where you find him", without knowing at least a little something about it's context, meaning and understanding amongst mainstream Muslims? Since this would involve Ann Coulter reading a book or article about Islam that wasn't written by a hate-filled ideologue bigot, I guess we can discount that as an option. The fact that Ann doesn't seem to realize that verses from the Bible can be, and have been, used and abused as well just begs the question: is she just pathetically ignorant or a complete hypocrite?

By the way, Ann's one attempt in her column to actually provide a reference for one of her assertions was, unsurprisingly, incorrect. Indeed, the chapter and verse numerical reference that she gave for the Qur'anic verse was off by quite a few numbers. See cited "Surah 9:92" even though that's not the verse she quoted. So not only did Ann mess up the major theme of her column, it seems that she dorked up the one reference as well! It seems rather ironic that such a person would have the nerve to accuse Liberals of sloppy thinking and intellectual dishonestly.

Be careful Ann, you might learn something. When I first heard that Mel Gibson's film The Passion of the Christ was going to be in Latin and Aramaic, I was optimistic. I was hoping that it might make it clear that the Aramaic word (Alaha) that Jesus Christ used for "God" is quite similar to the Arabic word (Allah) for "God" that Muslims often use, since they both have Semitic origins. I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know how clearly the Aramaic word "Alaha" (God) is spoken. However, if this linguistic detail was in any way made clear, Ann Coulter, who has seemingly seen the film, completely missed it. Based on what I've read, Ann Coulter remains painfully misinformed about both Jesus, Islam and the Middle East—and she seemingly wants to stay that way. Dealing with the fact that Jesus spoke Aramaic, not King James English, and the word he used for God was "Alaha" just might be too much for Ann. Indeed, this Aramaic word obviously sounds more similar to that word that Muslims use for God than the word in the English language. I mention this lest some forget that Judaism, Christianity and Islam all came from the "smell bad" Middle East, not from Western Europe.

Using Ann's logic, and I use the term loosely, I should conclude that all conservatives are uneducated, bigots with poor reasoning skills just because a few of them display these qualities. Since Ann loves to paint with a broad brush and taint all Muslims due to the actions of a few, she shouldn't be offended when the same broad brush is applied due to the rantings of a single conservative columnist. The simple fact that seemingly respectable publications carry Ann Coulter's child-like and intellectually insulting column is a sad statement on the intellectual state of American conservatives. Even if they're all too dense to pick up on all of Ann's intellectual goofs, they should be sensitive enough to know hate when they read it. Her column in defense of Gibson's film was about as un-Christian in tone as anything any decent person would want to read. This should come as no surprise, however, since the xenophobic neo-Imperialist right that Ann Coulter supports has more in common with the arrogant self-righteousness of Pontius Pilate and Imperial Rome than the humble, austere and compassionate Middle Eastern Semitic monotheism of Jesus Christ. That's obvious to any fair-minded person...

http://www.mereislam.info/2004/09/wh...hat-jesus.html
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 09:50 PM   #111
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:08 AM
Misconception #6: Islam was spread by the sword
Many non-Muslims, when they think about Islam, picture religious fanatics on camels with a sword in one hand and a Qur'an in the other. This myth, which was made popular in Europe during the Crusades, is totally baseless. First of all, the Holy Qur'an clearly says "Let there be no compulsion in religion". In addition to this, Islam teaches that a person's faith must be pure and sincere, so it is certainly not something that can be forced on someone. In debunking the myth that Islam was "spread by the sword", the (non-Muslim) historian De Lacy O' Leary wrote: "History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever accepted." (Islam at the Crossroads, London, 1923, p. 8.). It should also be known that Muslims ruled Spain for roughly 800 years. During this time, and up to when they were finally forced out, the non-Muslims there were alive and flourishing. Additionally, Christian and Jewish minorities have survived in the Muslim lands of the Middle East for centuries. Countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan all have Christian and/or Jewish populations. If Islam taught that all people are supposed to be killed or forced to become Muslims, how did all of these non-Muslims survive for so long in the middle of the Islamic Empire? Additionally, if one considers the small number of Muslims who initially spread Islam from Spain and Morocco in the West to India and China in the East, one would realize that they were far too few to force people to be members of a religion against their will. Additionally, the great empire and civilization established by the Muslims had great staying power -- its citizens were proud to be part of it. The spread of Islam stands in contrast to the actions of the followers of Christianity, who since the time of the Emperor Constantine have made liberal use of the sword - often basing their conduct on Biblical verses. This was especially true of the colonization of South America and Africa, where native peoples were systematically wiped-out or forced to convert. It is also interesting to note that when the Mongols invaded and conquered large portions of the Islamic Empire, instead of destroying the religion, they adopted it. This is a unique occurrence in history - the conquerors adopting the religion of the conquered! Since they were the victors, they certainly could not have been forced to become Muslims! Ask any of the over one billion Muslims alive in the world today whether they were forced! The largest Muslim country in the world today is Indonesia --- and there were never any battles fought there! So where was the sword? How could someone be forced to adhere to a spiritually rewarding and demanding religion like Islam?

http://www.muslim-answers.org/Introd...am/miscons.htm
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 09:52 PM   #112
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:08 AM
Misconception #9: The Islamic Threat
In recent years, a great deal of attention in the media have been given to the threat of "Islamic Fundamentalism". Unfortunately, due to a twisted mixture of biased reporting in the Western media and the actions of some ignorant Muslims, the word "Islam" has become almost synonymous with "terrorism". However, when one analyzes the situation, the question that should come to mind is: Do the teachings of Islam encourage terrorism? The answer: Certainly not! Islam totally forbids the terrorist acts that are carried out by some misguided people. It should be remembered that all religions have cults and misguided followers, so it is their teachings that should be looked at, not the actions of a few individuals. Unfortunately, in the media, whenever a Muslim commits a heinous act, he is labeled a "Muslim terrorist". However, when Serbs murder and rape innocent women in Bosnia, they are not called "Christian terrorists", nor are the activities in Northern Ireland labeled "Christian terrorism". Also, when right-wing Christians in the U. S. bomb abortion clinics, they are not called "Christian terrorists". Reflecting on these facts, one could certainly conclude that there is a double-standard in the media! Although religious feelings play a significant role in the previously mentioned "Christian" conflicts, the media does not apply religious labels because they assume that such barbarous acts have nothing to do with the teachings of Christianity. However, when something happens involving a Muslim, they often try to put the blame on Islam itself -- and not the misguided individual. Certainly, Islamic Law allows war --- any religion or civilization that did not would never survive --- but it certainly does not condone attacks against innocent people, women or children. The Arabic word "jihad", which is often translated as "Holy War", simply means "to struggle". The word for "war" in Arabic is "harb", not "jihad". "Struggling", i.e. "making jihad", to defend Islam, Muslims or to liberate a land where Muslims are oppressed is certainly allowed (and even encouraged) in Islam. However, any such activities must be done according to the teachings of Islam. Islam also clearly forbids "taking the law into your own hands", which means that individual Muslims cannot go around deciding who they want to kill, punish or torture. Trial and punishment must be carried out by a lawful authority and a knowledgeable judge. Also, when looking at events in the Muslim World, it should be kept in mind that a long period of colonialism ended fairly recently in most Muslim countries. During this time, the peoples in this countries were culturally, materially and religiously exploited - mostly by the so-called "Christian" nations of the West. This painful period has not really come to an end in many Muslim countries, where people are still under the control of foreign powers or puppet regimes supported by foreign powers. Also, through the media, people in the West are made to believe that tyrants like Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Moamar Qaddafi in Libya are "Islamic" leaders -- when just the opposite is true. Neither of these rulers even profess Islam as an ideology, but only use Islamic slogans to manipulate their powerless populations. They have about as much to do with Islam as Hitler had to do with Christianity! In reality, many Middle Eastern regimes which people think of as being "Islamic" oppress the practice of Islam in their countries. So suffice it to say that "terrorism" and killing innocent people directly contradicts the teachings of Islam.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 10:02 PM   #113
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:08 AM
Thanks Dread
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-27-2006, 10:05 PM   #114
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:08 AM
Yep..>Christianity has a lot to be proud of too!

http://amprom.org/

http://www.broadcaster.org/

http://www.kingidentity.com/

http://www.posse-comitatus.org/
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 10:20 PM   #115
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:08 AM
Hmmm Can Chrisitanity get the log out of its own eye?

Nah...
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 10:26 PM   #116
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 760
Local Time: 11:08 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Yep..>Christianity has a lot to be proud of too!

http://www.posse-comitatus.org/
WTF? That Aryan Nations one is showing allegiance with Al-Qaeda!

It even has the Islamic "Bismillah Irrah-man Ilrahim" in Arabic at the top.

Partners in hate...

(That music is kinda funny though.)
__________________
Judah is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 10:46 PM   #117
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 04:08 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
Hmmm Can Chrisitanity get the log out of its own eye?

Nah...
C'mon guys - you know I have said over and over that things done in the name of Christ doesn't mean that's what Christianity is teaching. We could sit and post about atrocities from both Christians and Muslims and start our own holy war. If any one of those “Christian” groups could actually produce proof that the NT has ordained them to do such things, then I think you would have a point (in response to my argument that is. On a separate note – hate groups are very disgusting). The argument has been about the actual teachings of the Quran and then I compared them to the actual teachings of the NT.

However, because we have no Quran expert hanging around - I guess we are stuck at an impasse. Which begs the question – to what degree can we ever be critical of a religion without being an expert? I do not have an answer. I studied Islam in a class in college; and I have read several books about it (mostly from a Christian perspective I admit, but I have read two “neutral” books. This by no means makes me an expert, but I do feel “somewhat” qualified to at least ask some questions about what I perceive to be major themes in the Quran.

Is interference.com the place to ask? Probably not, but I thought I’d give it a shot. I have learned a few things along the way.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 11:00 PM   #118
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 06:08 AM
[Q] I have said over and over that things done in the name of Christ doesn't mean that's what Christianity is teaching. [/Q]

No different than a Christian, looking at the people who do things in the name of Islam.

You can pick and choose real winners from EVERY religion, and I am willing to bet there are some real pieces of dung that should not be used to judge the entire religion on.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 11:30 PM   #119
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 05:08 AM
^Love the new avatar...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-27-2006, 11:48 PM   #120
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 06:08 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON


C'mon guys - you know I have said over and over that things done in the name of Christ doesn't mean that's what Christianity is teaching. We could sit and post about atrocities from both Christians and Muslims and start our own holy war. If any one of those “Christian” groups could actually produce proof that the NT has ordained them to do such things, then I think you would have a point (in response to my argument that is. On a separate note – hate groups are very disgusting). The argument has been about the actual teachings of the Quran and then I compared them to the actual teachings of the NT.

However, because we have no Quran expert hanging around - I guess we are stuck at an impasse. Which begs the question – to what degree can we ever be critical of a religion without being an expert? I do not have an answer. I studied Islam in a class in college; and I have read several books about it (mostly from a Christian perspective I admit, but I have read two “neutral” books. This by no means makes me an expert, but I do feel “somewhat” qualified to at least ask some questions about what I perceive to be major themes in the Quran.

Is interference.com the place to ask? Probably not, but I thought I’d give it a shot. I have learned a few things along the way.
I think interference can be that place, but you've got to change your approach. You can start by acknowledging that your insistence that things done in the name of Christianity don't represent Christianity could also apply to Islam. Things done in the name of Islam don't necessarily represent Islam. Second you should be willing to concede your inability (an inability shared by all of us) to speak authoritatively on the teachings of Islam given your limited knowledge of Islam. Anyone can be a critic of something without being an expert, but one can't expect that criticism to be taken seriously.

You can ask questions, certainly, but I think you're giving the impression that you already know the answer so your questions sound more like accusations then questions.

I do feel a bit bad about how AEON is being walloped around though--does A_Wanderer get this also? I know he posts most of the "concerns about Islam" threads.

I guess when it comes to religion, if anyone posts something critiquing a belief system, they can expect to go a few rounds with it's defenders. In that sense, AEON, this is totally normal.

I think there are legitimate questions that can and should be asked, and discussed. I thought Judah's posting on the Islamic concept of religious liberty was quite interesting. What I concluded from that is that the problem arises with Sharia, religion becoming public policy. I am a firm believer that the mixing of religion and government is ALWAYS a poisonous brew.

Sometimes it's suggested that the reason we enjoy such freedom of religion and thought in this country is because we are somehow a "Christian nation." I reject this notion. The reason we enjoy such freedom of religion and thought is the founders of the country had the good sense to keep relgion OUT of the government.
__________________

__________________
maycocksean is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com