or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is the US trying to insult Islam?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is the US trying to insult Islam? - Page 5

post #161 of 236
Sergovious, you deliberatly attempted to cite Bible passages-- that [in two cases] are allegroical, and are not used to promote violence -- in an apparent attempt to show how "violent" Christ-like behavior can be.

Then you attempted to insinuate a tolerance in Islam that is elusive at best. The reality today is that the Jizya, and other laws that fence in Christians are a very real, very sad reality.

I really, really don't, get it. The sign on the forum said "factually informed" discussion. This type of sly chisling, whether it's this forum, or some myopic, paraniod, rant on Halliburton is foolishness. You guys make mountians out of molehills but ignore what is right in front of your face. Islam has serious xenophobic issues, it has serious issues with primitivism, etc. and I have to read this horse hockey about "take two swords." What rot. General Electric, has nearly a billion dollars of fines, endless ligitagation with the government of it's contracts, and massive media and political connections, but Halliburton is the great evil we face today -- and it's all done with a straight face in the name of "integrity". What absolute childishness.

This isn't a discussion, this a cheap shilling contest.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #162 of 236
Ok, you force me to destroy your position once and for all. Please address each point I make sensibly or I ,will be forced to hammer them home continually.

Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Sergovious, you deliberatly attempted to cite Bible passages-- that [in two cases] are allegroical, and are not used to promote violence -- in an apparent attempt to show how "violent" Christ-like behavior can be.

YOU say they are allegorical - they may or may not be. I haven't said at all which I think they are so all your assumptions about my intent rest on nothing but that....assumptions. Which may or may not be correct. You don;t know. But you think you do.

Moving on to my rationale for posting them. They exist. They do not fit with Xian dogma so they are 'allegorical'. They may well be - but it is dishonest, dishonest and hypocritical to not consider that they may not.

I have not claimed the Qur'an passage you provide is allegorical (and I could justify it in at least 5 different ways if I chose to) but if I did then we would merely have a pissing contest. This subject is worth more than that and it is you who continually takes it there because of your refusal to look at things from differing angles. Not to accept - just look, that can't even happen. That's your choice and I respect it but let's not call it objective or talk about 'facts'.

As to violent 'Christ-like' behaviour, no-one with their eyes still unblinkered needs me to show that. A quick glance at random historical periods would do it and if that's not your bag try contemporary USA.

Quote:
Then you attempted to insinuate a tolerance in Islam that is elusive at best. The reality today is that the Jizya, and other laws that fence in Christians are a very real, very sad reality.

I did not 'attempt' or 'insinuate'. I stated.

You are clearly not thinking or are ignorant of this topic. The jizya tax was a tax on Christians living in Islamic society.

Perhaps you feel they should not be taxed but live free ? Should Muslims in the US today then have that same right ?

Or perhaps, you feel they should not have been in an Islamic society ? perhaps they should have been kicked out like the Christians did to the Jews ?

Unfortunately for you - in traditional Islam, historically, Jews and Christians lived in harmony with freedom of worship. Of course this ended when the Christians reclaimed Spain and there were wholesale slaughters but that's a different story.

Perhaps you are referring to Islam today - but then if so, you are displaying a foolishness on may levels. One, you did not say that: you clearly stated Islam as a religion was intolerant.

Perhaps then you did make a mistake and meant the situation in (say) Saudi - US ally #1. This is true, Christians are persecuted and there is no freedom of worship. But this contravenes the Qur'an and teaching of Muhammmad. No matter Saudis = Islam.

In fact, as it happens, I know for a fact that you are aware that the Wahabis are the persecutors of Christians and also that Wahabism is condemned by 95% of Islamic authorities throughout the world. So that makes me wonder about you some more...

But perhaps you meant Sudan ? Wahabis. Nigeria ? Wahabis ?

Possibly Syria or Turkey ? I have regularly attended Christian churches and services on countless occasions throughout both those countries so you'd be wrong there.

Iran ? Strong Christian population - Iraq also incidentally, but they are getting a bit p-ed off with being shot at and blown up though so perhaps they are not really Christians in the US sense.

But as I say, there is very little need for me to waste time on this. Every informed and knowledgeable person regarding this issue knows that Christians, jews and Muslims lived in harmony for 800 years and were responsible for much of the roots of European advancement.

You can believe what you like but if you wish to ignore facts, and it seems you do, there is very little point being on a board such as this, I can recommend some Islam un-friendly ones if you like. I've heard they're out there. But I guess you know that.


Quote:
I really, really don't, get it. The sign on the forum said "factually informed" discussion. This type of sly chisling, whether it's this forum, or some myopic, paraniod, rant on Halliburton is foolishness. You guys make mountians out of molehills but ignore what is right in front of your face. Islam has serious xenophobic issues, it has serious issues with primitivism, etc. and I have to read this horse hockey about "take two swords."

It says 'take two swords'. That's what it says. I didn't write it. There must be a reason for it and if you have one I'm very interested. 'Allegorical' just won't cut it I'm afraid or if it does I'm going to have to start claiming that terrorists wanting to gain bombs is 'allegorical' and we'll be pissing in the wind again.

Quote:
What rot. General Electric, has nearly a billion dollars of fines, endless ligitagation with the government of it's contracts, and massive media and political connections, but Halliburton is the great evil we face today -- and it's all done with a straight face in the name of "integrity". What absolute childishness.

I think you are gaining in integrity which is good. Your 'reasonable' mask has been checked at the door on this one and we can see something slightly less.....well. less.

This is progress. Islamophobia is never pleasant seeing the truth is good.

Quote:
This isn't a discussion, this a cheap shilling contest.

Well it shouldn't be. Please start discussing.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #163 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Ok, you force me to destroy your position once and for all. Please address each point I make sensibly or I ,will be forced to hammer them home continually.

Living in peace for 800 years? Give me a break.

From: _Islam and Dhummitude(2002)_
Quote:
historical negationism, consisting of suppressing or sketching in a page or a paragraph, one thousand years of jihad which is presented as a peaceful conquest, generally welcomed by the vanquished populations; the omission of Christian and, in particular, Muslim sources describing the actual methods of these conquests: pillage, enslavement, deportation, massacres, and so on; the mythical historical conversion of "centuries" of "peaceful coexistence", masking the processes which transformed majorities into minorities, constantly at risk of extinction....

Don't confuse 'peace' with 'submission'. Pantheism by any other name.......

I'm glad you brought up Iran, lets take a look: 1/2 of 1 percent of the population are Christian. Open witnessing is banned. Spies monitor Christian groups. Believers are descriminated in education, employment, and property ownership. Missions are not allowed to enter the country. And the rest of the Muslim world is guilty of the same offical/nonoffical biogtry to one degree or another. There is no denying this, except as a shil.

And yes, your "two swords" patently disingenous, and better tried on someone who has never picked up a commentary or concordance. You have no support for the 'two swords' comment in regards to any mainstream/modern Christian theology, in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM -- more inisnuation -- quite frankly, if you had more information on this issue, you would use more.

The fact of the matter is that over the centuries Christianity grew up and learned how to better approximate Christ-like behavior, learned how to approach the concept of freedom, AND ACTUALLY PUT IT IN PRACTICE. Because, unlike cheap recylcled pantheism in a ihram, they have the freedom to change and, most importantly the actual metaphysical option.

There is no comparison to the mentality of those two Faiths -- not Today.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #164 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Living in peace for 800 years? Give me a break.

From: _Islam and Dhummitude(2002)_

Either you are lying or believing a lie. Same difference.

Where do you want to duke this one out - here or new thread ?

I will be asking for evidence from academic authorities - not some Christian/Jewish hate site.

You choose.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #165 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Either you are lying or believing a lie. Same difference.

Where do you want to duke this one out - here or new thread ?

I will be asking for evidence from academic authorities - not some Christian/Jewish hate site.

You choose.

Just passing through....

So this book, Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide
by Bat Yeor, Miriam Kochan (Translator), David Littman (Translator)
is all lies?

(I'm just trying to get a clear view of the Bright Future awaiting my atheist self in the coming Islamic World Order)

V/R,

Aries 1B
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
"I pictured myself sitting in the shade of a leafy tree in a public park, a stylus in hand, a shiny Apple Tablet computer in my lap, and a pouty Jennifer Connelly stirring a pitcher of gimlets a...
Reply
post #166 of 236
Those names sound very... umm.. very... ahem..
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #167 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by Aries 1B
Just passing through....

So this book, Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide
by Bat Yeor, Miriam Kochan (Translator), David Littman (Translator)
is all lies?

(I'm just trying to get a clear view of the Bright Future awaiting my atheist self in the coming Islamic World Order)

V/R,

Aries 1B

If you want a sensible discussion then I'm afraid the answer is that it contains many lies and is founded on a lie. The lies are very, very subtle and an examination of them will take us into stormy waters but the truth is this:

The representatives of Islam and especially governments, are today not tolerant.

Islam as a religion was originally tolerant and as a teaching this has not changed - Muslims, their rulers have changed. Extremism has triumphed.

So far so bad. But this is not what Bat Yeor and his ilk are saying. They are saying that Islam has always been the same. This is a lie.

It is a lie you buy into every time you use Islam instead of 'extremists' or 'Wahahbis' when those are the sub-groups you refer to. it is a lie people like DMZ support and perpetuate for a reason.

The reason in his case is that if Islam is true then his belief is false (in his understanding - not necessarily a correct one) so he must find ways of downgrading Islam, of 'proving' it is wrong in order to feel that he is right. It is a similar case to why certain extremist Christians feel they need to convert people.

In the case of the authors and translators of this book then unfortunately there is a political aspect where the Zionist movement is waging a propaganda campaign against Islam and it is certainly not in their interest to promote knowledge of a time where Christians, Jews and Muslims lived in peace and harmony.

Btw - before our resident PC-cops check in, I use the term Zionist advisedly as a distinction between religious and secular Jews who DO acknowledge the truth of the convivencvia as this period is called. In fact, if DMZ were man enough to take this topic on, I could prove the point with links exclusively drawn from Jewish sites.

You see the fact is that the Muslim armies were invited to Spain rather than invaded and saved the Jews from extinction at the hands of the Christian Visigoths - a fact for which they were very grateful. 80o years later they were massacred again at the hands of the Church when the Inquisition started but in between they were safe.

Let's talk about Dhimmi. What did it mean ? It meant you were recognized as a Jew or a Christian and not a Muslim. It meant you were entitled to your own places of worship. What do the haters say it meant ? Well, second class citizens etc.....no mention of freedoms that would be unheard of until centuries later let alone in the ninth century which is when this was. What would they say if there was no recognition of jews and Christians ? Islam refuses to recognize our religion....and on and on.....

But really, you and people like DMZ must choose - you can investigate and see if there ever really was a civilization where these faiths that are now at each other's throats lived in harmony. See whether it is true that this alleged harmony led to amazing discoveries we rely on even today in medicine, astronomy, maths, architecture - an if you do, consider whether we might learn something of great value that we desperately need in these times today.

Or you can ignore it, not even look. And just keep denying the possibility at best or pushing other people's lies at worst.

I have said enough and will just leave you with two exhibits. One, a photo of the Medieval Synagogue at Toledo from Islamic Spain - possibly the greatest ever built in Europe. You should ponder how it ever got built if what you say is true. How was it allowed ? Who paid for it ? Why did it survive undesecrated all this time ?

The second is an Arabic poem from a Muslim Spaniard of the period - Ibn Arabi, it is self-explanatory.



A white-blazed gazelle
Is an amazing sight,
Red-dye signaling,
Eyelids hinting,

Pasture between breastbones
And innards.
Marvel,
A garden among the flames!

My heart can take on
Any form:
Gazelles in a meadow,
A cloister for monks,

For the idols, sacred ground,
Kaaba for the circling pilgrim,
The tables of the Torah,
The scrolls of the Qur'an

I profess the religion of love;
Wherever its caravan turns
Along the way, that is the belief,
The faith I keep.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #168 of 236
beautiful.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #169 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
..and then out of the other side of your mouth you miss passages like this from the big Q:

"Q009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.
SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection."

Historical context is always important: At the time of the revelation of these verses, prophet Muhammad and his followers controlled about a third of the arabian peninsula and it was in the height of the long war that the polytheistic Mecca started against prophet Muhammad and his followers. In that war there were four parties:

1. The polytheistic Meccans and their allies that started the war.
2. Prophet Muhammad, his followers and their allies that reacted to the war with jihad, namely a defensive war.
3. The minority of jews in Medina that signed a treaty with prophet Muhammad and his followers, in which they promised to stay neutral, but which they broke by sending informations to the polytheistic Mecca.
4. The even smaller minority of christians throughout Arabia who partly worked as spies for the roman empire.

During that time, the victory over polytheistic Mecca was near and everyone in Arabia knew it, prophet Muhammad sent ambassadors and messengers to the roman empire in order to sign a peace-treaty so that the romans stop their attacks against the northern arabian people that had converted to the islamic faith. Of the 15 ambassadors, 14 were killed by the romans, only one could escape to tell what happened.

Then the roman empire assembled an army of a hundred thousand soldiers and set them in motion towards Arabia, which was quickly reported to prophet Muhammad and his followers.

That was the declaration of war between the roman empire and prophet Muhammad and his followers, and that prompted part of the revelations of sura 9, the only sura of the Quran starting without the prefix "In the name of God, the forgiving one, the merciful", indicating and underlining it's temporary context.

Part of sura 9 can be regarded as an acceptance and counterdeclaration of the declaration of war by the romans, and eventhough the followers of prophet Muahammad were already engaged in a defensive war against Mecca, and the finances were strained because of that, they could assemble and equip with weapons and armoury an army of 30,000 soldiers to sent north to confront the about to invade roman army.

Those christians that worked as spies for the roman empire sent the message of the quick and successful establishment of the 30,000-man-army to the roman leader, and eventhough he had an army of 100,000 soldiers, he, remembering the previous spy-reports of how the soldiers of prophet Muhammad won battles despite a huge advantage in numbers of his opponents, decided to demobilise his invasion army and to reverse. When the 30,000 soldiers with prophet Muhammad at the front arrived at the border of the roman empire, the roman army didn't materialise and so prophet Muhammad, eventhough he could have conquered Syria, he chose to return back to Arabia.

Without a fight, the campaign was a huge strategic success which led to numerous neighbouring countries in the north between Arabia and the roman empire to accept the message of God voiced through the prophet Muhammad. This robbed the polytheistic Mecca of their last hope of winning the war they started.

From the point of view of God and his messenger, part of the sura 9 and the campaign against the romans was a mean to find out who was a hypocrite among the followers of prophet Muhammad, namely those that, despite being healthy and capable and rich, didn't want to travel north to fight against the invading roman army and didn't want to spend money for the equipment of the soldiers and as such exposing their disbelief in God, and identifiying them as possible helpers of the polytheistic Mecca.

Note, dmz, that the verse you quoted, that was a call to the arms against the roman empire that declared war, prepared the followers of prophet Muhammad to fight that defensive war against those among the people of the book, that didn't believe in God and the last day, and who didn't forbid what God has forbidden, until they accept defeat and pay the tax.

That's a huge progress in human rights and rules of warfare, in stark contrast to the way other empires have led war, including the roman empire, which have always fought until the complete distruction or enslavement of their opponents, who, if they survived, were forced to convert to the religion of the state, and whose possessions were transferred to the victors of the war.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #170 of 236
Oh hey wow it's a religionist who thinks his religion is sacrosanct and others are lower than dirt. I bet this discussion will be fruitful!
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #171 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Oh hey wow it's a religionist who thinks his religion is sacrosanct and others are lower than dirt. I bet this discussion will be fruitful!



A true believer in God can't think of other monotheistic religions as dirt or lower. A real muslim for example sees himself/herself as a servant of God that is devoted to Him and submits him-/herself to the way of God, which is described according to the Quran in Moses' Thora, in Jesus' evangelium and in the Quran itself.

The way of God is to believe in the one God, to establish and observe worship of God, to love your next, to spend money for the poor, to restrain evil by justice and mercy and to defend against those that warfare against or oppress the believers, be the believers of jewish, christian or islamic faith.

So respect for the messages of those books and the people that believe in those books is an integral part of being a muslim, as well as the quranic message that all believers in the one and only God and the last day, who commit good deeds can enter paradise.

That's the message of the Quran. The actual historical interpretation and application of said message is off course another topic, and got espescially misunderstood after the first arabic dynasties (an unislamic concept) got established, way after prophet Muhammad died.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #172 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by Nightcrawler
Is that a reply to me?

No.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #173 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
No.

Ok, sorry, my fault.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #174 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
No.

Must be me then heh
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #175 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
If you want a sensible discussion........

Are you willing to go on the record that the statement:

Quote:
...the actual methods of these conquests: pillage, enslavement, deportation, massacres...

is a lie?

Remember, before this goes to far afield, this started with:



Quote:
u don't have to look it up for me as I am very familiar with the complete data - I suggest you look it up for yourself and try to think about it.

Whilst you are at it I feel the two quotes below will clearly show that you know very, very little about these matters.

I really hope you can improve. We can talk again if and when you do.

quote:
Remember in the new testament Jesus was about love not Jihad thank you.


Matthew 10:34 - 36: "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a 'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, a man's enemies will be the members of his own household."

Luke 14:25-33 " If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also (like I do), he cannot be my disciple."

Luke 22 - 36: "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (to the disciples).

...essentially you attempting to deflect critisism that Islam has been a religion of the sword from it's inception --and then following up with a softpeddled version of "harmony" and "peace" that ought to be called for what it is: submission to a top-down [totalitarian] ideology. Rome had "peace" as well, but it was a built on slavery -- let's be honest about our underpinnings here.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #176 of 236
Yes, let's be honest and recognize that both religions preach subjugation to higher/other powers at the very root.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #177 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Yes, let's be honest and recognize that both religions preach subjugation to higher/other powers at the very root.

Islam and Christianity are different in that respect. With Islam you have top-down 'the will of Allah' at any cost, on the Christian side you have "All things work together for good". This fundamental difference explains why Islam has the strong tendency towards Totalitarian government.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #178 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Are you willing to go on the record that the statement:

is a lie?

If you are talking about Islamic Spain then I say it is a lie. On record.

That is to say, the conquest of the peninsular was as a result of two factors: one, the Muslim armies being invited there and two, the Umayyads fleeing oppression from other Islamic factions.

If you wish to talk about other Islamic empires such as the Ayyubids, Mamlukes, Seljuks or Ottomans then I will not dispute that (as you put it) pillage, enslavement, deportation, massacres actually occurred but I was (am) under the impression we are talking about the 800 years of harmony of the convevencia - something you dispute specifically.

Clearly no Jews were deported under Spanish Islamic rule. I believe there were 2 specific incidents which resulted in large scale death in this period towards the end. Enslavement was rare and Jews and Christians rose to positions of great power - particularly in court administration, finance and what we would call the 'civil service'. Inter-marriage was common - in fact where I live there are large Spanish communities of MozArabs - Spanish families with Arabic blood through marriage. They are extremely proud of this, are staunchly Christian and have celebrated this status for centuries.

Further, you are using selective reasoning. I saw today a Christian Church in ruins in Baghdad from US bombing.

Someone could rightly say (and probably will in centuries to come) that the US deliberately blew up this Church. They could say it about a mosque - many of those have been blown up too. They could use this as 'evidence' of the US injustice to the Iraqi people. But it is not necessarily so in such a case. Shit happens. I am talking about the root of a civilization and if you wish to counter it then you need to explain away the thousands of Christian Churches (still intact), the myriad communities of Christians throughout the Islamic world (still intact), the Jewish synagogues - ditto. Even the Bamiyan Buddhas survived until a few years ago.

If the Taleban are the same Muslims as Muslims have always been then how come ? How come these Churches and Synagogues are still there ? What about the Jewish and Christian historians themselves whose writings we have from this period of Spain who claim the same as I do ? Are they lying too ?

What is your opinion of that poem I quoted by the Spanish Muslim of that time ? Did I make that up ? Or is it just not representative ?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #179 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Islam and Christianity are different in that respect. With Islam you have top-down 'the will of Allah' at any cost, on the Christian side you have "All things work together for good". This fundamental difference explains why Islam has the strong tendency towards Totalitarian government.

That's a complete misunderstanding of the theology of both religions. With Islam, given your anti animus, it is in your case understandable. Regarding Christianity it is incomprehensible. It's even a misquote - you missed out the rider to them that love God which by any token is very few people so the majority would not fall under this rubric as you imply.

BUt I'm too bored/tired/pessimistic/wise to try to set you right so just carry on.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #180 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Yes, let's be honest and recognize that both religions preach subjugation to higher/other powers at the very root.

All religion by definition teaches this. That's what religion is - submission to an conception of God.

The argument is therefore reduced to being merely one of whose God is 'correct' and this is an arena which I will not enter.

My argument in this thread is purely against historical misrepresentations and falsifying of provable facts: it has nothing to do with the truth or otherwise of any spiritual dogma.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #181 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
If you are talking about Islamic Spain then I say it is a lie. On record.

That is to say, the conquest of the peninsular was as a result of two factors: one, the Muslim armies being invited there and two, the Umayyads fleeing oppression from other Islamic factions.

If you wish to talk about other Islamic empires such as the Ayyubids, Mamlukes, Seljuks or Ottomans then I will not dispute that (as you put it) pillage, enslavement, deportation, massacres actually occurred but I was (am) under the impression we are talking about the 800 years of harmony of the convevencia - something you dispute specifically.

Clearly no Jews were deported under Spanish Islamic rule. I believe there were 2 specific incidents which resulted in large scale death in this period towards the end. Enslavement was rare and Jews and Christians rose to positions of great power - particularly in court administration, finance and what we would call the 'civil service'. Inter-marriage was common - in fact where I live there are large Spanish communities of MozArabs - Spanish families with Arabic blood through marriage. They are extremely proud of this, are staunchly Christian and have celebrated this status for centuries.

Further, you are using selective reasoning. I saw today a Christian Church in ruins in Baghdad from US bombing.

Someone could rightly say (and probably will in centuries to come) that the US deliberately blew up this Church. They could say it about a mosque - many of those have been blown up too. They could use this as 'evidence' of the US injustice to the Iraqi people. But it is not necessarily so in such a case. Shit happens. I am talking about the root of a civilization and if you wish to counter it then you need to explain away the thousands of Christian Churches (still intact), the myriad communities of Christians throughout the Islamic world (still intact), the Jewish synagogues - ditto. Even the Bamiyan Buddhas survived until a few years ago.

If the Taleban are the same Muslims as Muslims have always been then how come ? How come these Churches and Synagogues are still there ? What about the Jewish and Christian historians themselves whose writings we have from this period of Spain who claim the same as I do ? Are they lying too ?

What is your opinion of that poem I quoted by the Spanish Muslim of that time ? Did I make that up ? Or is it just not representative ?

The poem? The poem was very good. As for Spain, I'll defer to your judgement. I'm sure the business in Spain is what you say it is essentially. But this has more to do with general movement of Islam's influence and keeping you honest.The Taleban were a faction, and there are many other factions. CMIIW, but I don't think I've tried to hold Islam accountable for this faction or that faction.

At any rate, I saw the bible quotes and thought I'd comment. Christendom has been plenty bloody in the past, I'm not all that concerned with comparing body counts -- there's plenty of fodder there to go around. I think maybe we butt heads on this becuase you want to explain Islam's problems today as "fundamentalist" problems and then transfer, or predict the same outcomes to any other religion that is true to it's roots -- hence bringing up the hate/swords thing. But, Christianity has actually had success in reinventing itself every so often, but doing so in terms of it's roots, and only having success because it has those coherent roots to return to. Islam, however, has a top-down submission at it's metaphysical root -- I don't think any sort of liberalism will save it.

(oh and BTW I heard a rumor that many churches were deliberatly bombed in Iraq during GW1 -- grist for the rumour mill -- anything to keep the the house of Saud or the Emir happy)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #182 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
...essentially you attempting to deflect critisism that Islam has been a religion of the sword from it's inception --and then following up with a softpeddled version of "harmony" and "peace" that ought to be called for what it is: submission to a top-down [totalitarian] ideology. Rome had "peace" as well, but it was a built on slavery -- let's be honest about our underpinnings here.

How can a 'religion of the sword' (nice fundie literalist buzz-phrase) be effective as such if it leaves synagogues and churches intact for hundreds of years ?

Again: why did the Islamo-fascists allow the Jews free worship ?

Why did they not expel them to face certain death at the hands of the Church ? Something that happened immediately on the fall of islamic Spain and is the reason why there are very few Jews here today.

Why did they not exterminate them ?

Interesting article

Quote:
During the Golden Age in medieval Spain, Jews played prominent roles in politics, art, commerce and all major areas of social discourse side by side with their Muslim brethren. Jews and Muslims did not hate each others religion. On the contrary, their respective theologians learned from each other & used the wisdom learned to enrich their own religions discourse.

Jews were prominent advisors to Arab leaders. They were the financiers who helped the viziers run the great Spanish cities of Toledo, Seville and Granada. Jewish poets (Yehuda HaLevi, Shlomo Ibn Gabirol, Abraham Ibn Ezra) wrote some of the finest poetry to emanate from this region & historical era. In their poetry, they describe the great culinary feasts at which both Arab & Jewish poets & musicians entertained guests with their elegant & cosmopolitan artistic productions.

Only in 1492, with the rise to power of Spains Christian monarchs, Ferdinand & Isabella, did the Golden Age come to an abrupt end with the Expulsion of the Jews. With the Inquisition that followed, Christian Spain hounded, harassed and tortured the remaining secret Jews (Marranos) instituting one of historys most hateful periods of Jewish persecution (until the Holocaust).

So, the 'religion of the sword' somehow allowed free worship of Christians and Jews and this continued until the rise of the Christian empire when Muslims and Jews were expelled and massacred by the tens of thousands under the Inquisition.

Do you dispute this ? For the record.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #183 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
That's a complete misunderstanding of the theology of both religions. With Islam, given your anti animus, it is in your case understandable. Regarding Christianity it is incomprehensible. It's even a misquote - you missed out the rider to them that love God which by any token is very few people so the majority would not fall under this rubric as you imply.

BUt I'm too bored/tired/pessimistic/wise to try to set you right so just carry on.

It's not a misquote, it should be assumed that we speak from the presepective of each faith's adherents.

You are missing the heavy issue of unity of authority/particularity in the Godhead [aka, Loving Father/Family] as opposed to the Unified authority of the top-down paradigm 'Allah-does-what-Allah-does, so be it', etc.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #184 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
How can a 'religion of the sword' (nice fundie literalist buzz-phrase) be effective as such if it leaves synagogues and churches intact for hundreds of years ?

Again: why did the Islamo-fascists allow the Jews free worship ?

Why did they not expel them to face certain death at the hands of the Church ? Something that happened immediately on the fall of islamic Spain and is the reason why there are very few Jews here today.

Why did they not exterminate them ?

Interesting article



So, the 'religion of the sword' somehow allowed free worship of Christians and Jews and this continued until the rise of the Christian empire when Muslims and Jews were expelled and massacred by the tens of thousands under the Inquisition.

Do you dispute this ? For the record.

I think you're lagging one post behind?

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #185 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
The poem? The poem was very good. As for Spain, I'll defer to your judgement. I'm sure the business in Spain is what you say it is essentially. But this has more to do with general movement of Islam's influence and keeping you honest.The Taleban were a faction, and there are many other factions. CMIIW, but I don't think I've tried to hold Islam accountable for this faction or that faction.

At any rate, I saw the bible quotes and thought I'd comment. Christendom has been plenty bloody in the past, I'm not all that concerned with comparing body counts -- there's plenty of fodder there to go around. I think maybe we butt heads on this becuase you want to explain Islam's problems today as "fundamentalist" problems and then transfer, or predict the same outcomes to any other religion that is true to it's roots -- hence bringing up the hate/swords thing. But, Christianity has actually had success in reinventing itself every so often, but doing so in terms of it's roots, and only having success because it has those coherent roots to return to. Islam, however, has a top-down submission at it's metaphysical root -- I don't think any sort of liberalism will save it.

(oh and BTW I heard a rumor that many churches were deliberatly bombed in Iraq during GW1 -- grist for the rumour mill -- anything to keep the the house of Saud or the Emir happy)

The submission you mention is submission to God. If you understood this properly you would realise it is not only a good thing but something that is not practiced now by many Muslims. I will give you an example:

In Islam, as you probably know, there is only God - that is to say, everything that happens is the will of God. Nothing can happen that is not.

Therefore the 'submission' you mention is not submission to an authority - no such authority exists, there are no Popes or Churches - but submission to God's will.

That is to say, if a US bomb lands on your house in Baghdad then you should accept this. That is the will of God.

However, people like OBL in his popular form clearly do not accept the will of God. Likewise any terrorist group which wants to 'change things' - this is anti-Islamic in the sense that you are arguing Islam and submission is.

How can a Muslim agitate to change what God has ordained ? Even if it is something with bad consequences for that individual.

So, it would be better for you and all of us if these people did actually submit - I wouldn't denigrate it that lightly if I were you.

Especially seeing as the representatives of Islam you have in mind are not even doing it.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #186 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I think you're lagging one post behind?

At least. There are so many errors to correct I have unfortunately built up a backlog.....
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #187 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
The submission you mention is submission to God. If you understood this properly you would realise it is not only a good thing but something that is not practiced now by many Muslims. I will give you an example:

In Islam, as you probably know, there is only God - that is to say, everything that happens is the will of God. Nothing can happen that is not.

Therefore the 'submission' you mention is not submission to an authority - no such authority exists, there are no Popes or Churches - but submission to God's will.

That is to say, if a US bomb lands on your house in Baghdad then you should accept this. That is the will of God.

However, people like OBL in his popular form clearly do not accept the will of God. Likewise any terrorist group which wants to 'change things' - this is anti-Islamic in the sense that you are arguing Islam and submission is.

How can a Muslim agitate to change what God has ordained ? Even if it is something with bad consequences for that individual.

So, it would be better for you and all of us if these people did actually submit - I wouldn't denigrate it that lightly if I were you.

Especially seeing as the representatives of Islam you have in mind are not even doing it.

I think that's exaclty right, in the way that the 'Muslim' worldview operates.

Although I would say that in OBL's case he's probably as out in left field as he can be.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #188 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
...essentially you attempting to deflect critisism that Islam has been a religion of the sword from it's inception --and then following up with a softpeddled version of "harmony" and "peace" that ought to be called for what it is: submission to a top-down [totalitarian] ideology. Rome had "peace" as well, but it was a built on slavery -- let's be honest about our underpinnings here.

It's funny that you talk about Rome and the slavery it's built upon, and then go on talking about Islam being a religion of the sword from it's inception, and not realizing the contradiction.

Islam was not a religion of the sword, it's a religion based on the Quran and prophet Muhammad's life. In both cases war was allowed only in cases of defense, jihad, next to numerous non-war-related aspects, was always meant as a defensive war or in the case of people calling muslims for help to free them from oppression.

Yes, sacrificing oneself for God's way was highly regarded, but again only in a defensive war, and only in battles against soldiers, aka armed and fighting men, that started the war or that oppressed people that called for help.

Prophet Muhammad's life was witness to that, he lived numerous years among polytheists in Mecca preaching the monotheistic message of God, until polytheistic Mecca started to oppress, harass and torture the followers of prophet Muhammad and years later even tried to assassinate him, and when he and his followers eventually left Mecca and found refuge in Medina, stole all the property of the leaving people and declared war against Medina.

Then a revalation of God came down calling for the defensive war against polytheistic Mecca.

Maybe you, like a lot of anti-Islam christians centuries before you, were shocked that so many countries that were previously christian under the rule of the roman empire transformed into islamic countries in such a quick time, which has led to the creation of the myth/propaganda of "forced conversion through the sword", and the propaganda-lie that Islam is the "religion of the sword".

Quite to the contrary, the people from those ex-roman-empire-countries that fell to the islamic rule called the muslims for help, because they were oppressed under the roman empire, the jews were persecuted and a lot of other christians, too, that didn't follow the doctrine of the emperor's christianity.
They called for help because they have heard that the muslims respected the jewish and christian religion and worship and granted them autonomy.

Over the years/decades these autonom christian and jewish communities also came into contact with the islamic religion and its message and found it to confirm and extend their own messages, and realized the message of being from the same God, so that most of them converted voluntarily, saving then the special "people-of-the-book"-tax but then obliged to pay the muslim-taxes and to serve in the military.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #189 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
This fundamental difference explains why Islam has the strong tendency towards Totalitarian government.


As evidenced by, The Soviet Union, Poland, Hungary, Yugoslavia (which includes, Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro), Cuba, China, Romania, Bulgaria, Czhek Republic, Slovakia, etc., etc., - all utterly Islamic states, with Totalitarian governments bent on destroying the wonderful model of democracy. Indeed.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #190 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
Islam and Christianity are different in that respect. With Islam you have top-down 'the will of Allah' at any cost, on the Christian side you have "All things work together for good". This fundamental difference explains why Islam has the strong tendency towards Totalitarian government.

No, quite to the contrary, I think you don't have understood the notion of Islam meaning to submit and devote oneself only to God. It means like segovious has already hinted at, no middle-men, no body, no cleric, nothing that resembles something like the governor of God on earth, that has to be followed.

At the inception of Islam right after prophet Muhammad died, the elder muslims themselves discussed and decided together who would be best to take the vacant position as leader, and regardless who was chosen for that position, he was the same man as the other muslims, no special richdoms or special rights for him. The only thing that let the elderly muslims decide in favour of him over the other was the candidate's plus in integrity.

Regardless of the powerful position, the muslims were only devoted to God, and obeyed the leader only as far as the orders are not in contradiction to the message of the Quran, so that the leader had always to justify new orders with the Quran, so that the Quran worked like a constitution with rules, rights and duties, that restricted the power of the leader.

That all changed with the establishment of dynasties, families that wanted to eternally keep the position of the leader to themselves and their descendants, no discussion and decision of the elderly muslims required, and with the accumulation of unimaginable richdoms controlled the mosques, installed imams that propagated the line of the government and branded any resistance as deviation of Islam.

That was the turning point, and slowly but surely led downwards, the hadith-collections were used as an easy way to create new rules and laws with the backing of the "supposed" prophet Muhammad-sayings, discriminatory laws against minorities were enacted to appease the majority, later on, mostly by the ottomans, jihad was interpreted and lived as offensive war, enslavement was reinforced, the leaders drunk alcohol, and enjoyed women en masse in their harems, despite the islamic restriction to a max of four wifes and no concubines.

Even more condemnable the ottomans practiced to kidnap at least one son, regardless of the faith, from every family of the conquered people and to train and recruit them for a special ottoman army-unit that should serve and protect the leader...

Since dynasties gave leadership from father to son, there was always a problem when there were numerous brothers that could claim the leadership, so that when one of this sons was chosen to be the leader the other brothers were killed...

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #191 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
It's not a misquote, it should be assumed that we speak from the presepective of each faith's adherents.

You are missing the heavy issue of unity of authority/particularity in the Godhead [aka, Loving Father/Family] as opposed to the Unified authority of the top-down paradigm 'Allah-does-what-Allah-does, so be it', etc.

What's your point? God, there is no need for the arabic word "Allah" for God here, does, did and will indeed do whatever he wills, willed and will will, He is allknowing and omnipotent, the creator of the universe and all life, and the one who let's live and let's die, and who will recreate us all on judgment day, on the last day to judge our faith in Him and our deeds, and to punish us eternally in hell or to reward us eternally in paradise.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #192 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
All religion by definition teaches this. That's what religion is - submission to an conception of God.

The argument is therefore reduced to being merely one of whose God is 'correct' and this is an arena which I will not enter.

My argument in this thread is purely against historical misrepresentations and falsifying of provable facts: it has nothing to do with the truth or otherwise of any spiritual dogma.

For us muslims, it's different, for us our God is the same as the God of the christians and jews, the same that created the universe, the angels, the jinns, the humans, all life, paradise and hell, the one who inspired prophets and messengers and who sent down messages, the latest being those from Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

That's why christians and jews are regarded as people of the book, as people having received messages from the same God, and that's why in the Quran God promises that christians and jews as well as muslims that believe in the one and only existing God and commit good deeds in order to please God, don't have to grieve on the last day and will receive their reward in paradise.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #193 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius

That is to say, if a US bomb lands on your house in Baghdad then you should accept this. That is the will of God.

Yes, it's God's will that the US-bomb lands in that house, and it's good for muslims to accept that as every damage, suffering and loss serves as a mean to forgive sins. There's the concept of everything good comes from God, and everything bad or evil comes from our own hands, meaning our previous bad or evil deeds coming back on us, like the karma-thing of the indians, but yet everything is God's will.

Therefore it's good and advised for muslims not to seek revenge or retaliation and to accept and fogive, but that doesn't mean that muslims should stay inactive! The Quran clearly calls numerous times to defend oneself against aggressors and oppressors, until the aggression/oppression stops and the aggressor/oppressor is defeated, and retaliation for damage or loss is allowed in equal measures, but it's advised to better not seek it and to accept and forgive it.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #194 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by Nightcrawler
For us muslims, it's different, for us our God is the same as the God of the christians and jews, the same that created the universe, the angels, the jinns, the humans, all life, paradise and hell, the one who inspired prophets and messengers and who sent down messages, the latest being those from Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

That's why christians and jews are regarded as people of the book, as people having received messages from the same God, and that's why in the Quran God promises that christians and jews as well as muslims that believe in the one and only existing God and commit good deeds in order to please God, don't have to grieve on the last day and will receive their reward in paradise.

Nightcrawler

As an aside, are you offended by what your muslim brothers are doing in the name of Allah?

For example, 9/11, the beheadings in Iraq, the constant and consistent taking of their fellow Muslim's lives, in the name of Jihad?

I am curious to hear from someone with your standpoint. No offense intended.
post #195 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
As an aside, are you offended by what your muslim brothers are doing in the name of Allah?

For example, 9/11, the beheadings in Iraq, the constant and consistent taking of their fellow Muslim's lives, in the name of Jihad?

I am curious to hear from someone with your standpoint. No offense intended.

As an aside, were you offended by what Timothy McVeigh did in the name of opposing big government?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #196 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by Nightcrawler
No, quite to the contrary, I think you don't have understood the notion of Islam meaning to submit and devote oneself only to God. It means like segovious has already hinted at, no middle-men, no body, no cleric, nothing that resembles something like the governor of God on earth, that has to be followed.

You should go back and look at how the metaphysics shakes out. It's a nonpersonal authority -- and it [strongly tends to] effects "their" authority structure. Philosophically, there's just no denying this.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #197 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
As an aside, were you offended by what Timothy McVeigh did in the name of opposing big government?

Of course.

But I am not seeing a connection between myself and T McV. We are both white, is that your point? However his belief structure and mine are not even close.

My questions to NC are apropos because both himself and the perpetrators of the crimes I mentioned claim the same roots.
post #198 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Of course.

But I am not seeing a connection between myself and T McV. We are both white, is that your point? However his belief structure and mine are not even close.

My questions to NC are apropos because both himself and the perpetrators of the crimes I mentioned claim the same roots.

How about the Abu Ghraib abusers and murderers...oh, wait...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #199 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Of course.

But I am not seeing a connection between myself and T McV. We are both white, is that your point?

One of my favorite lines from Shakespeare comes from the beginning of Act III of Henry V:

Work, work your thoughts!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #200 of 236
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
How about the Abu Ghraib abusers and murderers...oh, wait...

How about the Abu Ghraib abusers? They are a disgrace, what;s your point? You have one right?

Abu Ghraib murderers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is the US trying to insult Islam?