Saudi School's Books Racist

[pro_universal]

In other words, you don’t actually know of any works of Islamic theology to discuss.

Last I checked, the Jewish Anti-Defamation Leage and the Sydney Morning Herald weren’t sources of authority for Muslims

This is really just absurd now. If you want to discuss Islamic theology in this context, fine…but you should at least have a piece of theological work to discuss.

Your claims about Christianity are summary and totally unsupported, so at this point, all we have on that front is “Montablan says so.”

I think your list of sources really explains your grossly inaccurate and grossly anti-Muslim position very well. If I tried, I doubt I could come up with a more flagrantly biased set of sources to explain any subject whatsoever. If your idea of learning about Islam is reading Israeli intelligence websites, well…I’m afraid there’s not a school in the world that can help you to learn about Islam

 

[Montalban]

In other words, you don’t actually know of any works of Islamic theology to discuss.

In other words you want to deny those Islamic clerics have any knowledg of Islam.

Last I checked, the Jewish Anti-Defamation Leage and the Sydney Morning Herald weren’t sources of authority for Muslims

If only that was the sum of the evidence I had cited

This is really just absurd now. If you want to discuss Islamic theology in this context, fine…but you should at least have a piece of theological work to discuss.

I cited the Koran, and Hadith and modern clerics interpretations of it.

AND YOU STILL HAVEN’T SHOWN CAUSALITY. Is this a record attempt?

Your claims about Christianity are summary and totally unsupported, so at this point, all we have on that front is “Montablan says so.”

All you need do is show the ‘specific context’ of the verse about turn the other cheek - which you claim to be relevant to a limited situation.

 

[pro_universal]

Well, you can hyperventilate if you like, but if you’d like to continue discussing you’ll have to actually have some work of Muslim theology to talk about.

SMH and Israeli intelligence articles about what someone said on some day to who-knows-what audience are not works of theology, they aren’t even glosses. It’s ridiculous that we’re even at the point of having to say that.

So…let’s see the work. If you don’t have any, fine, but don’t expect a response.

 

[Montalban]

Well, you can hyperventilate if you like, but if you’d like to continue discussing you’ll have to actually have some work of Muslim theology to talk about.

So the Islamic opinion is not ‘some work of Muslim theology’, reducing 1400 years of such ‘opinion’ to something pointless.

SMH and Israeli intelligence articles about what someone said on some day to who-knows-what audience are not works of theology, they aren’t even glosses. It’s ridiculous that we’re even at the point of having to say that.

It is indeed. As I’ve noted twice already that’s not the only evidence I presented. You must open both your eyes when you read next time LOL!

So…let’s see the work. If you don’t have any, fine, but don’t expect a response.

If you want to bow out, that’s up to you. You think Moslem “opinion” is worthless and Moslem clerics ignorant.

Well folks…a few things Pro_universal needs to fix up
a) show any link between the verse he quotes about Jews taking over cities and a Catholic who has (shockingly) killed many.
b) acknowledge that Christians aren’t Jews (one would think that this is obvious) but he seems to think that we’re bound to all the rules and regulations of the Old Testament (I better stop eating this ham & pineapple pizza)
2) update his knowledge of the term ‘relativist argument’ as opposed to “Reductio Ad Absurdum”
3) deal with the fact that the Koran is ‘final’ (this can be ‘homework’)
See
usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/prophet/finalprophet.html
4) show the context he believes exists for “turn the other cheek”; and its limitations.
5)
a) show why the clerics I’ve cited don’t know what they’re talking about
b) why South Africa and Australia possess their own “Islamic schools of thought”; making them unrepresentative of the wider Islamic opinion
c) address any of the evidence I’ve cited in post #17 - which may or not be only from South Africa and Australia

Though I do love his latest attack on Islam. For 1,400 years Islamic opinion has been valued. It’s why Moslems still write to seek fatwas, or ‘rulings’ on questions in Islam. It’s the Islamic equivalent of ‘tradition’ in Islam. Pro_universal thinks that this has nothing to do with Moslem theology… that it’s not a ‘work’ of Islam.

 

[Montalban]

For anyone unfamiliar with Islam, it’s central work is the Koran. Following this in importance is the Hadith, which is the sayings of Muhammad and his close followers. It is used as a guide to see how the Koran worked in actual history.

“A hadith is a saying of Muhammad or a report about something he did. Over time, during the first few centuries of Islam, it became obvious that many so-called hadith were in fact spurious sayings that had been fabricated for various motives, at best to encourage believers to act righteously and at worse to corrupt believers’ understanding of Islam and to lead them astray. Since Islamic legal scholars were utilizing hadith as an adjunct to the Qur’an in their development of the Islamic legal system, it became critically important to have reliable collections of hadith. While the early collections of hadith often contained hadith that were of questionable origin, gradually collections of authenticated hadith called sahih (lit. true, correct) were compiled. Such collections were made possible by the development of the science of hadith criticism, a science at the basis of which was a critical analysis of the chain of (oral) transmission (isnad) of the hadith going all the way back to Muhammad. The two most highly respected collections of hadith are the authenticated collections the Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. (Sahih literally means “correct, true, valid, or sound.”) In addition to these, four other collections came to be well-respected, although not to the degree of Bukhari and Muslim’s sahih collections. These four other collections are the Sunan of Tirmidhi, Nasa’i, Ibn Majah, and Abu Da’ud. Together these four and the two sahih collections are called the “six books” (al-kutub al-sitta). Two other important collections, in particular, are the Muwatta of Ibn Malik, the founder of the Maliki school of law, and the Musnad of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the founder of the Hanbali school of law.”
uga.edu/islam/hadith.html

Following this is Islamic opinion. There are several major schools which I could quote from via Andrew Bostom’s great work “The Legacy of Jihad” but I chose to let modern Islamic clerics speak for themselves.

In an effort to ‘defend’ Islam we see Pro_universal attack the credentials of Islamic clerics in Australia and South Africa simply by virtue that they are in Australia and South Africa.

Worse than that he does not recognise the continuing history of Islamic opinion into the modern era, believing that such opinion has nothing to do with Islamic theology. His most novel idea to date.

There’s a great discussion on historical context at
frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24999

 

[artist3189]

news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=94224

meedo, you claim the Quran does not say all Jews are pigs, but only certain Jews and that we should ask a Muslim. From what I have read and from you have provided it does seem the whole pig thing is labeling only specific Jews.

Unfortunately for you case Sheikh Feiz Mohammed, the head of the Global Islamic Youth Center was caught on film calling Jews pigs and urging children to die for Allah. So here we have one Muslim saying the Quran doesn’t say that all Jews are pigs and a Sheikh making no distinction between a particular group of sinful Jews and all Jews. The Sheikh’s urgings for little jihadist to kill Jews also seems to cast serious doubt on the claim that Islam is a religion of peace.

What are we to believe meedo? We oft hear there is only one Islam, but there seem to be at least two mutually exclusive interpretation of what is the one true Islam. One peaceful one violent. It seems Muslims need to sort out their faith and let the rest of us know if we can live in peace with you as brothers and sisters or need to prepare for unrestricted war against you as mortal foes.

I think, to be fair, as has been pointed out to us Catholics time and time again, when one person voices his opinion, or acts out of his own ACCORD, not Gods, or acts inconsistently with his true beliefs, you can not hold a whole religion to task. Many Catholics through history, as well as now, have acted, not only UN-Catholic, or UN-Christian, but down right ANTI-Christian. These actions, in no way, represent the true teachings of Christ or of the Catholic Church. But, to be true, there are parts of the Qur’an that can be read as 'justifying violence, and I think much of the problem stems from the fact that unlike the Catholic Church, which has a magestierium, Muslims are open to whatever ‘teaching authority’ is relevant TO THEM, and that varies all over the place. Too much is subject to 'personal interpretation; and is used for the gain of the individual or group. This causes big differences in how someone wishes to teach it, as in the school in England.

 

[Montalban]

I think, to be fair, as has been pointed out to us Catholics time and time again, when one person voices his opinion, or acts out of his own ACCORD, not Gods, or acts inconsistently with his true beliefs, you can not hold a whole religion to task. Many Catholics through history, as well as now, have acted, not only UN-Catholic, or UN-Christian, but down right ANTI-Christian. These actions, in no way, represent the true teachings of Christ or of the Catholic Church. But, to be true, there are parts of the Qur’an that can be read as 'justifying violence, and I think much of the problem stems from the fact that unlike the Catholic Church, which has a magestierium, Muslims are open to whatever ‘teaching authority’ is relevant TO THEM, and that varies all over the place. Too much is subject to 'personal interpretation; and is used for the gain of the individual or group. This causes big differences in how someone wishes to teach it, as in the school in England.

This is the very point! We have standards of behaviour by which we can use as measures.

A Catholic might well believe that he should go to his local school and kill as many people as he can, but this would not make it Catholic belief

Many people make the same mistake. However those who continue to do so aren’t making a ‘mistake’ but an attack of vitriol against the Christian faith.

Pro_universal has failed repeatedly (this isn’t the first thread he’s attempted to do this) in showing any causal connexion between a bad Christian’s acts and Christianity.

I have stated this example before. If you have a man of 40 with brown hair and grey eyes who’s a legal researcher who follows football, who’s Christian and who has a couple of kids who then goes and kills someone the fact that he was Christian, or had grey eyes has nothing to do with his act of evil. (Unless someone can show causality - perhaps he was taunted by people about the colour of his eyes, but the colour of his eyes did not lead him to kill).

And we have the example of Moslems who hate Jews and Christians.

It’s in their Koran. It’s in their hadith. It’s in the opinion of Moslem clerics. There’s such a strong chain of evidence that I suspect anyone who denies this so avidly might be doing so in order to cause mischief. But that’s what Satan does; the father of lies - sows confusion.

 

[pro_universal]

Lots of typing, no reference to anything remotely approaching “Modern Muslim theology.” Andrew Bostom isn’t an authority for Muslims, either.

Cesustdei…does your silence on the massacres committed by priests constitute approval? This is sure tough to reconcile with your stance on Muslims.

 

[Montalban]

Lots of typing, no reference to anything remotely approaching “Modern Muslim theology.” Andrew Bostom isn’t an authority for Muslims, either.

I know; only you are.

I love the fact you discount a site simply because it’s from South Africa. That makes a whole lot of sense; no South African Moslem has any authority to speak on Islam.

 

[Keightlynn]

I have stated evidence from the Koran which is not consistent with peace. Although you wish to have a relativist argument here (by wishing to compare the verses of the respective holy books), I invite you to do so. If you’ve any from the Bible you think are relevant to Christians in how we should act today, please set them down for all to see.

Sorry, I don’t come here very often and I lost the thread. Just bumping this so I can come back to it. I have to go eat dinner now.

 

[Montalban]

Sorry, I don’t come here very often and I lost the thread. Just bumping this so I can come back to it. I have to go eat dinner now.

I’m in no hurry. Take a long look at the evidence posted here.