Just where do we go from here?

[DVV]

I can only judge Islam by my experience. Nobody can judge Islam by anything other than their experience. And who are you to define real Muslims? I've read the texts. I've heard the interpretations. And there are many.

No.
The four main sects of sunnism, and the shi'a, all agree about Jihad.

The différences are minor : are we allowed to sell a prisonner ?
Some say "yes", others say : "no, they've got to be executed".

Again, take the hadith. From Bukhari, for example, on whom all sunnites agree : for one hadith talking about "peace", dozens preach war.
That's a fact.

Same with the shi'a : indeed, Ali was a great warrior (physically courageous, which makes a difference with Muhammad, btw).

Again, take the Sira : the life of the prophet. A nice (re)collection of murders.

The only way to know islam is to read its "canon" : Koran, Hadith, Sira.

One has to be stupid to conclude, after having read all that, that islam is a peaceful religion preaching equality and tolerancy.

And by "real" Muslim, I mean : it's wrong to infer that Bin Ladin wasn't a good Muslim because he has killed people.

Perhaps he used to eat pork in Tora-Bora, who knows, but the use of violence is plainly "islamic", coranic, muhammadian.

[Ally]

Sorry again, but Paul played a major role in the "invention" of Christianism.

And no, you're wrong again, Muslmims can't ignore parts of the Koran. Some parts have already been "abrogated" by Muhammad himself, then this "science" has been developped.

An example : in one part, wine is said to be a good thing.
Then it has been clearly forbidden.
No Muslim is allowed to drink because of the abrogated part.

Same with the Qibla.
At the beginning, the Koran orederd to pray toward Jérusalem. Then, after Muhammad killed the Jewish tribes, he (or God, if you believe that) changed the direction.

No Muslim can now pray toward Jérusalem, although it is still in the Koran.

Seen ?

Sigh. I'll use the small words. Paul is basically a preacher. An Imam if you will. He "interprets" what he believes god wants or says. He is not a god. He is not prophesizing for God. He was a central tenet in shaping Christianity because he was a preacher that a lot of people clung to, and when the time came to collect their works, his was included. He is not god. He reads God and interprets it to his own ends. In this, he is no different than any other Imam who reads the Quoran and interprets what he believes it means, for good or for evil. There is "the word" (be it the christian or the muslim" and then there is man's interpretations of it. Which parts you choose to believe and follow determine what kind of Christian/muslim you become. The Bible was assembled by men. No one claims that Paul was channeling the direct will and word of god when he wrote his Epistle. It is an interpretation that is all. There were many other interpretations that the men who assembled the Bible chose and many that the men who assembled the Bible discarded. Once they had assembled their book (many parts of which also contradict other parts) they put it forth and said this is the word of god but it is not. It is a collection of interpretation on the word and will of god, no different than the interpretations out there of the Quoran.

People selectively pick and choose which parts of the Quoran to follow. People selectively pick and choose which parts of the Bible to follow.

They are no different and they are ALL "real" muslims and christians. And they are both convinced in the rightness of their religion and that all others will and should burn in everlasting hell.

[DVV]

They are no different and they are ALL "real" muslims and christians. And they are both convinced in the rightness of their religion and that all others will and should burn in everlasting hell.

Sigh.

Except that no Christian can use a single word of the New Testament to kill a non-Christian.

I'm waiting for your small words on this small difference.

[DVV]

One thing that will always amuse me, whenever there is a terrorist attack, is the inevitable question raised by the journalists :
"How come that such a nice guy has become a jihadist ?"

The answer is simple. He has carefully read the Koran and the life of Muhammad.

[Ally]

Sigh.

Except that no Christian can use a single word of the New Testament to kill a non-Christian.

I'm waiting for your small words on this small difference.

No? How about these words, by Jesus:

10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.


But maybe he meant one of those foam swords that don't cut or hurt or kill at all. Swords don't kill people, Jesus does.

[DVV]

Sure, Jesus is known to have encouraged murder and hate.

And the Apostles converted people at gun-point.

[Ally]

Sure, Jesus is known to have encouraged murder and hate.

And the Apostles converted people at gun-point.

The point is, you are wrong. If a Christian wants an excuse to do violence, there are words, in the Bible spoken by Jesus himself that gives them the excuse.

You stated there was not a single line in the NT that would justify killing non-believers. You are wrong.

[Smoking Joe]

It might be simpler to just continue "sleep walking into oblivion"
to coin a phrase.

[DVV]

No, I'm not.
As a proof, he was crucified and none of his follwers were advised to take revenge. How many Romans or Jews have been killed by early Christians ?

Answer : none.

Have a look at Luke, 22, 50-51 (Jesus preventing his friend to take revenge when he was arrested, and even curing the ear of his ennemy)

[DVV]

It might be simpler to just continue "sleep walking into oblivion"
to coin a phrase.

Indeed.
Now I know the status of dhimmi is fine, and Jesus is a serial killer.

[Ally]

Yes you are wrong. You are attempting to move goalposts and change the argument. You said there was not a single line in the NT that could justify killing. YOU ARE WRONG. There is. The only difference is, when it's the religion you don't hate, there's reasons, excuses and "that's not the RIGHT interpretation". When it's the religion you don't like "that's how it is, they are violent and kill people.". In short your stance on religion is purely hypocritical which means any and all views you have on the subject are irrelevant and irrational.

Your entire post is idiotic. How many Romans or Jews were killed by early Christians? I don't know, I don't have the crime logs. How many muslims were killed during the crusades? Thousands upon thousands. How many people were killed or tortured during the spanish inquisition, thousands.

The words for violence against others are there for those who wish to find them just like in the Quoran.

[Smoking Joe]

It would be easier to undo the damage and hatred and evil that Islam and christianity have done than to restore common sense and good judgement to people who are willing to hold these religions as sacred.The problem is much deeper.The present situation is just a symptom of what ails the Human race.Putting all the blame on the prince of fools shouldnt distract us from the vast amount of fools who made him their prince in the first place.
The world might well survive this wave of Islamic savagery,whether it can survive the multitude of fools who made Allah and Christ their master is another Kettle of Fish entirely.
Amen

[DVV]

Oh oh, the crusades again.

And on a thread in which kind souls try to prove islam isn't violent, you'll have a hard time to prove christianism is.

We're not talking of history, in case you failed to notice.

We're talking about the message, the core of the religion.

The numerous crimes of Muhammad are cited in example in the Sira. And the Koran encourages murder in many verses.

I know, it's a modern way of thinking (or rather : of not taking the pain to think) : everything is the same. All religions are equally bad and stupid.

The reality is a bit more complex.

[Ally]

About Jesus:
3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
3:17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.


Jesus own words, in a parable of how to treat the non-believer:

19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
19:28 And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

[DVV]

Ally, now you've convinced me.

And as a good Christian, I know what to do.

See you next year in Boston for the marathon.