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

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

I do not think the Visigoths were prophets of God, unlike Muhammad - who commanded the Muslims to persecute the Jews.

Whatever they were, the Visigoths sure did not follow the teachings of Jesus Christ in any dealings with their Jews.

But Islamo-apologists seem unable or unwilling to understand this point.

 

[Montalban]

Montalban, my brother, your incorrigible ability to misread (or misrepresent) what I write never ceases to amaze me!

Lack of insight leads you to repeat ad nauseum an apology, and call it something else.

You set immediately to justify their attacks on the Spanish lands of the Visigoths. They didn’t just attack the Visigoths, but the Basques of northern Spain, the Suebi of North-Western Spain and the Franks of southern Gaul.

If we Christians want to condemn Muslim intolerance or aggression, we had better admit our own history of intolerance and aggression. If we want Muslims to engage in self-criticism, we’d better show that we are capable of it ourselves, we should show them how it is done.

Which is again to justify their aggression. **Every **instance I’ve mentioned of Islamic aggression you’ve attempted to address with an example of Chrisitan aggression FIRST -to justify that of Islam.

No matter where Islam struck, you say Christians did something to provoke it!

You misrepresent your own posts by pretending to do anything but apologise for Islam!

 

[Montalban]

I do not think the Visigoths were prophets of God, unlike Muhammad - who commanded the Muslims to persecute the Jews.

Whatever they were, the Visigoths sure did not follow the teachings of Jesus Christ in any dealings with their Jews.

But Islamo-apologists seem unable or unwilling to understand this point.

I’m sure he has a reason for believing that the Franks also deserved to be attacked! Every instance Islam’s attacked, he’s provided an attempt to explain it by citing something evil Chrisitans have done… even to the point of inventing such evil deeds

 

[paarsurrey]

Lack of insight leads you to repeat ad nauseum an apology, and call it something else.
You set immediately to justify their attacks on the Spanish lands of the Visigoths. They didn’t just attack the Visigoths, but the Basques of northern Spain, the Suebi of North-Western Spain and the Franks of southern Gaul.
Which is again to justify their aggression. **Every **instance I’ve mentioned of Islamic aggression you’ve attempted to address with an example of Chrisitan aggression FIRST -to justify that of Islam.
No matter where Islam struck, you say Christians did something to provoke it!
You misrepresent your own posts by pretending to do anything but apologise for Islam!

Hi

If what has been mentioned by nonsumd is a truth, I think there is no harm going to come to you if you accept that. Why should you have to be partial in accepting that in the first place? If he says something wrong, then of course, you can also respond in a nice way rationally and reasonably.

Thanks

 

[nonsumd]

I do not think the Visigoths were prophets of God, unlike Muhammad - who commanded the Muslims to persecute the Jews.

Whatever they were, the Visigoths sure did not follow the teachings of Jesus Christ in any dealings with their Jews.

But Islamo-apologists seem unable or unwilling to understand this point.

Rodrigo, my brother, if we are talking strictly about the teachings of Jesus Christ as interpreted in light of His giving Himself over to death, then those teachings for our salvationdo not easily justify even war in defense of Christendom, much less all the historical aggression and oppression done in the name of Christ.

However, if we are talking about the body of teachings that have motivated or justified Christian aggression or oppression, we can say:

1. the OT regularly advocates hostility to non-believers, extending unto the slaughter of individuals innocent of actual sin (e.g. Canaanite infants); and
2. the NT, particularly the Gospel of John, speak of “the Jews” as enemies of Christ’s followers, which in history has very commonly been read to indicate that the Jews are collectively the enemies of Christians and thus enemies of God.

The Visigothic rulers and the bishops supporting them believed they were following Christ’s teachings in persecuting the Jews.

We modern Christians say that they were wrong, terribly wrong, that they misread the Bible.

Is that very different from non-extremist Muslims who say the extremist Muslims are wrong in pulling the Qur’anic injunctions commanding warfare against non-believers out of their specific historical context and assuming they are commands applicable in all relations between Muslims and non-Muslims through all time?

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

nonsumd:

We modern Christians say that they were wrong, terribly wrong, that they misread the Bible.

Is that very different from non-extremist Muslims who say the extremist Muslims are wrong in pulling the Qur’anic injunctions commanding warfare against non-believers out of their specific historical context and assuming they are commands applicable in all relations between Muslims and non-Muslims through all time?

One is a misinterpretation of scripture and the example of their Messiah.

The other is a correct interpretation of scripture and the example of their prophet.

Surely you can tell the difference?

For a start, Jesus Christ never killed any Jew, unlike you know who.

 

[nonsumd]

I’m sure he has a reason for believing that the Franks also deserved to be attacked! Every instance Islam’s attacked, he’s provided an attempt to explain it by citing something evil Chrisitans have done… even to the point of inventing such evil deeds

Montalban, my brother, have I ever said anyone, Christian, Muslim, or otherwise, “deserved” in an absolute sense to be attacked?

I have not said this anymore than I have said anyone, Christian, Muslim, or otherwise, has a right to attack.

You are putting words into your strawman’s mouth.

If a Muslim tells me that the early Muslim wars of conquest were launched purely out of the goodness of the aggressors’ hearts, purely out of their desire to follow the command of God, I would have to tell him that I would imagine lust for wealth and power had as much or more to do with it.

If a Muslim tells me that present-day Muslim extremists commit their violence purely out of submission to God’s will, I would tell him that I think they are acting more out of their selfish, human motivations. And there are many Muslims who do denounce the extremists for, at best, misinterpreting God’s will and, at worst, misappropriating God’s Word and the example of the Prophet’s life to justify their own evildoing.

You insist on peddling a caricature of early Muslim conquests and rule. Yes, there was bloodshed. Yes, there was dhimmitude. But the Monophysite Copts, among others, viewed the Muslims’ driving the Byzantines out of half of their empire as divine retribution for Catholic Byzantine persecution of their fellow non-Catholic Christians.

Christians remained the majority of the population of the Muslim-dominated east for at least three centuries after the conquest, centuries during which Byzantium remained a formidable power. If Muslim rule were as unmitigatedly black as you paint it, why did not that Christian majority revolt and hand the half of the old empire back to the Byzantine emperors?

So, the real historical situation was not so black-and-white as you are painting it.

I have no wish to perpetuate demonizing caricatures of either Christian civilization or Islamic civilization.

 

[nonsumd]

One is a misinterpretation of scripture and the example of their Messiah.

The other is a correct interpretation of scripture and the example of their prophet.

Surely you can tell the difference?

For a start, Jesus Christ never killed any Jew, unlike you know who.

If you consider Muhammad to be the equivalent of the Messiah for Jews or Christians, it appears your understanding of Islam is quite deficient.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

If you consider Muhammad to be the equivalent of the Messiah for Jews or Christians, it appears your understanding of Islam is quite deficient.

On the contrary. It is your understanding of what I wrote that is quite deficient.

Let me make it clear for you:

One is a misinterpretation of scripture and the example of their Messiah = Christians misinterpreting the NT and the example of Jesus Christ.

The other is a correct interpretation of scripture and the example of their prophet = Muslims making correct interpretation of the Quran and the example of Muhammad

Surely you can tell the difference? Obviously not.

For a start, Jesus Christ never killed any Jew, unlike you know who = clue to the above.

 

[nonsumd]

Rodrigo, my brother, I am not going to repeat what Edwin/Contarini wrote about non-Muslims arrogating to themselves the right to define what true Islam is for Muslims. I totally agree with his position on that.

If you think that the only valid interpretation of the Qur’an, Hadith, etc. is that of Osama bin Laden and his ilk and, agreeing with Osama bin Laden and his ilk, that non-extremist Muslims, the majority by far of all Muslims, are “fake Muslims,” then I wish the Muslim extremists and you and all those non-Muslims who consider the extremist Muslims the only “true Muslims” would fly off to another planet and fight jihad/crusade to your hearts’ content there.

And you can take all the Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh fndamentalists who happen to love war more than peace with you.

 

[Rodrigo_Bivar]

Sorry but this is also my planet and you do not have the right to tell me to fly to another one.

About Islam, it is clear i know more about it than you and your buddy put together.

For a start, most Muslims of whatever level of moderation/extremism (at least those who call themselves Sunnis and Shias) understand that the jihad verses in the Quran are there in black and white. They do not interpret them to be violent or peace. They just are.

These Muslims (who call themselves Sunnis or Shias) also understand that Muhammad killed Jews.

Why do most of these Muslims not kill Jews themselves? Because their innate humanity has over-ridden their desire to follow the example of their prophet. They do this by rationalizing away the need to jihad. But they don’t deny the jihad verses exist or that Muhammad killed Jews.

In other words, these ‘peaceful’ non-jihadist Muslims acknowledge Muhammad’s behavior and the jihadist teachings in the Quran but choose not to do it themselves.

They have not repudiated those jihadist teachings nor denied Muhammad killed Jews.

On Muslim heretics like paarsurrey deny Muhammad killed Jews.

 

[paarsurrey]

Rodrigo, my brother, I am not going to repeat what Edwin/Contarini wrote about non-Muslims arrogating to themselves the right to define what true Islam is for Muslims. I totally agree with his position on that.

If you think that the only valid interpretation of the Qur’an, Hadith, etc. is that of Osama bin Laden and his ilk and, agreeing with Osama bin Laden and his ilk, that non-extremist Muslims, the majority by far of all Muslims, are “fake Muslims,” then I wish the Muslim extremists and you and all those non-Muslims who consider the extremist Muslims the only “true Muslims” would fly off to another planet and fight jihad/crusade to your hearts’ content there.

And you can take all the Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh fndamentalists who happen to love war more than peace with you.

Hi

I agree with you . Osama Bin Laden is not a representative of Muhammad/Islam/Quran, he is just a politician using Islam’s name as a cover.

Thanks

 

[George_Waters]

Yeah! I want to live in peace too and there’s no room here for people like YOU!

OK… you can stay Rodrigo!

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… I agree with you . Osama Bin Laden is not a representative of Muhammad/Islam/Quran, he is just a politician using Islam’s name as a cover…

You may be right, but Osama is not the problem.

The problem is his followers and supporters, which includes 50% of the Saudi Arabians. I wonder if it has anything to do with the religion they follow.

 

[jonfan]

Hmmmm. I think we have to realize that the majority of Muslims do follow the grass roots effort of the Muslim Brotherhood(1) that began in the 50’s. There was always an underlining current of the extreme Islamic view as we could see in that late 1800’s, when in we know today as Israel, Arab’s slaughtered Jews that bought land from Arab landovers simply for cultivating crop and making a profit. However the Muslim Brotherhood definately brought this thought to the Islamic mainstream where it’s main target of terror and hatred is the west. Usama Bin Laden was a student of this philosphy as are a lot of other terrorist sects. Now we have the reverse where the minority of Muslims are peaceful and the majority follow extremist Islam. Not all of them act on their beliefs but they defiantely follow it. I know a few Muslims who don’t practive this form of Islam and would proudly defend America. But once again those Muslims are in the minority.

Reference:
(1)Muslim Brotherhood
google.com/search?hl=en&q=Muslim+Brotherhood

 

[Aramis]

Rodrigo, my brother, if we are talking strictly about the teachings of Jesus Christ as interpreted in light of His giving Himself over to death, then those teachings for our salvationdo not easily justify even war in defense of Christendom, much less all the historical aggression and oppression done in the name of Christ.

However, if we are talking about the body of teachings that have motivated or justified Christian aggression or oppression, we can say:

1. the OT regularly advocates hostility to non-believers, extending unto the slaughter of individuals innocent of actual sin (e.g. Canaanite infants); and
2. the NT, particularly the Gospel of John, speak of “the Jews” as enemies of Christ’s followers, which in history has very commonly been read to indicate that the Jews are collectively the enemies of Christians and thus enemies of God.

The Visigothic rulers and the bishops supporting them believed they were following Christ’s teachings in persecuting the Jews.

We modern Christians say that they were wrong, terribly wrong, that they misread the Bible.

Is that very different from non-extremist Muslims who say the extremist Muslims are wrong in pulling the Qur’anic injunctions commanding warfare against non-believers out of their specific historical context and assuming they are commands applicable in all relations between Muslims and non-Muslims through all time?

Yes, for Christ replaces the Old Law of the Old Testament for the most part. And much of the Old Testament is a History, rather than instruction.

Some parts of the Koran are instruction… often the most violent parts are seen as instruction.

The Old testament is important for proving Jesus, not for directing Christian Life, save for those parts Christ quite obviously says are continued… like the commandments.

 

[ransomthecaptiv]

perhaps we can start a thread called mohamedan crocodile tears? or maybe we should go to a mohamedan forum and say were sick of all the whining mohamedans? i’m sick of all these mohamedans cryin on catholic forums. poor me! poor us mohamedans. knock it off! when Christendom again fully wakes i’m sure the job the crusaders left undone will be finished! this isnt about usoma bubba. this is about islam or is it mohamedism?
viva la Falange! long live Christion Falangism! santiago de matomorros pray for us. our lady of victory pray for us!

 

[obadiah]

perhaps we can start a thread called mohamedan crocodile tears? or maybe we should go to a mohamedan forum and say were sick of all the whining mohamedans? i’m sick of all these mohamedans cryin on catholic forums. poor me! poor us mohamedans. knock it off! when Christendom again fully wakes i’m sure the job the crusaders left undone will be finished! this isnt about usoma bubba. this is about islam or is it mohamedism?
viva la Falange! long live Christion Falangism! santiago de matomorros pray for us. our lady of victory pray for us!

REMEMBER THE ALAMO.

 

[paarsurrey]

You may be right, but Osama is not the problem.

The problem is his followers and supporters, which includes 50% of the Saudi Arabians. I wonder if it has anything to do with the religion they follow.

Hi

They are also wrong in following Osama Bin Laden. Islam/Quran/Muhammad are neither responsible for their thought nor for their actions, that must be very clear.

Thanks

 

[obadiah]

Hi

They are also wrong in following Osama Bin Laden. Islam/Quran/Muhammad are neither responsible for their thought nor for their actions, that must be very clear.

Thanks

UNTIL WE GET RID OF ISLAM/QURAN/MUHAMMAD and her followers including you paarsurrey, there will never be peace in the world. DEATH TO ISLAM.