NationStates Jolt Archive

I have seen many people here raise the rather genuine question of Islam and its nature. Specicifly whether or not it is a viloent faith. The discussion in other threads for instance the thread entitled "Is Islam really a religion of peace" discusses verses from the Quran. Those who would support it being a religion of peace would then point out that all religions have had viloent pasts and have done terrible things before. However, that is not the point being raised by verses from the Quran. While we are all aware that all religions have viloent pasts, when quoting verses from the Quran people are not saying "Look Islam has a viloent past! It must be viloent and evil!" they are saying "Look, Islam has viloence written into its dogma", which is a more serious question.

This is geting boring now. Why not just bring up your point in the 238274 other Islam threads?

This is geting boring now. Why not just bring up your point in the 238274 other Islam threads?

Because people dont often listen to it unless its the first post. They just go on "Chrisitanity is evil, Crusades!!" but dont listen to the fact that we arnt making a point about Islam's history, but about Islam's doctrine.

they are saying "Look, Islam has viloence written into its dogma", which is a more serious question.

Aye, but one must consider how the dogma is presented and by whom. Always consider two things:

1] The Source
2] Context

If a website named www.fuckyoumuslims.com quotes Qur'an, you can automatically ignore it as a valid source for information on Islam.

The other problem is that people don't quote Qur'an when they do quote it. They'll find a Surah and quote a verse that says "Kill them all" but they completely ignore the verse before which lays out detailed diplomacy proceedings and every step that should be taken *before* war, before violence, and then completely ignore the verse afterwards which says to back off if apologies are issued and peace is sought. What's even more sad are the people who bring up the "smite the necks and fingers" verse and don't look back a couple of verses to see that it's Allah talking to Angels, not to men. Angels. NOT men.

"Religion of Peace" does *not* - I repeat: NOT - mean Muslims are to just sit back and take whatever is thrown at them, however. We are not meant to be global whipping boys.

What happens is that someone will come out and slap a Muslim and when the Muslim slaps him back, he will scream "See?! They're not peaceful!! Kill them all!!"

"Religion of Peace" does not mean we won't defend ourselves.

Christianity is a "Religion of Peace", but how many verses can be attributed to showing certain people as "worthy of death"? Taken out of context, Christianity can look pretty bloody in its dogma as well.

All three versions of the religion has "violence written into its dogma". Most people in the western hemisphere have just moved on, and don't put much weight on those bits anymore - including Muslims.

The "Turn the other cheek" bit from the NT isn't about non-violence. It's about defiance & standing up for yourself & your beliefs. Quite the opposite of what so many current-day Christians wants you to believe.

The religion, regardless of the wrapping, is a collection of bronze & iron-age culture. Violent death & extreme oppression was the norm back then. And while much of the world have moved on, not all of it has.

That is what you should be fighting. Scripture doesn't dictate behaviour. It impacts behaviour. When a society is violent and oppressive, religious followers use religion to defend themselves. When a society is tolerant & peaceful, religious followers use their religion to rise above the rest.

I have seen many people here raise the rather genuine question of Islam and its nature. Specicifly whether or not it is a viloent faith. The discussion in other threads for instance the thread entitled "Is Islam really a religion of peace" discusses verses from the Quran. Those who would support it being a religion of peace would then point out that all religions have had viloent pasts and have done terrible things before. However, that is not the point being raised by verses from the Quran. While we are all aware that all religions have viloent pasts, when quoting verses from the Quran people are not saying "Look Islam has a viloent past! It must be viloent and evil!" they are saying "Look, Islam has viloence written into its dogma", which is a more serious question.
As a point of clarification, what you said in bold (my emphasis) is not actually true. All of the Judeo-Christian religions have a violent past. I do not believe that, say, Taoism or Buddhism have violent pasts. You should be careful what you mean by "all religions" - do you really mean "all", or do you mean Christianity?

The "Turn the other cheek" bit from the NT isn't about non-violence. It's about defiance & standing up for yourself & your beliefs. Quite the opposite of what so many current-day Christians wants you to believe.


My interpretation of it is it is indeed about both non viloence and standing up for what you believe. In my mind if you want to stand up for your beliefs, the most logical thing is to be true to them. Which is what this verse is proposing, in my mind at least and that of my church, and the churchs I know.

My interpretation of it is it is indeed about both non viloence and standing up for what you believe. In my mind if you want to stand up for your beliefs, the most logical thing is to be true to them. Which is what this verse is proposing, in my mind at least and that of my church, and the churchs I know.
That's bollox.

It's only cheek-turning in that particular situation. The message is that you should fight back, regardless how futile the situation is. Try reading the Bible instead of listening to your Propaganda Priest.

Unrelenting resistance mate, that's what it's about. Not pacifism. If slaves had bazooka's back then, the passage would've read "Blow the cunts to bits!"

That's bollox.

It's only cheek-turning in that particular situation. The message is that you should fight back, regardless how futile the situation is. Try reading the Bible instead of listening to your Propaganda Priest.

Unrelenting resistance mate, that's what it's about. Not pacifism. If slaves had bazooka's back then, the passage would've read "Blow the cunts to bits!"

Yes, but think about it. It is unrelenting resistance, I am not disagreeing with you. But think about it. If you want to stand up for your beliefs, you should adhear to them. No where does Jesus advocate viloence. So you should resist, yes, but adher to your beliefs when doing so.

Why do you think its resistance then?

Islam is a religion of peace. Just like Christianity, there are members of the faith that like to take individual verses out of context and use them to justify their own desires and actions, instead of letting the actions flow from the faith. That's not a flaw in the faith or the doctrine. It's a flaw in the human beings.

Islam should not be blamed for the actions of a few wack-job militants, any more than Christianity should be blamed for the morally questionable antics of the Bush administration.

Islam is a religion of peace. Just like Christianity, there are members of the faith that like to take individual verses out of context and use them to justify their own desires and actions, instead of letting the actions flow from the faith. That's not a flaw in the faith or the doctrine. It's a flaw in the human beings.

Islam should not be blamed for the actions of a few wack-job militants, any more than Christianity should be blamed for the morally questionable antics of the Bush administration.
<rolls to resist the urge to say that christianity is not a religion of peace. manages to roll a 20, and still fails>:p

Why always bring up Christianity in threads about Islam? :rolleyes: Why not bring up Judaism, or some other religion, or why not just focus on the matter at hand and discuss the actual religion, rather than making some pathetic attempt at tearing apart Christianity?

Oh, and my favourite? The Crusades. Those usually using them as an argument seem to completely forget the actions of the Saracens and other Arabic peoples before they actually occured, especially with relation to the Byzantine Empire, one of the most civilised nations of the West at the time (so no, not the entire West was stuck in the Dark Ages...we compensated for that anyway with 3000 years of history before).

Why always bring up Christianity in threads about Islam? :rolleyes: Why not bring up Judaism, or why not just focus on the matter at hand and discuss the actual religion, rather than making some pathetic attempt at tearing apart Christianity?
that was my point, why didn't anyone bring up judaism, we have a much better track record than christianity, despite the fact the there is violence in our religious texts

Why always bring up Christianity in threads about Islam? :rolleyes: Why not bring up Judaism, or some other religion, or why not just focus on the matter at hand and discuss the actual religion, rather than making some pathetic attempt at tearing apart Christianity?

Because the people attacking Islam in all these threads usually aren't Jews or followers of another religion.

Because the people attacking Islam in all these threads usually aren't Jews or followers of another religion.
a fair point, most of the jews i know actually support islam, unlike many christians

Because the people attacking Islam in all these threads usually aren't Jews or followers of another religion.
So why take it to an ad-hominem level? We are attempting to discuss an issue, not proclaim whose religion is worst. What if those attacking Islam are atheists/agnostic? If people trying to defend Islam would stop resorting to weak attacks against Christianity, I might consider their arguments more seriously. Yet they don't put any up. They simply counter-attack. Way to go.

Why always bring up Christianity in threads about Islam? :rolleyes: Why not bring up Judaism, or some other religion, or why not just focus on the matter at hand and discuss the actual religion, rather than making some pathetic attempt at tearing apart Christianity?

Can't speak for everyone, but I brought up Christianity because I am a Christian. Of course my knowledge level is much higher with my own faith. I don't feel even a tenth as qualified to make Jewish or Buddhist comparisons.

And I am certainly not tearing apart Christianity. My point, actually, was to defend Islam, which I greatly respect.

Can't speak for everyone, but I brought up Christianity because I am a Christian. Of course my knowledge level is much higher with my own faith. I don't feel even a tenth as qualified to make Jewish or Buddhist comparisons.

And I am certainly not tearing apart Christianity. My point, actually, was to defend Islam, which I greatly respect.
I wasn't referring to anyone specifically; yet I have noted a large amount of posters always shredding Christianity apart, rather than actually tackling the topic's matter at hand, and acknowledging the fact that no, Islam is not perfect and it also has considerable flaws which can and should be debated. You may be using Christianity as a point of reference, yet others use it as a distraction, something I find reprehensible since it's a rather useless evasion tactic.

You may be using Christianity as a point of reference, yet others use it as a distraction, something I find reprehensible since it's a rather useless evasion tactic.

That's true. Happens in every debate thread on this board. Someone gets backed into a logical corner, so they pull out the smoke and mirrors.

That's true. Happens in every debate thread on this board. Someone gets backed into a logical corner, so they pull out the smoke and mirrors.
Agreed; yet when it comes to debates about Islam, this usually happens from the first few minutes, even if the OP was arguing from a completely objective point of view.

There's a verse in Deuteronomy that tells the Israelites to go into the land they will conquer and kill everybody.

The Book of Joshua is full of outright genocidal actions, some of which are carried out on God's command.

The Book of Samuel contains a commandment by God to utterly slaughter a group of people because of something they did centuries before, and when the King at the time, Saul, fails to adequately commit the atrocity, he loses his right to the kingship because of it.

Jesus tells everyone in the Gospels that people who don't follow him will all suffer eternal torment (the Quran says the opposite, incidentally.)

Religious texts are a strange mix. In the end it comes down to how one interprets them, and, even more importantly, how one uses them to guide one's actions.

No where does Jesus advocate viloence.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Jesus scheduled to return, bringing with him plague, famine, war and death? Not to mention some nasty locusts attacking at his behest:

1The fifth angel sounded his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth. The star was given the key to the shaft of the Abyss. 2When he opened the Abyss, smoke rose from it like the smoke from a gigantic furnace. The sun and sky were darkened by the smoke from the Abyss. 3And out of the smoke locusts came down upon the earth and were given power like that of scorpions of the earth. 4They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those people who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads. 5They were not given power to kill them, but only to torture them for five months. And the agony they suffered was like that of the sting of a scorpion when it strikes a man. 6During those days men will seek death, but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will elude them.

Not such a nice guy now huh?