NationStates Jolt Archive

After I saw the "Ask A Jew" thread, I decided to do the same, but for Muslims. I'm not claiming to be an expert on the subject of Islam, but any questions you throw at me, I will try to answer to fullest extent.

Do muslims keep a knife in their left shoe?

Yay! I have a spinoff! w00t!

Anyway, I'm almost sure I know the answer to this, but I just want to double check.

Islam, the word itself I mean, is a variation of the word 'Salaam' (Peace in Arabic), right?

No fair, I'm a Muslim!

Do not Muslims worship the same God as the Christian and the Jew?. A difference in messiahs/prophets seems to be a small difference indeed, when Each one teached peace.

Arabic is a semitic language, that makes muslims Semites.

People say it is 'anti-semitic' to insinuate that jews are crafty, is it accurate to state that muslims are crafty?

Are jews craftier than muslims, in your opinion?

Do not Muslims worship the same God as the Christian and the Jew?. A difference in messiahs/prophets seems to be a small difference indeed, when Each one teached peace.
Since Colodia is a Muslim as well...

Technically, we worship the same God, yes. Although there's one major difference between Christianity and Islam. The fact that we believe that God cannot have children, nor have ANY relatives at all. So, we would think it's rather impossible for Jesus to be a God! Without the God status, he fits the prophet status...

I dumbed it down a bit, it;s 10:20 pm

Yay! I have a spinoff! w00t!

Anyway, I'm almost sure I know the answer to this, but I just want to double check.

Islam, the word itself I mean, is a variation of the word 'Salaam' (Peace in Arabic), right?

What, you just ignore my question?

What, you just ignore my question?


Dont get too close he's crafty too!

Plus he keeps a knife in his left shoe, and he WILL stab you.

Since Colodia is a Muslim as well...

Technically, we worship the same God, yes. Although there's one major difference between Christianity and Islam. The fact that we believe that God cannot have children, nor have ANY relatives at all. So, we would think it's rather impossible for Jesus to be a God! Without the God status, he fits the prophet status...

I dumbed it down a bit, it;s 10:20 pm

OK. Educate me: God cannot have any relatives. Yet we are all his children. Jesus was and is not "God" Nor is Mohammed (SP?)

I am my own personal redeemer, my own messiah, and my own God.

OK. Educate me: God cannot have any relatives. Yet we are all his children. Jesus was and is not "God" Nor is Mohammed (SP?)

I am my own personal redeemer, my own messiah, and my own God.

No, we're God's creation...according to us Muslims IIRC.

Jeus was and is not God
Mohammed was and is not God

I'll try to answer questions too Im not Muslim but I fight for allah

How did Ayatullahs originate, and what's the history behind the dark clothings and thick white beard?

Yay! I have a spinoff! w00t!

Anyway, I'm almost sure I know the answer to this, but I just want to double check.

Islam, the word itself I mean, is a variation of the word 'Salaam' (Peace in Arabic), right?

Still waiting................

They may not like you because of your palpable jewishness Klonor.

The korean is sort of anti jewish in parts...


What do you think of mormons?

in light of this:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/morma/


their history

How did Ayatullahs originate,
they are the religious leaders of Shiism much like a bishop in Catholicism... the position has evolved with the trappings of political power

and what's the history behind the dark clothings
only strict muslims wear dark clothing... black has many significances. To strict sunnis black turbans mean purity while in shiism descedents of muhammad have the right to wear black turbans. On women the idea is that concealing garments with dark tones should be worn so as to not draw a man's attention and lust.
and thick white beard?
Strict muslims wear beards because it is a symbol of piety but only old strict muslims have white beards

Still waiting................
Islam means "surrender to Allah"

You said:
we believe that God cannot have children, nor have ANY relatives at all. So, we would think it's rather impossible for Jesus to be a God!
............................................................................................
So God is not omnipotent? There are limitations on what he can do? Who sets these limitations?

On another topic, what would make a Muslum think that killing children (i.e. russia) is ever justified? What's with all the beheadings? Do they really think these tactics are going to make us turn tail and run instead of just pissing us off more?

Islam means "surrender to Allah"

Really? Wow, I need to go back and edit a lot of posts now. I've been giving wrong info for quite a while. Whoops.

I know that a jihad is a religious war, but what, accorrding to the Koran, are grounds for starting one?

On another topic, what would make a Muslum think that killing children (i.e. russia) is ever justified? What's with all the beheadings? Do they really think these tactics are going to make us turn tail and run instead of just pissing us off more?

Of course Islam condemns the actions of terrorists and suicide bombers. No where in the Quaran does it suggest this is acceptable. Quite the contrary, in fact. Do not let the actions of a fanatic minority dictate to you the attitudes of the majority.

For the record, many terrors (such as suicide bombings) are actions of great desperation, frustration, anger and hopelessness. These actions are never justified. Before jumping to such conclusions, it will do you good to consider exactly what it is which leads people to such strong hate and destruction.

So God is not omnipotent? There are limitations on what he can do? Who sets these limitations?
The people who invented Islam.

On another topic, what would make a Muslum think that killing children (i.e. russia) is ever justified?
I don't know, but it must be the same as Putin thinking bombing Chechen children is justified. Theyre all nuts.

What's with all the beheadings? Do they really think these tactics are going to make us turn tail and run instead of just pissing us off more?
Maybe the iraqis dont deserve to be helped. Maybe we should run away, but in a pissed mood.

Do not Muslims worship the same God as the Christian and the Jew?. A difference in messiahs/prophets seems to be a small difference indeed, when Each one teached peace.

Yes, all three of the above religions ultimately worship the same God. A different name is given to him, is all.
The word 'Allah' translated to English, simply means 'God'.
Muslims also believe in Jesus, as a very important prophet. However, they do not believe he is the son of God and hold Muhammad in higher esteem.
Jews believe the son of God is yet to come.

Putting these differences aside, I'm sure you will find the above religions are very similar and share much in common (believe it or not).

Maybe the iraqis dont deserve to be helped. Maybe we should run away, but in a pissed mood.
Or possibly the Iraqi's feel we are not helping very much at all (despite our good intentions). I'm sure they are perfectly capable of judging the state of their own nation.

I know that a jihad is a religious war, but what, accorrding to the Koran, are grounds for starting one?
According to the Koran a jihad is necessary whenever one feels Islam is threatened; the jihad will be directed towards those who one feels threaten islam.

Or possibly the Iraqi's feel we are not helping very much at all (despite our good intentions). I'm sure they are perfectly capable of judging the state of their own nation.
Im not sure our intentions were good, and im not sure the iraqis are capable of sound self government.

Thank you for the information, IU.

Im not sure our intentions were good, and im not sure the iraqis are capable of sound self government.

You're right, our intentions were not good.

According to the Koran a jihad is necessary whenever one feels Islam is threatened; the jihad will be directed towards those who one feels threaten islam.

soooo...would missionaries and people of other religions be a target for jihad?...because theoretically that is a threat to the survival of Islam...I'm asking this because if I was Muslim I'd interpret it that way

They may not like you because of your palpable jewishness Klonor.

The korean is sort of anti jewish in parts...


What do you think of mormons?

in light of this:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/morma/


their history

Refer back to the "ask a latter day saint" thread. And, for the record, that link is bogus. If you need clarification, or have any questions, let me or any of the other mormons in the game know, and we will get back to you.

soooo...would missionaries and people of other religions be a target for jihad?...because theoretically that is a threat to the survival of Islam...I'm asking this because if I was Muslim I'd interpret it that way
yes, one can justify absolutely anything with nearly any scrap of holy writing, the Koran included. in fact your scenario is the Taliban's interpretation.

yes, one can justify absolutely anything with nearly any scrap of holy writing, the Koran included. in fact your scenario is the Taliban's interpretation.

well the Bible has plenty of those as well...that answers my question...Thank You :)

I'm asking this because if I was Muslim I'd interpret it that way
Then we can only hope you never convert to Islam. ;)

Arabic is a semitic language, that makes muslims Semites.

Wrong. It make ARABS Semites, not Muslims. Not all Arabs are Muslims, either. Like me. I'm a Christian.

Really? Wow, I need to go back and edit a lot of posts now. I've been giving wrong info for quite a while. Whoops.


Sorry I haven't been able to post lately. It's only been 24 hours since I posted this, and I didn't even expect such a big turnout on my first thread. To answer your question: Actually you're right, Islam is derived from the word "Salaam" which does mean peace in Arabic. But Islam literally means "to submit to Allah" and the word Muslim means "ones who submit to Allah".

According to the Koran a jihad is necessary whenever one feels Islam is threatened; the jihad will be directed towards those who one feels threaten islam.


Actually, what I have learned is that the grounds for starting a Jihad is that the offender has to do something to actually harm Islam. A Jihad can't just be started if one has the feeling that Islam is being threatened. That leaves a huge margin of error which could mean making Islam condemned in the eyes of everybody else. Even though that's already happened a little bit.

I know that a jihad is a religious war, but what, accorrding to the Koran, are grounds for starting one?


To further the answer to this one:
No offense, but you are totally wrong in that Jihad is a holy war. Just the sense of calling it a holy war sorta disgusts me. It is more like a struggle to make a good name out of Islam when someone is threatening it. It really doesn't have to be a war, but that's what it usually turns out to be. When you look back in history, you can see that most Jihads turned inot war, and this is where the media likes to twist it. They get inot this whole generalization that Jiahd is a holy war. The only part about that that's right is the fact that it's holy. So, I'm thinking you're a little bit too influenced by the media, and that should stop, because the media likes to put down Islam a lot. Just look at Pat Robertson, he's a really ignorant person, who likes to put down Islam. Remember, this is the guy who blamed the 9/11 attacks on the gays... Ignorant media??? Why yes...

Is it true that most muslims believe that the european christians started the crusades ? Also, what plans are there to return the Cathedral of Hagai Sophia in istanbul to its rightful owner the Patriarch of the Orthodox Church?

does it occur to you that the fanatic muslim minority is causing the majority to be hated? how does this make you feel?

Personally i'm disgusted that the british people are using this as an excuse to pick on muslims. It's becomming like germany in the 30's...

does it occur to you that the fanatic muslim minority is causing the majority to be hated? how does this make you feel?

Personally i'm disgusted that the british people are using this as an excuse to pick on muslims. It's becomming like germany in the 30's...

Personally, I hate thinking of these terrorists like Al Quaeda as muslims. They aren't muslims. Maybe they WERE. But to be a muslim, you have to practice Islam. And blowing up restaurants and beheading construction workers is not Islam.

I think a lot of muslims and non-muslims ought to try harder to remember that.

agreed. perhaps i could learn a thing or two from lunatics like you. :)

agreed. perhaps i could learn a thing or two from lunatics like you. :)

Not all who wander are lost. :)

Not all who wander are lost. :)

especially if they have a GPS Tracking system. :)

I'm sure you've heard alot of people say islam and democracy does not go together. What is your opinion on this?

As a muslim what is your view on homosexuality?

It is often said that muslim women cover themselves up because of lustful men. Can muslim men not control themselves instead of putting the onus on women to deal with the issue?

Also, is it "muslim" or "Moslem"(as in older texts)?

Thanks

They may not like you because of your palpable jewishness Klonor.

The korean is sort of anti jewish in parts...


What do you think of mormons?

in light of this:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/morma/


their history

Oh come on now, am I the only one that caught that? xD

I have been told by some scholarly sorts that wahabi (excuse sp?) does not mean militant or reactionary. They say it is a reform movement, going back to stricter morals and such, like Puritanism. Is that so?
I ask because two local mosque leaders are under house arrest and can't make a living, just because they're wahabi.

I'm sure you've heard alot of people say islam and democracy does not go together. What is your opinion on this?
I disagree that Islam and Democracy can't go together. I'm pretty sure that nowhere in the Koran it says that one is not allowed to choose one's leader and to choose the way that the gov't is run.

As a muslim what is your view on homosexuality?
As a muslim, I am told to look down upon homosexuality. As a human being, I really couldn't care less if someone's gay or not. I have at least 4 gay friends, so my views on homosexuality are tha it's very much ok. But as a muslim, like I said, I am suppose to look down on it, and I do to some degree, but ultimately, I am ok with it.

I have been told by some scholarly sorts that wahabi (excuse sp?) does not mean militant or reactionary. They say it is a reform movement, going back to stricter morals and such, like Puritanism. Is that so?
I ask because two local mosque leaders are under house arrest and can't make a living, just because they're wahabi.

Like I stated when I opened this thread, I am not a complete expert on Islam, and I regret to say that I have no clue what Wahabi is. I would be more than willing to look into it for you if you'd like.

It is often said that muslim women cover themselves up because of lustful men. Can muslim men not control themselves instead of putting the onus on women to deal with the issue?

Also, is it "muslim" or "Moslem"(as in older texts)?

Thanks

I've looked at the Arabic alphabet, and there are 3 vowels, a, i and u. Using 'o' just shows the pronunciation of the bloke who wrote it, who wasn't a Muslim. More recent texts will be scrutinised by people who speak both English and Arabic, so I'd tend towards the modern spelling. But anyway, it's a transliteration, so it's impossible to say one is categorically wrong.

As a muslim, I am told to look down upon homosexuality. As a human being, I really couldn't care less if someone's gay or not. I have at least 4 gay friends, so my views on homosexuality are tha it's very much ok. But as a muslim, like I said, I am suppose to look down on it, and I do to some degree, but ultimately, I am ok with it.

What is this view based on? Presumably there is a verse in the Quran this is used. I've heard it refers to Sodom and Lot, like the Bible.

Also, there's something I've wondered. If muslim women are supposed to cover up in public because men can't control their lusts, shouldn't muslim men cover up around men like me?

How do mahometans justify their mistreatment of Christians in the Holy Land that eventually led to the need for Crusades?

Is it true that most muslims believe that the european christians started the crusades ? Also, what plans are there to return the Cathedral of Hagai Sophia in istanbul to its rightful owner the Patriarch of the Orthodox Church?

I'm sure this deserves an answer. Or do I have to answer it myself.

Muslims ruled Holy Lands for hundreds of years...Neither before nor after the Crusades they mistreated the people there. The roots of european renassaince is found in that era. Crusaders learned many sciences from muslims, took many "wonder" machines, new production techniques etc. and they succeded to develop even better ones through out the history. Since in those times Islamic countries were highly civilized, people lived in peace together in a harmony. Do not compare today's situation with the one in several hundred years ago. In fact it were the crusaders who massacred thousands of muslims and jews in Holy Lands...if you go to a library and search for it, you'll see...and you do not need to go far beyond...just look at what happened in last 50 years...Ottoman empire ruled the holy lands for centuries (1500-1900), and neither jews nor christians suffered from that. In fact, they had tax exemptions in trade since they were living in those holy lands...Now, turn to crusaders...Crusaders made the same great mistake that is being done today by so-called muslim jihad warriors. They both have the same sick vision of "killing "non-believers" is essential to purify the holy lands"...What I am trying to say is that : we...as their grandsons..should not make the same mistake again and again...religion must be something that unite people, it should not be a source of hatret...

Crusaders even attacked to their own christian brothers in Constantinopolis and sucked the city, burn it, killed many people there !! This has nothing to do with religion !! It is insane...I believe both christians and muslims used the religious motives to cover their personal greed !! Therei s no pure black or pure white in that issues...everybody had made great mistakes...the problem is that...will we continue doing the same mistakes !! What can we do TOGETHER to get rid of fanatic maniacs ?

How do mahometans justify their mistreatment of Christians in the Holy Land that eventually led to the need for Crusades?

Yeah, how dare they hold land in Europe!

Seriously, shut your mouth. I had to do a research paper on the Crusades, and it was almost ALL political based. Want someone to blame for the Crusades? They were called the Eastern Roman Empire.



Besides, the Muslims were the nice ones in the Crusades. Ever hear of Saladin?

Muslims ruled Holy Lands for hundreds of years...Neither before nor after the Crusades they mistreated the people there.

which is why Egypt, Turkey etc. are still full of christians today - oh that's right they're not. And that's why no great cathedrals were descrated and turned into mosques.... oh dammit that's not true either.

The roots of european renassaince is found in that era. Crusaders learned many sciences from muslims, took many "wonder" machines, new production techniques etc. and they succeded to develop even better ones through out the history. Since in those times Islamic countries were highly civilized, people lived in peace together in a harmony.

Yes, thank you for not burning the library at alexandria for blasphemy... oh wait. Well, I guess I have all those muslims to thank for inventing byzantine culture that preserved the foundation for western civilization....DOH, dammit that's not right either those pesky byzantines were christian. Well at least you gave us noodles and gunpowder...oh no, that was the venitians who got it from the chinese.

Face it Islam overan the Byzantines and that's the basis of your roots of renassaince. The fact that they failed to destroy it after they conquered it, despite their best efforts, is no benchmark.

Do not compare today's situation with the one in several hundred years ago. In fact it were the crusaders who massacred thousands of muslims and jews in Holy Lands

Are you aware of an individual known as Charles Martel, or why he was known as the hammer. More importantly do you know what he did and why? Christian Massacres in the crusades.....pshaw. Muslims have tried to conquer Europe since forever. Part of this plan has always been the slaughter of all men who opposed their rule which is why so much opposition drove them back.

...if you go to a library and search for it, you'll see...and you do not need to go far beyond...

I obviously know more about it than you do, because unlike muslims I can look in the bits of the library that are blasphemous and contrary to the teaching of Allah. Also, if I lived in a muslim country they would burn most of the library that didn't contain what they liked.

FACT: most geography textbooks used in islamic countries show the middle east without Isreal. Go on tell me I'm wrong, because you can't.

Also, unlike most Americans on this board, I lived in the UK for twenty years, and I was there after the fatwah was pronounced on Salman Rushdie. I actually remember seeing piles of books being burned in the streets and it wasn't the Q'rann. Muslims in the UK also bitched about the blasphemy laws not being used to prosecute Rushdie, despite the fact that the UK is officialy a christian country (think about it: The UK is an officially christian so they should apply the blasphemy laws, but the Q'rann is blasphemous if you are a christian, therefore under the law all copies of the Q'rann should be destroyed: Yet muslims wanted the blasphemy laws to be enforced; I've never seen such retarded behavior.) Yet despite this lawless behavior by muslim comunities - burning books on street corners a strict no-no in the UK- no-one was prosecuted. Imagine if a Christian publicly burned a book that said Jesus was not god in an Islamic state. They probably would be beheaded or something. Unlike the UK, that spent days trying to tell its book burning muslims that its perfectly natural to be pissed off.

just look at what happened in last 50 years...Ottoman empire ruled the holy lands for centuries (1500-1900), and neither jews nor christians suffered from that.

Yeah 'cos they were virtually wiped out or made slaves in the initial conquests. (I believe there were many, many refugees at this point.) And muslims should stop bitching because a bunch of hard ass jews kicked the shit out of them and created Isreal. If anything, they should be happy that the jews don't want more, because they could probably get it if they wanted and the muslim feebs couldn't stop them. Besides most people would choose to live in isreal if the only alternative was a muslim country; except maybe for bangladesh 'cos there is a great beach there and until the recent middle eastern "actual" muslims funded international violent asshattery no-one there gave a shit about islam. Thank you British Empire.

In fact, they had tax exemptions in trade since they were living in those holy lands...

Didn't everyone have tax exemptions in the "holy land" ? And in any event didn't the so-called Dhimmis have to pay an extra tax because they were infidels as well as having a second class citizen status.

Now, turn to crusaders...Crusaders made the same great mistake that is being done today by so-called muslim jihad warriors. They both have the same sick vision of "killing "non-believers" is essential to purify the holy lands"


No, the crusaders were a result of political infighting in western europe coupled to the need to protect Constantinople - you know, the seat of eastern christianity and the orthodox papacy and now, for some reason, called Istanbul. Moreover, the crusaders only killed the muslims in the so-called "holy land" who were recent invaders. Probably if the Islam asshats just came and settled and quitely went about their business instead of charging into the Byzantine Empire on a holy mission it would have been a non-event. Anyway, that part of the world had been a christian dominion since Constantine. The Crusaders were solely there to kick them out, not to invade "traditional muslim territories." Any comparison to muslim jihad warrior is completely specious. It's like saying Al-quaeda is justified for hitting the world trade center because it formed part of the traditional muslim holy lands.

...What I am trying to say is that : we...as their grandsons..should not make the same mistake again and again...religion must be something that unite people, it should not be a source of hatret...


I agree, people should unite and stop killing each other for this crap, but there is a reason why europeans enjoy croissants for breakfast. And until muslims squarely face their own history and stop being fake victims it will not change.

In fact, this whole muslim=peace argument is disingenous. There is nothing in the history of Islam that supports it, nor do the actions of modern day muslims. The US got its shit on because 3000+ people were needlessly slaughtered on its soil. This was after numerous attacks on US citizens overseas by Islamic factions. Yet every muslim I meet tries to justify this in the same historical context that you do banker, i.e, Islam is essentially peaceful but we get picked on an awful lot by the west so it's understandble.

No major islamic leader has ever condememned the violence that inheres in your religion, nor is there any forum to do so. I know for a fact if I blew up Mecca because the practices there were an offence to my God I would be condemed by all leaders of the christian religions. The same cannot be same for a muslim who tries to descrate christian holy sites.

If muslims were serious about religious tolerence in these troubled times they would give up the mosque on the temple mount in jerusalem and they would return the Hagai Sophia to the orthodox church. This would be a clear and unequivocal gesture of peace on the part of the Islamic heirarchy. And one that, frankly, will never be made or asked for by any muslim. Consider this, you can visit western countries and see churches and temples which are now mosques.You never see the opposite in Islamic states. In fact every day Jews wake up and there is a Mosque on their most holy site. How would Muslims react if I built a curch of england temple on that big cube thing in mecca. Yeah, that's right you'd try to blow up the world or something. Islam is an unwelcome relic of the past and should have no place in modern society because of its inherent intolerence and lack of self critism.


The only reasons Muslims feel they can lecture westerners on the crusades is because, historically, we didn't want to be rude.

Now answer my questions and stop avoiding them with this false "history and contribution" of islam bullshit. Or else I'll answer them myself. And you'll find you got off light this time.

(IMO, islam never faced anything like reformation which led to the thirty year war. As such it is an anachronism which is completely incapable of adapting to modern society. Its religious tenants and hierachy are bound by pre-byzantine ideas and therefore, have never undergone the same type of adjustment to reality that most christian religions. As such it cannot function as part of a secular state, but rather only as a hideous reminder of thr relgious excesses of our own christian past.)

which is why Egypt, Turkey etc. are still full of christians today - oh that's right they're not. And that's why no great cathedrals were descrated and turned into mosques.... oh dammit that's not true either.

The christians in those lands were minorities then and there's no reason to assume that treating them well would cause them to multiply fast enough to become anything more than a minority. And just out of curiosity, what cathedrals are you talking about?

Yes, thank you for not burning the library at alexandria for blasphemy... oh wait. Well, I guess I have all those muslims to thank for inventing byzantine culture that preserved the foundation for western civilization....DOH, dammit that's not right either those pesky byzantines were christian. Well at least you gave us noodles and gunpowder...oh no, that was the venitians who got it from the chinese.

I was under the impression that monasteries spread across Europe played some role in preserving western civilization while the rest of us western europeans ran around burning down what was left of the western roman empire... And that the Byzantines mainly were occupied with slowly collapsing. Also, I think the Byzantines suffered as well in the Crusades, seeing as how they were the 'wrong' type of christians.

And the Muslims did not invent noodles or gunpowder, no.. They didn't invent the wheel or written language either. That's not the same as saying they never invented anything, though. It's a bit like saying that since the US didn't invent democracy, there's no way they could have helped develop it later.

Face it Islam overan the Byzantines and that's the basis of your roots of renassaince. The fact that they failed to destroy it after they conquered it, despite their best efforts, is no benchmark.

Perhaps you would like to explain how you came to that conclusion? Or should we just take your word for it? And weren't the Byzantine empire destroyed? I can't remember having seen them on a map of Europe for a while, now...

Are you aware of an individual known as Charles Martel, or why he was known as the hammer. More importantly do you know what he did and why? Christian Massacres in the crusades.....pshaw. Muslims have tried to conquer Europe since forever. Part of this plan has always been the slaughter of all men who opposed their rule which is why so much opposition drove them back.

Christians have been trying to conquer Europe since forever (well, since the Roman empire turned christian, anyway) as well. And part of most plans of conquest up during the ages have been to slaughter all the opposition. This is because they might otherwise oppose your rule. The US is slaughtering (literally) opposition in Iraq of the same reason. You can't have a humane conquest.


I obviously know more about it than you do, because unlike muslims I can look in the bits of the library that are blasphemous and contrary to the teaching of Allah. Also, if I lived in a muslim country they would burn most of the library that didn't contain what they liked.

The wonderful thing about no religious oppression (which, of course, all muslims in the world live under, right?) is that one is free to look up exactly the information that fits one's own thoughts and opinions. If I wanted to believe that the white/black/plaid race of humans was superior to other races of humans, I'd have no trouble finding thick tomes backing up my claim. If I wanted to believe the Earth was hollow and that a race of sentient lizards lived inside it, I'd have little trouble in finding information to "prove me right".

FACT: most geography textbooks used in islamic countries show the middle east without Isreal. Go on tell me I'm wrong, because you can't.

That's brilliant of you. After all, who'd bother to sift through all geography books used in islamic countries in the middle east just to prove you wrong?

Also, unlike most Americans on this board, I lived in the UK for twenty years, and I was there after the fatwah was pronounced on Salman Rushdie. I actually remember seeing piles of books being burned in the streets and it wasn't the Q'rann. Muslims in the UK also bitched about the blasphemy laws not being used to prosecute Rushdie, despite the fact that the UK is officialy a christian country (think about it: The UK is an officially christian so they should apply the blasphemy laws, but the Q'rann is blasphemous if you are a christian, therefore under the law all copies of the Q'rann should be destroyed: Yet muslims wanted the blasphemy laws to be enforced; I've never seen such retarded behavior.) Yet despite this lawless behavior by muslim comunities - burning books on street corners a strict no-no in the UK- no-one was prosecuted. Imagine if a Christian publicly burned a book that said Jesus was not god in an Islamic state. They probably would be beheaded or something. Unlike the UK, that spent days trying to tell its book burning muslims that its perfectly natural to be pissed off.

So your argument is that since certain islamic countries today burn 'heretic' books, the crusades several houndred years ago were justified? Does it matter to you that back in those days, christians burned books as well as heretics?


Yeah 'cos they were virtually wiped out or made slaves in the initial conquests. (I believe there were many, many refugees at this point.) And muslims should stop bitching because a bunch of hard ass jews kicked the shit out of them and created Isreal. If anything, they should be happy that the jews don't want more, because they could probably get it if they wanted and the muslim feebs couldn't stop them. Besides most people would choose to live in isreal if the only alternative was a muslim country; except maybe for bangladesh 'cos there is a great beach there and until the recent middle eastern "actual" muslims funded international violent asshattery no-one there gave a shit about islam. Thank you British Empire.

I was under the impression that under the ottomans, everyone was treated equally bad. Much better than the contemporary European system of treating some people worse than others in my opinion.


No, the crusaders were a result of political infighting in western europe coupled to the need to protect Constantinople - you know, the seat of eastern christianity and the orthodox papacy and now, for some reason, called Istanbul. Moreover, the crusaders only killed the muslims in the so-called "holy land" who were recent invaders. Probably if the Islam asshats just came and settled and quitely went about their business instead of charging into the Byzantine Empire on a holy mission it would have been a non-event. Anyway, that part of the world had been a christian dominion since Constantine. The Crusaders were solely there to kick them out, not to invade "traditional muslim territories." Any comparison to muslim jihad warrior is completely specious. It's like saying Al-quaeda is justified for hitting the world trade center because it formed part of the traditional muslim holy lands.

Wasn't Constantinople/Istambul sacked during the crusades? By crusaders, I mean? And saying that the crusaders only killed the muslims who were recent invaders is just about the most stupid thing I've ever heard. Any uneducated half-wit with absolutely no knowledge of world history should be able to realize that no matter how noble and wonderful the crusaders might have been, they would never have stopped to ask muslims if they were recent invaders or if they'd lived there for a while before killing them.

Yeah, how dare they hold land in Europe!

Seriously, shut your mouth. I had to do a research paper on the Crusades, and it was almost ALL political based. Want someone to blame for the Crusades? They were called the Eastern Roman Empire.



Besides, the Muslims were the nice ones in the Crusades. Ever hear of Saladin?
That's all nice coming from your little state-funded textbook. :rolleyes:

Try some free investigation next time?

The christians in those lands were minorities then and there's no reason to assume that treating them well would cause them to multiply fast enough to become anything more than a minority. And just out of curiosity, what cathedrals are you talking about?

No they weren't minorities. In fact Eygpt was completely Chritstian prior to the muslim hoardes. The most famous Cathedral is, of course, the Hagai Sofia, but when I vacationed in eastern north africa i saw many coptic churches that are now mosques. I'm sure a full investigation could come up with a comprehensive list.


I was under the impression that monasteries spread across Europe played some role in preserving western civilization while the rest of us western europeans ran around burning down what was left of the western roman empire... And that the Byzantines mainly were occupied with slowly collapsing. Also, I think the Byzantines suffered as well in the Crusades, seeing as how they were the 'wrong' type of christians.

No, completely incorrect. In fact the Byzantine empire was a dynamic and important center of learning until the muslim hoardes conquered it. Yes many times it was invaded, probably most notably by the vikings, but it was never destroyed until Islam showed up. Nor was it "slowly collapsing" as you put it. Byzantium was always a viable society, but it was never really militarilly strong. Using your logic, NATO has perfect justification to invade all of the middle east because it is militarily weaker and thus it is slowly collapsing.

And the Muslims did not invent noodles or gunpowder, no.. They didn't invent the wheel or written language either. That's not the same as saying they never invented anything, though. It's a bit like saying that since the US didn't invent democracy, there's no way they could have helped develop it later.

I never claimed that the US invented democracy. And yes the muslims have invented nothing. Name one muslim invention other than holy war - which I don't count. ( And don't say zero. 'cos the hindus thought of that, and don't say al gebra either that's just a back translation)

All islam did is conquer then Byzantines who were, ceteris paribus, the most advanced region in the world. Islam's inability to wipe out the good stuff does not make them great philosophers. And may I say again, thank you for burning the library at alexendria for blasphemy. Truly the mark of an enlightended people.

Perhaps you would like to explain how you came to that conclusion? Or should we just take your word for it? And weren't the Byzantine empire destroyed? I can't remember having seen them on a map of Europe for a while, now...

Yes the Byzantine empire was destroyed, by muslim invaders. Who then put it back about 1500 years.

Christians have been trying to conquer Europe since forever (well, since the Roman empire turned christian, anyway) as well. And part of most plans of conquest up during the ages have been to slaughter all the opposition. This is because they might otherwise oppose your rule. The US is slaughtering (literally) opposition in Iraq of the same reason. You can't have a humane conquest.

Yes, damn those christians who used to show up as single individuals and try to convince people to convert with their armies of no people. You can't name one single "christian invasion" in europe becuase there wasn't any. I don't know why europeans became christian, but for shit sure it wasn't at sword point.

The wonderful thing about no religious oppression (which, of course, all muslims in the world live under, right?) is that one is free to look up exactly the information that fits one's own thoughts and opinions. If I wanted to believe that the white/black/plaid race of humans was superior to other races of humans, I'd have no trouble finding thick tomes backing up my claim. If I wanted to believe the Earth was hollow and that a race of sentient lizards lived inside it, I'd have little trouble in finding information to "prove me right".


Apart from Jules Verne's journey to the center of the earth, I am not aware of any texts that assert that the world is hollow. And I don't believe that. And no, not all muslims live under religious oppression some of them live in the liberal west where they spend every day that they live trying to censor others.

Notwithstanding, its a good thing to live in non-muslim countries because they do not ban books, so I can actually look up history and find out that muslims are not the historically opressed minority they pretend they are. God knows what I'd think if I lived in Saudi Arabia, which today restricts internet access.

In any event you are positing, fallaciously I suggest, that because my library is uncensored I am free to look up information that will support my own prejudice. Guess what, as part of that I will come across contrary postions and ultimately modify my position due to new information. Muslims in muslim countries don't have that option. They are told one thing in school and everything in the library backs it up. No dissent; No debate; No argument; No question.

And yes, again, all islamic nations are big time censorers.

That's brilliant of you. After all, who'd bother to sift through all geography books used in islamic countries in the middle east just to prove you wrong?

Blah, blah, blah

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2003/7/Geography+in+the+Service+of+Politics.htm?DisplayMode=print

This is not uncommon, and if you spent half the time you waste defending islam actually looking things up you would know this.

your argument is that since certain islamic countries today burn 'heretic'
books, the crusades several houndred years ago were justified? Does it matter to you that back in those days, christians burned books as well as heretics?

No, I actually made the point that muslims are allowed to burn "heretic" books in non muslim countries and escape the penaltied that the law imposes because everybody feels bad for them, whereas any non muslim who does the same in an islamic nation would be killed. And they do this today, not hundreds of years ago.

A muslim can publicly burn the new testament in the UK or the US and they will face no legal sanction. Name me one islamic nation where I could burn the Q'rann and get away with it. And for your edification the UK is not, in fact an Islamic nation - at least not yet.

I was under the impression that under the ottomans, everyone was treated equally bad. Much better than the contemporary European system of treating some people worse than others in my opinion.


Yeah that's right, any nation that institutionalizes slavery must treat all of its people equally...... wait I hear I noise ..... WHOO WHOO .... oh look it's the clue train. Maybe you should get on it. And anyway who gives a shit about the Armenians, fuck them they had it coming. Oh wait that's right, I'm not a muslim so I do, in fact, care that the Ottomans murdered 2,000,000 (thats right two million) people - man woman and child - in 1915-17 because they were ethnic non-christians. Good old ottomans setting the ground work for the jewish genocide and leading the way in civil rights. If only those bastard english and americans could learn to emulate them more.

Wasn't Constantinople/Istambul sacked during the crusades? By crusaders, I mean? And saying that the crusaders only killed the muslims who were recent invaders is just about the most stupid thing I've ever heard. Any uneducated half-wit with absolutely no knowledge of world history should be able to realize that no matter how noble and wonderful the crusaders might have been, they would never have stopped to ask muslims if they were recent invaders or if they'd lived there for a while before killing them.

In a sense yes; but as you mean it no. In fact the crusaders were invited to the region by the eastern pontiff of constantinople to reclaim the holy land from muslims who were merrily converting christians at sword point. However due to internal disputes there was, at one point, a sacking of Constantinople to recover promised debts. Until muslims can point to the crusaders viscously sacking Mecca, its a non sequiter and inapposite to my current argument.

I suggest that you go get a history book and actually look up what happened over the past 1300 years and stop relying on social studies texts offered in schools.

I don't want much. In fact i don't even care if people choose to believe in allah or not. What I would like, however is for a muslim to admit that; a, historically Islam has been an aggressive force trying to subgegate christian europe because of its infidel nature; and b, they admit that now anf they are sorry.

In any case, my questions are still unanswered.

Hi everyone

I'm a muslim and i thought i would try and help out here a little.

First Jihad actually means "a struggle" that struggle could be involving me and my school work.

Or it could be me against an invading force.

Jihad doesnt just mean a holy war.

And guys can we please drop the Crusade thing. It's distracting from the main idea of this thread. There're tons of interpretations(sp) as to what happened.

Ok and sorry but i have to post this.

Muslims aren't out to do this :mp5: or this :sniper: we (moderate muslims) just want to do this :fluffle:

:D

ash

I disagree that Islam and Democracy can't go together. I'm pretty sure that nowhere in the Koran it says that one is not allowed to choose one's leader and to choose the way that the gov't is run..
Why is it than, that no muslim country is a complete democracy which is in compliance with human rights? Even Turkey isn´t and they are "best".


As a muslim, I am told to look down upon homosexuality. As a human being, I really couldn't care less if someone's gay or not. I have at least 4 gay friends, so my views on homosexuality are tha it's very much ok. But as a muslim, like I said, I am suppose to look down on it, and I do to some degree, but ultimately, I am ok with it.
Isn´t that like a multi-personality view?
What are your views on woman who are only getting half rights in the Koran -like in testaments or in the matter of a divorce where male consent is needed but not female consent.
I don´t see that many forms of Islam are in compliance with a modern, free and open society. There are forms of christianity which aren´t as well. But most are today - unlike in the past by the way.
Therefore I´m very concerned about letting muslim countries into the EU.
And I´m very concerned about the situation in the Middle East and that this may swap over into the muslim community in Europe and elsewhere.
What are muslim communities doing in the fight against terrorism and islmists ideologies which are the basis for it? What is it doing against anti-isrealism?

:headbang:

Take one civilised thread. Inject indoctrinated reactionary. Shake vigorously. watch all go to hell.

Honestly, there were atrocities on both sides of the Crusades. And no, there is no one "real" cause of them, though AS a Christian I'd be more inclined to say it was more imperialistic European nobility, looking for more land for thier younger sons, being aided and abetted by a religious organisation just as expansionistic and agressive as its Islamic counterpart (the Roman Catholic Church).

But beyond that, I would like to ask a few question of the thred's originator, and others, if 99% of the forums haven;t turned away in disgust.

1- Muslims / Islamic militant / Arab community have tried many ways to violently sieze what is seen as occupied territory in the middle east. (I'm not going into who's right or wrong on that as again, so many evils have been done on both sides it's almost useless to sift through the bllodstains.) Why not use a different approach? If the Arab world united behind a figure whose methods mirrored Ghandi's, there would be no moral higher ground for those opposed to thier aims to claim. The complete aims of the group may not be met, but a great start could be made.

2- This is a question frought with a lot of angst. You see, I hate what has happened in the past two years. I hate what a mockery of my religion leaders of a foriegn nation have made. My question is this- with all the ight-wing yahoo "Christian" media personalities backing a "Christian" government in the US, lead by a "Christian" President... Is there any hope that the face of Christianity in the Muslim worldview will be changed form an armored Invader in the future?

3- Why is it that outside of the Middle East (true, I am thinking of the Western World) when I get together with Muslim and Jewish aqquiantences/friends, there's so little animosity? (Beyond the obvious,I mean. I.E. that none of us are looking to blow the others away.) I would hate to think that all of the media-hyped hate is, at its roots bitterness over land/resource grabbing and old hurts done.

No they weren't minorities. In fact Eygpt was completely Chritstian prior to the muslim hoardes. The most famous Cathedral is, of course, the Hagai Sofia, but when I vacationed in eastern north africa i saw many coptic churches that are now mosques. I'm sure a full investigation could come up with a comprehensive list.

Would these be the Muslim hordes under the command of Saladin who took Eygpt without looting or sacking the place-much unlike the christian "liberators?"



No, completely incorrect. In fact the Byzantine empire was a dynamic and important center of learning until the muslim hoardes conquered it. Yes many times it was invaded, probably most notably by the vikings, but it was never destroyed until Islam showed up. Nor was it "slowly collapsing" as you put it. Byzantium was always a viable society, but it was never really militarilly strong. Using your logic, NATO has perfect justification to invade all of the middle east because it is militarily weaker and thus it is slowly collapsing.
There was a war between them and the muslims, through no fault of EITHER of them. During that time, war is what you did with your neiboors. You were either at a state of "I won't kill you...yet" or "Dammit, your grass is greener, so now it's MINE!"




All islam did is conquer then Byzantines who were, ceteris paribus, the most advanced region in the world. Islam's inability to wipe out the good stuff does not make them great philosophers. And may I say again, thank you for burning the library at alexendria for blasphemy. Truly the mark of an enlightended people.
And all this time I thought the christians did a wonderful job of burning it down...



Yes, damn those christians who used to show up as single individuals and try to convince people to convert with their armies of no people. You can't name one single "christian invasion" in europe becuase there wasn't any. I don't know why europeans became christian, but for shit sure it wasn't at sword point.
You really no absolutly nothing about the crusades, do you? In the first crusade, the crusaders stole from villages and massacred the jews. This was actually done AGAINST the church's wishes, but hey-they were the crusaders, according to them they could do no wrong.

And that's only the first Crusade. Compare the actions of Saladin and the crusaders. Saladin did not mistreat his captives; he made sure they were fed sufficiently, and when Egypt was re-taken he let them go free. The crusaders were known for pillaging anything they came across, holding prisoners ransom and torcuring them.




This is not uncommon, and if you spent half the time you waste defending islam actually looking things up you would know this.
So you have an actual problem with the religion itself? I feel my ignore cannon heating up...



No, I actually made the point that muslims are allowed to burn "heretic" books in non muslim countries and escape the penaltied that the law imposes because everybody feels bad for them, whereas any non muslim who does the same in an islamic nation would be killed. And they do this today, not hundreds of years ago.
What the hell are you talking about? Burning books is legal for everyone, or it's illegal for everyone. We don't say "This is the law...but we'll stretch it for you." Are stupid, or just ignorant?


A muslim can publicly burn the new testament in the UK or the US and they will face no legal sanction. Name me one islamic nation where I could burn the Q'rann and get away with it. And for your edification the UK is not, in fact an Islamic nation - at least not yet.
I can gurantee that if a nation was a "christian nation" then burning the Bible would be illegal. It has nothing to do with Islam and everything to do with religious fervor.




Yeah that's right, any nation that institutionalizes slavery must treat all of its people equally...... wait I hear I noise ..... WHOO WHOO .... oh look it's the clue train. Maybe you should get on it. And anyway who gives a shit about the Armenians, fuck them they had it coming. Oh wait that's right, I'm not a muslim so I do, in fact, care that the Ottomans murdered 2,000,000 (thats right two million) people - man woman and child - in 1915-17 because they were ethnic non-christians. Good old ottomans setting the ground work for the jewish genocide and leading the way in civil rights. If only those bastard english and americans could learn to emulate them more.
Yeah, that's nothing like the first crusade, when they tried to massacre...all...the...jews....um...



In a sense yes; but as you mean it no. In fact the crusaders were invited to the region by the eastern pontiff of constantinople to reclaim the holy land from muslims who were merrily converting christians at sword point. However due to internal disputes there was, at one point, a sacking of Constantinople to recover promised debts. Until muslims can point to the crusaders viscously sacking Mecca, its a non sequiter and inapposite to my current argument.
Pfh, it still happened, weither or not you want to count it. The crusaders sacked their own christian city.




I don't want much. In fact i don't even care if people choose to believe in allah or not. What I would like, however is for a muslim to admit that; a, historically Islam has been an aggressive force trying to subgegate christian europe because of its infidel nature; and b, they admit that now anf they are sorry.
Christianity first

In any case, my questions are still unanswered.[/QUOTE]

From what I've read of history Muslims take over all the important churches in their invaded land and turn them into mosques. Then the remaining Christians and their few churches left in the country are heavily taxed, usually can't own land anymore, the Christians will be killed if they attempt to convert anyone and they normally become virtual serfs to the Muslims. And of course, over time the remaining Christians convert to Islam because the culture has so thoroughly infiltrated the nation. Muslims don't "force" the people to convert they just make life VERY difficult for non-Muslims.

It is certainly much easier for muslim to build a mosque in "evil" and "intolerant" Europe than it is for christians to built a church in any muslim country. That is even the case for Turkey.
So, the muslims should really act reasonable here. They enjoy here much more freedom than they do in any muslim country.
But we can´t tolerate hate-speech and Islamic congresses (just recently one was planned in Berlin) where the destruction of Israel and hate-speech against the West and the US is conducted. It was banned.
The tolerance with the intolerant needs to end. European countries have to be more though on extremists. Not like in the 1990s were we in Europe conducted and Apeasement policy. That needs to stop and Europe needs to do much more in that respect.

It is certainly much easier for muslim to build a mosque in "evil" and "intolerant" Europe than it is for christians to built a church in any muslim country. That is even the case for Turkey.
So, the muslims should really act reasonable here. They enjoy here much more freedom than they do in any muslim country.
But we can´t tolerate hate-speech and Islamic congresses (just recently one was planned in Berlin) where the destruction of Israel and hate-speech against the West and the US is conducted. It was banned.
The tolerance with the intolerant needs to end. European countries have to be more though on extremists. Not like in the 1990s were we in Europe conducted and Apeasement policy. That needs to stop and Europe needs to do much more in that respect.

EXACTLY!! I'm a bit tired of hearing how Europeans oppress them(Muslims) but they have complete religious freedom and much more economic opportunity in Europe(and of course they should have these freedoms). I completely agree, appeasement is the LAST thing Europe needs to be doing if it plans to survive culturally with the huge wave of Muslim immigration that Europe is constantly having to take.

Turkey is not a muslim country. It is secular. I had made a socioeconomic study about Turkey last year. All the laws are taken by the European countries, mainly Italy and Switzerland. And the most recent laws are in accordance with thet European Union. There is an important transformation process in that country and that is why we strongly support their efforts. I have been to Istanbul, Izmir, and Antalya cities last summer. You can see no difference than any other European country...I was very surprized since I was waiting to see arab-looking guys around with their camels...people were very friendly and warm...They were just like the people of Italy...I think they will succeed in about at most 15 years to be a modern European country. Seeing is believing.

by the way..what I meant by "arab-looking" is only about the traiditonal wearing. Do not take it wrong.

Turkey is not a muslim country. It is secular. I had made a socioeconomic study about Turkey last year. All the laws are taken by the European countries, mainly Italy and Switzerland. And the most recent laws are in accordance with thet European Union. There is an important transformation process in that country and that is why we strongly support their efforts. I have been to Istanbul, Izmir, and Antalya cities last summer. You can see no difference than any other European country...I was very surprized since I was waiting to see arab-looking guys around with their camels...people were very friendly and warm...They were just like the people of Italy...I think they will succeed in about at most 15 years to be a modern European country. Seeing is believing.
Yes, they have taken the criminal laws of fascist Italy as the basis for their criminal law.
And yes: there are tourists regions which are modern and "European". And yes, there is a small westernized elite. But I was in Istanbul and on the Asian part you really feel to be in the Arab world - especially on the Bazar.
And that was only about ten years ago. And Islamism was on the rise since then. I just refer to Mr. Erbakan. And Erdogan was part of this islamist party which was banned. Would the Turkish military still be able to prevent those bastards from getting power? No, they wouldn´t because that would be against the democratic values. And that is the reasons why the Islamists are supporting Turkish membership to the EU. Torture, forced marriages, killings of honour are still common practieses. And recently Turkey suggested to criminalize breaking marriages. That is really taken from Sharia law.
So, obviously it isn´t that secular.
And if you see how many problems are there for christians to build churches -which is nothing compared to the freedom for muslims in Europe - it can´t be argued that the state is secular.
No, Turkey can not be trusted. They have not proven to be a stable democracy, they haven´t admitted guilt for the genocide on the Armeninans during World War I (2 million casualties). And they haven´t done so towards the Kurds.
Turkey wants to be an EU member because of two things: Free-trade is not the reason, there is already a free-trade pact:
Firstly they want to get the money from the EU -for which Germany, France and Britain are going to have to pay.
Secondly they want to reduce internal pressure due to their exploding population (today 60 million, in 2030 100 million) by getting the possibility to "export" them to Europe. Mainly Central Europe would be hit by an influx of 5-10 million migrants within a few years -according to cautious estimates.
That is the realtiy.
As a German citizen I reject both: Paying for them and allowing unlimmited immigration of them. And if we are all honest the people in other European countries - especially in Continental Europe - think the same way.
This decision is done against the will of the people. Since that is the case it is no wonder that the EU is unpopular, and with this decision it will get unpopular even more because it is spitting on the face of the people because it is almost always ignoring it.

Just like to say that as an agnostic atheist who has read through the Qu'ran, there is NOTHING that supports Shariah, or unwritten law (hence there being no... writings...of...it). Shariah existed before Muhammed and was unjustly kept by Arab chieftains after "conversion" to Islam. The Qu'ran does not support all the insane tortures and punishments that Shariah does. There is no place for Shariah in a modern society or indeed Turkey. There is space for any human beings free to practice their own religions.

I would like to ask though what the author thinks of a possible Muslim equivalent to the Pope - others that Muslims should withdraw mosques and such from Israel, which is just as holy to them, but this cannot happen because their is no central authority, just imam or ayatollan interpretation of the Qu'ran.

Just like to say that as an agnostic atheist who has read through the Qu'ran, there is NOTHING that supports Shariah, or unwritten law (hence there being no... writings...of...it). Shariah existed before Muhammed and was unjustly kept by Arab chieftains after "conversion" to Islam. The Qu'ran does not support all the insane tortures and punishments that Shariah does. There is no place for Shariah in a modern society or indeed Turkey. There is space for any human beings free to practice their own religions.
.
Sorry, but this is not true. Islamic law only allows the practise of christianity and judaism - however they have a discriminating dhimmi-stutus.
And Islamic law and scholars are demanding Sharia law in the entire Islamic world.
It is right that Arab societies prior to Islam were even more disriminating against woman. But that doesn´t change the fact that Islam is discriminating against woman as well: especially in respect to testaments - where female relative only get half of that a male relative would get or regarding divorce rights in Islamic law. Islamic law is therefore an obstacle for woman.
As long as Islam doesn´t change - and has a kind of reformation - it is not possible to have an muslim state which is an democracy. Democracy in Europe was also only possible when the power of the church was broken - after reformation.
Even France and to some degree Italy put themself to some degree at distance with the church, especially France.
The only muslim country which has taken such steps was Turkey - though that was done as "a revolution from above" supported and garanteed by the military. And it was the military which prevented a fall-back in 1961 (by hanging Mendres) and in the 1990s (by pushing for a ban of the Refah partisi of Erbakan (who had even been prime minister for two years).

Everyone deserves a second chance..Germans klled millions of jews and innocent people...what if the allies had said "Ok..our patience has exhausted. We dealed to much with germans in both WWs, we do not want any more trouble, let's share germany's lands as allies" ? As I said before, I have made a study last year about Turkey's transformation in last 80 years. I were also interested in that Armenian kills in WWI. As far as I have read; armenians, who were allying with russians against turkish trooos in East Anatolia were moved from their lands to the southern parts of that country. In a war, that is normal I think. We made the similar thing to Japanese-Americans n WWII. Stalin killed people in Krymea because of their supports to germans in WWI. You can find countless of examples in history. I think the only real genoside is about the jews that your grandfathers did in WWII !! But we still call germany as a civilized country with civilized people !! The main problem is the WAR itself. I hate war, it is inhuman ! There is no justice in war. How can you expect justice from someone who invades your home ? That is why I don't blame Iraqese either..by the way...when I was in Antalya, I saw a village dominated by germans..they were building a church and local authorities and local people were donating money to help them finish quickly...when will be able to control our deep-rooted historic hatrets among eachother? If we stay in yesterday, we can not show progress..I think Eurepans have problem with that ! Think with your own mind, not with your grandfathers' !

Actually (to those who say what justifies the holy war) it is not the Koran that justifies it, but the New Testament of the Bible, where it says "There is a time to kill"
Leave it to Christianity, huh?

According to the Koran a jihad is necessary whenever one feels Islam is threatened; the jihad will be directed towards those who one feels threaten islam.


This is not true, a Jihad can only be called for against a piece of land which originated from the Islam and taken by any other people. Those were the real Jihads. Any land which was once owned by any Islamic faction may be taken back by a Jihad force.

By th way : Jihad in its early forms meant, to find peace with yourself, find who you really were!!!
Now it is used, to create bad things and kill people !!!

Everyone deserves a second chance..Germans klled millions of jews and innocent people...what if the allies had said "Ok..our patience has exhausted. We dealed to much with germans in both WWs, we do not want any more trouble, let's share germany's lands as allies" ? As I said before, I have made a study last year about Turkey's transformation in last 80 years. I were also interested in that Armenian kills in WWI. As far as I have read; armenians, who were allying with russians against turkish trooos in East Anatolia were moved from their lands to the southern parts of that country. In a war, that is normal I think. We made the similar thing to Japanese-Americans n WWII.
The Turks murdered one million Armenians, men and women, fighters and civilians. The US moved a few thousand Japanese to internment camps. THere is a big difference.

We have also gone through decades of soul-searching and introspection about the internment camps, and the US government has made many of the internment camps into national monuments in order to teach future people about racism and bigotry. However the Turks have whitewashed and censored history, and spit in the memory of the murdered Armenians.

Stalin killed people in Krymea because of their supports to germans in WWI. You can find countless of examples in history.
Just because other similar events happened does not make the Armenian genocide, or Turkey's refusal to acknowledge it, right.
I think the only real genoside is about the jews that your grandfathers did in WWII !! But we still call germany as a civilized country with civilized people !! The main problem is the WAR itself. I hate war, it is inhuman ! There is no justice in war. How can you expect justice from someone who invades your home ? That is why I don't blame Iraqese either..by the way...when I was in Antalya, I saw a village dominated by germans..they were building a church and local authorities and local people were donating money to help them finish quickly...when will be able to control our deep-rooted historic hatrets among eachother? If we stay in yesterday, we can not show progress..I think Eurepans have problem with that ! Think with your own mind, not with your grandfathers' !
Germany for the last sixty years has been apologizing for the HOlocaust, paying compensation to the Jews, and confronting the terrible crimes that their country committed during the WWII. That is why Germany, through its self-introspection and reconciliation, can be considered a civilized nation. However the Turks have tried to delete all mention of the Armenian Genocide from history, they have downplayed the massacre's magnitude, and in other ways abuse the minorities in their country.

A second chance for Turkey is surely in order, but only when they change the intolerances and injustice in their policies.

I must go now. What I want to say is that; we must support countries who are trying hard to transform themselves. Its monetary costs may be high in the short-run, but the benefits will be much more higher later. Just the basic rule of finance; Invest now to earn later. And every investment carries a risk. We can take relatively low risks like the one in Turkey. They are so close to success. And they made it in just last 20 years. But for high risk carrying countries like Iraq, there are still many years to go...take care everybody

This is not true, a Jihad can only be called for against a piece of land which originated from the Islam and taken by any other people. Those were the real Jihads. Any land which was once owned by any Islamic faction may be taken back by a Jihad force.

Actually Jihad has been used against previously non-Muslim lands... the Almoravids conquered pagan Ghana in a jihad. Jihad has also been used against by Muslims against rival Muslim nations.

By th way : Jihad in its early forms meant, to find peace with yourself, find who you really were!!!
Now it is used, to create bad things and kill people !!!
The passages in the Koran regarding jihad are pretty open to interpretation... you may think it is about peace and stuff but for many Muslims jihad has been and will continued to be interpreted in a violent way.

Everyone deserves a second chance..Germans klled millions of jews and innocent people...what if the allies had said "Ok..our patience has exhausted. We dealed to much with germans in both WWs, we do not want any more trouble, let's share germany's lands as allies" ? As I said before, I have made a study last year about Turkey's transformation in last 80 years. I were also interested in that Armenian kills in WWI. As far as I have read; armenians, who were allying with russians against turkish trooos in East Anatolia were moved from their lands to the southern parts of that country. In a war, that is normal I think. We made the similar thing to Japanese-Americans n WWII. Stalin killed people in Krymea because of their supports to germans in WWI. You can find countless of examples in history. I think the only real genoside is about the jews that your grandfathers did in WWII !! But we still call germany as a civilized country with civilized people !! The main problem is the WAR itself. I hate war, it is inhuman ! There is no justice in war. How can you expect justice from someone who invades your home ? That is why I don't blame Iraqese either..by the way...when I was in Antalya, I saw a village dominated by germans..they were building a church and local authorities and local people were donating money to help them finish quickly...when will be able to control our deep-rooted historic hatrets among eachother? If we stay in yesterday, we can not show progress..I think Eurepans have problem with that ! Think with your own mind, not with your grandfathers' !
Never - since Germany is and remains hated in Britain, Poland and the Czech Republic by huge parts of the population (and most of them were born after World War II). I know that and I´m aware of that. It is the same for Japan in East Asia (China, Korea in particular).
That is not going to change.
In the case of Germany for at least two thousand years. We - I (with one jewish grandfather by the way)- have to life with that.
And the Turks have to live with certain things as well.
Why is there so much anti-French sentiment in Britain? The last time they were at war is a long time ago. It exists and remains that way regardless of what we do. It is the same with anti-americanism or anti-semitism.
The same is the case for Turkey. They tried to conquor Europe during the Middle Ages and now they want to enter the EU.
By the way: 2 million Armenians were killed during World War I by Turkey. That was a genocide and a Turkey was never held accountable for it in any way and is still denying that it happened. By the way - Germany was giving logistical support to its ally at that time - also for that. Though it was done and decided by the Turks. The Armenians are very much aware of this history. I´m surprised you don´t know it. Well: it doesn´t stand in the Turkish history books.
Regarding Germany: I´m pretty shure that this - my - country would have been destroyed if there wasn´t the Cold War which saved us - and we lost a third of the territory anyway (to Poland and Russia) and the german citizens were "removed" from that. But we were needed as allies in that confrontation. The same can be said for Japan.
In the case of Germany there was even such a thing like the Morgenthau plan. But the upcoming confrontation between the West and the East prevented it. And now it is too late. Japan and Germany are too strong and important today to try such a thing.

I don´t have anything against Turkey. They are an important ally. I just don´t want them in the EU. I want them to make order in the Middle East and to form a Turkmen Union. I think they fit culturally better to that.
You have not even adressed the problems a turkish membership would cause: financially and socially (immigration problem).
I don´t think we can make a realistic policy by ignoring the realities.
The European Union can´t be expanded indefinately. It is after all an European Union and not an World Union. And Turkey is 97% an Asian country.

Ah sorry..I read your message when I was leaving...I just wanted to give you little information. Turk do not say that "we did not commit a genoside on armenians". They say "historians must search and deal with that issue, because armenians are both right and wrong on their arguments". And that is why throughout the last 1,5 years, a group of historians from Armenia and Turkey are collaborating on investigation of those events. They are periodically coming together and sharing their findings. I think this issue will come on an agreement in several years. All right everybody !! Stay with peace...and free your mind..

% 97 of Turkish land may be in Europe but even that land is bigger than many European countries (Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, etc) :) I get your ideas about social and economic issues, but the "amount of land in Europe" can not be an argument...see you later....as the great Aristotle said "That is your thought, let this be mine"....

I think the only real genocide is about the jews in WWII
You don´t know much about history, do you? The fact that is was the only one with industrial killing doesn´t make it the only gonocide.
Or what to you think about Ruanda and Burundin in 1994. Or other mass-murdereres from Pol Pot to Stalin and many others -like in the Balkans.
The US government has recently declared the event in Darfur genocide. Even the most recent once in Ruanda/Burundi which after all costed more than 1,5 within a few months in 1994 doesn´t get attention by Western historians. Only the Holocaust. Or the current situation in Eastern Kongo - Well, who cares about Africa anyway.
They were numerous genocides in human history, unnumbered campaigns of ethnic cleansing and mass killing. The Holocaust was the biggest of it but not the only one. Does this fact make it less worse: No, I don´t think so.
However I wonder why the other events all together don´t get even slightly as much attention as the Holocaust. In that sense the Holocaust and the evil Germans have to play the bad guy role -and we will be chosen for that for at least the next two thousand years. We remain the "eternal Nazi" among the nations. An irony - since before that the jews were in that position of the "bad guys" - and are used to justify even wars of today and will be used for that in the future. Fortunately we have our own state, though.
At the end that is the only security assurance for any nationality: having its own state and being able to defend it.
The weak get killed, spit in their face and repressed. That was always the case. I therefore completly understand and support the Israeli policy. The don´t want to be weak again and play the victim role. It is always better to be on the dominant side and on the winning side than on the weak side and on the losing side.
I didn´t chose my nationality. And I don´t feel accountable for actions I haven´t done. Guilt is individual not collective.
That others fell differently about it is regretable. But fortunately they don´t have the power to enforce their believes.

Ah sorry..I read your message when I was leaving...I just wanted to give you little information. Turk do not say that "we did not commit a genoside on armenians".
Yes they do. In fact a few years ago there was a diplomatic incident over this matter. The French government officially declared the slaughter of Armenians a "genocide" and the Turks threatened to break many trade agreements with France because of this. The Turks specifically refuse to call it "genocide," and also refuse to acknowledge that 2 million people were slaughtered.

They say "historians must search and deal with that issue, because armenians are both right and wrong on their arguments".
Armenians are right in the argument that 2 million people died. The Turks put the casualties at a few hundred thousand people. There is also no moral equivalence between the Turks' murdering 2 million people, civilians included, and the Armenians rebelling against the Ottoman Empire. It would make sense if Turkey only killed the rebel fighters, but they indiscriminately slaughtered random people in Armenia.

And that is why throughout the last 1,5 years, a group of historians from Armenia and Turkey are collaborating on investigation of those events. They are periodically coming together and sharing their findings.
They are most likely not sponsored by the government. The Turksih government has always condemned historians who try to find the truth about the genocides, and the official Turkish position is that no genocide ever happened, and 300,000 Armenians died because of normal war causes, not because the Turks targetted them for systematic genocide. They refuse to acknowledge that Turkish forces executed 2 million Armeinans, civilians included.

I must go now. What I want to say is that; we must support countries who are trying hard to transform themselves. Its monetary costs may be high in the short-run, but the benefits will be much more higher later. Just the basic rule of finance; Invest now to earn later. And every investment carries a risk. We can take relatively low risks like the one in Turkey. They are so close to success. And they made it in just last 20 years. But for high risk carrying countries like Iraq, there are still many years to go...take care everybody

Wouldn't it be better to wait until Turkey has come closer to BEING a "transform"ed nation before it has an equal say in policy or admittance in the EU? Turkey, which makes it virtually impossible for people of other religions to not have violence inflicted upon them and have law enforcement which looks the other way, for non-Muslims who cannot reside in Turkey as near equals to the Muslim majority and a nation that still allows honor killings is FAR from transformed. History shows that aggressive cultures and peoples eat up the peace loving ones(Europe). Perhaps Turkey will be a little closer to transformed in 50 years but right now they certainly have a VERY long way to go.

Actually Jihad has been used against previously non-Muslim lands... the Almoravids conquered pagan Ghana in a jihad. Jihad has also been used against by Muslims against rival Muslim nations.


The passages in the Koran regarding jihad are pretty open to interpretation... you may think it is about peace and stuff but for many Muslims jihad has been and will continued to be interpreted in a violent way.


First of all, i was talking about the first meanings.
Jihad means holy war, but in the beginning it meant to fight a holy war with yourself to discover your true being and find peace with yourself !!!!

This however has changed in the course of time, which first became wars to reconquer the land previously owned by any Islamic faction.

Later just called upon for anyone that made any threat to Islam.







By the way, on another issue here...

I live in Belgium and there have been a lot of bad things hapenning, like mobile phone thefts and petty thieves stealing children's wallets. Even one of my friends got his mobile phone stomen wehen he went to the movies.
What i mean is that most of these things are hapenning by Arabic young men.
One Jewish child even got stabbed in the back when he was returning home from school, one of his friends got hospitalized and the other just punched in the stomach.
My question is, why they do that?
Don't talk to me about being poor and such since in Belgium, the social welfare has hit it's peak in the last 5 years or so and is rated among the top 5 countries for Social Welfare.
Those men just decide to rob people and even on one occasion kill someone. Why?
This has been hapenning with people of every ethnicity/ religion, but most of it happens with people who are Arabic and/or Muslim.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/003131.php

Oh and i have another question...

Throughout history.
The only way the Islam got so many followers was through : "You become a Muslim or die!"- way.
I don't understand how come people can remain truly faithful when they know their ancestors were forced into that certain faith?


(I know some Christians were also sometimes converted like that, but most of the times it was through means of missionarism)

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/003131.php


That's too long to read for me as i have no time for that !!!

That's too long to read for me as i have no time for that !!!

You should just read the top article but the whole website has some very interesting articles from newspapers all over Europe. It's about violence/rape against native Swedes by Muslim men. It's gone up 17% in just a year!...but this is a common trend all over Europe.

Well, this topic is too ask about Muslims not about Sweden.

Well, this topic is too ask about Muslims not about Sweden.

Talking about Muslims in Sweden counts too.

My questions:

I'm gay, are Muslims just as homophobic as Christians?
Which Arab countries are liberal?
Is Islam really like "smite the infidel" stuff?

My questions:

I'm gay, are Muslims just as homophobic as Christians?
Which Arab countries are liberal?
Is Islam really like "smite the infidel" stuff?

Speaking for all kind hearted Christians everywhere...most of us aren't homophobes. The idiots of any group are always the loudest. What you do in your personal life is none of anyone's business. God bless you :)

Which Arab countries are liberal?
None, you are better off in any western country.
And of coures homosexuality is considered a sin - unthinkable in a society like Turkey for example.
Even in Italy homosexuality doesn´t officialy exist. Thats the way it is in "the south" (meditareanean).
Islam has also the validity of the Old Testament in that points like Judaism and Christianity.

My questions:

I'm gay, are Muslims just as homophobic as Christians?
Which Arab countries are liberal?
Is Islam really like "smite the infidel" stuff?
The only thing the Mahometans have gotten right is regarding the homosexuals.
Crushing this disease is integral from the Christian perspective.

The only thing the Mahometans have gotten right is regarding the homosexuals.
Crushing this disease is integral from the Christian perspective.

please do not use the term 'Mahometan', it's quite derogatory

please do not use the term 'Mahometan', it's quite derogatory
I assume you are one?

I assume you are one?
believe it or not, yes

My questions:

I'm gay, are Muslims just as homophobic as Christians?
Sure there are some Muslims that tolerate gays but Muslim society is generally FAR more homophobic than Christians. At least it's legal to be gay in the US. Homosexuality is officially banned in a lot of Muslim nations.

Which Arab countries are liberal?
None, by western standards.

Is Islam really like "smite the infidel" stuff?
Most Muslims are not like that.

believe it or not, yes
Vile creature, you are indeed, Mahometan.

Vile creature, you are indeed, Mahometan.
There's no need for insult

Oh there speaks the voice of God's love. So gay folks are diseased, right? Well ain't we all created in the image of God ? Chill out. Unless you live by the word of the whole Bible & Koran, i.e. start stoning people for trivial offences, get a grip.

One of the problems with Islam is that there's no definitive leadership of this faith, to give guidance to the vast majority of adherants. The RC's have the Pope, the anglicans have the Archbishop of Canterbury, why is there no similar postion in Islam ? Perhaps such a voice would lead folks away from the radicals in the mosques ?

Oh and i have another question...

Throughout history.
The only way the Islam got so many followers was through : "You become a Muslim or die!"- way.
I don't understand how come people can remain truly faithful when they know their ancestors were forced into that certain faith?


(I know some Christians were also sometimes converted like that, but most of the times it was through means of missionarism)
I'm afraid that I have to oppose you on that, according to records, muslim countries were one of the few at the time that allowed people to keep their own religion once they had gained their territories.

Vile creature, you are indeed, Mahometan.

You really piss me off...you are a hateful Catholic...you make all the rest of us look bad...you should use your knowledge to make the world better...but instead you continually spew hate...that just causes people to go in the opposite direction(especially idealistically)...Christ would smack you!

[QUOTE=
One of the problems with Islam is that there's no definitive leadership of this faith, to give guidance to the vast majority of adherants. The RC's have the Pope, the anglicans have the Archbishop of Canterbury, why is there no similar postion in Islam ? Perhaps such a voice would lead folks away from the radicals in the mosques ?[/QUOTE]
couldnt that become a problem? I mean, what if the religious leader was a fanatic? THere used to be a single leader elected by the people, but since islam became a mjor religion it just isnt practical anymore. I suppose most people feel that it would just be a figurehead that couldnt actually help people, but give speeches behind a podium

You really piss me off...you are a hateful Catholic...you make all the rest of us look bad...you should use your knowledge to make the world better...but instead you continually spew hate...that just causes people to go in the opposite direction(especially idealistically)...Christ would smack you!
And what makes you so sure of your ludicrous claims?
This place is infested with anti-Christians like you.
Another Mahometan yourself?

I'm afraid that I have to oppose you on that, according to records, muslim countries were one of the few at the time that allowed people to keep their own religion once they had gained their territories.

Like I said earlier=
"From what I've read of history Muslims take over all the important churches in their invaded land and turn them into mosques. Then the remaining Christians and their few churches left in the country are heavily taxed, usually can't own land anymore, the Christians will be killed if they attempt to convert anyone and they normally become virtual serfs to the Muslims. And of course, over time the remaining Christians convert to Islam because the culture has so thoroughly infiltrated the nation. Muslims don't "force" the people to convert they just make life VERY difficult for non-Muslims."

Oh another question (I would like my other questions answered upon too).

Did any Muslim think of it once that they have been lied upon. Let me clear this up.

Muslims, Jews and Christians alike believe that the OT (Old Testament) is true).
Which is actually the word of the Qrann and the Torah.

So let's think about this for a moment.
Jews were the first monotheistist religion (that i know about) and that still exists today. And since all of three most well-known religions belive in the word of the OT. They all believe that the Israelites/Jews received the 10 commandments, that every one of the the people there heard the voice of GOD telling them the first two commandments? This meaning, that only one god exists and that a whole people heard him.

Well, if a whole people heard him, it should be true.



So know let's think for a second.
"Your name is John and you walk down the street, suddenly you hear a voice, it calls you. You follow it and stumble an alley with nobody in sight, nor will anybody be able to hear or see you. The voice tells you :"You are the chosen one, lead a good life in my name, the one you call GOD, you are chosen by me to lead a new people to make peace rule the land of this world", John amazed starts telling this to some people inthe street and at first some people laugh at him. Then some people start believing him, after a month or so of looking, half a dozen of people believe him. John gives them all the title of Gadu'O, he tells them that it means "The one that believes in HIM", he tells them they have to spread the word among the people and that a new people has risen because GOD had told him, John, that he was chosen as the new prophet. Everyone believing should join upon making this world a better place."


Well, now take 5 seconds to laugh at this ridiculous story, but this is what hapenned with Muhammad ( a.k.a. Mohammed, Muhamad, Muhammed...).
What if he just invented the whole thing, or he was just some loonie seeking attention? :confused:

Like I said earlier=
"From what I've read of history Muslims take over all the important churches in their invaded land and turn them into mosques. Then the remaining Christians and their few churches left in the country are heavily taxed, usually can't own land anymore, the Christians will be killed if they attempt to convert anyone and they normally become virtual serfs to the Muslims. And of course, over time the remaining Christians convert to Islam because the culture has so thoroughly infiltrated the nation. Muslims don't "force" the people to convert they just make life VERY difficult for non-Muslims."

unfortunately, I cant agree or disagree with you on that part, my knowledge only goes so far... sorry

I'm afraid that I have to oppose you on that, according to records, muslim countries were one of the few at the time that allowed people to keep their own religion once they had gained their territories.


Only monotheistic people could remain faithful to their own faith all the others, called barbarians were killed or converted.

Oh another question (I would like my other questions answered upon too).

Did any Muslim think of it once that they have been lied upon. Let me clear this up.

Muslims, Jews and Christians alike believe that the OT (Old Testament) is true).
Which is actually the word of the Qrann and the Torah.

So let's think about this for a moment.
Jews were the first monotheistist religion (that i know about) and that still exists today. And since all of three most well-known religions belive in the word of the OT. They all believe that the Israelites/Jews received the 10 commandments, that every one of the the people there heard the voice of GOD telling them the first two commandments? This meaning, that only one god exists and that a whole people heard him.

Well, if a whole people heard him, it should be true.



So know let's think for a second.
"Your name is John and you walk down the street, suddenly you hear a voice, it calls you. You follow it and stumble an alley with nobody in sight, nor will anybody be able to hear or see you. The voice tells you :"You are the chosen one, lead a good life in my name, the one you call GOD, you are chosen by me to lead a new people to make peace rule the land of this world", John amazed starts telling this to some people inthe street and at first some people laugh at him. Then some people start believing him, after a month or so of looking, half a dozen of people believe him. John gives them all the title of Gadu'O, he tells them that it means "The one that believes in HIM", he tells them they have to spread the word among the people and that a new people has risen because GOD had told him, John, that he was chosen as the new prophet. Everyone believing should join upon making this world a better place."


Well, now take 5 seconds to laugh at this ridiculous story, but this is what hapenned with Muhammad ( a.k.a. Mohammed, Muhamad, Muhammed...).
What if he just invented the whole thing, or he was just some loonie seeking attention? :confused:

here's the islamic perspective;
allah sent messages to various communites, however as these religions spread to other parts of the world, they became adapted into the religion of the native people.
Islam was meant to be the final message of truth that would not be changed or altered. Highly meticulous means were used to maintain the sayings and teachings of the prophet muhamed.
The prophet always revealed the quranic surahs in a highly complicated poetry, it is hihgly suspect that a madman could create such a work of art

And what makes you so sure of your ludicrous claims?
This place is infested with anti-Christians like you.
Another Mahometan yourself?

I really shouldn't dignify you with an answer but I, myself am an orthodox Catholic. In other words, I attempt to follow all the teachings of the Church(that includes not judging people...that is the job of God)and I attempt to imitate Christ as much as an imperfect person can. You are placing yourself in the position of Judge that is a VERY grave sin.

Only monotheistic people could remain faithful to their own faith all the others, called barbarians were killed or converted.
Christians were brutally persecuted by the Mahometans as well.
The Jews were spared as they funded the Mahometans in exchange for racial alliance against the Christians.

makes sense, only god should judge people...

that's jsut my opinion of course

here's the islamic perspective;
allah sent messages to various communites, however as these religions spread to other parts of the world, they became adapted into the religion of the native people.
Islam was meant to be the final message of truth that would not be changed or altered. Highly meticulous means were used to maintain the sayings and teachings of the prophet muhamed.
The prophet always revealed the quranic surahs in a highly complicated poetry, it is hihgly suspect that a madman could create such a work of art

A lot of suspected madmen were geniuses or great artists, the most famous madman-genius was Hitler and his companions who stirred up the world in such extent that the hate is still here now!

A lot of suspected madmen were geniuses or great artists, the most famous madman-genius was Hitler and his companions who stirred up the world in such extent that the hate is still here now!
hitler did not create art, or teach peace, he was a warmongerer and an evil, sadistic person

I really shouldn't dignify you with an answer but I, myself am an orthodox Catholic. In other words, I attempt to follow all the teachings of the Church(that includes not judging people...that is the job of God)and I attempt to imitate Christ as much as an imperfect person can. You are placing yourself in the position of Judge that is a VERY grave sin.
An orthodox Catholic?!
Do you know not an ounce of Catholic dogma?!
Fools truly believe that I will blindly agree that you are Catholic despite the fact that you do not follow Catholic doctrine. You do not decide whether you are Catholic or not! If you are a so called "nominal" Catholic and have problems with one doctrine or another, then get out and call yourself what you really are- a protestant.
No better than a Mahometan, deceivers like you are.

Christians were brutally persecuted by the Mahometans as well.
The Jews were spared as they funded the Mahometans in exchange for racial alliance against the Christians.


Christians aren't seen as monotheistic by the Islam as Jesus could not have been seen as the son of god as this is like portraying the greek gods in a minor scale, with Zeus being the father(god) and Herakles being the son (Jesus who had the power of healing instead of bashing heads).
Thus making Maria like the mother of Herakles (forgot her name) and making Christianity a polytheistic religion.

Well, ive read up a wee bit on Islam and believe it to be a peaceful faith and that the vast vast majority of its followers are real decent folks just making their way in life like the rest of us. If only a few leaders of the faith could be more prominent and say, hey, terrorism in the name of God/Allah is a dreadful sin, the Islamic faith would be better understood in the west. There are great similarities between Islam and Christianity too, their emphasis on charitable works and looking after the poor and infirm through the tythe, the redemptive power of prayer. In fact, Jesus is regarded by muslims as one of the great prophets, although they don't regard him as being the Son of God.
I only wish there were greater links between the two faiths and that folks could live in freedom and peace, but be free to worship whichever faith they believe in.

Well, ive read up a wee bit on Islam and believe it to be a peaceful faith and that the vast vast majority of its followers are real decent folks just making their way in life like the rest of us. If only a few leaders of the faith could be more prominent and say, hey, terrorism in the name of God/Allah is a dreadful sin, the Islamic faith would be better understood in the west. There are great similarities between Islam and Christianity too, their emphasis on charitable works and looking after the poor and infirm through the tythe, the redemptive power of prayer. In fact, Jesus is regarded by muslims as one of the great prophets, although they don't regard him as being the Son of God.
I only wish there were greater links between the two faiths and that folks could live in freedom and peace, but be free to worship whichever faith they believe in.
Thankyou very much, you have a fine dream

hitler did not create art, or teach peace, he was a warmongerer and an evil, sadistic person

You were talking about artists, some people found his way artistic like Dr.Mengele who maid artistic and scientific experiments with the Jews, by cutting their legs off and trying to reattach them to another Jew to see if it would grow as a third leg (showing Jews to be Demons). Dr.Mengele was a doctor and for him it was art to cut off people's legs, arms and other body parts for experiments.

By the way, Mohammed could have just some kind of Idealistic boy who looked for attention, thus preaching about god talking to him.

Well, ive read up a wee bit on Islam and believe it to be a peaceful faith and that the vast vast majority of its followers are real decent folks just making their way in life like the rest of us. If only a few leaders of the faith could be more prominent and say, hey, terrorism in the name of God/Allah is a dreadful sin, the Islamic faith would be better understood in the west. There are great similarities between Islam and Christianity too, their emphasis on charitable works and looking after the poor and infirm through the tythe, the redemptive power of prayer. In fact, Jesus is regarded by muslims as one of the great prophets, although they don't regard him as being the Son of God.
I only wish there were greater links between the two faiths and that folks could live in freedom and peace, but be free to worship whichever faith they believe in.
Mahometanism is a religion of violence and savagery. This is incompatible with the One True Faith of Christianity.

An orthodox Catholic?!
Do you know not an ounce of Catholic dogma?!
You do not decide whether you are Catholic or not! If you are a so called "nominal" Catholic and have problems with one doctrine or another, .

When did I say I didn't follow doctrine?! And yes, of course, I'm quite well versed in the Catechism of the Church. I am a cradle Catholic, went to Catholic school, and I actually read bits of my Catechism book every night. I'm just not seething with hate and I don't insult people who have differing beliefs from mine like you sir.

You were talking about artists, some people found his way artistic like Dr.Mengele who maid artistic and scientific experiments with the Jews, by cutting their legs off and trying to reattach them to another Jew to see if it would grow as a third leg (showing Jews to be Demons). Dr.Mengele was a doctor and for him it was art to cut off people's legs, arms and other body parts for experiments.

By the way, Mohammed could have just some kind of Idealistic boy who looked for attention, thus preaching about god talking to him.

there's a difference between preaching poetically-versed doctrine based upon peace and the word of god and cutting people's legs off...

mohammed grew up in a society where idol worship was not only prominent, but fiercely enforced... he was a target of several assasinations after he began to preach. I don't think he was juust looking for attention

When did I say I didn't follow doctrine?! And yes, of course, I'm quite well versed in the Catechism of the Church. I am a cradle Catholic, went to Catholic school, and I actually read bits of my Catechism book every night. I'm just not seething with hate and I don't insult people who have differing beliefs from mine like you sir.
And where does the Roman Catechism endorse heresy?
I have the Catechism as well and it does not endorse your claims.
I assume you have a protestant version of catechism.

Do you not know of the great Catholic dogma :

extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Mahometanism is a religion of violence and savagery. This is incompatible with the One True Faith of Christianity.
I'll say this once again, please remain within a certain code of ettiquette, there is no need for insult

I'll say this once again, please remain within a certain code of ettiquette, there is no need for insult

Don't mind him and his filth...He is an equal opportunity insulter. Look at me for instance, he insults his own kind.

Mahometanism is a religion of violence and savagery. This is incompatible with the One True Faith of Christianity.

......thats the problem I have with all faiths, their exclusivity, you have to believe in the one but not the other.........Islam can in no way be described as a religion of violence.......consider World War One and Two and all the conflict since, wars between Christian countries in which millions perished and in which the Islamic world was not involved..........Sir, with respect, your views are deeply repugnant to other Christians and you cannot speak for me

there's a difference between preaching poetically-versed doctrine based upon peace and the word of god and cutting people's legs off...

mohammed grew up in a society where idol worship was not only prominent, but fiercely enforced... he was a target of several assasinations after he began to preach. I don't think he was juust looking for attention


All the political leaders in the world have risks of assassination(sp?), but they still do it. It doesn't matter if they are crazy or not.
Mohammed could have shown a road to peace, but my question is, can it be that he imagined hearing god?

Mahometanism is a religion of violence and savagery. This is incompatible with the One True Faith of Christianity.

......thats the problem I have with all faiths, their exclusivity, you have to believe in the one but not the other.........Islam can in no way be described as a religion of violence.......consider World War One and Two and all the conflict since, wars between Christian countries in which millions perished and in which the Islamic world was not involved..........Sir, with respect, your views are deeply repugnant to other Christians and you cannot speak for me
WWI and WWII did not involve Christianity. Jews played the major role in provoking the wars.

All the political leaders in the world have risks of assassination(sp?), but they still do it. It doesn't matter if they are crazy or not.
Mohammed could have shown a road to peace, but my question is, can it be that he imagined hearing god?

Mohammed was out in the desert with very little food for a LONG time. That stuff happens a lot under those sort of conditions. Not to mention the amazing music and prose the unconscious mind can create.

He was out in the desert with very little food for a LONG time. That stuff happens a lot under those sort of conditions. Not to mention the amazing music and prose the unconscious mind can create.


Yeah, but my question is mostly to Muslims.

All the political leaders in the world have risks of assassination(sp?), but they still do it. It doesn't matter if they are crazy or not.
Mohammed could have shown a road to peace, but my question is, can it be that he imagined hearing god?
he was not a political leader, he was a religious leader of waht began as seven people. Fourteen by the time he was made the target of his own family.

and, I'm afraid that I do not think that one can imagine hearing god... however. You have your opinion and I have mine. (taken from surah al-kafiruun)

The country i live in, UK, got into world war one when Belgium was invaded and entered world war 2 in defence of the Poles. You're bordering on anti semitism and i counsel you to be careful in your remarks.

How does a Christian with an interest in Islam go about finding out more about that particular faith?

Homosexuality is NOT a disease. It is a normal sexual orientation, it is natural. Homophobia is wrong. The problem is not Islam that generates the homophobia common in Islamic governments, it is the "literalists" who take everything the Qur'an says literally. This is a step backward, not forward. Governments persecuting and murdering homosexuals reminds me of the 1500s of Europe, at that time, everyone took the Bible literally. Should Muslims be 500 years behind other countries in terms of civil rights? No, things need to change. Muslims must NOT take some of the more homophobic passages literally if they want to be considered one of the civil rights nations. THere is a myth about things "Western".

Civil rights is not "Western", it is a HUMAN right.
Technology is not "Western", it is necessary for the progress of ANY society.
Tolerance is not "Western", it is treating other people with respect.
Seperation of Church (Mosque) & State is not "Western", it is necessary to ensure the rights of individuals whose religion or religious belief differs from the main religion.
And so on, and so on...

Muslims must embrace these things. It is time for the Arab world to catch up with the West in terms of tolerance, civil rights, and seperation of church and state.

The solution is reform.

Yeah, but my question is mostly to Muslims.

Sorry :( didn't mean to cut in :p

he was not a political leader, he was a religious leader of waht began as seven people. Fourteen by the time he was made the target of his own family.

and, I'm afraid that I do not think that one can imagine hearing god... however. You have your opinion and I have mine. (taken from surah al-kafiruun)


Yeah i respect that, so i'll stop about this issue, for you except if another Muslim would like to talk about it.


So since you mentioned it. What is Sural al-kafiruun?

Mohammed was out in the desert with very little food for a LONG time. That stuff happens a lot under those sort of conditions. Not to mention the amazing music and prose the unconscious mind can create.
he heard the revelations from the angel gabriel a long time before he was out in the desert.

Yeah i respect that, so i'll stop about this issue, for you except if another Muslim would like to talk about it.


So since you mentioned it. What is Sural al-kafiruun?
the surahs are the chapters of the quran, they were each revealed by the angeal gabriel to the prophet at different times of his life. THis was so that they could gradually be memorized and then written down into a definitive text that would be impossible to be changed by mistake

Mystic are you a Muslim?

If so, do you believe in the possibility he was just imagining things? (or maybe even lying; maybe for a good cause, but still lying or imagining?)

Mystic are you a Muslim?

If so, do you believe in the possibility he was just imagining things? (or maybe even lying; maybe for a good cause, but still lying or imagining?)
I have already clarified that I am a muslim, but not, I do not believe that he could have been imagining things. listen to the quran sometime from a good speaker, its really beautiful.

the surahs are the chapters of the quran, they were each revealed by the angeal gabriel to the prophet at different times of his life. THis was so that they could gradually be memorized and then written down into a definitive text that would be impossible to be changed by mistake


Isn't the Quran similar or almost the same as the Bible or the Torah?
How many chapters are there in the quran?
When did Mohammed get those surahs?

he heard the revelations from the angel gabriel a long time before he was out in the desert.

Really? I'd never heard that before. Thanks for the info/correction. That's quite interesting, I'll keep that in mind.

I have already clarified that I am a muslim, but not, I do not believe that he could have been imagining things. listen to the quran sometime from a good speaker, its really beautiful.

Should i listen in Arabic or just read it?
Is the quran being studied upon as closely as the Torah?

"Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ's heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it."

~Pope Urban II

"Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ's heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it."

~Pope Urban II



TT, did you ever think about it, that all the Popes were liars and just spoke in the name of god to keep some millions of people obeying every word they said?

Isn't the Quran similar or almost the same as the Bible or the Torah?
How many chapters are there in the quran?
When did Mohammed get those surahs?
the quran is similar to each of them. However, according to our beliefs, the original texts were distorted either by mistake or purposefully. The quran, in our opinion is the completely unchanged doctrine of god

there's about twenty seven I think

the prophet mohammed recieved revelations beginning at age fourty after meditation in the cave of mount hira. He constantly did this to escape from the hectic life in mecca. On one ocassion, the prophet felt an immense weight press down on him, the presence of the angel gabriel. THe angel spoke to him and said 'recite' the prophet replied, 'buth what shall I recite' the angel said 'recite' again, the prophet became firghtened and ran home to contemplate this.. after this he began to recieve revelations from the angle... if you want to hear more just ask me,

TT, did you ever think about it, that all the Popes were liars and just spoke in the name of god to keep some millions of people obeying every word they said?
Any antipope who spoke in the name of your pagan "god" is of course a liar, but popes speaking for the One True God are speaking in His name in accordance with Apostolic tradition.

well its 02.00 sunday mornin in UK and i'm heading,

to my muslim friends.....

tenete does not speak for christianity, far from it, just ignore him.......and all the very very best for you and your folks

well its 02.00 sunday mornin in UK and i'm heading,

to my muslim friends.....

tenete does not speak for christianity, far from it, just ignore him.......and all the very very best for you and your folks
I speak for the Roman Catholic Church and in turn Christ Himself.
You are a heretic and have no business deciding who is or is not a Christian.

Should i listen in Arabic or just read it?
Is the quran being studied upon as closely as the Torah?
its been studied pretty much as extensively as the torah, however it's considered not wuite good to spend your entire life just studying it... the point is to apply peace to your life.

listen in arabic and try to follow along, if you can read arabic I suggest you do that. It's not too hard to laern, the english transaltions are okay most of the time.

the quran is similar to each of them. However, according to our beliefs, the original texts were distorted either by mistake or purposefully. The quran, in our opinion is the completely unchanged doctrine of god

there's about twenty seven I think

the prophet mohammed recieved revelations beginning at age fourty after meditation in the cave of mount hira. He constantly did this to escape from the hectic life in mecca. On one ocassion, the prophet felt an immense weight press down on him, the presence of the angel gabriel. THe angel spoke to him and said 'recite' the prophet replied, 'buth what shall I recite' the angel said 'recite' again, the prophet became firghtened and ran home to contemplate this.. after this he began to recieve revelations from the angle... if you want to hear more just ask me,


First of all, i would like to read more.
Second, about this : "However, according to our beliefs, the original texts were distorted either by mistake or purposefully. The quran, in our opinion is the completely unchanged doctrine of god", how can the image have been changed by the Jews or Christians?? As they came before the Muslims? So the only logical explanation is that the Muslims changed it?

you know what, if you can get a copy of 'the essential koran' its a really good translation in english. Very thourough. Look at your local library for more information

I speak for the Roman Catholic Church and in turn Christ Himself.
You are a heretic and have no business deciding who is or is not a Christian.


You neither my beloved friend...

As an atheist, here I will sum this up, Abraham invented Judaism, Paul the Apostle invented Christianity (Jesus never existed), and Muhammad invented Islam.There are many similarities between the three.

I'll be back later, got to go

its been studied pretty much as extensively as the torah, however it's considered not wuite good to spend your entire life just studying it... the point is to apply peace to your life.

listen in arabic and try to follow along, if you can read arabic I suggest you do that. It's not too hard to laern, the english transaltions are okay most of the time.


Well, i don't understand a thing in Arabic, so my question actually was, if it would be better to listen to it in English or any other lagnuage known to me or read it?

Thank you for telling me about how it is studied.(well in very brief)

You neither my beloved friend...
An admitted hindoo/"agnostic humanist" is claiming this as well.
Aren't you all perfect little "popes" following your own warped doctrines on Christianity now? :rolleyes:

As an atheist, here I will sum this up, Abraham invented Judaism, Paul the Apostle invented Christianity (Jesus never existed), and Muhammad invented Islam.There are many similarities between the three.


One major difference is that Judaism became more concrete once 600.000 people heard the voice of god when receiving the ten commandments.

a heretic indeed lol
no, i'm a dude who is receptive to learning about other faiths and traditions whilst quietly practising my own, calmly and peacefully like most other members of the christian faith......
nite folks

An admitted hindoo/"agnostic humanist" is claiming this as well.
Aren't you all perfect little "popes" following your own warped doctrines on Christianity now? :rolleyes:


I am sorry, but since English isn't my native tongue, i didn't understand what you said...

No, no, No-one heard the voice of God when the Ten Commandments were written, because there is no historical record of any voice from the heavens.

No, no, No-one heard the voice of God when the Ten Commandments were written, because there is no historical record of any voice from the heavens.


Please explain?

Since I posted this on another thread, I realize it is much more relevant here:
An Informational Video on Islam in Europe (http://host106.ipowerweb.com/~whitehis/gohomemuslims2.mov)

I am sorry, but since English isn't my native tongue, i didn't understand what you said...
You've understood this up until this point, strangely enough...

I don't trust videos on the net... look at www.rotten.com

Since I posted this on another thread, I realize it is much more relevant here:
An Informational Video on Islam in Europe (http://host106.ipowerweb.com/~whitehis/gohomemuslims2.mov)

Just wondering, do you live in Europe TT?

Hello everyone, I have a pretty good summary of the making of Islam

when the prophet mohammed first heard the voice of Gabriel, he ran home, reasonably scared as one would upon feeling a tremendous weight. He spoke to his wife, who in turn told him to speak to her cousin who was a christian. This christian told the prophet that these signs pointed towards the fact that the prophet was the final messiah of god.

mohammed began to preach, and his relatives didn't like this. They made a good living from having people worship their idols. THey set out to kill him.

at this time, the prophet made a migration to the nearby city of yathrib (later renamed medina). His followers met him there, and the prophet continued to preach.

(the rest is important, however the essentials are all written above)

according to the records made at rome, the bible was written in a council fifty years after the prophet jesus passed away. several of them were mearely observers of the observers of the prophet. Several books were made, and some did not even become part of the bible (these books now called apogrypha)

as christianity spread to greece, it is believed that the greeks looked at what had occured and changed it to become parallel with their own mythology (zeus is god, herakles is jesus, mary is the mother f herakles whom I cannot remember the name of)

the main difference between christian belief and muslim belief is that jesus is the son of god. We claim he was a prophet, and that god does not have relations, he is one, supremely ultimate being.

sorry if this offends anyone, however this is the opinion of most muslims..

: "However, according to our beliefs, the original texts were distorted either by mistake or purposefully. The quran, in our opinion is the completely unchanged doctrine of god", how can the image have been changed by the Jews or Christians?? As they came before the Muslims? So the only logical explanation is that the Muslims changed it?
the bible has been changed and additions have been made to it over time. One king of england even changed a few verses.

well its 02.00 sunday mornin in UK and i'm heading,

to my muslim friends.....

tenete does not speak for christianity, far from it, just ignore him.......and all the very very best for you and your folks

thanks for the good will, very much appreciated

I speak for the Roman Catholic Church and in turn Christ Himself.

Only Christ speaks for himself anybody else who claims they speak on behalf of Christ is committing idolatry and sinning as per The Ten Commandments.

Hello everyone, I have a pretty good summary of the making of Islam

when the prophet mohammed first heard the voice of Gabriel, he ran home, reasonably scared as one would upon feeling a tremendous weight. He spoke to his wife, who in turn told him to speak to her cousin who was a christian. This christian told the prophet that these signs pointed towards the fact that the prophet was the final messiah of god.

mohammed began to preach, and his relatives didn't like this. They made a good living from having people worship their idols. THey set out to kill him.

at this time, the prophet made a migration to the nearby city of yathrib (later renamed medina). His followers met him there, and the prophet continued to preach.

(the rest is important, however the essentials are all written above)

according to the records made at rome, the bible was written in a council fifty years after the prophet jesus passed away. several of them were mearely observers of the observers of the prophet. Several books were made, and some did not even become part of the bible (these books now called apogrypha)

as christianity spread to greece, it is believed that the greeks looked at what had occured and changed it to become parallel with their own mythology (zeus is god, herakles is jesus, mary is the mother f herakles whom I cannot remember the name of)

the main difference between christian belief and muslim belief is that jesus is the son of god. We claim he was a prophet, and that god does not have relations, he is one, supremely ultimate being.

sorry if this offends anyone, however this is the opinion of most muslims..


HUH?
You took part of my post !!!

the bible has been changed and additions have been made to it over time. One king of england even changed a few verses.


I'm not hundred % certain about the thing i'm gnna say, but from what i have read and learned, the Torah hasn't changed in any way (that's why it is still being studied in all the possible ways), I am talking about the real version, not any of the translated version.

And if you didn't know, the Bible has been taken from the Jewish Torah, the Greeks translated it and since the Greek alphabet or combination of the Greek letters, don't get pronounced as "sh" a lot in any translated Bibles have changed (i only know about the "sh"-case, but some other things too, i've been told) (example: Saul=Bible, name in Torah is Shaul (with the "A" pronounced as the "A" in the word "as"). So every translated Bible and book is different.

Only Christ speaks for himself anybody else who claims they speak on behalf of Christ is committing idolatry and sinning as per The Ten Commandments.


But you do so.

HUH?
You took part of my post !!!really? sorry, I had no idea that I took part of it... i was reading a book on greek mythology at the time, and put two and two together

I'm not hundred % certain about the thing i'm gnna say, but from what i have read and learned, the Torah hasn't changed in any way (that's why it is still being studied in all the possible ways), I am talking about the real version, not any of the translated version.

And if you didn't know, the Bible has been taken from the Jewish Torah, the Greeks translated it and since the Greek alphabet or combination of the Greek letters, don't get pronounced as "sh" a lot in any translated Bibles have changed (i only know about the "sh"-case, but some other things too, i've been told) (example: Saul=Bible, name in Torah is Shaul (with the "A" pronounced as the "A" in the word "as"). So every translated Bible and book is different.
I don't remember what the system was exactly... however the bible was translated from a lot of different languages... this could have resulted in unintentional alteration...

out of context for a moment... since there seems to be so many christians here, perhaps you could provide me with some information on the book of revelations. I am writing a science fiction novel loosely based upon it, and I need to know a few things..
how many archangels are there, and what are there names? Do they each have different properties of some sort?
apologies if this kind of detracts the original conversation, but I realy need to know right now before I write any further into the story

I don't remember what the system was exactly... however the bible was translated from a lot of different languages... this could have resulted in unintentional alteration...
There was one Divinely Inspired translation- the Latin Vulgate.
It is untainted no matter what some English king or modern-day scholar has done with anything else.

There was one Divinely Inspired translation- the Latin Vulgate.Who on earth could possibly have the authority to say what is divine and what isn't? Honestly, as long as we're being picky, why don't you just stick to the original Hebrew version? Oh, and even if you personally read Latin fluently and are not just getting it off some website, you're translating it for us to share your pearls of wisdom - isn't that a corruption too?

There was one Divinely Inspired translation- the Latin Vulgate.
It is untainted no matter what some English king or modern-day scholar has done with anything else.
what is the latin vulgate... and unfree peoples is correct, how does one have the authority to ascribe what is and is not divine? How was this vulgate recieved? And does anyone know the names of the archangels?

what is the latin vulgate... and unfree peoples is correct, how does one have the authority to ascribe what is and is not divine? How was this vulgate recieved? And does anyone know the names of the archangels?
The Vulgate is the Bible as translated by Saint Jerome under Pope Damasus I.
There is an entire discussion on this in another thread.

The Vulgate is the Bible as translated by Saint Jerome under Pope Damasus I.
There is an entire discussion on this in another thread.
so... this was translated into latin... from a text in hebrew... and spoken in their original tongue of aramic (not arabic, aramic is different, just to clarify). And it was translated under the pope... but if it was a translation, then where is the original document?

so... this was translated into latin... from a text in hebrew... and spoken in their original tongue of aramic (not arabic, aramic is different, just to clarify). And it was translated under the pope... but if it was a translation, then where is the original document?
Prior to the Vulgate, there were just manuscripts, not yet codified as the Canon of the Bible.

Prior to the Vulgate, there were just manuscripts, not yet codified as the Canon of the Bible.

I see, but if they were not specified as the canon of the bible, then first of all; what made certain texts eligible for places within the book. And second, how is the divine nature of the manuscripts proven?

I see, but if they were not specified as the canon of the bible, then first of all; what made certain texts eligible for places within the book. And second, how is the divine nature of the manuscripts proven?
There is an active thread:
"The true language of the Bible and debates on other issues involving the church."
This sort of discussion has been taking place there.

Do muslims beleive that the Koran is THE word of god and nothing else?

Do muslims beleive that the Koran is THE word of god and nothing else?
how do you mean that? If you mean that everything in there is solely from divine transmittion fromt he angel gabriel to the prophet mohammed, then yes.

I don't remember what the system was exactly... however the bible was translated from a lot of different languages... this could have resulted in unintentional alteration...


Yeah, but isn't the Quran taken from the Torah or Bible?
As the Quran came a lot later !!!

There was one Divinely Inspired translation- the Latin Vulgate.
It is untainted no matter what some English king or modern-day scholar has done with anything else.


The Christian Bible was translated from the Torah in Greek first, only later in Latin !!!

Are Skittles okay to eat?

so... this was translated into latin... from a text in hebrew... and spoken in their original tongue of aramic (not arabic, aramic is different, just to clarify). And it was translated under the pope... but if it was a translation, then where is the original document?


Original of Bible is the Torah, that is 100% sure, even the Christians recognise that. They just say the Jews aren't the Chosen Ones anymore.

The difference is with the Muslims who say Mohammed got the Qurann from an angel and it seems both the Qurann and the Torah still remain closely linked. MY question, how come?

Prior to the Vulgate, there were just manuscripts, not yet codified as the Canon of the Bible.


Proof that, everything points to it, that the Bible has been translated from the Torah.

Are Skittles okay to eat?
I love skittles, why do you ask?

Yeah, but isn't the Quran taken from the Torah or Bible?
As the Quran came a lot later !!!
nope, I believe that I have already clarified that the Qur'ran was not taken from any one of the previous two texts. It was transmitted by the angel Gabriel to the prophet Mohammed. Besides, I have also mentioned once the surahs were recieved, great efforts were made to keep the words intact.

why do you hate freedom?

The difference is with the Muslims who say Mohammed got the Qurann from an angel and it seems both the Qurann and the Torah still remain closely linked. MY question, how come?

the messages were sent to many communites, namely, the descendants of the prophet abraham, the societies changed small or grand aspects of the messages sent to them, so that they were no longer the completely pure word of god.
The prophet mohammed was the last prophet. The Qur'ran sent to him is the completel unchanged message to the people of earth.

why do you hate freedom?
excuse me?

why do you hate freedom?

sit down in the corner and shut up. nobody wants to hear what you have to say, inbred redneck scum.

why do you hate freedom?

Why do we hate freedom? That question in itself is very tainted. The media does nothing but put these things in your head that, "Islam is bad", and "All Muslims are terrorists." This, obviously is not true. I can attest to this, so can all the Muslims who have posted here thus far. The only place that you might have heard that Muslims hate freedom is from the media. So, going back to what I was saying about the media, they're ignorant little ****s, and I hate them with a passion. Islam does not hate freedom, Islam is a very peacful religion. One might take it that Islam doesn't like freedom, but like I have been saying, Islam likes freedom. If we didn't like freedom, then we'd all be shackled up and be beatenm and we'd be enjoying it, because it would be for that name of Allah, but oviously not, so Islam is totally pro-freedom. Not in all cases though, but these cases are so minute, that it really doesn't affect the whole freedom thing.

P.S.: Sorry I haven't been able to post, I've had to study for a Bio test that's coming up soon, and me being a Senior and all..... heh.

Is it true that the Muhammed said "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him." ? And that this is widely accepted by muslims today ?

Wouldn't it be better to wait until Turkey has come closer to BEING a "transform"ed nation before it has an equal say in policy or admittance in the EU? Turkey, which makes it virtually impossible for people of other religions to not have violence inflicted upon them and have law enforcement which looks the other way, for non-Muslims who cannot reside in Turkey as near equals to the Muslim majority and a nation that still allows honor killings is FAR from transformed. History shows that aggressive cultures and peoples eat up the peace loving ones(Europe). Perhaps Turkey will be a little closer to transformed in 50 years but right now they certainly have a VERY long way to go.
I absolutely agree with your statement.

bump

Is it true that the Muhammed said "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him." ? And that this is widely accepted by muslims today ?
I know I don't agree with that... besides I also don't believe that god would allow anyone to change islam in the first place with any degree of sucess.

I know I don't agree with that... besides I also don't believe that god would allow anyone to change islam in the first place with any degree of sucess.


But Islam did change, not the Qurann itsself, but the people did change, like most people of most religions...

Do you condemn any or all actions taken by the Israelis in Gaza as retaliation on the rockets launched on the village of Shdarot ( where two children and a woman died on a holiday ) ???

Do you condemn any or all actions taken by the Israelis in Gaza as retaliation on the rockets launched on the village of Shdarot ( where two children and a woman died on a holiday ) ???
I condemn the Israel/Palestine wars period. The reasons are not religious, but political, yet the leaders of both nations use their religion to further their own goals. All war is ugly, and this war is no exception.

I love skittles, why do you ask?
The gelatin in them...is it bad because it comes from pigs?

(Or am I just wrong there?)

But Islam did change, not the Qurann itsself, but the people did change, like most people of most religions...
that is true, however the complete truth is still in the Qur'ran, and most muslims still follow that truth.

Wow, I had no idea that my first thread would get such a big reaction... I really was expecting like 2 or 3 dumb simple questions. Instead, I'm up to like, 200 posts, and I started a few debates... WOW!!!!! :eek:

how do i donate to organizations trying to free the palisanian people from israelie oppression

how do i donate to organizations trying to free the palisanian people from israelie oppression
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2162.shtml

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2162.shtml
looking for a little more hands on org.

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2162.shtml
School let out early TT?

School let out early TT?
What is this "TT" you speak of?

looking for a little more hands on org.
http://www.nad-plo.org/help4.php

There are others I could post, but this is America, land of the PATRIOT.

http://www.nad-plo.org/help4.php

There are others I could post, but this is America, land of the PATRIOT.
and the RACISTS apparently....

Israel is only opressing the Palestinians as they were getting multple hits a week, now only 1 or 2 a month.
So this strategy seems to help and that is why they are continuing.

The terorrists are trying to oppress the Israelians, so the Israelians tried to stop them, it didn't work ,so now they use extreme measures which seem to help.

The gelatin in them...is it bad because it comes from pigs?

(Or am I just wrong there?)
you know what, I never really thought about it before... a darn it, now I can't eat skittles until I'm sure there's no pig...

Arguments begin and then are never resolved…...Wherever will it end, but in violence….And on and on…
:headbang:

I don't want to bring any offense with the statement I am about to bring in. However I would like to point out at this point that (as most muslims believe) all the prophets foretold the coming of the prophet which would follow them. In the bible, the prophet Jesus has been claimed to say;

lo! God shall send you a comforter to continue my message
(That is, monotheistic worship of one god)

most christians have taken this to mean as some sort of protecting spirit, however in the ancient aramaic that the bible was taken from, the actual meaning of the words is

lo! God shall send you the admirable to continue my message

The arabic translation of 'Mohammed' is 'admirable'