The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism - Page 4 - 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 07-26-2006, 11:40 PM   #46
War Child
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 760
Local Time: 09:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
I'm not entirely convinced of the argument that Nazis directly influenced Muslims into their ideology. I say this, because Nazis would have had as much contempt for Muslims as they would have had for other minorities. They're certainly not a group of blond-haired, blue eyed übermensch.
Melon
Hey, but some of us ARE Aryan (i.e. those of us from certain parts of India/Pakistan...we're considered of Aryan descent...though, i'm sure, Hitler would disagree)!

Er...not sure why i wanted to brag about being Aryan...never mind.

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
But it's easy to see why fascist ideology would appeal to many Muslim extremists today, as it gives them outside justification for their deep seated anti-Semitism. And it's not just Nazism; the infamous book, "The Protocols of Zion," was written during tsarist Russia, and that book has very large sway in the Muslim world.Melon
This is very true.
__________________

__________________
Judah is offline  
Old 07-26-2006, 11:50 PM   #47
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


There are verses that tell Christians to behave violently toward nonChristians? Are you sure about that? I would be interested to see that, because I can tell you that as many years as I have been reading the Bible, I have never read those verses. Now remember, I am not talking about the times before Christ in whcih God told Israel to take over lands or conquer their enemies by violent methods. I am specifically talking about commands to Christians, which is of course, the New Testament.
Judah touched upon most everything I wanted to say.

There were one or two in the new testament, though.

But, how are we to ask other faiths to ignore the OT? "Christians" still use the OT out of context to justify certain things...
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:21 AM   #48
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Judah touched upon most everything I wanted to say.

There were one or two in the new testament, though.
Show me.

Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

But, how are we to ask other faiths to ignore the OT? "Christians" still use the OT out of context to justify certain things...
I didn't ask anyone to ignore what was commanded in the OT.

Some of the things God commanded in the OT are hard to reconcile with the picture of Christ presented in the New Testament. I will admit that I do not completely understand why God commanded some of the things he did.

However, when God commanded violent acts against an enemy nation, it was for a specific time and situation. There were no "general" commands to just go out and kill unbelievers.

However, since Judah was a Muslim and he says that the Koran only teaches violence in times of war, I will have to accept that until such time as I discover evidence that leads me to believe otherwise, if that ever does happen.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:03 AM   #49
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 03:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

I didn't ask anyone to ignore what was commanded in the OT.

Some of the things God commanded in the OT are hard to reconcile with the picture of Christ presented in the New Testament. I will admit that I do not completely understand why God commanded some of the things he did.

However, when God commanded violent acts against an enemy nation, it was for a specific time and situation. There were no "general" commands to just go out and kill unbelievers.
But this is my point, you have researched and know the context, someone that reads that passage for the first time tomorrow, doesn't. And for them it comes off very different...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:10 AM   #50
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:45 PM
Nowhere in the New Testament is violent conversion preached. We went over this a few weeks back, and the only thing anyone could come up with was the quote where Jesus says he does come to bring peace, but the sword. (Matthew 10:34)

But if you read the entire chapter it is obvious that Jesus is referring to the consequences to the believer (the exclusion from non-believing families, the community..etc)
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:41 AM   #51
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
Nowhere in the New Testament is violent conversion preached. We went over this a few weeks back, and the only thing anyone could come up with was the quote where Jesus says he does come to bring peace, but the sword. (Matthew 10:34)
And even without context, that isn't even anywhere close to Jesus commanding Christians to act violently toward nonChristians.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:43 AM   #52
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


But this is my point, you have researched and know the context, someone that reads that passage for the first time tomorrow, doesn't. And for them it comes off very different...
I'm not talking "interpretation" here. I am talking about things written down in black and white.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 06:42 AM   #53
Refugee
 
all_i_want's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,180
Local Time: 12:45 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Alright, I'll rephrase for you.

"Based on the verses that I have read, the Koran appears to teach different things regarding how to treat non-Muslims."
As Judah mentioned earlier, Jews and Christians are viewed as 'the people of the book', because Islam recognizes the validity of both religions, however sees them as 'outdated'. It views itself as the update. Jews and Christians are not viewed as 'non-believers'. I second Judah's post, as well.
__________________
all_i_want is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 07:53 AM   #54
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 07:45 AM
Yes quite right, people of the book can all live as dhimmis enjoying lower status and payment of protection money but able to practice their faith in Islamic empires. Those who don't subscribe to that Abrahamic God however are fair game.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:25 AM   #55
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Judah
Hey, but some of us ARE Aryan (i.e. those of us from certain parts of India/Pakistan...we're considered of Aryan descent...though, i'm sure, Hitler would disagree)!
It is very strange. There is the literal definition of "Aryan," which refers to Iranian and Indo-Iranian peoples (which includes many people of India), but then there's the concept of the "Aryan race," which was created in the early 20th century by European racial theorists. Basically, the main distinction was that Aryans were non-Semitic people--basically coming into common usage as a reference to Gentiles.

But that brings me back to my original argument that it makes little sense for Nazis to encourage Muslims, because Arabs are a Semitic people and Arabic is a Semitic language (although I'm sure that they would not want to hear that).

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 11:36 AM   #56
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 02:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon



But that brings me back to my original argument that it makes little sense for Nazis to encourage Muslims, because Arabs are a Semitic people and Arabic is a Semitic language (although I'm sure that they would not want to hear that).

Melon
I don't think the Nazis would have had a long term alliance with the Muslims - but I think they most certainly would have used them to help rid the earth of the Jews.

It's not like the Nazi's loved the Japanese race, but they allied with them.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:44 PM   #57
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: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars



Nazism had a lot to do with Christianity, as sad as it sounds. And guess what, Christians still are paying a percentage of their salary to the Church. This rule was created when Hitler took the land of the big owners - i.e. the Catholic church - for himself and did a deal with them so they could get the money back by taxing the Christians. This tax is still paid today, while we are speaking-. The church did not care to change this rule. This is a reason for many Christians to leave church, because if you don´t pay, you are breaking the law.

Where on earth did you get this from? Are you talking about tithe? Because that's existed since Biblical times and has nothing to do with the Nazis?
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:48 PM   #58
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: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest






Secondly, I'll say that you are the one who needs to go back and read that post again. The person was taking issue with what I wrote, not to what was written by the person to whom I was responding.



The person was referring to me, not the person who called Republicans "wacko".

I was the one who used the term "argument free", not the person to whom I was replying.

Also, consider the word "retort", which is defined thusly:

Retort's definition is "To reply, especially to answer in a quick, caustic, or witty manner".

I was the only one doing any "retorting". The comment I was responding to was an insult, not a retort.
Since, I'm the person in question, let me just clarify. 80's is right. I was referring to him.

Though 80's, I didn't feel harshly when I wrote it. Many times I was itching, just itching to comment on some of things people were saying so I sympathized with your doing so though I still maintain that we shouldn't.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:51 PM   #59
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: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by all_i_want
You can pick up this quote from wikipedia:

"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter."

—Hitler, on his belief in the non-Jewish, anti-materialistic, 'Ario-heroic' spirit of Jesus, later distorted by exoteric Christianity
Hitler was also a notorious liar. He was willing to go along with alliances of convenience (the pact with Stalin, the alliance with Japan) so long as they were able to move his agenda along.

So his posturing as a Christian for what is most likely a Christian audience can hardly be taken seriously.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 11:53 PM   #60
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:45 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean


Since, I'm the person in question, let me just clarify. 80's is right. I was referring to him.

Though 80's, I didn't feel harshly when I wrote it. Many times I was itching, just itching to comment on some of things people were saying so I sympathized with your doing so though I still maintain that we shouldn't.
Thanks for coming forward.

The thing that got me about that thread is the double-standard that often comes into play in this forum. Certain people with certain views that differ from those held by myself and like-minded individuals are allowed to say things like that without anyone calling them on the carpet. However, if I were to say Liberals are lunatics or something like that, especially in a thread that was expressly intended as a "no-argument zone", there'd be no end to the flack I'd get for it.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest 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 04:45 PM.


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