The Pope

[JerrySeinfeld]

Here is more from the "religion of peace"....

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14954468/displaymo...rstry/14957012/

a photo of the pope...

[M.Dancer]

BFD

[Borg]

I think you are starting to get to him Jerry.

Borg

[geoffrey]

Just shows educated debate only exists on our side. I haven't heard a Muslim scholar have a scholarly rebuttal yet, just street rioting, defacing of pictures and burning of likenesses.

Oh well, just went to prove what the Pope said.

[M.Dancer]

Just shows educated debate only exists on our side. I haven't heard a Muslim scholar have a scholarly rebuttal yet, just street rioting, defacing of pictures and burning of likenesses.

Oh well, just went to prove what the Pope said.

You haven't heard any? How many did you listen to? 2? 3? Zero?

Interesting, aside from your vaccuum and your show stopping claim "educated debate only exists on our side" (the irony which must be lost on you) I was watching a show on vision last saturday called understanding the Koran. The show consisted of a young and attractive woman asking a muslim scholar question about life, the universe and everything.

She finally got to the pope.

His explanation was well reasoned, thought provoking and insightful.

I can't repeat verbatim his discourse, but in a nutshell......

The pope was wrong on 2 counts.....

1) The Pope was discussing the relationship between science and religion. In doing so, the byzantine quote added nothing to the argument, it was a non sequitor.

2) The Byzantine quote in context was false. Muslims made war, it is true. Christians made war as well, for exactly the same reasons Muslims made war...for political reasons. While it is true that Christians fought in the name of Christianity (Constantine, Crusades), why should one be surprised that muslims are different? And while it is true that in every land conquered by christians, the public became christains, it is not true of every muslim conquest.

He mentions a third reason but by that point I was readingh Thomas and the Rumours to my son........

[JerrySeinfeld]

Just shows educated debate only exists on our side. I haven't heard a Muslim scholar have a scholarly rebuttal yet, just street rioting, defacing of pictures and burning of likenesses.

Oh well, just went to prove what the Pope said.

You haven't heard any? How many did you listen to? 2? 3? Zero?

Interesting, aside from your vaccuum and your show stopping claim "educated debate only exists on our side" (the irony which must be lost on you) I was watching a show on vision last saturday called understanding the Koran. The show consisted of a young and attractive woman asking a muslim scholar question about life, the universe and everything.

She finally got to the pope.

His explanation was well reasoned, thought provoking and insightful.

I can't repeat verbatim his discourse, but in a nutshell......

The pope was wrong on 2 counts.....

1) The Pope was discussing the relationship between science and religion. In doing so, the byzantine quote added nothing to the argument, it was a non sequitor.

2) The Byzantine quote in context was false. Muslims made war, it is true. Christians made war as well, for exactly the same reasons Muslims made war...for political reasons. While it is true that Christians fought in the name of Christianity (Constantine, Crusades), why should one be surprised that muslims are different? And while it is true that in every land conquered by christians, the public became christains, it is not true of every muslim conquest.

He mentions a third reason but by that point I was readingh Thomas and the Rumours to my son........

Well, that right there is grounds for shooting a nun in the back! Dancer - you've changed my mind! I'm painting my death-threat placards as I type....

[M.Dancer]

Critical thinking isn't something you're interested in is it? You know what they say about muscles, use them or they atrophy.....I would get someone to help you with your placard painting....you know there's no spell check in latex

[Chrissy1979]

Well, that right there is grounds for shooting a nun in the back! Dancer - you've changed my mind! I'm painting my death-threat placards as I type....

I'm still waiting for the one-sided "educated debate."

[geoffrey]

You haven't heard any? How many did you listen to? 2? 3? Zero?

Interesting, aside from your vaccuum and your show stopping claim "educated debate only exists on our side" (the irony which must be lost on you) I was watching a show on vision last saturday called understanding the Koran. The show consisted of a young and attractive woman asking a muslim scholar question about life, the universe and everything.

She finally got to the pope.

His explanation was well reasoned, thought provoking and insightful.

I can't repeat verbatim his discourse, but in a nutshell......

The pope was wrong on 2 counts.....

1) The Pope was discussing the relationship between science and religion. In doing so, the byzantine quote added nothing to the argument, it was a non sequitor.

2) The Byzantine quote in context was false. Muslims made war, it is true. Christians made war as well, for exactly the same reasons Muslims made war...for political reasons. While it is true that Christians fought in the name of Christianity (Constantine, Crusades), why should one be surprised that muslims are different? And while it is true that in every land conquered by christians, the public became christains, it is not true of every muslim conquest.

He mentions a third reason but by that point I was readingh Thomas and the Rumours to my son........

Oh, so Muslims violent reactions to a comment are justified. Right.

Everyday society attacks Christian beliefs and what do we hear? Not much. Piss off the Muslims and you've got riots, burning of likenesses, calls for murder.

I can't believe you don't see the difference. Islam is a violent religion still, Christianity isn't, it's modernized.

[sharkman]

Man, some liberals are beginning to be completely blinded by their prejudice against Christianity. Anytime Muslim acts of terror or rioting violence are criticized, Prepare For The Great Comparison!!!: Christians did it too. As if that justifies the bombings, burnings and riots. Let alone the fact that the Koran admonishes the faithful to kill infidels and get 72 virgins in paradise, and the Bible does not. Astounding that otherwise level headed people go completely off their rockers when critical comments of Muslims dare be uttered.

And of course, they completely ignore freedom of speech issues whenever Muslims freak out over a cartoon or comments they deicide don't show proper respect for their religion. It's only freedom of speech that needs to be protected when Howard Stern goes x-rated on his radio program, and people complain. If the Pope is slapped down for a few comments that would have probably put the rest of us to sleep, the silence from the liberal side of the fence is deafening. Double standard.

Thats okay, the rest of us will try to keep speech free.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Man, some liberals are beginning to be completely blinded by their prejudice against Christianity. Anytime Muslim acts of terror or rioting violence are criticized, Prepare For The Great Comparison!!!: Christians did it too. As if that justifies the bombings, burnings and riots. Let alone the fact that the Koran admonishes the faithful to kill infidels and get 72 virgins in paradise, and the Bible does not. Astounding that otherwise level headed people go completely off their rockers when critical comments of Muslims dare be uttered.

And of course, they completely ignore freedom of speech issues whenever Muslims freak out over a cartoon or comments they deicide don't show proper respect for their religion. It's only freedom of speech that needs to be protected when Howard Stern goes x-rated on his radio program, and people complain. If the Pope is slapped down for a few comments that would have probably put the rest of us to sleep, the silence from the liberal side of the fence is deafening. Double standard.

Thats okay, the rest of us will try to keep speech free.

Not only that, but it's ridiculous that no matter what radical Islam throws at the world, there are still people who can't wait to defend it.

Basically it's a form of racism: The liberals who "protect / defend" radical Islam's behavior do so out of some sense of duty to "protect" "minorities" from "prejudice".

They give the muslims far too little credit - these people have far more sense of identity and purpose than liberal lefties do - and trust me - if they happened past the cave, Bin Laden would plug them full of lead and cut off their head before they had a chance to say "BUT I'M ON YOUR SIDE".

[Remiel]

To think that I so bitterly argued with M.Dancer when I first started posting here... And now we find ourselves arguing the same side of an issue...

What some of you seem to too dense to realize, in the M.Dancer is using his quotes for a rebuttal of viscious attacks many are making on the Islamic faith as a whole. He merely shows evidence that it is not the province of Christianity to act as if its practitioners are all good and just, and superior somehow to other faiths, when they exhibit the same tendancies in the past as are being exhibited now in Muslim states. Thus, the problem do not stem from religion, but from practitioners of religion, invalidating arguments based on the so called superiority of one over the other. He isn't advocating for the ' goodness ' of the extremists, he is advocating for the non-evilness of the religion itself. Nowhere did he say that it was good, or better than any other, merely that historically speaking, it has been in similar company.

Get over yourselves.

[sharkman]

To think that I so bitterly argued with M.Dancer when I first started posting here... And now we find ourselves arguing the same side of an issue...

What some of you seem to too dense to realize, in the M.Dancer is using his quotes for a rebuttal of viscious attacks many are making on the Islamic faith as a whole. He merely shows evidence that it is not the province of Christianity to act as if its practitioners are all good and just, and superior somehow to other faiths, when they exhibit the same tendancies in the past as are being exhibited now in Muslim states. Thus, the problem do not stem from religion, but from practitioners of religion, invalidating arguments based on the so called superiority of one over the other. He isn't advocating for the ' goodness ' of the extremists, he is advocating for the non-evilness of the religion itself. Nowhere did he say that it was good, or better than any other, merely that historically speaking, it has been in similar company.

Get over yourselves.

Why don't you speak to my points? Your comments above do not, but I will test your comments. I don't understand your first sentence, it seems you may have missed a word or letter or something.

We are not arguing that Christianity is better or superior to other faiths, but that Islam advocates violence.

Acts of terror by Christian terrorists do not exist. Acts of war in the name of the Christian God did happen, but not in modern times.

The problem with Muslim religion is in fact its teachings which is where the violence comes from. A poster here dug up some scripture from the Koran:

"I have been made victorious with terror" (Sahi Bukhari V4B52N220)

"I shall terrorise the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them, because they oppose Allah and

His apostle." (Qur'an 8:12)

"The believers fight in Allah's cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed" (Qur'an 9:111)

"Muhammad said, 'You are commanded to carry out jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam'" (Qur'an)

There are no such commands in the Bible for Holy war. There were specific times when Israel was to attack or fight wars, but that was in ancient times. There is no such standing orders anywhere in the Bible to attack and fight unbelievers for a Holy reward in Heaven.

I dare you to find some, you will find none. That is all I am saying. The Muslim faith commands war and violence. And I still say liberals who argue for freedom of speech in some cases, but not when the Pope's benign comments cause Islam to threaten his life, those liberals have a double standard.

[geoffrey]

Exactly, Muslims calling for the Pope's death and painting such images is ok with liberals, but not some cartoons?

Please...

[Riverwind]

We are not arguing that Christianity is better or superior to other faiths, but that Islam advocates violence.

1 Samuel 15:2-4

2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Sounds like the Judeo/Christian God is advocating genocide to me.

[geoffrey]

We are not arguing that Christianity is better or superior to other faiths, but that Islam advocates violence.

1 Samuel 15:2-4

2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Sounds like God is adovocating genocide to me.

If camels are the same genetic makeup as Amalek...

His point was a standing order to kill everyone that doesn't believe. Christianity doesn't have such a standing order. Islamic folk are promised reward by their religion by acting violently against the 'infidel'.

[Riverwind]

His point was a standing order to kill everyone that doesn't believe. Christianity doesn't have such a standing order. Islamic folk are promised reward by their religion by acting violently against the 'infidel'.

There is no such 'standing order' in Islam. One quote he provided (Qur'an 8:12) was taken out of context and is part description of a battle between Muslims and non-Muslims (much like the quote from Samuel that I provided).

The Qur'an 9:111 does not actually advocate killing it simply state that you be prepared to give up your self entirely in return for receiving the grace of Allah.

Jihad means a non-violant struggle in the eyes of many Muslims.

The idea that Islam is inherently violent is false. We are dealing which a cultural problem - not a religious problem. Much of the killing going on in Iraq has its roots in tribal traditions which existed among Arabs long before Mohammend showed up.

[KrustyKidd]

The idea that Islam is inherently violent is false. We are dealing which a cultural problem - not a religious problem

Your post is correct in that Islam is not inherently violent. However, it is more than cultural and many more than you suspect support the Jihadists without being violent. Jihadists, like most Arabs and Muslims seek to recreate a time when being Muslim was part of an enlightened society. In control and on the edge of philosophy, technology, religion and culture. Religion to Muslims is their entire life and how they live it in day to day activities, not just a Sunday worship thing.

The Caliphate is not a pipe dream of a few nutbar individuals. The Pan Arab State has been dreamed of since the Huns destroyed it, the Dutch occupied it, the British used it and the US financed it.

[Riverwind]

The Pan Arab State has been dreamed of ....

Much like a Pan-European state has been dreamed of for centuries. A Caliphate is not something to fear, in fact, it might turn the various Arab states in a politically mature nation because the _only_ way a Caliphate could possibly emerge is if the Arab Muslims learn to stop fighting among themselves. If they learn to do that then it is quite likely they will have learned to get along better with non-Muslims in the process.

Radical Islam is like Ebola: an extremely deadly disease that kills its hosts so quickly that it is not able to spread very far. If I lived in certain parts of Africa I would worry about Ebola. I see no reason to worry about it in Canada.

[sharkman]

We are not arguing that Christianity is better or superior to other faiths, but that Islam advocates violence.

1 Samuel 15:2-4

2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Sounds like the Judeo/Christian God is advocating genocide to me.

Ah, I was hoping remiel would see my post, oh well. Reread the entire passage and you will see your error. Do you not wonder why Amalek was to receive such actions? And it was a one time judgement. Genocide? How about trying to massage your 'evidence' into something it isn't?

When the Qur'an says in 9:111 The believers fight in Allah's cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed, it is as plain as day what it means. More massaging? And all of the other passages you just ignore, so that must mean you have no answer for them.

Believe there is pie in the sky if you choose, but the facts are what they are.

[Riverwind]

And it was a one time judgement. Genocide?

The wholesale slaughter of non-combatants is genocide no matter your God thinks of them.

When the Qur'an says in 9:111 The believers fight in Allah's cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed, it is as plain as day what it means.

What it means if you bother to read the entire context in the Quran is when you give yourself to Allah that you give everything including your life. It is an abstract metaphor that means you will live or die, kill or be killed according to the needs of Allah. It does not in anyway imply that Muslims are supposed run out and kill all non-believers.

all of the other passages you just ignore, so that must mean you have no answer for them.

Or maybe I could't be bothered to do the research. You probably got the passages from some anti-Muslim hate propaganda site and did not bother to read the entire passages that contain the quotes so you could really understand what they were talking about. The Bible has tons of pretty disgusting stuff in it ranging from genocide to pedophilia and incest all committed by God's faithful. If you want to get into a battle of out-of-context quotes from old books then I can assure you that Christianity will end up looking as bad as Islam if not worse.

[sharkman]

And it was a one time judgement. Genocide?

The wholesale slaughter of non-combatants is genocide no matter your God thinks of them.

When the Qur'an says in 9:111 The believers fight in Allah's cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed, it is as plain as day what it means.

What it means if you bother to read the entire context in the Quran is when you give yourself to Allah that you give everything including your life. It is an abstract metaphor that means you will live or die, kill or be killed according to the needs of Allah. It does not in anyway imply that Muslims are supposed run out and kill all non-believers.

all of the other passages you just ignore, so that must mean you have no answer for them.

Or maybe I could't be bothered to do the research. You probably got the passages from some anti-Muslim hate propaganda site and did not bother to read the entire passages that contain the quotes so you could really understand what they were talking about. The Bible has tons of pretty disgusting stuff in it ranging from genocide to pedophilia and incest all committed by God's faithful. If you want to get into a battle of out-of-context quotes from old books then I can assure you that Christianity will end up looking as bad as Islam if not worse.

Well, assure all you want but the Bible still has no standing orders to kill, and Muslims still kill for religious reasons. Maybe you ought to put your blinders back on, I sense that your nostrils are flaring.

[Riverwind]

Well, assure all you want but the Bible still has no standing orders to kill, and Muslims still kill for religious reasons.

There are no 'standing orders' to kill in the Quran either. I already explained how you took the quotes out of context but it appears that you don't want to let go of your irrational hatred of Islam.

[sharkman]

So, those that disagree with you hate Islam, eh? Usually those that throw around basesless accusations do so because they can no longer defend their position. You can't refute my references or the fact that the Qur'an advocates violence. Try a little harder.

[Riverwind]

So, those that disagree with you hate Islam, eh? Usually those that throw around basesless accusations do so because they can no longer defend their position. You can't refute my references or the fact that the Qur'an advocates violence. Try a little harder.

I have already explained in at least two posts why your interpretation of those quotes is completely wrong. Why don't you try reading what I wrote and respond to it with some more context from the Quran that backs up your interpretation.