NationStates Jolt Archive

Christians do not arest/kill non Christians ANY MORE. Muslims did it in the past and they are doing it now. Everyone remebers the crusades but forgets the Muslim conquest of medievil SPAIN. The diffrence is Christians have stopped, Muslims havnt.
Lol like book worms said the last 58 years ... out of 2k I am sure there has been dry spells longer then that before

Don’t you worry Christianity will get back to its "roots" and find someone else to persecute, just you wait and see

Edit: I don’t mean for it to sound that condescending … it is just history, and generally what happens when religion is around people

It is one of the downsides (nothing is for free … there is always a tradeoff)

Lol like book worms said the last 58 years ... out of 2k I am sure there has been dry spells longer then that before

Don’t you worry Christianity will get back to its "roots" and find someone else to persecute, just you wait and see

Edit: I don’t mean for it to sound that condescending … it is just history, and generally what happens when religion is around people

It is one of the downsides (nothing is for free … there is always a tradeoff)

Actually, "Dry spells" without war last longer. Its just wars get all the focus in history.

Actually, "Dry spells" without war last longer. Its just wars get all the focus in history.
Yup that’s why I said probably longer (not all forms of oppression or murder take place during wars) but I digress

Ever heard of the Crusades or Colonialism?

That's right, Christians do horrible things as well. The only difference between Christianity and Islam is that the Christians were able to conquer the world whereas the Muslims did not.

Ever heard of the Crusades or Colonialism?

That's right, Christians do horrible things as well. The only difference between Christianity and Islam is that the Christians were able to conquer the world whereas the Muslims did not.
Not for lack of trying.

Ever heard of the Crusades or Colonialism?

That's right, Christians do horrible things as well. The only difference between Christianity and Islam is that the Christians were able to conquer the world whereas the Muslims did not.

Stop pointing to the crusades. I have already explained they were territoral wars, not religous ones. And Colonialism wasn't a Chrisitan thing. That was a European thing and in the past. Muslim nations are still practising there intolarnece in their nations now. Educating Islam as the only truth and all other religons as false where as the UK and most European nations teaching comparitve religion, Islamic nations outlaw preaching of any non Islamic religon yet freedom of reliogn is enshrined in Europe and America.

Not for lack of trying.
Nope :p maybe Christianity has something built in that makes it better at fighting wars :p (or sponsoring successful ones)

Nope :p maybe Christianity has something built in that makes it better at fighting wars :p (or sponsoring successful ones)

Christanity doesnt have holy war enshrined into its holy book. Islam does (but I digress, talking about Islam not Islamic states)

Educating Islam as the only truth and all other religons as false where as the UK and most European nations teaching comparitve religion, Islamic nations outlaw preaching of any non Islamic religon yet freedom of reliogn is enshrined in Europe and America.
I know you wanted me to get off of it and I will try but again sounds like Christianity … us non religious folks are trying to hold the balance but there is always a fight to move it into our school systems … push out other scientific point out thought … instead of teaching people about sex abstinence


Yes depressingly similar trends between the two religions

At least Christians have weaned themselves from chopping people's heads off.

I know you wanted me to get off of it and I will try but again sounds like Christianity … us non religious folks are trying to hold the balance but there is always a fight to move it into our school systems … push out other scientific point out thought … instead of teaching people about sex abstinence


In America you cannot be arrested for publishing or publicising Islamic litriture. Whereas in Islamic states you can exepect arrest for spreading Christian views.

In America you cannot be arrested for publishing or publicising Islamic litriture. Whereas in Islamic states you can exepect arrest for spreading Christian views.
No not in america ... but christianity is not restricted to america (and you are right as far as I know no major oppression going on right now) but that may always change ... massive potential there

Islamic nations outlaw preaching of any non Islamic religon yet freedom of reliogn is enshrined in Europe and America.

You are terribly misinformed. Islam is not only a religion, it is a way of life. People who are from the Middle East praise God in everyday language, as my Muslim friend said, "even the Communists praise Allah when they say hello or goodbye."

I'd advise that you learn a little more about Islam before you try to degrade it. The fact that the second in command of Saddam's Army was a Christian, or that there is a large minority of Christian Palestianians is simple proof that Islam and other religions can and do live in harmony.

I'm putting you in my Book of Misinformed along with George W. Bush and the Christian radical right.

You are terribly misinformed. Islam is not only a religion, it is a way of life. People who are from the Middle East praise God in everyday language, as my Muslim friend said, "even the Communists praise Allah when they say hello or goodbye."

I'd advise that you learn a little more about Islam before you try to degrade it. The fact that the second in command of Saddam's Army was a Christian, or that there is a large minority of Christian Palestianians is simple proof that Islam and other religions can and do live in harmony.

I'm putting you in my Book of Misinformed along with George W. Bush and the Christian radical right.
To be fair in its true form Christianity is supposed to be a way of life too … as with most religions

To be fair in its true form Christianity is supposed to be a way of life too … as with most religions

Sadly, America is now the opposite of what a Christian Nation should be. I should know, I'm a Perfectionist (or a Christian Communist).

In America you cannot be arrested for publishing or publicising Islamic litriture. Whereas in Islamic states you can exepect arrest for spreading Christian views.
oh you can get arrested, it just depends WHICH views you publish...

Sadly, America is now the opposite of what a Christian Nation should be. I should know, I'm a Perfectionist (or a Christian Communist).
I wouldn’t say directly opposite … (not going to argue about how bad/good we are) but being directly opposite would be something like murdering everyone in this country and nuking the entire world while having gay sex and aborting babies all at the same time


Anything less then totally that (and more) wouldn’t be opposite lol

At least Christians have weaned themselves from chopping people's heads off.
nope, the radicals are still doing it, they just found guns work better than machetes for delivering "divine" retribution

nope, the radicals are still doing it, they just found guns work better than machetes for delivering "divine" retribution
Not quite the same as chopping head off … lol (bad but not the same) he/she didn’t say they were not still doing bad things

I think it's a hard argument to make that our soldiers, taken as a whole, are just as depraved as their insurgents, taken as a whole.

When was the last time the insurgents opened an investigation into the abuse of prisoners by their own? Is there a formal provision for the investigation, trial, and punishment of insurgents found to have abused prisoners?

Don't think so.

I haven't read all of this thread so if someone already stated this sorry.

Heres a news flash, in the middle east, they don't HAVE freedom of religion!!
Just because the Americas, and Europe has it doesn't mean they do!
Besides, what about Bush, trying to push his belief that homosexuality is wrong, which is basically a religious belief, on everyone in the U.S.?

Plus, how many times have Muslims been killed, discriminated against, for being Muslims?!!!! Many more times than christians have.

I haven't read all of this thread so if someone already stated this sorry.

Heres a news flash, in the middle east, they don't HAVE freedom of religion!!
Just because the Americas, and Europe has it doesn't mean they do!
Besides, what about Bush, trying to push his belief that homosexuality is wrong, which is basically a religious belief, on everyone in the U.S.?

Plus, how many times have Muslims been killed, discriminated against, for being Muslims?!!!! Many more times than christians have.
How do you figure that more muslims have been killed for their religion than christians. I don't buy that at all without some verifiable numbers to back it up.

You are terribly misinformed. Islam is not only a religion, it is a way of life. People who are from the Middle East praise God in everyday language, as my Muslim friend said, "even the Communists praise Allah when they say hello or goodbye."

I'd advise that you learn a little more about Islam before you try to degrade it. The fact that the second in command of Saddam's Army was a Christian, or that there is a large minority of Christian Palestianians is simple proof that Islam and other religions can and do live in harmony.

I'm putting you in my Book of Misinformed along with George W. Bush and the Christian radical right.
Actually Saddam was a secular leader. He didn't care about religion. He only used religious references to keep the people behind him. As for the christian palestinians, they are a shrinking minority. In fact, much of the middle east was once christian, muslim oppression cleared most of the christians out.

oh you can get arrested, it just depends WHICH views you publish...
You can ony get arrested in the US for publishing islamic literature if your interpretation of Islam includes inciting violent jihad and overthrowing the government.

How do you figure that more muslims have been killed for their religion than christians. I don't buy that at all without some verifiable numbers to back it up.
yeah you know cuz you have sources for everything you are saying

yeah you know cuz you have sources for everything you are saying
Does anecdotal statements count as evidence? (cause then he/she has plenty I am betting)

[/joke]

Plus, how many times have Muslims been killed, discriminated against, for being Muslims?!!!! Many more times than christians have.

I think it's a matter of a different kind of discrimination. When I walk into a restaurant with my Muslim brothers, I get strange looks and even had one man ask me why I was hanging out with these "niggers and camel jockeys".

Since my embracing of Islam, I have been called "enemy of the human race", asked when I was going to strap on a bomb and blow up some kids, and generally given some very harsh words. 95% positive reaction, of course, but those 5% negative are over the top negative.

Had I converted to Christianity, I'd simply be called "uneducated" or "blind".

The ignorant tend to be a lot more harsh against Muslims these days than against most other groups. Unfortunately, this is due to the actions of a very limited few. People just don't realize that it is a limited few.

If there is a group of, say, 100,000 people and 1 person does something bad, it doesn't mean the other 99,999 of those people are bad. Less than 0.5% of Muslims are radical terrorist murderers .... I wonder what the percentage of Christians there are who want to make sure that everyone not like them don't enjoy the same rights as them ...

Well, if there's ever another 9-11 here in the US, and it's far worse than the previous one, i.e., it involves some sort of WMD, I'm going to kill any Muslim I see after that.

I'm not sure that anyone will stop me. I've overheard police talking about doing just that.

Well, if there's ever another 9-11 here in the US, and it's far worse than the previous one, i.e., it involves some sort of WMD, I'm going to kill any Muslim I see after that.


That's just stupid. Why don't you join the military and go after the ones responsible instead of targeting everyone?

In the US, I doubt seriously that you'd know a Muslim on the street if you saw one.

I'm not sure that anyone will stop me. I've overheard police talking about doing just that.

I would stop you and I have military training.

Well, if there's ever another 9-11 here in the US, and it's far worse than the previous one, i.e., it involves some sort of WMD, I'm going to kill any Muslim I see after that.

I'm not sure that anyone will stop me. I've overheard police talking about doing just that.
now who was it that said christians gave up beheading a long time ago?

I'm not saying I'm a Christian. My daughter is, and I'm not.

I've killed far too many people in combat to hope that I'm going anywhere except Hades. So I don't think the Lord (anyone's Lord) will begrudge me a few more.

I'm not saying I'm a Christian. My daughter is, and I'm not.

I've killed far too many people in combat to hope that I'm going anywhere except Hades. So I don't think the Lord (anyone's Lord) will begrudge me a few more.
welcome to irrelevant to the point. population: you.

I've killed far too many people in combat to hope that I'm going anywhere except Hades. So I don't think the Lord (anyone's Lord) will begrudge me a few more.

The Lord, maybe ... maybe not ... I, however, am nobody's Lord and I would do everything in my political and physical power to ensure that if one innocent Muslim is harmed by your hands that you spend the rest of your life in prison. I'm sure you'll have fun. Bunches of people find Islam in prison and I'm sure they'd love to be in the same room with you. I can make sure they know why you're there.

I wouldn't be alone in that venture either.

I don't know Keru. From the mouths of more than one policeman, I've heard talk about lethal retribution if there's another 9-11. So I doubt if you'll be around.

I don't know Keru. From the mouths of more than one policeman, I've heard talk about lethal retribution if there's another 9-11. So I doubt if you'll be around.

I'm not too worried about chubby, doughnut eating badge polishers. I'm a Ranger.

So, Keruvalia depreciates his new religion by making us understand that he has contacts to many coreligionaries, who are actually serving sentences. Don't even bother replying that they are judiciary mistakes, or oppression of the system, I don't care.

Then, My gun not yours, he boasts how the day after the next 9/11 (g.d FORBID!) will be a giant muslim genocide.

I mean, come on, you two are now turning to thinly veiled threats and a pissing contest. I distrust islam vehemently and history teaches my people that christians have to be trusted from afar, but if you people have to talk the talk, you have to get off the internet now, and walk the walk.

Let's see how manly you'd both look, face to face and throwing punches, instead of sharing a drink. I think the anonymity of the 'net really boosts your confidence. Both.

Last time I was in Iraq, I wasn't very anonymous. And I'm still here, and there are those on the other side who are no longer here.

So, Keruvalia depreciates his new religion by making us understand that he has contacts to many coreligionaries, who are actually serving sentences. Don't even bother replying that they are judiciary mistakes, or oppression of the system, I don't care.


There are far more Christians in prison. So I happen to visit my Muslim brothers who are in jail. If you had a brother in jail, would you not visit them?

Last time I was in Iraq, I wasn't very anonymous. And I'm still here

Neither was I ... and so am I.

The people the article discuss's make me uneasy. But no more than any evengelical christian does. Both consider me evil, heritic, whatever. I'm atheist. Let whom worship whatever they want is what I say. I heard some time ago, that in maybe a hundred years, Europe will be predominatly muslim, but what bugs me, is will the indigounous cultures cease to exist? It only takes one nut to screw things up and become like another Taliban and whipe out all the non muslim culture from their land
If the current trend holds moderate Muslims will be ineffevtual and the more extreme elements will call the political shots. It would be interesting to see the expected age demographic.

We have only the world's best interests at heart and are almost entirely moderate in our outlook. You should trust our better judgement. We are very happy to allow you total freedom in accordance with the principles outline in Sharia and by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

Please stop being racist against us at once, you devilish white infidels.

The Kaliph :sniper:
Cute.

Kindly read the entire thread.

Then go to "google". Look up the French wars of religion, "bloody Mary", German wars of religion, the crusades, and the Spanish inquisition, for starters.

Then return with an informed opinion.
How about we deal with current reality and not the history of the ages?

How about we deal with current reality and not the history of the ages?
Because history has a tendancy to repeat itself

I know you wanted me to get off of it and I will try but again sounds like Christianity … us non religious folks are trying to hold the balance but there is always a fight to move it into our school systems … push out other scientific point out thought … instead of teaching people about sex abstinence


Yes depressingly similar trends between the two religions
Religion is the opiate of the masses.

Ole' Karl might have been a bit off on the economics but he was a decent student of human nature.

Actually, Karl identified a problem to which no one, including himself, has come up with a workable solution.

all you peaple are fucking morons... exept to people who agree with me on this... keep for religion to yourself.. believe what you want but don't go preaching to others. as for the problems in the middle east. its not the islamic religion... its the muslim people and not all of them just the crazy ones

I think it's a matter of a different kind of discrimination. When I walk into a restaurant with my Muslim brothers, I get strange looks and even had one man ask me why I was hanging out with these "niggers and camel jockeys".

Since my embracing of Islam, I have been called "enemy of the human race", asked when I was going to strap on a bomb and blow up some kids, and generally given some very harsh words. 95% positive reaction, of course, but those 5% negative are over the top negative.

Had I converted to Christianity, I'd simply be called "uneducated" or "blind".

The ignorant tend to be a lot more harsh against Muslims these days than against most other groups. Unfortunately, this is due to the actions of a very limited few. People just don't realize that it is a limited few.

If there is a group of, say, 100,000 people and 1 person does something bad, it doesn't mean the other 99,999 of those people are bad. Less than 0.5% of Muslims are radical terrorist murderers .... I wonder what the percentage of Christians there are who want to make sure that everyone not like them don't enjoy the same rights as them ...

I have no doubt that lower individuals hold all Muslims responsible for 9-11 and other acts of the radicals. I have no problem with Muslims per se, (I am a New Yorker and have a broad exposure to world cultures.) But when a culture has the stated intention of overwhelming and putting an end to another culture then it's going to be met with strong resistance. Not unlike the resistance the Bush administaration will continue to meet in it's efforts to transform Afghanistan and Iraq.

This has been discussed here before but I'll reiterate:The public relations problem Islam has is that the moderates do not appear to have any significant presence in the internal political dialogue. It may well be that they are a silent majority and decry the abuse Islam suffers at the hands of the fringe elements. But that is not apparent. It is unrealistic to expect a reduction in the doubt and anger that fuels the discrimination unless the PR aspect is also effectively dealt with.

This has been discussed here before but I'll reiterate:The public relations problem Islam has is that the moderates do not appear to have any significant presence in the internal political dialogue.

Yes ... and therein lies a lot of the problem. If a prominent Muslim speaks out against, say, Al Qaeda, then that prominent Muslim becomes an even bigger target for Muslim extremists. Even Bin Laden himself said that a non-Muslim speaking against Muslims is excusable because, in his words, "dogs don't know any better". However, if a Muslim were to stand up and speak out you'll start seeing radical Muslims blowing up Mosques.

It's a delicate issue and is being dealt with internally as much as possible. We just don't make such things public affairs because that which happens in a family stays in the family. To make it openly public, however, would be spitting in the face of brothers who may have been duped into their beliefs. We have to separate the wheat from the chaff first.

Like I've always said ... find those responsible and bring them to justice. Don't alienate 1/3rd of the world's population by the actions of less than 20 men.

It's a delicate issue and is being dealt with internally as much as possible. We just don't make such things public affairs because that which happens in a family stays in the family. To make it openly public, however, would be spitting in the face of brothers who may have been duped into their beliefs. We have to separate the wheat from the chaff first.

Like I've always said ... find those responsible and bring them to justice. Don't alienate 1/3rd of the world's population by the actions of less than 20 men.

Look, the christians have used the same excuse, and it didn't work. Ask any whining asshat about the crusades, and he'll answer "OMG, ALL XTIANS SUCK!!!! NEVERMIND IT TOOK PLACE 800 YEARS AGO!!!!1111ONE"

Now, tell me which "less than 20 men" operate Al-Jazeerza, Al-Manar, in which countries "Mein Kampf" and "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" sell the most.

Because hot DAMN, if these guys managed to bomb the WTC, survive, and operate the rest of this, I'm joining islam right now and asking for my "How to kick infidel ass and get 74 virgins" Manual!

Oh, maybe you think the western world has a bone to pick with *only* one act of war? How cute.

/Another specious argument?

Because hot DAMN, if these guys managed to bomb the WTC, survive, and operate the rest of this, I'm joining islam right now and asking for my "How to kick infidel ass and get 74 virgins" Manual!


The poor schmucks who were duped into believing in the Paradise full of virgins routine (which has no basis in Islam) didn't survive. The 3 men who organized and paid for it are still very much alive and still causing problems (yesterday's attack on the embassy in Saudi comes to mind).

Your problem is you want to go after the ones who shrug and say, "It's not my problem" when it comes to things like 9/11. You can't be bothered to actually go after the men who are truly responsible. Even your "fearless leader" has said, "Osama who?".

Nope ... you'd rather pick on average Muslims who have never done anything in their lives to harm anyone. It's easier ... but, then, I imagine you're just another wussy American who can't even be bothered to get up to change the channel when he can't find the remote.

Go eat some more pork rinds and watch Fox News and leave politics to the educated.

undefinedIt is not Christianity that is sub judice for vileness, it is Islam.
It is not Judaism that is sub judice for vileness, it is Islam.
It is not Hinduism that is sub judice for vileness, it is Islam.
It is not Buddhism that is sub judice for vileness, it is Islam.
It is not Religion that is sub judice for vileness, it is Islam.

It looks like you have never met anyone that is a Muslim
If you did you would have understood that it is wrong to judge someone by theyr religion
In fact my great great great friend is Muslim
And we have some really interesting debates about this issues
Indeed not all Muslims are radical, small minded and violent
But yopu might never know that since you live in an unjustified fear of them
Islam is not in any way sub judice for vileness
Get informed before you talk
read the Coran
you will find very interesting that it does not at all
want's the Muslims to subject the world to them
well
just read it anyways

my country rulez !!!!!!!!! :)

Just to refocus the discussion, we are not talking about Muslims and Islam. We are talking about Islamic governments and nations and how they are opressive.

Your problem is you want to go after the ones who shrug and say, "It's not my problem" when it comes to things like 9/11. You can't be bothered to actually go after the men who are truly responsible. Even your "fearless leader" has said, "Osama who?".

Nope ... you'd rather pick on average Muslims who have never done anything in their lives to harm anyone. It's easier ... but, then, I imagine you're just another wussy American who can't even be bothered to get up to change the channel when he can't find the remote.

Go eat some more pork rinds and watch Fox News and leave politics to the educated.

Looks like I've struck comedy gold with you! Since you have a habit of fantasizing about my life, I'll set the record straight : I am a jew, I live in France, and I'm actually grateful for the US to even EXIST. But hey, let's resort to base attacks and name calling when we don't have arguments, it's so much fun! The Taqquya also gives you the right to lie, so keep up the good work!

Now, If there's something you should understand, is that most harmless muslims I have no beef with. But I have yet to find ONE of them that doesn't believe the lies any large-broadcast panarabic TV channel airs 24/7.

YOU criticize the Fox news channel (which I don't care about since it doesn't exist in france!), now let's see YOU criticize THIS (http://www.pmw.org.il/tv.html) : I'll directly paste an excerpt here if your "remote control" cannot be found anywhere...

Interviewer: You described shahada [martyrdom] as something beautiful.
Do you think it is beautiful?
Child #1: Shahada is a very beautiful thing. Everyone yearns for Shahada. What could be better than going to paradise?
Moderator : What is better, peace and full rights for the Palestinian people or shahada?
Child #1: Shahada. I will achieve my rights after becoming a shahid [martyr]. We won’t stay children forever.
Moderator: Ok, Yussra, would you agree with that?
Child #2: Of course, Shahada is a good(sweet) thing. We don’t want this world, we want the Afterlife. We benefit not from this life but from the Afterlife. All Palestinians, not like other youth, are hot tempered, they choose Shahada, since they are Palestinian.
Moderator: Do you actually love death?
Child #2: Death is not Shahada.
Interviewer: No, I mean the absence after death, the physical absence, do you love death?
Child #2: No child loves death. The children of Palestine adopted the concept that this is Shahada. They believe that Shahada is very good. Every Palestinian child, say someone aged 12, says: O lord, I would like to become a Shahid.

How about this, if you want more? (http://memri.org/video/index.html) I find the sitcoms the most enlightening! They're the ones in which my folk cooks matzoh and cookies with GOYIM BLOOD.

This kind of broadcast is the #1 reason antisemitic acts have become the most reported form of hate crimes for the past two years, here in france. Many PC-thinkers still shudder at the thought, but more and more, the perpetrators of antisemitic acts are arabs, and for the most part, devout muslims.

Why, when there is a demonstration in the streets for the "palestinian" people, do they have to shout "allahu akbar"? Do they think that we sephardic jews don't know what "ittba'h al yahood" means in arabic? Why are hamas slogans like "from the river to the sea, balastin will be set free" chanted at such demonstrations?

But wait. FOX-NEWS EATS BABIES! And civilization has to atone for crimes committed about 800 years before this entire generation was born! It's the victim's fault! Of course!

I am sick and tired of the same, endless "religion of peace, most of us are harmless" tirade. I don't believe it when the vatican apologizes for its "leniency towards nazism" 50 years after the shoah, and I don't believe it now with islam. And forget that "family business" crap, too. When the towers fell, it became the whole western world's business.

Stop being a fraud.

/actually, I find pork rinds pretty tasty, but they, like onion rings or froot loops, aren't sold in france
//doesn't even watch TV...
///I'll take the confusion about my nationality as a compliment, thanks.
////As I said... throw the specious arguments at me, I'm batting away!

Just to refocus the discussion, we are not talking about Muslims and Islam. We are talking about Islamic governments and nations and how they are opressive.

No we arn't, we're talking about how ALL religious governments and nations are opressive.

Get it right.

Face it, every religion and belief is going to have people who insist on ramming their "Truth" down people's throats sooner or later. Said people will do whatever they believe is necessary to get themselves into a position where they can do this to the largest number of people possible. Once they do, they can set things up to create more people just like them.

It doesn't matter whether such people are christian, muslim, psycho-american uberpatriot or vegetarians. Every Cause has it's "True Believers", who consider anyone who doesn't see the glory and rightness in their way to be Evil Incarnate.

It's a short step from there to actively targeting the Evil Ones to keep them from corrupting your nice, pure people. Or to declaring anyone who challanges your powerbase as being Evil, because, after all, if you're not in charge, how can you make sure things keep going they way they should?

----

Personally, I chalk up fanatacism as a form of contagious mental illness.

Personally, I chalk up fanatacism as a form of contagious mental illness.

No, no, no. It's fun. Why else would so many Germans go along with the Holocaust? Why would so many Rwandans run out and slaughter their neighbors with knives? And why would so many Arabs become suicide bombers? Why would I join the Army?

Because it's fun!

No, no, no. It's fun. Why else would so many Germans go along with the Holocaust?

There was a study done on this. A psychologist was convinced that all of the Nazis must have just been evil people. After all, who would go along with such atrocities?

He designed an experiment in which the "test subject" believed they were there to help in a shock therapy study. Their job was to turn the dial to administer the shocks when the doctor told them too. In the chair supposedly receiving the shocks was an actor. The doctor would tell the subject to turn the dial up gradually. When the actor started acting like he was in pain, the doctor told the subject to ignore it and keep turning it up. The actor would then plead, claiming that he had a history of heart problems and chest pains. *Every single test subject* continued to do as the doctor ordered, turning the dial well into the red "danger" zone.

Basically, human beings naturally submit to anyone they see as being an authority figure.

Stop pointing to the crusades. I have already explained they were territoral wars, not religous ones. And Colonialism wasn't a Chrisitan thing. That was a European thing and in the past. Muslim nations are still practising there intolarnece in their nations now. Educating Islam as the only truth and all other religons as false where as the UK and most European nations teaching comparitve religion, Islamic nations outlaw preaching of any non Islamic religon yet freedom of reliogn is enshrined in Europe and America.
I pointed towards WW2, which was aided by most churches, one exception being the Mormon church and Maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses? Dunno, anyway most christian sects in the area cooperated willingly with Hitler.

welcome to irrelevant to the point. population: you.
Actually that sort of was the crux of your statement.

I'm not too worried about chubby, doughnut eating badge polishers. I'm a Ranger.
Ah, but how many more of them are there than you. And even if you are a Ranger you ain't a match for a whole SWAT team.

Actually that sort of was the crux of your statement.
dunno what you mean cuz i hadve a headache but since you revived the post ima make a point

he said if a wmd goes off by some radical muslim, he iwll kill all muslims he finds.

wow i wonder whats fueling all teh anti american hatred in teh middle east that normal people are attacking us

could it be we are bombing their homes and killing their family and friends?

nah, they just hate our freedom :rolleyes:

Yes ... and therein lies a lot of the problem. If a prominent Muslim speaks out against, say, Al Qaeda, then that prominent Muslim becomes an even bigger target for Muslim extremists. Even Bin Laden himself said that a non-Muslim speaking against Muslims is excusable because, in his words, "dogs don't know any better". However, if a Muslim were to stand up and speak out you'll start seeing radical Muslims blowing up Mosques.

It's a delicate issue and is being dealt with internally as much as possible. We just don't make such things public affairs because that which happens in a family stays in the family. To make it openly public, however, would be spitting in the face of brothers who may have been duped into their beliefs. We have to separate the wheat from the chaff first.

Like I've always said ... find those responsible and bring them to justice. Don't alienate 1/3rd of the world's population by the actions of less than 20 men.
It ain't just 9/11 we're worried about here.

dunno what you mean cuz i hadve a headache but since you revived the post ima make a point

he said if a wmd goes off by some radical muslim, he iwll kill all muslims he finds.

wow i wonder whats fueling all teh anti american hatred in teh middle east that normal people are attacking us

could it be we are bombing their homes and killing their family and friends?

nah, they just hate our freedom :rolleyes:
If that was truly the case there would be several orders of magnitude higher amounts of insurgents. And last time I checked we haven't bombed Iran lately.


Or Jordan, or Syria, or Saudi Arabia, or Egypt. In fact, the last two get massive aid from us. Your argument holds as much water as my pasta strainer.

They're the ones in which my folk cooks matzoh and cookies with GOYIM BLOOD.
Haven't your people learned yet that blood is horrible in cookies? Now, chilled and spiked with vodka is a different matter. :D

If that was truly the case there would be several orders of magnitude higher amounts of insurgents. And last time I checked we haven't bombed Iran lately.


Or Jordan, or Syria, or Saudi Arabia, or Egypt. In fact, the last two get massive aid from us. Your argument holds as much water as my pasta strainer.
EXCEPT muslims are far more interwoven by their religion than any other. and hell how do you know those people ARNT family or friends? i got friends in canada and family far enough away to be in canada and my grandmothers side of the family is italian so i mgiht be distantly related to some poeple in italy. your argument is blind

Because history has a tendancy to repeat itself
That is often said. The problem seems to be finding out which part is repeating when.

We are all pundits in retrospect.

Actually, Karl identified a problem to which no one, including himself, has come up with a workable solution.
Which problem are you refering to? The classless society or the religion issue?

Yes ... and therein lies a lot of the problem. If a prominent Muslim speaks out against, say, Al Qaeda, then that prominent Muslim becomes an even bigger target for Muslim extremists. Even Bin Laden himself said that a non-Muslim speaking against Muslims is excusable because, in his words, "dogs don't know any better". However, if a Muslim were to stand up and speak out you'll start seeing radical Muslims blowing up Mosques.

It's a delicate issue and is being dealt with internally as much as possible. We just don't make such things public affairs because that which happens in a family stays in the family. To make it openly public, however, would be spitting in the face of brothers who may have been duped into their beliefs. We have to separate the wheat from the chaff first.

Like I've always said ... find those responsible and bring them to justice. Don't alienate 1/3rd of the world's population by the actions of less than 20 men.

A ghordian knot to be sure. But there are other means to display goodwill and outreach to other cultures than disparaging a brother.

I pointed towards WW2, which was aided by most churches, one exception being the Mormon church and Maybe the Jehovah's Witnesses? Dunno, anyway most christian sects in the area cooperated willingly with Hitler.
That is making a point where none exists. What was the predominant religion of the allied forces?

I think it's a hard argument to make that our soldiers, taken as a whole, are just as depraved as their insurgents, taken as a whole.

When was the last time the insurgents opened an investigation into the abuse of prisoners by their own? Is there a formal provision for the investigation, trial, and punishment of insurgents found to have abused prisoners?

Don't think so.

Nope. They will cut off the heads of innocent civilians while hollering Allah Akbar and be praised by the religious leaders. In the mean time, American soldiers who put panties on the heads of prisoners are going to jail. What those soldiers did was wrong and we will punish them. However, what the insurgents did was commanded by Allah. They are commanded to kill the unbelievers and infidels. Go figure. :headbang:

Nope. They will cut off the heads of innocent civilians while hollering Allah Akbar and be praised by the religious leaders. In the mean time, American soldiers who put panties on the heads of prisoners are going to jail. What those soldiers did was wrong and we will punish them. However, what the insurgents did was commanded by Allah. They are commanded to kill the unbelievers and infidels. Go figure. :headbang:Go figure this--your state, your city is invaded and occupied by a foreign army, and you have very limited means with which to retaliate. To what ends do you go to drive the invaders out? Is there any level to which you wouldn't stoop? The Iraqis who are fighting us are largely of that type--they are insurgents trying to drive an invading force out of their land. What do you expect them to do? Roll over and take it? How stupid are you?

The ignorant tend to be a lot more harsh against Muslims these days than against most other groups. Unfortunately, this is due to the actions of a very limited few. People just don't realize that it is a limited few.

If there is a group of, say, 100,000 people and 1 person does something bad, it doesn't mean the other 99,999 of those people are bad. Less than 0.5% of Muslims are radical terrorist murderers .... I wonder what the percentage of Christians there are who want to make sure that everyone not like them don't enjoy the same rights as them ...

You are absolutely right. But look at it this way, if little green men had been responsible for 9-11, if little green men were blowing people up with car bombs, if little green men were suicide bombers, would people react any differently to little green men?

Go figure this--your state, your city is invaded and occupied by a foreign army, and you have very limited means with which to retaliate. To what ends do you go to drive the invaders out? Is there any level to which you wouldn't stoop? The Iraqis who are fighting us are largely of that type--they are insurgents trying to drive an invading force out of their land. What do you expect them to do? Roll over and take it? How stupid are you?

I wouldn't be shooting old women in the head on TV. Old women who had spent the majority of their lives helping my children live better lives.

I wouldn't be cutting the throats of civilians whose only crime was being from another country.

I wouldn't be burning wounded men alive, chopping up their bodies, hanging the parts from a bridge, and then dancing around the carnage.

I might be killing the enemy, but it doesn't require the extra showmanship they seem to be displaying.

I wouldn't be shooting old women in the head on TV. Old women who had spent the majority of their lives helping my children live better lives.

I wouldn't be cutting the throats of civilians whose only crime was being from another country.

I wouldn't be burning wounded men alive, chopping up their bodies, hanging the parts from a bridge, and then dancing around the carnage.

I might be killing the enemy, but it doesn't require the extra showmanship they seem to be displaying.

I hope you realize, of course, that you can't truely confidently say that. You haven't ever had to live like they do; never had to listen to the daily reports of people dying all around you, people who have walked the same streets you have, and died in those streets.

I certainly have had people die around me.

I certainly have had people die around me.

I'm sure you have, but not in the same exact way as in Iraq.

Islam was forced on Persia by the sword, and is still enforced today, and would have reached Europe if not stopped at Tours, France.

Read up on your history, Arabs attacked Persia after it was weak from half a millenium of war with Byzantine, and FORCED the Zorastrian people to denounce their religion and accepting Islam.

Islam was forced on Persia by the sword, and is still enforced today, and would have reached Europe if not stopped at Tours, France.

Read up on your history, Arabs attacked Persia after it was weak from half a millenium of war with Byzantine, and FORCED the Zorastrian people to denounce their religion and accepting Islam.
guess who was in control of byzantine..

I'm sure you have, but not in the same exact way as in Iraq.

Oh, but it was in Iraq.

Last time I was in Iraq, I wasn't very anonymous. And I'm still here, and there are those on the other side who are no longer here.

Real heros don't brag about it. They just do their job. I know, I was in the military for 26 years. I can understand the attitude, but you have taken it a bit to far. Retired E-8

Let's see:
Egypt: Allows Religious Freedom
Israel: Allows Religious Freedom
Jordan: Allows Religious Freedom
Saudi Arabia: Allows Religious Freedom
Lebanon: Allows Religious Freedom
Syria: Not sure
Oman: Not sure
Yemen: Not sure
Iraq: Allows Religious Freedom
Iran: Allows Religious Freedom
UAE: Allows Religious Freedom
Qatar: Allows Religious Freedom
Kuwait: Allows Religious Freedom
Bahrain: Allows Religious Freedom

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.

[QUOTE=Keruvalia]The poor schmucks who were duped into believing in the paradise full of virgins routine (which has no basis in Islam) didn't survive. /QUOTE]

You don't beleive in the Hadiths?

Looks like I've struck comedy gold with you! Since you have a habit of fantasizing about my life, I'll set the record straight : I am a jew, I live in France, and I'm actually grateful for the US to even EXIST. But hey, let's resort to base attacks and name calling when we don't have arguments, it's so much fun! The Taqquya also gives you the right to lie, so keep up the good work!

Very well said.

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.1

Obviously you have never been in, nor do you know anything about Saudi Arabia.

1

Obviously you have never been in, nor do you know anything about Saudi Arabia.

I imagine you travel there regularly, then?

I wouldn't be shooting old women in the head on TV. Old women who had spent the majority of their lives helping my children live better lives.

I wouldn't be cutting the throats of civilians whose only crime was being from another country.

I wouldn't be burning wounded men alive, chopping up their bodies, hanging the parts from a bridge, and then dancing around the carnage.

I might be killing the enemy, but it doesn't require the extra showmanship they seem to be displaying.I'm not condoning the actions, but let's be realistic--if you're desperate enough, who knows what you'll be willing to do?

I imagine you travel there regularly, then?

Yes, in fact I did.

Yes, in fact I did.

And you seem to have made it out alive. How fortunate for you.

Let's see:
Egypt: Allows Religious Freedom
Israel: Allows Religious Freedom
Jordan: Allows Religious Freedom
Saudi Arabia: Allows Religious Freedom
Lebanon: Allows Religious Freedom
Syria: Not sure
Oman: Not sure
Yemen: Not sure
Iraq: Allows Religious Freedom
Iran: Allows Religious Freedom
UAE: Allows Religious Freedom
Qatar: Allows Religious Freedom
Kuwait: Allows Religious Freedom
Bahrain: Allows Religious Freedom

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.


Last time I checked, for my religious beliefs I could be, and probably would be picked up by the police and imprisoned, if not shot in at least 5 of those countries, not including Iraq which I could get shot in for completely different reasons.
Also, Israel is a Jewish state, not Muslim, so I don't know why they're listed here. And Jordan happens to be one of the better countries from that area, they actually have and advocate peace with all their neighbors. Last time I checked they were they only muslim country bordering Israel that had a peace treaty with Israel.

guess who was in control of byzantine..


Eastern Orthodox Christians

which brings up an interesting point, the muslims took Jerusalem not from the Christians but, shock, surprise, from the Persians, who took it from the Byzantine Empire.

Eastern Orthodox Christians

which brings up an interesting point, the muslims took Jerusalem not from the Christians but, shock, surprise, from the Persians, who took it from the Byzantine Empire.

Seriously, why would you even WANT to take the damn place back then? You KNEW someone was just gonna try and take it from you a bajillion times over again soon.

Let's see:
Egypt: Allows Religious Freedom
Israel: Allows Religious Freedom
Jordan: Allows Religious Freedom
Saudi Arabia: Allows Religious Freedom
Lebanon: Allows Religious Freedom
Syria: Not sure
Oman: Not sure
Yemen: Not sure
Iraq: Allows Religious Freedom
Iran: Allows Religious Freedom
UAE: Allows Religious Freedom
Qatar: Allows Religious Freedom
Kuwait: Allows Religious Freedom
Bahrain: Allows Religious Freedom

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.

http://answering-islam.org.uk/NonMuslims/rights.htm

This explains why I have a problem with Islamic states. Here is an extract

Zimmis and Religious Practices
Muslims believe that the Zimmis are Mushrikun (polytheists) for they see the belief in the Trinity as belief in three gods. Islam is the only true religion, they claim. Therefore, to protect Muslims from corruption, especially against the unforgivable sin of shirk (polytheism), its practice is forbidden among Muslims, because it is considered the greatest abomination. When Christians practice it publicly, it becomes an enticement and exhortation to apostasy. It is significant here to notice that according to Muraghi, Zimmis and infidels are polytheists and therefore, must have the same treatment.

According to Muslim jurists, the following legal ordinances must be enforced on Zimmis (Christians and Jews alike) who reside among Muslims:

1)
Zimmis are not allowed to build new churches, temples, or synagogues. They are allowed to renovate old churches or houses of worship provided they do not allow to add any new construction. "Old churches" are those which existed prior to Islamic conquests and are included in a peace accord by Muslims. Construction of any church, temple, or synagogue in the Arab Peninsula (Saudi Arabia) is prohibited. It is the land of the Prophet and only Islam should prevail there. Yet, Muslims, if they wish, are permitted to demolish all non-Muslim houses of worship in any land they conquer.

2)
Zimmis are not allowed to pray or read their sacred books out loud at home or in churches, lest Muslims hear their prayers.

3)
Zimmis are not allowed to print their religious books or sell them in public places and markets. They are allowed to publish and sell them among their own people, in their churches and temples.

4)
Zimmis are not allowed to install the cross on their houses or churches since it is a symbol of infidelity.

5)
Zimmis are not permitted to broadcast or display their ceremonial religious rituals on radio or television or to use the media or to publish any picture of their religious ceremonies in newspaper and magazines.

6)
Zimmis are not allowed to congregate in the streets during their religious festivals; rather, each must quietly make his way to his church or temple.

7)
Zimmis are not allowed to join the army unless there is indispensable need for them in which case they are not allowed to assume leadership positions but are considered mercenaries.

Extract ends

This is CURRENT Muslim law.

http://answering-islam.org.uk/NonMuslims/rights.htm

This explains why I have a problem with Islamic states. Here is an extract

Zimmis and Religious Practices
Muslims believe that the Zimmis are Mushrikun (polytheists) for they see the belief in the Trinity as belief in three gods. Islam is the only true religion, they claim. Therefore, to protect Muslims from corruption, especially against the unforgivable sin of shirk (polytheism), its practice is forbidden among Muslims, because it is considered the greatest abomination. When Christians practice it publicly, it becomes an enticement and exhortation to apostasy. It is significant here to notice that according to Muraghi, Zimmis and infidels are polytheists and therefore, must have the same treatment.

According to Muslim jurists, the following legal ordinances must be enforced on Zimmis (Christians and Jews alike) who reside among Muslims:

1)
Zimmis are not allowed to build new churches, temples, or synagogues. They are allowed to renovate old churches or houses of worship provided they do not allow to add any new construction. "Old churches" are those which existed prior to Islamic conquests and are included in a peace accord by Muslims. Construction of any church, temple, or synagogue in the Arab Peninsula (Saudi Arabia) is prohibited. It is the land of the Prophet and only Islam should prevail there. Yet, Muslims, if they wish, are permitted to demolish all non-Muslim houses of worship in any land they conquer.

2)
Zimmis are not allowed to pray or read their sacred books out loud at home or in churches, lest Muslims hear their prayers.

3)
Zimmis are not allowed to print their religious books or sell them in public places and markets. They are allowed to publish and sell them among their own people, in their churches and temples.

4)
Zimmis are not allowed to install the cross on their houses or churches since it is a symbol of infidelity.

5)
Zimmis are not permitted to broadcast or display their ceremonial religious rituals on radio or television or to use the media or to publish any picture of their religious ceremonies in newspaper and magazines.

6)
Zimmis are not allowed to congregate in the streets during their religious festivals; rather, each must quietly make his way to his church or temple.

7)
Zimmis are not allowed to join the army unless there is indispensable need for them in which case they are not allowed to assume leadership positions but are considered mercenaries.

Extract ends

This is CURRENT Muslim law.Don't you mean, "This is current law in an Islamic state"?

Eastern Orthodox Christians

which brings up an interesting point, the muslims took Jerusalem not from the Christians but, shock, surprise, from the Persians, who took it from the Byzantine Empire.

Wait, I thought the Romans took it from the persians. :confused:

I have very mixed feeling on islam.

my girlfriend is muslem, and wants me to convert.

now, im not the biggest god beleiver in the world, i personally am more of a 'leave and let live' kind of person. my statment on the whole religion thing is: 'you dont have to be religions to beleive in god, and you dont have to be a believer to be a good person'.

i have lived in several muslem countries, and visited many more, and have to say that the average mood of the populance is laid back, but start talking about religion, and if you dont think the same thing as them, you will get the crap beaten out of you.

from an early age, they are indoctrinated, and in places where the country is islamic, they are discriminated for. for example, islamic students are given afree education, and the native and chinese people have to pay their own way.

the stated aim of islam is to out breed the other religions, and so gain voting power, and then take over the country.

i have yet to see a muslem who would not fight for their religion. they may not even be a practicing muslem, but say one thing about it, and they will be at your throat.

there needs to be a much more open schooling system in the east which does not descriminate against people who are non islam.

i personally fear that people like myself will no longer esist in the future because islam will totaly take over and destroy everything else.

we live in a mostly civilised time, we stopped the crusades and hostile religious invasions of others many hundreds of years ago, yet they still continue being so closed minded, and damn... aragant... that it just makes me want to start up on a holy war of my own.

their arragance is what upsets me most :(

Eastern Orthodox Christians

which brings up an interesting point, the muslims took Jerusalem not from the Christians but, shock, surprise, from the Persians, who took it from the Byzantine Empire.
The Romans/Byzantines owned Palestine for hundreds of years and in the 7th centuries the Arabs took Palestine from the Byzantines, not the Persians.

Let's see:
Egypt: Allows Religious Freedom
Israel: Allows Religious Freedom
Jordan: Allows Religious Freedom
Saudi Arabia: Allows Religious Freedom
Lebanon: Allows Religious Freedom
Syria: Not sure
Oman: Not sure
Yemen: Not sure
Iraq: Allows Religious Freedom
Iran: Allows Religious Freedom
UAE: Allows Religious Freedom
Qatar: Allows Religious Freedom
Kuwait: Allows Religious Freedom
Bahrain: Allows Religious Freedom

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.


Not true. There have been Westerners arrested and jailed in nearly every one of those countries for possession of a Bible.

In Iran, if you're Jewish, and go outside of your synagogue with the Torah, you are subject to arrest.

The Romans/Byzantines owned Palestine for hundreds of years and in the 7th centuries the Arabs took Palestine from the Byzantines, not the Persians.

your right, I confused the sack of Jerusalem by the Persians with actual control. Interesting though that the code of conduct required of Muslim warriors required that no temples be burned down, no religious people killed, and that when an enemy stopped fighting, you were required to as well.

Now on the main subject of this thread, the British built the greatest empire in the world on the "it's for their own good" policy, the Americans had their brief period of empire on the same principle (both times involving horrible human rights violations by the oppressed as well as the oppressors). Guess what the basis for the draconian laws in these theocracies is? That's right. "It's for their own good." It's not even theocracy vs. secular, more like good idea, bad actions vs. oh, wait a minute, what did Bush end up falling back on?
"It's for their own good." Shit.

your right, I confused the sack of Jerusalem by the Persians with actual control. Interesting though that the code of conduct required of Muslim warriors required that no temples be burned down, no religious people killed, and that when an enemy stopped fighting, you were required to as well.


Yes, and it is a damn shame that Muslim leaders of the 21st century do not live up to the benevolence and nobility of Muslim leaders in medieval times.

I guess this is why when the Mongols merely wanted a trade treaty with Samarkand (and later with Baghdad), the Muslims slaughtered the ambassadors, took their possessions, and sent the heads back with nasty notes.

If I had been the Mongols, I would have done exactly what the Mongols ended up doing.

Stop being a fraud.


Your excerpt from Fox News talking about shahadah is amusing because shahadah is the declaration when you become Muslim and has nothing to do with death or martyrdom.

You've proven my point that Fox News has no clue what it's doing or talking about.

French ... American ... whatever ... ignorance knows no national boundries.

You don't beleive in the Hadiths?

Of course ... but the English translations that you will present to me will be shakey at best, but I will do my best to explain them if you do present them. There is no promise of 70+ virgins in paradise anywhere in Qur'an or the Hadith.

I have very mixed feeling on islam.

my girlfriend is muslem, and wants me to convert.


You girlfriend may want you to convert, but she should know that Islam is something that must be embraced of a person's own free will. She, nor anybody else, can force you to convert. If forced, the conversion would not be valid and you would not be a Muslim.

is laid back, but start talking about religion, and if you dont think the same thing as them, you will get the crap beaten out of you.

That is the way of some Muslims, but it is not the way of Islam.

the stated aim of islam is to out breed the other religions, and so gain voting power, and then take over the country.

That is absolutely not true.

i have yet to see a muslem who would not fight for their religion.

I've never met a Christian who would not fight for their religion. The difference is that Muslims are only allowed to fight in self-defense while Christians are permitted to be the aggressors.

Let's see:
Egypt: Allows Religious Freedom
Israel: Allows Religious Freedom
Jordan: Allows Religious Freedom
Saudi Arabia: Allows Religious Freedom
Lebanon: Allows Religious Freedom
Syria: Not sure
Oman: Not sure
Yemen: Not sure
Iraq: Allows Religious Freedom
Iran: Allows Religious Freedom
UAE: Allows Religious Freedom
Qatar: Allows Religious Freedom
Kuwait: Allows Religious Freedom
Bahrain: Allows Religious Freedom

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.
Saudi Arabia allows religious freedom? Don't think so. Why do US servicemen in Saudi have to hold their services in secret? Why is it an arrestable offense to hand someone a bible?
Iran? Give me a break. Look into how the Baha'is are oppresed there.

Don't you mean, "This is current law in an Islamic state"?

Its law that is derived from the Qu'ran and Hadiths and is put into practice in Islmaic states.

You girlfriend may want you to convert, but she should know that Islam is something that must be embraced of a person's own free will. She, nor anybody else, can force you to convert. If forced, the conversion would not be valid and you would not be a Muslim.

That is the way of some Muslims, but it is not the way of Islam.


We are not discussing Islam. We are discussing Islamic states

Because history has a tendancy to repeat itself
This is true, and probably means that both religions are gonna try and pull a lot of stupid shit very soon.

EXCEPT muslims are far more interwoven by their religion than any other. and hell how do you know those people ARNT family or friends? i got friends in canada and family far enough away to be in canada and my grandmothers side of the family is italian so i mgiht be distantly related to some poeple in italy. your argument is blind
Income dear sir. You probably make enough money to regularly travel and as such visit them with some regularity. The same is highly unlikely to be said of the terrorists pouring into Iraq from elsewhere. Especially since as had been noted before they tend to blow up innocent children.

Let's see:
Egypt: Allows Religious Freedom
Israel: Allows Religious Freedom
Jordan: Allows Religious Freedom
Saudi Arabia: Allows Religious Freedom
Lebanon: Allows Religious Freedom
Syria: Not sure
Oman: Not sure
Yemen: Not sure
Iraq: Allows Religious Freedom
Iran: Allows Religious Freedom
UAE: Allows Religious Freedom
Qatar: Allows Religious Freedom
Kuwait: Allows Religious Freedom
Bahrain: Allows Religious Freedom

Wow, what a nice list of Middle East Countries banning other religions than Muslim.
Oh look, now who's buying into government propaganda?

Considering that in Islam, you aren't allowed to force anyone - not even your wife or children - to convert to Islam, it would seem to me that religious freedom is something Muslims have already understood for a long time.

Yes, but you forgot to mention what happens to a non-Muslim in a Muslim country if they do talk to them about their religion in a manner of converting them. Death penalty. Immediately. There is no such thing as religious tolerance in ANY Muslim countries. They either tax, murder, or even rape you in the more hostile regions. It even happens today. Algeria, Azerbaijin, Bangladesh, Brunei, Chechnya, Comoro Islands, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigera, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudia Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen...just to name a FEW Muslim countries that are intolerant to any other belief than Islam.

It's a sad, sad world when this goes on and people say, "Oh, Islamic nations aren't intolerant." You can believe what you like, but it does happen and still is happening. Intolerance is what a lot of religion's basises are.

You say Christianity is intolerant, but that's not what it's about. Their creed is, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Not, "Kill thy neighbor if they don't agree." That's hogwash. Most Christians don't dislike a single person who disagrees with them. I've only met one Muslim (a girl) out of near 50 Muslims who was tolerant of other beliefs. That's pathetic. Don't even say it's a minority of the people, because that one Muslim said it was the majority of Islam that hated non-Muslims.

Believe as you wish, but please don't say all Christians are hate, because they are not. Just as not all Muslims are not. It just seems that there are far too little who are truthful of what is really going on.

The Muslim reign reminds me too much of the Holocaust.

I have very mixed feeling on islam. my girlfriend is muslem, and wants me to convert.:(

The reason why this girl wants you to convert is because she can not marry an infidel. However, if you were a Moslem, you could marry an infidel. I see nothing in your post that indicates you are confused about what you should do. What you did is list every reason why you should not convert. Put the shoe on the other foot. Ask your girlfriend if she will convert. :(

Of course ... but the English translations that you will present to me will be shakey at best, but I will do my best to explain them if you do present them. There is no promise of 70+ virgins in paradise anywhere in Qur'an or the Hadith.

OK! I give up. Now it is the translations that are wrong. I guess we should all learn how to read the Koran, the Hadiths, and history in ancient Arabic. That way there will be no doubt that women are not oppressed. After all, it is the man who can have more than one wife, and that is from the Hadith and not "ancient Arabic tradition." :(

A little test. According to the Koran, what is the penalty for a woman who commits adultery?

Stoning. and not the smoking kind.

I've never met a Christian who would not fight for their religion. The difference is that Muslims are only allowed to fight in self-defense while Christians are permitted to be the aggressors.

Obviously, you never read the New Testament. Christ never fought when they came to arrest and kill him. In fact he admonished one of his followers for cutting off the ear of one of those who came to arrest him.

Where is there anything in the Koran that is similar to “turn the other cheek?” Where in the Koran is the concept of “loving thy neighbor” even if he doesn’t believe in the same religion as you?

We are not discussing Islam. We are discussing Islamic states

This thread has strayed a long way from that, but all is related. :D

Obviously, you never read the New Testament. Christ never fought when they came to arrest and kill him. In fact he admonished one of his followers for cutting off the ear of one of those who came to arrest him.

Where is there anything in the Koran that is similar to “turn the other cheek?” Where in the Koran is the concept of “loving thy neighbor” even if he doesn’t believe in the same religion as you?

Amen.

Stoning. and not the smoking kind.

WRONG! Try again.

WRONG! Try again.
100 strikes of a whip.

WRONG! Try again.
Death.

Obviously, you never read the New Testament. Christ never fought when they came to arrest and kill him. In fact he admonished one of his followers for cutting off the ear of one of those who came to arrest him.

Where is there anything in the Koran that is similar to “turn the other cheek?” Where in the Koran is the concept of “loving thy neighbor” even if he doesn’t believe in the same religion as you?

Umm.. how about what you have to do before you can enter a jihad:

reason with your enemy
if he will not reason, move away from your enemy
if he pursues, then you may fight him.

the funny thing about that passage in the New Testament is that while Christ never fought, one of his disciples did. Funny how the actions of any religious leaders followers aren't exactly what he or she intended, no?

Where is there anything in the Koran that is similar to “turn the other cheek?” Where in the Koran is the concept of “loving thy neighbor” even if he doesn’t believe in the same religion as you?

Do *you* actually know what the true meaning of "turn the other cheek" is?

Just a hint - it isn't "let them keep hitting you."

Just a little random thing: but has anyone ever gone to a jewish rabbi and asked him to translate Exodus 21:18? The bit about "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live?"


Well...I have. Translated from the original text of the Torah, that same verse as stated in the King James bible is "Thou shalt not suffer a poisoner of wells to live among you."

....anyone notice that was one of the bible quotes used in witch hunts?
Just a question.

100 strikes of a whip.

Try locking her up in the house. So where does this idea of stoning come from? And even if it were whipping how is that not a very cruel punishment? In many Islamic nations, a woman who becomes pregnant out of wedlock, whether that is from rape or consensual sex can be murdered by her family. After all, she has brought disgrace upon the family and the family honor must be protected.

Why? Why, don't we see the Islamic religious leaders speaking out about such atrocities? Why don't we see Islamic religious leaders speaking out about the beheadings of innocent civilians in Iraq? Why don't we see Islamic religious leaders speaking out about the suicide bombings? Then we can ask the same questions about the Islamic leaders and politicians.

It seems the only ones who are speaking out about these things are the "American fascist lap dogs." What a sick attitude for a supposedly peaceful religion. If you are a Muslim, if you truly believe your religion is a peaceful one why in the name of God, or Allah, or whatever you want to call him are you NOT standing up for what is right and just? :headbang:

A little test. According to the Koran, what is the penalty for a woman who commits adultery?

The Shariah says Rajm (stoning). Same for a man.

The Qur'an says flogging, 100 lashes. 24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication flog each of them".

http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2004/october/izadi_161004.shtml

It's been posted before but thought it relevant.

...the funny thing about that passage in the New Testament is that while Christ never fought, one of his disciples did.

And was admonished by Christ for doing so!

Obviously, you never read the New Testament. Christ never fought when they came to arrest and kill him. In fact he admonished one of his followers for cutting off the ear of one of those who came to arrest him.

Where is there anything in the Koran that is similar to “turn the other cheek?” Where in the Koran is the concept of “loving thy neighbor” even if he doesn’t believe in the same religion as you?

Islam recognizes the divinity of Torah and the Gospel.

As for your question, Islam teaches: "Shall I tell you what acts are better than fasting, charity, and prayers? Making peace between enemies are such acts; For enmity and malice tear up the heavenly rewards by the roots."

Kinda like that whole "Blessed are the peacemakers" thing.

Oh ... and "Love thy Neighbor" isn't NT ... it's Torah.

Islam recognizes the divinity of Torah and the Gospel.

As for your question, Islam teaches: "Shall I tell you what acts are better than fasting, charity, and prayers? Making peace between enemies are such acts; For enmity and malice tear up the heavenly rewards by the roots."

Kinda like that whole "Blessed are the peacemakers" thing.

Oh ... and "Love thy Neighbor" isn't NT ... it's Torah.
Your response is mistaken in that the phrase is a common Christian synecdoche. Here is the full reference;

"Matthew 5:43
Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

Matthew 5:44
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Matthew 5:46
For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?"

Your comment is accurate in that it appears in Leviticus with a very limited scope.

Leviticus 19:18
Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.

This goes to the issue of the Christian belief that Jesus was the perfecting of The Law of Moses (Torah). Certainly anyone can see that the NT version is all encompassing while the Mosaic is quite specifically limited.

Christians do not arest/kill non Christians ANY MORE. Muslims did it in the past and they are doing it now. Everyone remebers the crusades but forgets the Muslim conquest of medievil SPAIN. The diffrence is Christians have stopped, Muslims havnt.

The recent "ethnic cleansing" in the Balkans was Christians killing Muslims.

As for the Muslim conquest of Spain, how about the reconquest by the Christians, followed shortly therafter by the Inquisition?

Christians and Muslims have both been guilty of atrocities.

Are US troops in Iraq not Christians killing Muslims?

Your excerpt from Fox News talking about shahadah is amusing because shahadah is the declaration when you become Muslim and has nothing to do with death or martyrdom.

You've proven my point that Fox News has no clue what it's doing or talking about.

French ... American ... whatever ... ignorance knows no national boundries.

I agree with you on your last sentence.
You didn't even look at the source of the text. Click the link or right-click on the link, and select "open in new window". It's not even related AT ALL TO FOX NEWS!

But hey, just as I said, taqquya allows you to lie as long as you defend "the cause"... :rolleyes: Who cares, you just end up looking like a moron who's cornered into spinning any truth thrown at him. "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, RELIGION OF PEACE", wow. Pretty sad...

Well, if there's ever another 9-11 here in the US, and it's far worse than the previous one, i.e., it involves some sort of WMD, I'm going to kill any Muslim I see after that.

I'm not sure that anyone will stop me. I've overheard police talking about doing just that.

You realise that this (if widespread) could be seen as a legitimate case for a Khital/Jihad (Holy War) against the USA?

Currently when Al Qaeda screams "Jihad" at the West, it is dismissed by (most) Muslims because the Muslims in these countries are not being directly executed for their faith. The West hasn't waged war upon the Muslims living within their borders (no more so than the rest of the population, at least, apart from the obvious fueling of the racial and religious prejudice fire).

The USA Vs. The entire Islamic World.

I agree with you on your last sentence.
You didn't even look at the source of the text. Click the link or right-click on the link, and select "open in new window". It's not even related AT ALL TO FOX NEWS!

But hey, just as I said, taqquya allows you to lie as long as you defend "the cause"... :rolleyes: Who cares, you just end up looking like a moron who's cornered into spinning any truth thrown at him. "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, RELIGION OF PEACE", wow. Pretty sad...

What proof do you have that the Shahada is in any way related to martyrdom? I believe the translation of the Shahada is as follows:

"I bear witness that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammad is His servant and messenger." (please correct, if wrong)

Who cares, you just end up looking like a moron who's cornered into spinning any truth thrown at him. "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, RELIGION OF WAR", wow. Pretty sad...

Islam recognizes the divinity of Torah and the Gospel.

As for your question, Islam teaches: "Shall I tell you what acts are better than fasting, charity, and prayers? Making peace between enemies are such acts; For enmity and malice tear up the heavenly rewards by the roots."

Kinda like that whole "Blessed are the peacemakers" thing.

Oh ... and "Love thy Neighbor" isn't NT ... it's Torah.

"Someone has said that Europeans in South Africa dread the advent of Islam - Islam, that civilised Spain; Islam, that took the torch of light to Morocco and preached to the world the Gospel of Brotherhood. The Europeans of South Africa dread the advent of Islam, as they claim equality with the white races. They may dread it. If brotherhood is a sin, if it is equality of the coloured races that they dread, then their dread is well-founded."

- Mahatma Ghandi.

You realise that this (if widespread) could be seen as a legitimate case for a Khital/Jihad (Holy War) against the USA?

Currently when Al Qaeda screams "Jihad" at the West, it is dismissed by (most) Muslims because the Muslims in these countries are not being directly executed for their faith. The West hasn't waged war upon the Muslims living within their borders (no more so than the rest of the population, at least, apart from the obvious fueling of the racial and religious prejudice fire).

The USA Vs. The entire Islamic World.

Hmm. Having been a very reasonable person put into a highly unreasonable situation (combat) and having done some really unreasonable things (killing), I'm trying to make the point that even people of intelligence (including many I've talked to in real life) will devolve and resort to killing.

And that at that point, anything that comes out of their mouth will be a "justification" for whatever they do.

In order to come to grips with what I've done, I now say that there's absolutely no reason for it, and I did it because it was enjoyable. There's no other rational explanation.

Maybe there's been too much peace for too long. No real World War to get everyone off. So now we're all going to do the Rwanda thing in the streets, and afterwards, we'll pontificate about how our "jihad" or "massacre" was justified.

I suggest also that before you talk about the justification for killing, that you try it first. You'll quickly find that you probably like it, and that the justification really wasn't necessary.

"The power of the subconscious is greater than that of the conscious. The only way to win is to deny it battle."

The recent "ethnic cleansing" in the Balkans was Christians killing Muslims.

As for the Muslim conquest of Spain, how about the reconquest by the Christians, followed shortly therafter by the Inquisition?

Christians and Muslims have both been guilty of atrocities.

Are US troops in Iraq not Christians killing Muslims?
And athiests and agnostics, and possibly a few muslims as well.

Sorry, if I have kill anyone it's not my revolution. I think it's interesting that you think you find killing enjoyable.

Having been a very reasonable person put into a highly unreasonable situation (combat) and having done some really unreasonable things (killing), I'm trying to make the point that even people of intelligence (including many I've talked to in real life) will devolve and resort to killing.


I wouldn't say you "devolved". I'm assuming you joined the army voluntarily?
As you say, you're an intelligent person. You knew what joining the armed forces entailed. So you possibly had little or no qualms about killing anyway.

Actually, I'm confused here. Are you saying that in certain situations you chose to kill even if it wasn't necessary?

Sorry, if I have kill anyone it's not my revolution. I think it's interesting that you think you find killing enjoyable.



I wouldn't say you "devolved". I'm assuming you joined the army voluntarily?
As you say, you're an intelligent person. You knew what joining the armed forces entailed. So you possibly had little or no qualms about killing anyway.

Actually, I'm confused here. Are you saying that in certain situations you chose to kill even if it wasn't necessary?

No, the idea is that many people like to kill. Not too many, or we would have never survived this long.

But, in order to assauge ourselves that we're ok, we make up justifications.

Jihad, patriotism, nationalism, Chomsky, just pick one.

Can you honestly say that most killings are "necessary"? You may be just like me if you believe that.

The only one I've seen here who won't budge for a justification is Dobbs.

I should have said "even if you didn't deem it necessary".

I should have said "even if you didn't deem it necessary".

Oh, no. Like most people, I needed a "justification".

My rule was this. You had to be shooting at me first. We're about 300 yards apart or more. I wait until you begin to change your magazine. Then I pop you in the head.

One might think, "gosh, the poor guy was defenseless at that point". But I gave him 30 rounds - 30 chances to hit me before I shot back. How many more should I give him?

Of course, the odds on him hitting me were infinitesimal at that distance with an AK. So maybe I was perfectly safe, and didn't need to shoot. But I wanted them to die heros, thinking that they were doing well.

Oh, no. Like most people, I needed a "justification".

My rule was this. You had to be shooting at me first. We're about 300 yards apart or more. I wait until you begin to change your magazine. Then I pop you in the head.


Pfffff. That's common sense, wait till he can't fire back :D

If you're in cover of course. You weren't jumping up and down on the spot yelling "Hey :D HEY HEY :D I'm right here, come on, shoot me :D"

...

Were you?

Pfffff. That's common sense, wait till he can't fire back :D

If you're in cover of course. You weren't jumping up and down on the spot yelling "Hey :D HEY HEY :D I'm right here, come on, shoot me :D"

...

Were you?

I was standing up on a few occasions, but no, I didn't wave at them.

Islam is the Anti-Christ, and should be treated as such.

What, runs around cloning itself until it clones the Christ, negating both, everything blows up and the world is a much better place?

What, runs around cloning itself until it clones the Christ, negating both, everything blows up and the world is a much better place?
Hmm, but who is Neo?

*so tempted to say Christianity...*

"Someone has said that Europeans in South Africa dread the advent of Islam - Islam, that civilised Spain; Islam, that took the torch of light to Morocco and preached to the world the Gospel of Brotherhood. The Europeans of South Africa dread the advent of Islam, as they claim equality with the white races. They may dread it. If brotherhood is a sin, if it is equality of the coloured races that they dread, then their dread is well-founded."

- Mahatma Ghandi.
What Ghandi has said is not what is being discussed. Were it a matter of peace & equality then the entire starting point and most of the subsequent comments would be moot. The discussion revolves around Islamic imperialism.

What proof do you have that the Shahada is in any way related to martyrdom? I believe the translation of the Shahada is as follows:

"I bear witness that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammad is His servant and messenger." (please correct, if wrong)

Who cares, you just end up looking like a moron who's cornered into spinning any truth thrown at him. "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU, RELIGION OF WAR", wow. Pretty sad...

Do you know what "Shahid" means? Do you know the current description it coins? By all means, NO.

You quote bold text about me pointing out that keruvalia didn't even bother to take a look at my sources, then you also do it? And try to counter my arguments by copy-pasting them?

Who the hell are you going to convince with this kind of drivel? All I'm sayin' is, READ THE FUCKING SOURCE. CLICK ON THE FUCKING LINK. If you're not even willing to verify if my sources are utter bullshit or something that might provide you food for thought, then you are unable to participate in a discussion.

Then, you can step back and let the grownups do the talking.
Sheesh...

What Ghandi has said is not what is being discussed. Were it a matter of peace & equality then the entire starting point and most of the subsequent comments would be moot. The discussion revolves around Islamic imperialism.

It was a reply to Keruvalia's comment about brotherhood rather than a reply to the the topic. All imperialism is a stain on the human race. I agree that in some states where the majority of the population are Muslims, the governments in power have oppressive and repressive policies. However, I would blame these governments. Some of them are theocracies, some of them are not.

Do you know what "Shahid" means?

It means "witness" and nothing more. I know what you think it means and I understand why you'd think so because of your already clouded and closed mind.

Keep trying, though.

Keru, back to the original topic (religious freedom)...

Why, if Saudi Arabia has religious freedom, was I not permitted to bring my Bible into the country when I went there both as a military person and as civilian (two occasions).

Why was my crucifix taken from me at their Customs desk?

Why was I grilled about my religion?

And this is way, way before 9-11, so you can't say it was tit-for-tat.

Keru, back to the original topic (religious freedom)...

Why, if Saudi Arabia has religious freedom, was I not permitted to bring my Bible into the country when I went there both as a military person and as civilian (two occasions).

Why was my crucifix taken from me at their Customs desk?

Why was I grilled about my religion?

And this is way, way before 9-11, so you can't say it was tit-for-tat.
I've come to the conclusion that Keruvalia is more than willing to twist the facts any way he sees fit to exonerate Islam and all muslims from any blame for anything.

Why, if Saudi Arabia has religious freedom, was I not permitted to bring my Bible into the country when I went there both as a military person and as civilian (two occasions).


For that very reason, actually.

The world has known for a good 1500 years now that wherever Christians go, they tend to make every possible effort to convert everyone else to their way. 1500 years, man. You can't argue with obvious history.

The conversions always happen through subjugation, fear mongering, deception, and - if all else fails - brute force. Certain countries, like Saudi Arabia, want to preserve its citizens religious freedom, hence, its customs are going to eye with suspicion any member of a religion that devotes much of its practice to the conversion of others (whether they like it or not).

Now, you may be saying to yourself that not having your Bible would not stop you from preaching to anyone within earshot (if you were the preaching type, I'm not saying you are, but work with me). The Muslims view the Qur'an differently than Christians view the Bible. Muslims believe Qur'an to be the final holy word of Allah and even when printed it becomes something spectacular and Muslims make sure their Qur'an is never at the same level as their feet and, when not in use, is covered by a cloth and no other book stacked on top of it; conversely, Christians see the Bible as a subjective pursuit and can often be seen making notes in margins and using highlighters on passages, etc etc. Cultural difference, I suppose, but that's why you had your Bible taken.

Your crucifix is something else. It depicts a human sacrifice, which is an abomination in Islam.

It means "witness" and nothing more. I know what you think it means and I understand why you'd think so because of your already clouded and closed mind.

Keep trying, though.

Why try, when one can succeed? You already tried to spin the literals for "slave" (ab'd) and "black" (ab'd) , and now for the word shahid. You refuse to translate it and then say that you think I know what it means. Spin, spin, spin! Dreidel, dreidel, dreidel...

In Arabic, a martyr is termed "shahid" (literally, "witness"). The concept of the shahid is discussed in the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad; the term recurs frequently in the Qur'an, but usually with its literal meaning of "witness".
source : wikipedia.org

Moderator: "They [Israelis] accuse the Palestinian mother of hating her sons and in encouraging them to die. This is what we hear from Israelis. Is this true?

Mother Um Al-Ajrami: "No, we do not encourage our sons to die. We encourage them to Shahada [martyrdom] for the homeland, for Allah."

[She then talks about a group of women, all mothers of Shahids, who go to other mothers of Shahids during the period of mourning]:
"We don't say to the mothers of the Shahids, 'We have come to comfort you’, but 'We have come to bless you on the wedding of your son, on the Shahada of your son. Congratulations to you on the Shahada . . . ' For us, the mourning is joyous. We give out drinks, we give out sweets. Praise to God -- the mourning is joyous. occasion" [PATV, Nov. 17, 2004]


Well then, if that special guy "witnessed", there's nothing to mourn for, right? Since he didn't blow himself up, or tried to!

The mother of Samir Fuda, murderer of 3 Israelis, described her joy upon hearing of his death. She then recounted that he aspired to Shahada, because "72 Dark-eyed Maidens of Paradise are waiting for me". The promise of great rewards for the Shahid (Martyr for Allah) is often a motivating factor driving terrorists. [PA TV July 11, 2004; Apr 25, 2004; Mar. 1, 2004 ]

[Narrator]: "In a silence filled with tears, with a mother’s warm longing, his mother hugged him good-bye at length planting the parting kiss on his cheeks before their final parting. Ordering him not to not to return to her except as a Shahid. Seeing this [parting] is more than words. The last moments of Um-Nidal with her son, the youngest [age 17] Shahada-Seeker, The newest General, to join the ranks of Shahada-Seeker. [The mother after he was killed]: "I gave my son to Jihad for Allah. It is a our religious obligation . If I wanted to have compassion for him, or to make him to change his mind, it would be wrong, a mistake. I don’t want to be guided by my feeling, a mother’s feelings. I put them aside for a while for something greater. Although this is connected to a mothers feelings. Why? Because I love my son and I want to choose the best for him and the best is not life in this world. No, for us there is an afterlife, the eternal bliss. So if I love my son, I will choose eternal bliss for him“ [Arab News Network TV, Mar 2002]

More "witnessing" goodness here! (http://www.pmw.org.il/tv%20part4.html)

Shall I continue with more definitions? Ooh, but wait, I have a closed and clouded mind. Guess the examples over on up were fucking geniuses. Or that you can always try to lie to someone who actually has notions of arab, being from algeria, and end up looking like some dumbass.

I've come to the conclusion that Keruvalia is more than willing to twist the facts any way he sees fit to exonerate Islam and all muslims from any blame for anything.

Agreed. Taqya RuLz0RZ!

I've come to the conclusion that Keruvalia is more than willing to twist the facts any way he sees fit to exonerate Islam and all muslims from any blame for anything.

Newp ... not at all ... just trying to help people understand why Muslims do things the way they do and disprove the stereotypes. Not all Muslims are good and honorable people, but people are imperfect.

Islam is a way of life that teaches peace, tolerance, equality, and brotherhood and nobody has been able to successfully prove otherwise.

For that very reason, actually.

The world has known for a good 1500 years now that wherever Christians go, they tend to make every possible effort to convert everyone else to their way. 1500 years, man. You can't argue with obvious history.

The conversions always happen through subjugation, fear mongering, deception, and - if all else fails - brute force. Certain countries, like Saudi Arabia, want to preserve its citizens religious freedom, hence, its customs are going to eye with suspicion any member of a religion that devotes much of its practice to the conversion of others (whether they like it or not).

Now, you may be saying to yourself that not having your Bible would not stop you from preaching to anyone within earshot (if you were the preaching type, I'm not saying you are, but work with me). The Muslims view the Qur'an differently than Christians view the Bible. Muslims believe Qur'an to be the final holy word of Allah and even when printed it becomes something spectacular and Muslims make sure their Qur'an is never at the same level as their feet and, when not in use, is covered by a cloth and no other book stacked on top of it; conversely, Christians see the Bible as a subjective pursuit and can often be seen making notes in margins and using highlighters on passages, etc etc. Cultural difference, I suppose, but that's why you had your Bible taken.

Your crucifix is something else. It depicts a human sacrifice, which is an abomination in Islam.
Meanwhile Islam is spread through peace? give me a break. Islam was spread through the sword. It was spread by oppressing conquered people until they gave up their old religions. Christians nowadays may try to talk you into their religion, but muslims will try to intimidate you into it.

For that very reason, actually.

The world has known for a good 1500 years now that wherever Christians go, they tend to make every possible effort to convert everyone else to their way. 1500 years, man. You can't argue with obvious history.

The conversions always happen through subjugation, fear mongering, deception, and - if all else fails - brute force. Certain countries, like Saudi Arabia, want to preserve its citizens religious freedom, hence, its customs are going to eye with suspicion any member of a religion that devotes much of its practice to the conversion of others (whether they like it or not).

Now, you may be saying to yourself that not having your Bible would not stop you from preaching to anyone within earshot (if you were the preaching type, I'm not saying you are, but work with me). The Muslims view the Qur'an differently than Christians view the Bible. Muslims believe Qur'an to be the final holy word of Allah and even when printed it becomes something spectacular and Muslims make sure their Qur'an is never at the same level as their feet and, when not in use, is covered by a cloth and no other book stacked on top of it; conversely, Christians see the Bible as a subjective pursuit and can often be seen making notes in margins and using highlighters on passages, etc etc. Cultural difference, I suppose, but that's why you had your Bible taken.

Your crucifix is something else. It depicts a human sacrifice, which is an abomination in Islam.

How do you square that with your previous statement that there is religious freedom in Saudi Arabia? You gave us a list of Islamic countries. Saudi Arabia was on the list. I didn't get ANY religious freedom.

Why try, when one can succeed? You already tried to spin the literals for "slave" (ab'd) and "black" (ab'd) , and now for the word shahid. You refuse to translate it and then say that you think I know what it means. Spin, spin, spin! Dreidel, dreidel, dreidel...


Oy ... so some mother calls her son "shahid" when he straps on some bombs and blows up a market place ... and that means the term shahid means everyone who does the same? Yes, you are closed minded.

Shahid means "witness" ... that's it. Suicide is one of the worst sins in Islam and people who strap on bombs are called "entehari" (suicidal). They are only martyred by their mothers and a few whack-job cave dwellers ... and apparently by you as well.

In Islam, Allah himself is the first shahid to the unity of creation. The word indicates that individuals cannot decide to become martyrs--that choice belongs only to God.

But this is a lofty honor. There are no more than a dozen or so "shahids" in the history of Islam--people who fell in loyal battle in defense of the faith, not in pursuit of political goals. By becoming shahid they bore testimony to the truth of God's message. The Palestinian teenager who says in video-recorded testament that he or she has decided to become a martyr is, in fact, challenging one of Allah's prerogatives.

I have never discussed with you the meaning of ab'd. Continue to lie, though, it helps your cause.

How do you square that with your previous statement that there is religious freedom in Saudi Arabia? You gave us a list of Islamic countries. Saudi Arabia was on the list. I didn't get ANY religious freedom.

I gave no list of countries.

Oh ... are you a Saudi citizen? Why would you get to enjoy the benefits of Saudi citizenship just because you came into the country?

Oy ... so some mother calls her son "shahid" when he straps on some bombs and blows up a market place ... and that means the term shahid means everyone who does the same? Yes, you are closed minded.

Shahid means "witness" ... that's it. Suicide is one of the worst sins in Islam and people who strap on bombs are called "entehari" (suicidal). They are only martyred by their mothers and a few whack-job cave dwellers ... and apparently by you as well.

In Islam, Allah himself is the first shahid to the unity of creation. The word indicates that individuals cannot decide to become martyrs--that choice belongs only to God.

But this is a lofty honor. There are no more than a dozen or so "shahids" in the history of Islam--people who fell in loyal battle in defense of the faith, not in pursuit of political goals. By becoming shahid they bore testimony to the truth of God's message. The Palestinian teenager who says in video-recorded testament that he or she has decided to become a martyr is, in fact, challenging one of Allah's prerogatives.

I have never discussed with you the meaning of ab'd. Continue to lie, though, it helps your cause.
It's hard to take you seriously. I remember that when I posted a list of some of the draconian restricitons placed on dhimmis in muslim lands you said it was only in reaction to christians and jews corrupting the traditional arabic greeting into a curse. So you said that it's just to strip someone of virtually all legal protection just because they curse you out. That attitude shows you to be less than an honest and just man.

Meanwhile Islam is spread through peace? give me a break. Islam was spread through the sword.

Got some real, well documented, historical proof of that and can you correlate it to what is written in Qur'an?

Oy ... so some mother calls her son "shahid" when he straps on some bombs and blows up a market place ... and that means the term shahid means everyone who does the same? Yes, you are closed minded.


Minimize all you want, you're still not convincing. If by "some", you mean "all", then okay, I agree with you.

Then again, being called "closed-minded" by a muslim probably means the exact opposite, so I'm cool with that.

It's been fun, but you're hopeless.

It's hard to take you seriously. I remember that when I posted a list of some of the draconian restricitons placed on dhimmis in muslim lands you said it was only in reaction to christians and jews corrupting the traditional arabic greeting into a curse. So you said that it's just to strip someone of virtually all legal protection just because they curse you out. That attitude shows you to be less than an honest and just man.

Laws are made to protect people. A death curse is a serious thing in Muslim cultures and laws were made to protect people. The only restriction on that was placed in Iran with a very old law that says non-Muslims are not allowed to look like Muslims.

Big deal. You got a problem with that law, then become an Iranian citizen and go through their governmental process to get the law changed.

In many states in the US, giving someone a death threat is a felony. How is that any different?

I gave no list of countries.

Oh ... are you a Saudi citizen? Why would you get to enjoy the benefits of Saudi citizenship just because you came into the country?

Hmm. Freedom is freedom. And at least here in the US, your right to worship the religion of your choice is enshrined in the Constitution. It doesn't say you don't have the right if you're not a citizen.

There's a mosque within a few miles of my house. Built by Saudi money. Muslims worship there. Copies of the Koran are available here for anyone who wants one.

That's freedom. Anything less is not. It's oppression.

Muslim individuals can be saved. All they need to do is to accept Jesus Christ as their Savior.

Minimize all you want, you're still not convincing. If by "some", you mean "all", then okay, I agree with you.


Yes ... because all mothers' sons blow themselves up ... that's why the only Muslims left alive in the world are women. :rolleyes:

Your absolutes are just retarded.

Laws are made to protect people. A death curse is a serious thing in Muslim cultures and laws were made to protect people. The only restriction on that was placed in Iran with a very old law that says non-Muslims are not allowed to look like Muslims.

Big deal. You got a problem with that law, then become an Iranian citizen and go through their governmental process to get the law changed.

In many states in the US, giving someone a death threat is a felony. How is that any different?
It's not illegal to say "I hope you die", or "death be upon you". It's only illegal to say "I'm going to kill you.". There's a difference between a curse and a threat. In fact, I'm going to say I hope any evil spirits around strike you down Keruvalia. If you think you can get me locked up for that, be my guest.

Hmm. Freedom is freedom. And at least here in the US, your right to worship the religion of your choice is enshrined in the Constitution. It doesn't say you don't have the right if you're not a citizen.


Saudi Arabia != US

Muslim individuals can be saved. All they need to do is to accept Jesus Christ as their Savior.


Yes ... let's all worship a human sacrifice.

Keru, I've found through experience that people who want to kill you rarely tell you in advance. And those that tell you, rarely carry it out.

Ever notice that when OBL actually has his men carry something out, there's no warning, and no real "taking credit" afterwards?

And when he does appear and talk, it's when nothing happens?

No, Keru, to be fair, I only shoot the ones who get at least 30 rounds off at me. I want them to die thinking that they were doing well, defending their faith as heroes, when I put that round through their skulls. Their friends should take heart when that happens, and continue to try and reload their own weapons, while I pick them off.

Might help if they all learned how to shoot, instead of a rare few. Studying modern warfare might be more beneficial to the cause than studying in a madrassa. I was virtually immune to their rifle fire at ranges of 300 yards or greater.

Yes ... let's all worship a human sacrifice.

It's no wonder you think Muslimism is the right method. No person took time to explain that God came to earth in the form of a human, as a means of reconciling humans with God for their sins.

Jesus chose to allow humans to execute Him, because this is what God required, as best as I can understand it.

You may want to find the local Muslims for Jesus group to help you learn more about Christianity.

Got some real, well documented, historical proof of that and can you correlate it to what is written in Qur'an?
http://answering-islam.org.UK/Terrorism/by_the_sword.html

An article with data from books by Bernard Lewis among other noted scholars.
Note the part where it shows Muhammad's instructions on how to make war on non-beleivers.

By the way, in Christianity, we are told to love our enemies. We don't have instructions to start wars against "infidels" and the like. You see, God will decide how to deal with souls after they are separated from their mortal shells.

Yes ... let's all worship a human sacrifice.
Just because it's not your religion doesn't mean it's an inferior one. All religions are baseless superstition with no real evidence for them.

http://answering-islam.org.UK/Terrorism/by_the_sword.html

An article with data from books by Bernard Lewis among other noted scholars.
Note the part where it shows Muhammad's instructions on how to make war on non-beleivers.

I could spend the next hour of my life tearing apart your article piece by piece, but I will leave it at this: Using "answering islam" as a reliable source for Islamic beliefs is like using "Jew Watch" as a reliable source on Jewish truths.

Ever notice that when OBL actually has his men carry something out, there's no warning, and no real "taking credit" afterwards?



Yes, well, I have no sympathy for OBL. He's about as Muslim as GWB is.

I could spend the next hour of my life tearing apart your article piece by piece, but I will leave it at this: Using "answering islam" as a reliable source for Islamic beliefs is like using "Jew Watch" as a reliable source on Jewish truths.
It's a lot easier to call your opponent's bigots than to debate the issues, isn't it.

Just because it's not your religion doesn't mean it's an inferior one. All religions are baseless superstition with no real evidence for them.

Actually, in Christianity, there were a number of miracles that occurred during the life of Jesus. Even after His resurrection from the dead, He returned to visit with His apostles. That gave the early followers some "real evidence."

Today, Christians keep the faith based on that -- faith.

By the way, in Christianity, we are told to love our enemies.

So are we ... Islam recognizes the divinity of the Gospel ... just not the divinity of the letters of Paul or the Revelation.

We don't have instructions to start wars against "infidels" and the like.

Neither do we.

You see, God will decide how to deal with souls after they are separated from their mortal shells.

Exactly.

The difference between us is that you require a god in the flesh for salvation. We do not.

It's a lot easier to call your opponent's bigots than to debate the issues, isn't it.

I ask for reliable, well documented source and you give me the equivalent of "Jew Watch". Try again.

I ask for reliable, well documented source and you give me the equivalent of "Jew Watch". Try again.
So Bernard Lewis is a bigot? Sorry, he's one of the best respected students of Islamic history and culture. You have used the Jew Watch analogy at least twice now. I have a feeling that you will use it any time some organization is critical of Islam. So much for reasoned debate.

Actually, in Christianity, there were a number of miracles that occurred during the life of Jesus. Even after His resurrection from the dead, He returned to visit with His apostles. That gave the early followers some "real evidence."

Today, Christians keep the faith based on that -- faith.

Miracles by Muhammad:

The splitting of the moon, water flowing from between his fingers, increasing the quantity of food and water, the glorification of the food, the palm tree yearning for him, stones greeting him, the talking of the poisoned leg [of roasted sheep], trees walking towards him, two trees that were far apart coming together and then parting again, the barren [and therefore dry] sheep giving milk, his returning the eye of Qatidah bin an-Nu`man to its place with his hand after it had slipped out, his spitting lightly into the eye of Ali when it had become inflamed and its being cured almost immediately, his wiping the leg of `Abdullah bin `Atiq whereupon he was immediately cured.

Thousands of witnesses to these things.

All prophets performed miracles as proof of their being appointed as prophets.

So Bernard Lewis is a bigot? Sorry, he's one of the best respected students of Islamic history and culture. You have used the Jew Watch analogy at least twice now. I have a feeling that you will use it any time some organization is critical of Islam. So much for reasoned debate.

Is it really that difficult for you to find another source? If you can find a truly unbiased source for what you claim, then we can debate. Until then, your side holds no water.

Muslim individuals can be saved. All they need to do is to accept Jesus Christ as their Savior.

no one needs to be saved
only those who don't respect other people's religions should be put in a mental hospital for not respecting other people's freedom

So are we ... Islam recognizes the divinity of the Gospel ... just not the divinity of the letters of Paul or the Revelation.



Neither do we.



Exactly.

The difference between us is that you require a god in the flesh for salvation. We do not.

Christians do not require "a god in the flesh for salvation." We simply accept that God sent His Son to earth to teach us certain truths. Among those truths are that Jesus was without sin, and that He chose to be sacraficed for us.

I am glad that Muslims share many beliefs with Christians. There is no war between us, because real Christians are not at war with any other people. I am guessing that real Muslims are not at war either.

I have done my part here, by trying to let you know about the path to eternity with God. I say choose Jesus. It is by God's will that humans have a choice -- free will. God be with you, until we meet again. Peace.

As for freedom of religion, that is an American right (currently). Forcing any person to worship in some manner is not appropriate.

Let's take the observations of a non-Jew, who equally criticized Western Civilization and is famous for it, and is a Nobel Prize winner for literature. And he's not a politician. Naipaul.

Naipaul starts by describing a young man he met in Java who wanted to become a poet. Not a lot of money in that, but Naipaul asked him, "Isn't your mother secretly proud you are a poet?" The young man replied, "She wouldn't have even a sense of what being a poet is." In her worldview, all poetry had been written. It was passed down through the ages. Having her son come up and tell her that he wanted to be a poet was akin to having him tell her he wanted to grow up and rewrite the Bible. This woman's conception of history was static, whereas her son had moved into a different culture.

When Naipaul used the phrase Universal Civilization, he was talking about
a civilization that believes in the future, in progress, in the unfolding of human accomplishment. That civilization started in Europe, and once had racialist overtones, but it has spread.

It has enemies, however. Naipaul goes on to describe his journeys through non-Arab Muslim lands. What was striking about these places was that they were not originally Islamic. They had been something else. But that pre-Islamic past was everywhere denounced and erased. In the virulent form of Islam that Naipaul found in, say, Iran, the glories of Persia were being denied and abolished. In the beginning was error, apostasy, disgrace. Then came Islam and truth. End of story. "Faith abolished the past," Naipaul reported.

The style of religion he found was a complete way of life. "To possess the faith was to possess the only truth; and possession of this truth set many things on its head. To believe that the time before the coming of the faith was a time of error distorted more than an idea of history. What lay within the faith was to be judged one way; what lay outside of it was to be in another."

Naipaul was born in Trinidad to a Hindu family. At 18 he won a scholarship to Oxford, and he has lived in England since. In other words, he has many different cultures in his heritage, many histories flowing through his veins: Trinidad, India, England, the culture of the global intellectual class.

But the Islamicists he met in his travels repressed all their histories but one. The Taliban recently destroyed a 1,500 year old Buddhist shrine, but the Islamic radicals commit the same sort of vandalism within themselves. They destroy all their inheritances but Islamic fundamentalism.

And when they face a world in which they confront the pluralism of histories, they grow disoriented. Naipaul calls it "philosophical hysteria."
During his trip though Iran, Naipaul met a newspaper editor who had been at the center of the 1979 revolution. Seven months later his son was trying to get a visa to study in the United States, but the hostage crisis was underway and he couldn't get in. This man, who had supported the Khomeini revolution, was lamenting his son's predicament. "It's his future," he said. The father in him could not quite accept that his son would live as a slave to the past.

All of this really helps us understand bin Laden. He and his followers have mutilated themselves, by destroying all but one of their cultural inheritances. They believe in only one history, and it was defined and perfected long ago. Everything since is decline. In bin Laden's crackpot version of history, everything since the decline of the Ottoman empire and its alleged greatness is an additional outrage and insult to God.

In this worldview the future is not especially important (so why not go blow yourself up in a plane?). In fact, the concept of an unknown and desirable future is something of an insult. America stands for the future. It's the land of promise. More than anywhere else, it is a country with a multiplicity of histories intertwining. It's the place where the different pasts of the world come together to bring human freedom to fruition. In

Lincoln's words, it's the "last best hope of earth." The emphasis in that phrase is on "last." It's hard to imagine a time when America settles back into the realm of unimportant middle rank nations, because America is about chasing the future fastest, whatever that future is. That's what the phrase, "the pursuit of happiness" means, a phrase Naipaul dissects in his speech.

So America's conception of history is the antithesis of bin Laden's. He recognizes an enemy when he sees one.

I am guessing that real Muslims are not at war either.

Not that I'm aware of, nope.

I say choose Jesus.

I say choose God. Jesus said the same thing.

Is it really that difficult for you to find another source? If you can find a truly unbiased source for what you claim, then we can debate. Until then, your side holds no water.
What's your opinion of unbiased? something that whitewashes islam and only shows the positive? The article I linked to was fair, scholarly and unbiased.

Just to point this out, I (dont know about others) am criticsing Muslim governments who dont allow religous freedoms. A question, why do Muslim governments not teach comparitive religion? We do that in the UK and in many other European nations but many Muslim states teach Islam as the only true religion as being Islam. Also, why is it illegal to posses Bibles in some states?

no one needs to be saved
only those who don't respect other people's religions should be put in a mental hospital for not respecting other people's freedom

True. No one needs to be saved. It is a choice. I feel a need to express what I know as truth. If you don't have an understanding of life beyond your experience on earth, then acceptance of eternity and the path to God during this span of time may be lost.

By the way, it is interesting to remember that God created time, as well as space and all matter, energy, and other forces in this and all dimensions.

What's your opinion of unbiased? something that whitewashes islam and only shows the positive?

Of course not. The truth is always unbiased.


The article I linked to was fair, scholarly and unbiased.

Hardly. The article does not even separate the teachings of Islam from the actions of Muslims. It's like saying all Christians boiled non-Christians in oil for not being Christian during the Inquisitions and that boiling non-believers in oil is a teaching of Christianity.

It shows a clear bias in that manner.

I say choose God. Jesus said the same thing.

This is where we are coming closer to agreement. Jesus is God. He is in the Father and the Father is in Him. Also, there is the Holy Ghost (or Holy Spirit) that serves as a Comforter in the meantime between the Resurrection and the Second Coming.

Jesus is God.

There is no proof of that in the teachings of Jesus.

There is no proof of that in the teachings of Jesus.

Luke 22: 70

They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?”

He [Jesus] replied, “You are right in saying I am.”

And another thing. What right do Muslims have to demand of non Muslims tax for being non Muslim (Jizya)?

Actually, Jesus said that He is God. He waited before releasing this truth. He said in no uncertain terms that the Father is in Him and He is in the Father.

John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

John 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Luke 22: 70

They all asked, “Are you then the Son of God?”

He [Jesus] replied, “You are right in saying I am.”


Jesus said earlier, "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called the Sons of God". Jesus was calling himself a Peacemaker.

Actually, Jesus said that He is God. He waited before releasing this truth. He said in no uncertain terms that the Father is in Him and He is in the Father.


He also said that God is in all of creation, in every man and every beast. So it would make sense he'd include himself. It doesn't mean worship them.

Use Jesus as a reminder to glorify God, but worshipping him as God violates the first commandment.

Jesus said earlier, "Blessed are the Peacemakers, for they shall be called the Sons of God". Jesus was calling himself a Peacemaker.

Poor interpretation. "They shall be CALLED" not will be. He calls himself the son of man throught the Bible.

Use Jesus as a reminder to glorify God, but worshipping him as God violates the first commandment.

To Christians Jesus is part of the trinity so he is God. The trinity is extremly hard to explain or understand. I can understand the common misconception (particulaly amoung Muslims) that Christians worship three Gods. We dont.

He also said that God is in all of creation, in every man and every beast. So it would make sense he'd include himself. It doesn't mean worship them.

Use Jesus as a reminder to glorify God, but worshipping him as God violates the first commandment.

We should worship God as the singular God. We should pray to God with Jesus as our intercessor, too. Likewise, we should have faith in the Holy Tinity -- The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost (Spirit).

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 14:18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

John 14:19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.

Poor interpretation. "They shall be CALLED" not will be. He calls himself the son of man throught the Bible.

Charles Manson called himself the son of man as well, but that doesn't make it so. Jesus was a good and gentle prophet and his lessons should be admired and followed, but Jesus prayed to God. If he were God, then he would not have prayed to himself in the manner that he did (such as in the desert and in the garden) nor would he have asked why God had forsaken him on the cross.

It would make no sense.

To Christians Jesus is part of the trinity so he is God. The trinity is extremly hard to explain or understand. I can understand the common misconception (particulaly amoung Muslims) that Christians worship three Gods. We dont.

I know you don't worship three gods. You worship one. However, the difference is that you require a mediator. Jews and Muslims do not.

Charles Manson called himself the son of man as well, but that doesn't make it so. Jesus was a good and gentle prophet and his lessons should be admired and followed, but Jesus prayed to God. If he were God, then he would not have prayed to himself in the manner that he did (such as in the desert and in the garden) nor would he have asked why God had forsaken him on the cross.

It would make no sense.

Again, trinity problems. Hard to understand but real. Jesus, God, Holy Spirit. One and the same, yet individual entitys. Hard to comprehend I know but the simplest explination is water, ice, vapour. All three have the same molicule, in the same way that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit have the same core being, yet are diffrent entitys. We dont know how they communicated or how they relate to one another but in the end those details are unimportant. What is important is their significene as being "God" (As confusing as that is, but then if it were simple, what would there be to believe)

Keru, I have a question.

I have been told by several Muslims in person that nothing happens that is not God's Will, and that it is useless to plan or struggle against it, as that is defying God's Will. To them, everything that happens is God's Will, and they can't do anything about it.

They also believe that when things are going badly for them, God is showing his displeasure with them. In other, more unkind words, God is f**king them hard.

If you agree with this interpretation, can you then explain how the Palestinians were dispossessed; how most Muslim nations are rules by despotic tyrants; how the Ottoman Empire fell; why there has been no significant scientific or engineering advance from any Muslim nation since the Battle of Lepanto; why they lost the Battle of Lepanto; why both Israel and the US seem to be able to kick the ass of any Muslim army; why the Mongols were able to sack Baghdad, the seat of the Caliphate, after only one week, and they didn't have the modern army that the US possesses?

I think there's only one Islamic interpretation, and the Muslims who work in my office agree that it fits all of the situations.

I know you don't worship three gods. You worship one. However, the difference is that you require a mediator. Jews and Muslims do not.

We dont "Require" a mediator. By that logic I could say Muslims and Jews do too (Muhammad, Moses). We believe Jesus had to be the sinless sacrifice to save us all. He broke the sin-death cycle to enable humans to be with God

Charles Manson called himself the son of man as well, but that doesn't make it so. Jesus was a good and gentle prophet and his lessons should be admired and followed, but Jesus prayed to God. If he were God, then he would not have prayed to himself in the manner that he did (such as in the desert and in the garden) nor would he have asked why God had forsaken him on the cross.

It would make no sense.

There are three entities. God is the Father. Jesus is the Son. The Holy Ghost is an essence of understanding or truth, the likes of which go beyond what you may understand now as making sense.

Jesus was half mortal, with Mary as His mother and God as His Father. This may help you understand why He would ask God why God had forsaken Jesus. At the end of the crucifiction, He said, "It is done."

Jesus said that the only way to God, the Father, was through Him (Jesus). It was not through Elijah or Mohammed or Confuscious, etc.

We dont "Require" a mediator. By that logic I could say Muslims and Jews do too (Muhammad, Moses). We believe Jesus had to be the sinless sacrifice to save us all. He broke the sin-death cycle to enable humans to be with God

It's more accurate to say that Jewish and Islamic religious leaders are not permitted to fill the role of mediator between worshipper and God. The idea behind Jesus allows a direct, personal relation between the worshipper and God. A mediator (i.e., a religious leader) is allowed, particularly in the Catholic Church, but is not required, nor even acknowledged in some Christian churches.

In some Christian churches, anyone can pray with you or for you. That's their idea of mediation. But there's no reason you can't pray by yourself.

If there is no "proof" that Jesus is the Son of God, and you want to hold people to a standard of "proof", where is the "proof" that Muhammed was God's Messenger, or even talked to God?

And by proof, we'll need outside, validated evidence that does not include the Koran, because we're verifying what is in the Koran.

Look, we're talking about religious postulates, not facts. Facts can be verified by outside, independent, repeatable, observable, experimentation and validation. Postulates are beliefs that are adhered to by faith.

To me, arguing about faith as though it were fact is spam.

As I say, "Keep the faith." Be a Christian.

Just to point this out, I (dont know about others) am criticsing Muslim governments who dont allow religous freedoms not Islam as a religion. A question, why do Muslim governments not teach comparitive religion? We do that in the UK and in many other European nations but many Muslim states teach Islam as the only true religion as being Islam. Also, why is it illegal to posses Bibles in some states?

Just to point this out, I (dont know about others) am criticsing Muslim governments who dont allow religous freedoms not Islam as a religion. A question, why do Muslim governments not teach comparitive religion? We do that in the UK and in many other European nations but many Muslim states teach Islam as the only true religion as being Islam. Also, why is it illegal to posses Bibles in some states?

Neo, Political Correctness and Multiculturalism stem from "Westerner Guilt".

They aren't Westerners, so they don't feel guilty. Therefore, they give a rat's ass about someone else's beliefs. After all, Keru said that if you're not a citizen of that country, you have NO RIGHTS AT ALL.

If you agree with this interpretation, can you then explain how the Palestinians were dispossessed; how most Muslim nations are rules by despotic tyrants; how the Ottoman Empire fell; why there has been no significant scientific or engineering advance from any Muslim nation since the Battle of Lepanto; why they lost the Battle of Lepanto; why both Israel and the US seem to be able to kick the ass of any Muslim army; why the Mongols were able to sack Baghdad, the seat of the Caliphate, after only one week, and they didn't have the modern army that the US possesses?

Hard times befall any empire. Some bounce back, others do not. I don't know why any of these things have happened any more than I know why suicide bombings and child molestation are allowed to continue.

Neo, Political Correctness and Multiculturalism stem from "Westerner Guilt".

They aren't Westerners, so they don't feel guilty. Therefore, they give a rat's ass about someone else's beliefs. After all, Keru said that if you're not a citizen of that country, you have NO RIGHTS AT ALL.

What right do they have to arrest someone who owns a Bible? What threat are they? Why should religion and citzenry be linked? Do you have to be a Muslim to be a citizen of an Islamic state. It is not "Political correctnes" or "multiculturalism" that freedom of religion is a human right.

What right do they have to arrest someone who owns a Bible? What threat are they? Why should religion and citzenry be linked? Do you have to be a Muslim to be a citizen of an Islamic state. It is not "Political correctnes" or "multiculturalism" that freedom of religion is a human right.

*shrug* ... The Qur'an is the Constituion of Saudi Arabia and no amount of complaining will change that any more than people who want to take away gun rights in the US can just ignore the 2nd Ammendment.

Just because it's a different way of life doesn't mean it's inferior.

Your Western attitude of privilege shows in the attitude that you should be free to do whatever you want wherever you want in the world and not be faced with any consequences. If you truly believe you have dominion, go tell that to an angry bear face to face.

*shrug* ... The Qur'an is the Constituion of Saudi Arabia and no amount of complaining will change that any more than people who want to take away gun rights in the US can just ignore the 2nd Ammendment.

Just because it's a different way of life doesn't mean it's inferior.

Your Western attitude of privilege shows in the attitude that you should be free to do whatever you want wherever you want in the world and not be faced with any consequences. If you truly believe you have dominion, go tell that to an angry bear face to face.
Yeah, it's inferior. Freedom for all is a noble goal. Eliminating freedom of religion (and from religion) is barbaric.

*shrug* ... The Qur'an is the Constituion of Saudi Arabia and no amount of complaining will change that any more than people who want to take away gun rights in the US can just ignore the 2nd Ammendment.

Just because it's a different way of life doesn't mean it's inferior.

Your Western attitude of privilege shows in the attitude that you should be free to do whatever you want wherever you want in the world and not be faced with any consequences. If you truly believe you have dominion, go tell that to an angry bear face to face.

True Islam would not ban Christians or Jews from practicing their religion - or from having their holy books.

It would be just as ancient Muslim countries were tolerant of other religions (*specifically* Christianity and Judaism).

*shrug* ... The Qur'an is the Constituion of Saudi Arabia and no amount of complaining will change that any more than people who want to take away gun rights in the US can just ignore the 2nd Ammendment.


I am sorry? Let me just check this out? The Qu'ran is what gives the Saudi Government the right to arrest and kill Christians in their country just because they are Christians? If that is the case then are not Muslims following a religion that upholds the killing of those who are not of your religion?


Just because it's a different way of life doesn't mean it's inferior.

Your Western attitude of privilege shows in the attitude that you should be free to do whatever you want wherever you want in the world and not be faced with any consequences. If you truly believe you have dominion, go tell that to an angry bear face to face.

Arresting and killing people purely on the basis of religion is breaking basic human rights. We do not believe you can do anything you want and ignore concequences, we have laws you know. We can however practise any faith we want. What is wrong with Non Muslims in Islamic countries? Why should you treat them any diffrently because they are not Muslim?

Hard times befall any empire. Some bounce back, others do not. I don't know why any of these things have happened any more than I know why suicide bombings and child molestation are allowed to continue.

The answer I was given was that God has it in for Muslims because they're doing something terribly wrong - and perhaps doing something wrong from generation to generation. God hates them (exact words). It's been hundreds of years, and one humiliation after another, that only seems to be getting worse.

With all this talk of Saudi Arabia, I thought I'd point out a couple of things:


1] Islamists openly challenge the Saud dynasty with its 6000 Princes for decadent and corrupt lifestyle.

2] The Committee for the Defence of Legitimate Rights under the professor of physics Muhammad Massari is a militant Islamist Saudi opposition. His movement is well-funded by rich members of the clandestine opposition. Another opposition movement is being funded by Ussama Ibn Ladin (Osama bin Laden) and operates from Sudan and Afghanistan.

As you can see ... even the most extreme Muslims are anti-Saud.

The answer I was given was that God has it in for Muslims because they're doing something terribly wrong - and perhaps doing something wrong from generation to generation. God hates them (exact words). It's been hundreds of years, and one humiliation after another, that only seems to be getting worse.

So the same thing could be applied to Jews and Catholics and Evangelists? Nobody knows who or what God has it in for and anyone who claims to is trying to sell you something.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. I don't think God has it in for us anymore than God is punishing all of the missing and exploited children in the world.

The answer I was given was that God has it in for Muslims because they're doing something terribly wrong - and perhaps doing something wrong from generation to generation. God hates them (exact words). It's been hundreds of years, and one humiliation after another, that only seems to be getting worse.

Biblical history points to the Arab nation as decending from Ishmael, the illigtamate child of Hagar and Abraham. The Bible says that his nation will always be against another and that they shall forever be at war. Looking at Palistine now and throught Islamic history, I would say it seems to be comming true.

With all this talk of Saudi Arabia, I thought I'd point out a couple of things:


1] Islamists openly challenge the Saud dynasty with its 6000 Princes for decadent and corrupt lifestyle.

2] The Committee for the Defence of Legitimate Rights under the professor of physics Muhammad Massari is a militant Islamist Saudi opposition. His movement is well-funded by rich members of the clandestine opposition. Another opposition movement is being funded by Ussama Ibn Ladin (Osama bin Laden) and operates from Sudan and Afghanistan.

As you can see ... even the most extreme Muslims are anti-Saud.

That doesnt change the fact that the Saudi Constitution is the Qu'ran. If thats the case and it is that which allows the Saudi Government to persecute Christians then please explain how the Qu'ran sanctions the arrest and execution of practising non Muslims in Islamic nations. Does it give a reason?

Biblical history points to the Arab nation as decending from Ishmael, the illigtamate child of Hagar and Abraham. The Bible says that his nation will always be against another and that they shall forever be at war. Looking at Palistine now and throught Islamic history, I would say it seems to be comming true.

Actually, looking at Islamic history, we find that the early Islamic countries were very tolerant of Christians *and* Jews living within their midst. These religions were seen as "partially enlightened," but obviously with some things wrong (according to the Koran).

It was not until much later that the fighting began.

Just to point this out, I (dont know about others) am criticsing Muslim governments who dont allow religous freedoms not Islam as a religion. A question, why do Muslim governments not teach comparitive religion? We do that in the UK and in many other European nations but many Muslim states teach Islam as the only true religion as being Islam. Also, why is it illegal to posses Bibles in some states?

You're missing what many posters said before you.

This isn't a case with Islamic nations-this is the case with a theocracy period.

That doesnt change the fact that the Saudi Constitution is the Qu'ran. If thats the case and it is that which allows the Saudi Government to persecute Christians then please explain how the Qu'ran sanctions the arrest and execution of practising non Muslims in Islamic nations. Does it give a reason?

It's not the sole basis. My apologies. It's actually based in Qur'an and the Hadith and is comprised of the Sariah. I've been looking through Saudi law and I can't find one single law that says Christians are to be persecuted.

Do you have a source somewhere for that?

The answer I was given was that God has it in for Muslims because they're doing something terribly wrong - and perhaps doing something wrong from generation to generation. God hates them (exact words). It's been hundreds of years, and one humiliation after another, that only seems to be getting worse.
umm... what?

you have just demonstrated that it is not only muslim nations that need to understand freedom of religion or tolerance. well done.

umm... what?

you have just demonstrated that it is not only muslim nations that need to understand freedom of religion or tolerance. well done.

No, that's the scoop I got from Muslims right here.

It's not the sole basis. My apologies. It's actually based in Qur'an and the Hadith and is comprised of the Sariah. I've been looking through Saudi law and I can't find one single law that says Christians are to be persecuted.

Do you have a source somewhere for that?

I asked you, your the one who is suposed to be an expert. Given that non Muslims can expect to be arrested by the Mutawwa'in and that Saudi law comes from the Qu'ran and Hadith, logic dictates that somewhere in those two sources there is something which give the Saudi government the power to persecute Christians.

This isn't a case with Islamic nations

IT IS the case, see Saudi Arabia

I asked you, your the one who is suposed to be an expert. Given that non Muslims can expect to be arrested by the Mutawwa'in and that Saudi law comes from the Qu'ran and Hadith, logic dictates that somewhere in those two sources there is something which give the Saudi government the power to persecute Christians.

You were asked for a source, not a speculation.

If you can't prove it, don't say it.

I asked you, your the one who is suposed to be an expert. Given that non Muslims can expect to be arrested by the Mutawwa'in and that Saudi law comes from the Qu'ran and Hadith, logic dictates that somewhere in those two sources there is something which give the Saudi government the power to persecute Christians.

Well it doesn't lie in the Qur'an or the Hadith. I can't even see that it exists at all in Saudi law that non-Muslims are to be persecuted, but I will keep looking.

We now get to the root of the problem, though.

I have studied Torah. From the time I was three years old, I studied Hebrew, studied Torah, later studied the Nevi'im and Kethuvim, continued my studies with the Talmud, went to college, studied halakkah, studied in Israel, was granted semikhah (making me a Rabbi), and then went on to read the Gospel (in English, I didn't bother learning Greek) and listened to great Jewish, Christian, Muslim, and secular scholars discuss, debate, and argue over the NT ad nauseum and even created a list of 148 questions pertaining to Christianity, which I put forth in a thread a while back.

I am a Muslim now.

So I ask you ... have you actually read Qur'an? Have you sat down with the book and actually read it and contemplated it? If you like, I will be more than happy to send you a copy of the Qur'an as translated by Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali, which is the near unanimously agreed best translation of Qur'an, and you can read it for yourself.

Don't rely on word of mouth or internet snippets. Make up your own mind.

It is part of the essential mistrust that a Christian will slip a Bible into my hands and say I need to read it and pray for enlightenment, but if I slip a Qur'an into the hands of a Christian, it ends up in a garbage can.

Well it doesn't lie in the Qur'an or the Hadith. I can't even see that it exists at all in Saudi law that non-Muslims are to be persecuted, but I will keep looking.

We now get to the root of the problem, though.

I have studied Torah. From the time I was three years old, I studied Hebrew, studied Torah, later studied the Nevi'im and Kethuvim, continued my studies with the Talmud, went to college, studied halakkah, studied in Israel, was granted semikhah (making me a Rabbi), and then went on to read the Gospel (in English, I didn't bother learning Greek) and listened to great Jewish, Christian, Muslim, and secular scholars discuss, debate, and argue over the NT ad nauseum and even created a list of 148 questions pertaining to Christianity, which I put forth in a thread a while back.

I am a Muslim now.

So I ask you ... have you actually read Qur'an? Have you sat down with the book and actually read it and contemplated it? If you like, I will be more than happy to send you a copy of the Qur'an as translated by Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali, which is the near unanimously agreed best translation of Qur'an, and you can read it for yourself.

Don't rely on word of mouth or internet snippets. Make up your own mind.

It is part of the essential mistrust that a Christian will slip a Bible into my hands and say I need to read it and pray for enlightenment, but if I slip a Qur'an into the hands of a Christian, it ends up in a garbage can.

Done the Torah thing myself. Read the Koran. And been a Christian as well.

So I ask you ... have you actually read Qur'an? Have you sat down with the book and actually read it and contemplated it? If you like, I will be more than happy to send you a copy of the Qur'an as translated by Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali, which is the near unanimously agreed best translation of Qur'an, and you can read it for yourself.

I don't know about Neo, but I have been interested in reading it for some time now. Everything I know comes from Muslim friends or history lessons. I doubt that I'd "convert" per se, but I believe that there is some truth in all religions, and I have yet to look as deeply into Islam as I would like.

Abdullah Yusuf'Ali, you say? I'll try and remember that.

I don't know about Neo, but I have been interested in reading it for some time now. Everything I know comes from Muslim friends or history lessons. I doubt that I'd "convert" per se, but I believe that there is some truth in all religions, and I have yet to look as deeply into Islam as I would like.

Abdullah Yusuf'Ali, you say? I'll try and remember that.

Nod ... and that's just where a lot of people fail. Everyone should know by now that "consider the source" must be the mantra of the intelligent and educated. A lot of people go only by the word of others and never actually look at the source.

A lot of people in the US's only impression of Islam comes from a few corrupt kings and Osama Bin Laden, but they never look at the source (Qur'an) and simply accept these few nutcases word!

If you live near a mosque, you can probably get a free copy just for the asking. Shoot, man, they'll even help you, right there in the mosque, without any pressure to convert! The Imam will probably assign some of the more learned of the ummah (community) to help you and they will do so gladly ... even teaching you Arabic, if it is your wish, so that you don't have to rely on Ali's translation.

Well it doesn't lie in the Qur'an or the Hadith. I can't even see that it exists at all in Saudi law that non-Muslims are to be persecuted, but I will keep looking.

We now get to the root of the problem, though.

I have studied Torah. From the time I was three years old, I studied Hebrew, studied Torah, later studied the Nevi'im and Kethuvim, continued my studies with the Talmud, went to college, studied halakkah, studied in Israel, was granted semikhah (making me a Rabbi), and then went on to read the Gospel (in English, I didn't bother learning Greek) and listened to great Jewish, Christian, Muslim, and secular scholars discuss, debate, and argue over the NT ad nauseum and even created a list of 148 questions pertaining to Christianity, which I put forth in a thread a while back.

I am a Muslim now.

So I ask you ... have you actually read Qur'an? Have you sat down with the book and actually read it and contemplated it? If you like, I will be more than happy to send you a copy of the Qur'an as translated by Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali, which is the near unanimously agreed best translation of Qur'an, and you can read it for yourself.

Don't rely on word of mouth or internet snippets. Make up your own mind.

It is part of the essential mistrust that a Christian will slip a Bible into my hands and say I need to read it and pray for enlightenment, but if I slip a Qur'an into the hands of a Christian, it ends up in a garbage can.

1) I still have that list of 148 questions on my harddrive. Essential reading, I think.

2) Neo Cannen hasn't actually read the Bible - so the chances are slim that he has read Qur'an.

3) Is it an e-Qur'an... or are you talking about mailing an actual Qur'an? If it's an electronic one, I might be interested... since the last time I read the Qur'an was almost a decade ago, and most of my 'religious' books are 4000 miles away, now. :(

4) As a matter of interest - some of my Moslem friends told me that you cannot read the Qur'an in translation. They said the ONLY way to read it is in the native tongue, otherwise it is corrupt... so, if Neo thinks he has a case against it, he better be able to back it up with original language scripture.

If you live near a mosque, you can probably get a free copy just for the asking. Shoot, man, they'll even help you, right there in the mosque, without any pressure to convert! The Imam will probably assign some of the more learned of the ummah (community) to help you and they will do so gladly ... even teaching you Arabic, if it is your wish, so that you don't have to rely on Ali's translation.

Out of curiosity - I thought it was considered sacrilege for a non-Muslim to even touch the Koran? I know that a friend of mine has to go through kind of a "cleansing" ceremony before even touching his copy. I was always under the (apparently false) impression that it was "against the rules" to give a copy to someone not planning on converting.

Nod ... and that's just where a lot of people fail. Everyone should know by now that "consider the source" must be the mantra of the intelligent and educated. A lot of people go only by the word of others and never actually look at the source.

A lot of people in the US's only impression of Islam comes from a few corrupt kings and Osama Bin Laden, but they never look at the source (Qur'an) and simply accept these few nutcases word!

If you live near a mosque, you can probably get a free copy just for the asking. Shoot, man, they'll even help you, right there in the mosque, without any pressure to convert! The Imam will probably assign some of the more learned of the ummah (community) to help you and they will do so gladly ... even teaching you Arabic, if it is your wish, so that you don't have to rely on Ali's translation.

(Not a big Moslem movement, where I live) :(

Nod ... and that's just where a lot of people fail. Everyone should know by now that "consider the source" must be the mantra of the intelligent and educated. A lot of people go only by the word of others and never actually look at the source.

A lot of people in the US's only impression of Islam comes from a few corrupt kings and Osama Bin Laden, but they never look at the source (Qur'an) and simply accept these few nutcases word!

If you live near a mosque, you can probably get a free copy just for the asking. Shoot, man, they'll even help you, right there in the mosque, without any pressure to convert! The Imam will probably assign some of the more learned of the ummah (community) to help you and they will do so gladly ... even teaching you Arabic, if it is your wish, so that you don't have to rely on Ali's translation.

And that is Freedom Of Religion.

Anything short of that is not.

Shoot, man, you and the people in the mosque don't even have to be American citizens to enjoy that right!

I don't buy this "Islam is violent, Christianity is not" argument. People decide what they want to do with religion. Some people are driven to violence by their religion, some aren't.

Haha, well true there have been people in the past who were violent and called themselves Christians, but that does not make them so. With Islam, it's part of their core teachings to "kill the infidels," or basically anyone who doesn't believe. And before you start flaming me, yes, I know they don't ALL want to kill people, but that doesn't change the fact that their holy book teaches it.

2) Neo Cannen hasn't actually read the Bible - so the chances are slim that he has read Qur'an.
4) As a matter of interest - some of my Moslem friends told me that you cannot read the Qur'an in translation. They said the ONLY way to read it is in the native tongue, otherwise it is corrupt... so, if Neo thinks he has a case against it, he better be able to back it up with original language scripture.

I have not read the Qu'ran but I am deducing logic

1) The Saudia Arabian constitution is the Qu'ran and the Hadiths
2) The Saudi Arabian authorities can legaly arest and execute Christians just because they are Christian
3) Therefore somewhere in the Qu'ran or the Hadiths they must give some justification for the fact that they can arrest and execute Christians for being Christian

I have not read the Qu'ran but I am deducing logic

1) The Saudia Arabian constitution is the Qu'ran and the Hadiths
2) The Saudi Arabian authorities can legaly arest and execute Christians just because they are Christian
3) Therefore somewhere in the Qu'ran or the Hadiths they must give some justification for the fact that they can arrest and execute Christians for being Christian

Okay - Keruvalia questioned your assumptions about the Qur'an - and you failed to provide sources to back up your claims.

I challenged your lack of 'source', and you imply that you used 'logic' INSTEAD of a source (how do you think 'logic' alone can replace facts?)

Okay - provide me a source that says that "Saudi Arabian authorities can legaly arest and execute Christians just because they are Christian" (sic).

At the moment, all you promote is speculation heaped upon speculation.


Oh, by the way - I assume it goes without saying.... see if you can find a source that isn't a christian-fundamentalist-propoganda site, this time?

Okay - Keruvalia questioned your assumptions about the Qur'an - and you failed to provide sources to back up your claims.

I challenged your lack of 'source', and you imply that you used 'logic' INSTEAD of a source (how do you think 'logic' alone can replace facts?)

Okay - provide me a source that says that "Saudi Arabian authorities can legaly arest and execute Christians just because they are Christian" (sic).

At the moment, all you promote is speculation heaped upon speculation.

While I can't cite an executed Christian, I can cite a direct experience with Saudi Customs agents. And Keru said that it happened because I'm not a citizen, and the cross is a bad thing, and Christians are not to be trusted.

So, I had my Bible confiscated, although I wasn't there to convert anyone. I had my crucifix confiscated. And I was warned that mere possession of these items was a crime punishable by a lengthy jail term.

Unlike people who want a cite from a website, I decided to take the word of Saudi police officers in uniform who looked pretty serious. I could have asked them to give me a link to a website, but they didn't look like they would let me go without my assenting to abandoning all symbols of my religion.

Keru said that there is religious freedom in Saudi Arabia.

Well, on the UK website that gives travel information about laws, customs, etc. we see this bit about Saudi Arabia:
______________________
LOCAL LAWS AND CUSTOMS

Saudi Arabia is a Muslim country in which Islamic law is strictly enforced.

The public practice of any form of religion other than Islam, or proselytising, is not permitted. The importation and use of narcotics, alcohol, pork products and religious books (apart from the Qu'ran) and artefacts are forbidden.
______________________

Well, that looks like religious freedom to me. You're free to possess religious books only if they are the Qu'ran.

Keru, unless you can come up with a word or two from the Saudi Embassy, I'm afraid you're going to have to retract your statement that there is religious freedom in Saudi Arabia.

http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/s04100111.htm

This man was arrested for the offence of "Spreading Christanity" and sentenced to 10 months in jail and 300 lashes, with a warning that far harsher punishments will be handed down if he appeals. The Saudi reliogous police (The Muttawa) exist and are there to arrest Christians. My logic stands.

1) The Saudia Arabian constitution is the Qu'ran and the Hadiths
2) The Saudi Arabian authorities can legaly arest and execute Christians just because they are Christian
3) Therefore somewhere in the Qu'ran or the Hadiths they must give some justification for the fact that they can arrest and execute Christians for being Christian

http://www.assistnews.net/Stories/s04100111.htm

This man was arrested for the offence of "Spreading Christanity" and sentenced to 10 months in jail and 300 lashes, with a warning that far harsher punishments will be handed down if he appeals. The Saudi reliogous police (The Muttawa) exist and are there to arrest Christians. My logic stands.

For the record, "spreading Christianity" and "being Christian" are not necessarily the same thing.

This demonstrates that people may be arrested for proseletyzing, not for simply subscribing to a given religion.

For the record, "spreading Christianity" and "being Christian" are not necessarily the same thing.

This demonstrates that people may be arrested for proseletyzing, not for simply subscribing to a given religion.

What about the restrictions, which I have cited with references, that you cannot possess a Bible?

Is that not "being Christian"?

How can Christians "be Christian" and worship without their religious books?

They are ILLEGAL in Saudi Arabia. Mere possession!

For the record, "spreading Christianity" and "being Christian" are not necessarily the same thing.


"No one lights a lamp and hides it in a jar or puts it under a bed. Instead, he puts it on a stand, so that those who come in can see the light. For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open"

Luke 8:16-17

If you are a Christian it is your duty to spread the message to others. It is not your duty to force confession. If this is not freedom of religon being removed then it is freedom of speech. And there is also the small matter of posession of a Bible being illegal.

What about the restrictions, which I have cited with references, that you cannot possess a Bible?

It is an unfair restriction, but does not demonstrate, as Neo has stated numerous times, that someone can "be arrested just for being Christian."

Is that not "being Christian"?

How can Christians "be Christian" and worship without their religious books?

One doesn't need the Bible there to worship.

It is an unfair restriction, but does not demonstrate, as Neo has stated numerous times, that someone can "be arrested just for being Christian."



One doesn't need the Bible there to worship.


My point is that Keru said that everyone has religious freedom in Saudi Arabia.

How is deprivation of your religious books "religious freedom"?

Please explain how that is free.