Common Misconceptions About Islam

  • Thread starter Thread starter gurrato_alaien
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Ortho:
I brought bibles through Saudi customs several times. None was shredded.

Personal religious symbols found in luggage are not taken. I have come through Saudi customs several times with people who had purchased religious items in other countries. Nothing was taken. I personally brought carved wooden figures of Hindu gods.

I had one thing taken in customs. It was a wooden carving of a hand. I also shipped a two foot high wooden elephant from Sri Lanka. It was solid wood. The Saudis drilled a hole in the bottom to look for drugs. When they found no drugs, they wished me well and I took my elephant to my car.

Multiple bibles will be confiscated. The person then goes on his way. If the number of religious items in luggage appears to be more than for personal use, they will be confiscated. For example, a dozen crosses will be taken.

Passengers stay on the plane when it lands if they are proceeding to another destination. Not if you are transferring flights. I’ve flown quite a few times myself, and each time I was proceeding to another destination, I got off the airplane and boarded another.

I travelled in and out of Saudi all the time. I think I made several hundred round trips out of Dhahran, Riyadh, and Jedda. I never witnessed the behavior you describe, not dd I hear of it from other people with first hand experience.

Saudi is a dictatorship and police state, and it can be dangerous. However, I suspect the religiously motivated actions you describe are gross exagerations.
Click to expand...
Peace be with you!

OK, so it hasn’t happened to you. But it does happen. You even admitted that if you have multiple Bibles or crosses they are confiscated. How is that OK? Is there any Christian country where Qurans are confiscated? No. Saudi Arabia is run by terrible people…that was my point. I realize that this probably does not happen all the time (as you’ve pointed out), but even if it happens every once in a while, that’s still a bad thing. And, like you said, multiple Bibles and crosses are confiscated, an obvious violation of human rights, not to mention they are STEALING what that person paid for. Bibles and crosses are not drugs or weapons and cannot hurt anyone. There is no need whatsoever to take them from people.

Here is one place I read about this: exorthodoxforchrist.com/saudi_arabia_and_human_rights.htm
There are others, but it’s been a while since I’ve read about this stuff, so I can look for the other ones I found before if you want.

In Christ,
Rand
 
Rand Al'Thor:
Peace be with you!

OK, so it hasn’t happened to you. But it does happen. You even admitted that if you have multiple Bibles or crosses they are confiscated. How is that OK? Is there any Christian country where Qurans are confiscated? No. Saudi Arabia is run by terrible people…that was my point. I realize that this probably does not happen all the time (as you’ve pointed out), but even if it happens every once in a while, that’s still a bad thing. And, like you said, multiple Bibles and crosses are confiscated, an obvious violation of human rights, not to mention they are STEALING what that person paid for. Bibles and crosses are not drugs or weapons and cannot hurt anyone. There is no need whatsoever to take them from people.

Here is one place I read about this: exorthodoxforchrist.com/saudi_arabia_and_human_rights.htm
There are others, but it’s been a while since I’ve read about this stuff, so I can look for the other ones I found before if you want.

In Christ,
Rand
Click to expand...
Perhaps Saudi is run by terrivble people. It’s still important to know the facts.

Multiple bibles are confiscated because it implies one intends to distribute them. Bibles are allowed for personal use, not for distribution. Of course it’s OK. That’s how the Saudis choose to run their country.

I don’t know of any Christian country. What country is a Christian country? Why do you say it is a Christian country? So, I can’t answer if a Christian country confiscates Qurans.

Various countries have customs regulations and routinely confiscate items. I suppose one might consider that stealing, but i think it is a stretch.

I agree bibles are not weapons or drugs. But, any country has the right to prohibit entry to whatever they choose.

I’m not interested in what various web sites say about Saudi. I lived there too long to care what web sites say.
 
As much as we ought to have respect for our brethren , found the following on Mohammed rather fascinating - was 30 years old , in year 600 ! ;last words were ‘destroy jews and Christians ( agreed - King david too , on his death bed leave instructions to take vengeance ona few select enemies - and the contrast with Our Lord and His Power of Grace and forgiveness that has flown to our hearts - even nonchrsitans ! )and that Mohammed’s motto was ‘the sword is the key to heaven and hell’ ; had 14 wives and the favorite Ayesha , he had married when he was 53and she was 9 ! …
Could the essential diffrenece between the two faiths be - recieving The Father Love , in The Person of Our Lord, Christians -and all His children are called to that joyful, loving Family bond,even when many choose to go the way of the prodigal son !
Does Islam show us the hold and power of servile fear - fear of ‘outsiders’, fear / mistrust that God can be so loving and humble as to be with us , even waiting for the fiat of a young virgin …respecting our freedom and dignity …
Yet …is Islam also the antidote , to remind us Christians , to be humble before a God who ‘can raise children out of stones’ …their fidelity to fasting ,tithing , families , even the Bl. Mother and is it that Motherly care that seem to bring the grace into their hearts too - inspite of the terror alerts etc; - when their large numbers are considered , mostly living in peace and often to our embarassement /awe at God’s grace , side on the all important side of life , in matters of birthcontrol, abortion, mothers staying home to care for the young, love of large families , obediance to hierarchy ( amazing how they wait till the’last min’ to hear the date of their Festival days! )courage of dress codes - many an area where the Christians have fallen so short …did The Father foresee our days …and have allowed the growth of Islam …wanting to have all things work for good for those who love Him …

An intersting historical anecdote - Moslems in India too had the sword as the key policy( the history of the Moslem rulers and the cruelty to the fathers, to grab power , is heartbreaking- even the Taj Mahal - a tale of sorrow! !) and one esp. powrful one 'Tipu sultan ’ in a southern state , went on one his rampages - looting , raping and killing , forcibly converting , taking hold of little babies by thier feet and beating them to death on rocks in front of their mothers …( a point to rememeber - many of our Moslem brethren might have had Christian ancestors and be victims of such forced conversions and still be recipients of The Promise - ’ My Mercy is to a thousand generations ! ) So fear and panic gripped the people - the mothers went on 8days of intense prayer , fasting …the 8th day - Sept 8 ,Birthday of our bl. Mother, word came from the Sultan’s capital of mutiny at home and he returned …
The people were gifted with a beautiful devotion - preparing in a special way for The bl. Mother’s birthday - still very much followed and even credited with as a source of the strong family life , vocations and virtue of purity in that culture even to this day !
 
40.png
Ortho:
Another named fallacy!!!
Click to expand...
Would you prefer if I don’t name the fallacies?
40.png
Ortho:
One can reasonably discuss the spread of a religion and the methods employed in the context of the way other religions were spread. I’d say it’s important to note if the spread of one particular religion is an anomaly or the norm.

It becomes more important if people are criticizing the manner in which one religion was spread. That implies a standard, and investigation of that standard in the context of history can provide valuable insights.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Are you saying that because some religion X commits horrible crimes then religion Y is absolved of any responsibility for its own horrible crimes?

Are you saying that Christianity spread through conquest means that Islam is excused from spreading by the sword? Do you excuse the crimes of one man by pointing out the crimes of another?

If you were a lawyer, do you defend an alleged murderer by pointing out that the jails are full of prisoners? Or do you defend the alleged murderer on the particulars of the alleged crime? Methinks you’re just trying on a tu quoque here.

We’re not undertaking a comparative religions discussion here. We’re discussing whether or not Islam (not Christianity or any other religion) was spread by the sword.
 
Dear Ortho,

You said:
I agree Hinduism and Buddhism predominated prior to Islam.

But your story of one man does not demonstrate Indonesia was a forced conversion to Islam. (Are we still using the 51% rule?)

First of all, I use the 51% rule when YOU SAID ON BEHALF OF THE SAUDIS that MOST OF THEM find the Christianity to be boring (reread again).
I never said on behalf of anything that MOST OF the Indonesians are forced into Islam. I believe the Islamization of Indonesian comes in two ways:
  1. The subtle and peaceful way (marriage, etc, like happened in Padjajaran Kingdom). Usually when Islam was the minority.
  2. The harsh way (like happened in Padjajaran Kingdom in Kian Santang era). Usually when Islam was the majority.
    And that’s the fact that refuted your opinion that Islam was NEVER spread by sword in Indonesia.
I hope this clarifies matter.

Neverland.
 
Rodrigo Bivar:
Would you prefer if I don’t name the fallacies?

I disagree. Are you saying that because some religion X commits horrible crimes then religion Y is absolved of any responsibility for its own horrible crimes?

Are you saying that Christianity spread through conquest means that Islam is excused from spreading by the sword? Do you excuse the crimes of one man by pointing out the crimes of another?

If you were a lawyer, do you defend an alleged murderer by pointing out that the jails are full of prisoners? Or do you defend the alleged murderer on the particulars of the alleged crime? Methinks you’re just trying on a tu quoque here.

We’re not undertaking a comparative religions discussion here. We’re discussing whether or not Islam (not Christianity or any other religion) was spread by the sword.
Click to expand...
I love seeing people name fallacies. Go for it.

I said nothing about absolving any religion of horrible crimes. I said it was reasonable to investigate the standrad of criticism.

I said nothing about excusing Islam.

One does not excuse the crimes of one by pointing out the crimes of another.

A lawyer will use whatever defense will resonate with the jury.

Tu quoque! Did it again.

It remains reasonable when discussing the history of Islam to contrast it with the history and practice of other religions. It also remains reasonable to identify the standard by which one is criticizing the actions of a religion. Once the standard is identified it is reasonable to test that standrad by applying it to other religions to determine its applicability

(Keep naming those fallacies.)
 
40.png
Neverland:
Dear Ortho,

You said:
I agree Hinduism and Buddhism predominated prior to Islam.

But your story of one man does not demonstrate Indonesia was a forced conversion to Islam. (Are we still using the 51% rule?)

First of all, I use the 51% rule when YOU SAID ON BEHALF OF THE SAUDIS that MOST OF THEM find the Christianity to be boring (reread again).
I never said on behalf of anything that MOST OF the Indonesians are forced into Islam. I believe the Islamization of Indonesian comes in two ways:
  1. The subtle and peaceful way (marriage, etc, like happened in Padjajaran Kingdom). Usually when Islam was the minority.
  2. The harsh way (like happened in Padjajaran Kingdom in Kian Santang era). Usually when Islam was the majority.
    And that’s the fact that refuted your opinion that Islam was NEVER spread by sword in Indonesia.
I hope this clarifies matter.

Neverland.
Click to expand...
I’m glad you realize most Indonesians were not forced to accept Islam.

I suppose we can then drop the idea that Christianity was never spread by the sword. Kool. Both Christianity and Islam were spread by the sword.
 
40.png
Ortho:
I love seeing people name fallacies. Go for it.
Click to expand...
I suppose I might just point out a logical fallacy without naming it. Would that be better for you?
40.png
Ortho:
I said nothing about absolving any religion of horrible crimes. I said it was reasonable to investigate the standrad of criticism.
Click to expand...
No. It is not reasonable because it would be tu quoque. Logical fallacies are never reasonable. That’s why they are caled logical fallacies.
40.png
Ortho:
I said nothing about excusing Islam.
Click to expand...
That’s your implication - why else would you tu quoque?
40.png
Ortho:
One does not excuse the crimes of one by pointing out the crimes of another.

A lawyer will use whatever defense will resonate with the jury.

Tu quoque! Did it again.
Click to expand...
Shows how little you know about the law. Legal arguments are all about ‘credibility’. I do agree that legal practitioners employ a particular fallacy a lot - that of ad hominem circumstantial, but they wouldn’t use tu quoque.
40.png
Ortho:
It remains reasonable when discussing the history of Islam to contrast it with the history and practice of other religions. It also remains reasonable to identify the standard by which one is criticizing the actions of a religion. Once the standard is identified it is reasonable to test that standrad by applying it to other religions to determine its applicability

(Keep naming those fallacies.)
Click to expand...
I’ve already told you that you’re committing tu quoque. If you want to compare religions, why don’t you compare with Buddhism? Why pick Christianity? That’s because you’re committing tu quoque and comparing with Buddhism wouldn’t turn out the answer you want, even in your tu quoque.
 
Rodrigo Bivar:
I suppose I might just point out a logical fallacy without naming it. Would that be better for you?

No. It is not reasonable because it would be tu quoque. Logical fallacies are never reasonable. That’s why they are caled logical fallacies.

That’s your implication - why else would you tu quoque?

Shows how little you know about the law. Legal arguments are all about ‘credibility’. I do agree that legal practitioners employ a particular fallacy a lot - that of ad hominem circumstantial, but they wouldn’t use tu quoque.

I’ve already told you that you’re committing tu quoque. If you want to compare religions, why don’t you compare with Buddhism? Why pick Christianity? That’s because you’re committing tu quoque and comparing with Buddhism wouldn’t turn out the answer you want, even in your tu quoque.
Click to expand...
No. Don’t drop the names. It’s refreshing to still hear someone naming them in a chat room.

Does a fallacy have to be linked to an argument? What argument did I present? If there is no argument, is there then no fallacy? (I hope not. i do love to hear those fallacies named.)

Why else? Let’s use some imagination. One might investigate the standard for criticism of a religion’s actions in order to evaluate the validity of the criticism.

Oh rats. Now I know little about the law. Does that mean I have to accept reversals and censure for all those juries I led down the garden path? Perhaps I need advice from a humanities major. Please don’t tell the clients.

I didn’t pick Buddhism because I figured you probably kenw less about Buddhism than Islam. Stick with the familiar.

Now I remember what tu quoque is. Is this the one about the one legged ballerina who wore a one-one?
 
Ortho, what exactly is your objection to people pointing out the logical fallacies that other people are committing?

A logical fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. What is wrong with pointing out errors in someone’s reasoning?
 
I understand Islam perfectly. That is why I don’t like it. Muslims persecute Christians and deny them equal rights. That is a simple fact. If anyone denies this then let’s meet for Mass in Saudi Arabia.
 
40.png
cestusdei:
I understand Islam perfectly. That is why I don’t like it. Muslims persecute Christians and deny them equal rights. That is a simple fact. If anyone denies this then let’s meet for Mass in Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
THAT IS A GOOD IDEA, CESTUSDEI 👍
 
40.png
Ortho:
No. Don’t drop the names. It’s refreshing to still hear someone naming them in a chat room.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your kind permission to continue naming the logical fallacies you commit.
40.png
Ortho:
Does a fallacy have to be linked to an argument? What argument did I present? If there is no argument, is there then no fallacy? (I hope not. i do love to hear those fallacies named.)
Click to expand...
The term ‘argument’ used is not the layperson’s understanding – i.e. a disagreement. Perhaps you might want to consult this reference, atheism.about.com/od/logicalarguments/a/argument.htm , to determine what an ‘argument’ in logical reasoning means.
40.png
Ortho:
Why else? Let’s use some imagination. One might investigate the standard for criticism of a religion’s actions in order to evaluate the validity of the criticism.
Click to expand...
The standard of criticism of a religion’s actions does not involve criticizing any other religion. Using common sense, one might consult morality, ethics and common decency.
40.png
Ortho:
Oh rats. Now I know little about the law. Does that mean I have to accept reversals and censure for all those juries I led down the garden path? Perhaps I need advice from a humanities major. Please don’t tell the clients.
Click to expand...
Perhaps it might be better if you understood the subjects you comment on. Just an advice. You don’t have to take it.
40.png
Ortho:
I didn’t pick Buddhism because I figured you probably kenw less about Buddhism than Islam. Stick with the familiar.
Click to expand...
Oh… I know Islam better than you think. That’s why I’m not a Muslim.
40.png
Ortho:
Now I remember what tu quoque is. Is this the one about the one legged ballerina who wore a one-one?
Click to expand...
Seems like you’ve run out of any substantive statements.

Hasta la vista, baby,
Rodrigo
 
40.png
discipleofJesus:
Ortho, what exactly is your objection to people pointing out the logical fallacies that other people are committing?

A logical fallacy is, very generally, an error in reasoning. What is wrong with pointing out errors in someone’s reasoning?
Click to expand...
I haven’t objected. But what I haven’t seen is the description of the particular error in reasoning. Have you? Care to provide one? If you do, please use a named fallacy. I love that.
 
40.png
cestusdei:
I understand Islam perfectly. That is why I don’t like it. Muslims persecute Christians and deny them equal rights. That is a simple fact. If anyone denies this then let’s meet for Mass in Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
I deny it and will meet you for mass on King Khalid street by Eve’s jewelery in Khobar Friday morning at 9am. After mass I’ll clear up your questions about Catholicism since I have a perfect understanding of it.
 
Rodrigo Bivar:
Thanks for your kind permission to continue naming the logical fallacies you commit.

The term ‘argument’ used is not the layperson’s understanding – i.e. a disagreement. Perhaps you might want to consult this reference, atheism.about.com/od/logicalarguments/a/argument.htm , to determine what an ‘argument’ in logical reasoning means.

The standard of criticism of a religion’s actions does not involve criticizing any other religion. Using common sense, one might consult morality, ethics and common decency.

Perhaps it might be better if you understood the subjects you comment on. Just an advice. You don’t have to take it.

Oh… I know Islam better than you think. That’s why I’m not a Muslim.

Seems like you’ve run out of any substantive statements.

Hasta la vista, baby,
Rodrigo
Click to expand...
You’re welcome. Keep naming those fallacies.

Glad you know what an argument is. Who says the humanities are a waste? Now, what argument did I present which you label as a named fallacy?

The standard of criticism itself is deserving of examination. Investigation of the precedents for the application of that standard is reasonable.

I agree it’s always good to understand a topic. That’s why I am so thrilled when I see these named fallacies.

Wonderful that you understand Islam better than I think. I should learn never to underestimate a man who names fallacies.

Was your final statement really, “Seems like you’ve run out of any substantive statements.”

Will you be meeting us for mass in Khobar on Friday?
 
40.png
Ortho:
I haven’t objected. But what I haven’t seen is the description of the particular error in reasoning. Have you? Care to provide one? If you do, please use a named fallacy. I love that.
Click to expand...
Well it is assumed that people know what logical fallacies are. For example, if I accuse you of commiting a straw man fallacy or a red herring fallacy, it is assumed that you (and others) would know what the meaning (or description) of those named fallacies are and that if you (and others) don’t know, it is assumed you will look up the meaning (or description) of those named fallacies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top