I'm sick of the rabid Islamophobia on these boards...

[burnside]

The link i gave in the previous post was about a student who wanted to be a bomber and had to be told by a lecturer to switch off from the terrorist sites he was viewing on College premises.
Just in case they take the page out.It should be easy enough to find in their archives.

 

[Montalban]

Now who sounds like a “post-modernist”!

Then you clearly don’t understand the term.

If I were talking to a Muslim talking nonsense like “Islam spread only through peaceful means,” then I would happily point out to him that the Arab armies that swept out of the peninsula in the 7th c. were not just out for a picnic excursion.

When we are speaking of such communities ranging over vast stretches of time and space as we are when we speak of “Islam” or “Christianity”/“The West,” if we are honest with ourselves we must admit that we cannot reduce a whole such community to the role of either “vicitim” or “victimizer.”

Sure, you’re more than welcome to ignore the Islamic opinion that has been consistant in promoting jihard through non-peaceful means.

Muslims have oppressed non-Muslims, including Christians. Christians have oppressed non-Christians, including Muslims. Recognizing this does not excuse either side of wrongdoing.

You are correct here. But it’s still based on the position of refusing to examine what’s central to each’s beliefs.

This is also written into the Qur’an (sura al-Ma’idah 65-68, Dawood translation, emphasis added):
This shows that, as far as Jews and Christians are concerned, a Muslim is enjoined by his Qur’an not to forcibly convert them. The Qur’an instructs Christians and Jews to keep faithful to their respective revelations – of course, with the proviso that they interpret them correctly, i.e. apparently in the light of the Qur’an. The chapter as a whole denounces “unbelievers” but also allows that Jews and Christians could be “believers” even if they do not become Muslims – Muslims seem to be instructed to give Jews and Christians the “benefit of the doubt.”

The Koran doesn’t ask Chrisitans to be faithful Christians. You miss the point of the Islamic belief that people like Moses, Jesus et al were ‘Moslem’.

Moslems believe that they gave a message from al-lah that was Islamic - and that Jews and Christians have corrupted this message - else no need for Muhammed to have come.

When Christians are asked to keep to the teachings of Christ it would be in the sense of keeping to Islamic teaching as Moslems believe Jesus taught.

All your assumptions are simply false. You offer no attempt with dealing with Islam as it is, but rather revert to truisms.

 

[Montalban]

(cont.)

Do you really want to go there?

Why not. Nothing you say denies that the teachings of exploitation to Islam were central to Islam. Sure, you want to dig up something that concerned ONLY CATHOLICS that was written 1,215 years AFTER Christ.

The early Muslims did not invent the idea of dhimmitude for those who did not share their religion.

Yes, they did. 600 years before the Lateran Council you evidence.

Christians thought and legislated and acted according to the same principle with respect to non-Christians, especially the Jews.

Again you’re showing a lack of understanding of what are different issues.

Edward I (for e.g.) expelled the Jews from England. He considered himself a Christian. Can you show me where there’s one single Christian teaching he followed in expelling the Jews. No.

Islam’s Koran and Hadith suppress Christians and Jews. It is central to Islamic thought. It is not to Christianity. It’s why Christians have easily dumped such notions and Islam remains oppressive.

You’ve yet to show a single causal link between the teachings of Christ and any Christian discrimination.

 

[Montalban]

You are reading deconstruction into what I am saying.

That is what you’re saying; that one can’t address “Moslem” because the term is so broad as to lose meaning… in terms of describing what Moslems do

Of course, we can say that in order for us to speak of “Muslims,” we must recognize that the category of people we want to designate as “Muslims” share a certain set of beliefs.

Of course, to be Muslim includes believing in ideas like “Muhammad was sent by God as His last prophet to bring His definitive and incorruptible revelation.”

All Muslims agree with this (I can say the “all” here more confidently than I could say “All Christians believe in the divinity of Christ,” since manifestly quite a few do not).

That’s again another nonsense. Some Moslems deny Muhammed was the last prophet. Just look at paarsurrey and his 20 million co-religionists.

But does being Muslim necessarily include holding to ideas like “all non-believers should die” (as I have often read on these boards) or “converting the whole world to Islam should be accomplished through military conquest of un-believers”?

That is the crux of this debate; do they in fact hold this view. You’ve simply offered that they don’t. Based on you repeating that they don’t.

Many, many Muslims would disagree with those propositions.

In walks the truism

And *jihad *does have a wider range of meanings than just “armed struggle for the faith.”

I noted this already!

You seem to be characterizing that particular meaning of jihad as some sort of “doctrinal DNA” that Muslims can’t lose unless they renounce Islam altogether.

Not at all. You’ve now gone from truisms to straw-man, in a valiant effort to pack as much fallacy into one series of posts.
I have recognised Jihad has a wider meaning. I’ve also stated that the idea of Jihad as war is central to Islam. I stated this, because it is true. Check this out

And has the "‘invasion’ of Western culture ever been going on without some kind of actual manipulation, interference, or aggression by Western powers?

That’s right, the US Army forces Saudis to listen to Madonna

 

[obadiah]

You will have to produce proof that each and every Muslim who has ever existed has believed that the internal non-violent jihad excludes showing goodwill to non-Muslims and moreover that there has absolutely never been the case that a Muslim has shown goodwill to a non-Muslim.

Otherwise, you are just showing that you hate Muslims so much that you are unwilling even to imagine that Muslims could be capable of doing good and doing good under the influence of their religion as **they (not you) **interpret it.

The trouble with hating a stereotype is that one inevitably becomes like one’s stereotype. You accuse all Muslims of hating all non-Muslims, and you seem to return them the favor.

You don’t call yourself a Christian, so I will refrain from pointing out to you that even if all Muslims indeed hated you, Jesus would still ask you to love them, all of them.

If you love Islam so much, CONVERT. ISLAM IS A BLOODY RELIGION. Why do you as a Catholic defend the ANTICHRIST?

 

[Montalban]

If you love Islam so much, CONVERT. ISLAM IS A BLOODY RELIGION. Why do you as a Catholic defend the ANTICHRIST?

Has anyone started a thread called…
I’m sick of the Christians fawning to Islam on these boards…

 

[obadiah]

nonsumd,
Historical points: the IRA was communist: written into their long-standing platform. It was founded by a Protestant. It was run, ultimately, like a mafia and richly funded by the USSR.

I think all Christians can agree that when it took to violence it violated Christianity.

PROOVE IT.

 

[angelusm]

The aim of islam is to conquer the world. Not with love but with violence. They are doing it in Europe and European countries will have a big problem in the future. In the US it hasn’t gone so far. Remember that Christians are bieng persecuted and killed in muslim countries every day.

 

[Palladio]

PROOVE IT.

Are you joking?

 

[Montalban]

PROOVE IT.

Start off with this
“The Official IRA had an essentially Marxist approach”

 

[obadiah]

Are you joking?

I am quite serious. The IRA Communist? Started by a Protestant? GIVE ME A BREAK you should go to the conspiracies thread. Again I say PROOVE IT.

 

[Palladio]

I am quite serious. The IRA Communist? Started by a Protestant? GIVE ME A BREAK you should go to the conspiracies thread. Again I say PROOVE IT.

I think you need to start reading and stop issuing commands. (Also, prove is the word you are trying to use, and the antecedent of “it” is unclear.)

Puplic libraries have catalogues, often on line.

Hit the books.

 

[Montalban]

I am quite serious. The IRA Communist? Started by a Protestant? GIVE ME A BREAK you should go to the conspiracies thread. Again I say PROOVE IT.

See Appeal to incredulity

 

[Montalban]

I think you need to start reading and stop issuing commands. (Also, prove is the word you are trying to use, and the antecedent of “it” is unclear.)

Puplic libraries have catalogues, often on line.

Hit the books.

Indeed, the “Appeal to Incredulity” we see being practiced here is a logical fallacy, borne out often by ignorance (as according to Wiki’s site I linked above)

Even Michael Collins joined the IRB (precursor of the IRA) at the insistance of a Protestant

Sam Maguire, a Protestant republican from Dunmanway, County Cork, introduced the 19 year old Collins into the IRB.

 

[Palladio]

See Appeal to incredulity

Most Americans know little about the IRA.

Most Brits seem to think Americans completely bankrolled it.

I feel a syllogism forming…

God bless.

 

[obadiah]

See Appeal to incredulity

I do not believe wiki, it’s too easy to edit it. I need evidence from the IRA’s own sources themselves. Until then I will continue to believe they are a Catholic organization.

 

[obadiah]

Indeed, the “Appeal to Incredulity” we see being practiced here is a logical fallacy, borne out often by ignorance (as according to Wiki’s site I linked above)

Even Michael Collins joined the IRB (precursor of the IRA) at the insistance of a Protestant

Sam Maguire, a Protestant republican from Dunmanway, County Cork, introduced the 19 year old Collins into the IRB.

This is way off topic. Back to the muslims.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Is it OK to quote Osama bin Laden?

Is it OK to quote al Jezzira?

is it OK to quote the Koran (albeit in English)?

 

[Montalban]

I do not believe wiki, it’s too easy to edit it.

Yes, it’s all false (how about that for an appeal)

I need evidence from the IRA’s own sources themselves.

WWW’s available for you.

Until then I will continue to believe they are a Catholic organization.

You do that !

 

[Moneo]

1 Amen, amen I say to you: He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up another way, the same is a thief and a robber. 2 But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out. 4 And when he hath let out his own sheep, he goeth before them: and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. 5 But a stranger they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers.

6 This proverb Jesus spoke to them. But they understood not what he spoke to them. 7 Jesus therefore said to them again: Amen, amen I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All others, as many as have come, are thieves and robbers: and the sheep heard them not. 9 I am the door. By me, if any man enter in, he shall be saved: and he shall go in, and go out, and shall find pastures. 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I am come that they may have life, and may have it more abundantly. John 10: 1-10

Right there is where the whole “Islamophobia” nonsense ends for me.

I’m not afraid of it. I don’t like it. It isn’t true, it isn’t holy and if you can’t handle someone saying it, then tough.

There is clearly an incitement to violence against non-believers in the name of their Allah that has been present from its inception and a propensity for it that is all too active now. Mohammed didn’t have what it took to be a genuine prophet, for the minute he faced serious rejection and persecution he went out and got himself an army and started slaughtering his way to acceptance. It’s right there in the Quran and the Hadith, along with the Mohammed’s commands to his followers practice it themselves. If the fact that some kaffir points it out and accuses them of being disingenuous or obfuscatory when they hide it while insisting on the peaceful nature of their religion upsets them, then tough.

In the West, where the moral code was determined by the Judeo-Christian tradition, that’s called mendacity, LYING. It’s wrong, and when we do it, it’s a SIN. It has to be REPENTED.

In Islam it’s called TAQIYYA, religious deception. It’s a VIRTUE. In some circumstances, it’s A RELIGIOUS OR MORAL OBLIGATION.

For me, the whole debate as to whether or not the Muslims worship the same God that we do is a non-issue. They believe that they do, although they believe that they do it perfectly while we’re the ones who corrupted God’s revelation and it was therefore necessary for Him to send Mohammed. They’re wrong. If they can’t handle some kaffir saying it, then tough.