Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Islamic countries, no jew nor christain allowed
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
In response to my comments on the previous page, the two people posting after me took my comments out of context to a degree. During my previous post and this post, I'm referring to the Western world as defined by Europe and North America, not necessarily Christians.
#1 was to show why the west has been very good to Islam. Even though the Muslims burned down the great library of alexandria in the 7th century that contained all Roman knowledge, the Muslims took advantage of western know-how. God bless them for it. Another little tidbit, the Arabic number system actually originated in India. Look it up. I do commend the Arabs for inventing algebra, etc.
#2 was not a justification for the murdering of civilians in Jerusalem nor was it intended to be. It was to merely point out that the Muslim world provoked the Christian crusades and brought them upon itself.
#3 was just to debunk the myth that Islam is a total religion of peace and (this was taught to me in my college world histroy class) Muslims won the people through their religious ideas and not conquest. This is simply not possible as it is not easy to get a pagan or christian to suddenly forego their beliefs for a new idea. If you know history you know that all these conquests were forged into an empire divided into caliphates very friendly toward each other, almost like West and East Rome after that split. I agree that the Christians did the same in the Americas. The difference here is the people who practice Christianity have reformed and the religion itself now is a very pacifist religion. You don't see many Christians cutting people's throats or suicide-bombing in the name of the Christian God? If you have let me know. I don't necessarily go by what the scriptures say when analyzing a religion, I look at the people who practice the religion.
In response to Chingyz last two statements about #3, forced conversions to Christianity were only done in the Americas, which only had two major civilizations still standing. The Catholic church sent out missionaries to as far away as China to peacefully convert people to Christianity. The only exception I can find to peaceful conversion in the old world would be Russia, however, forced conversions to Christianity in Russia was sanctioned and carried out by the state.
#4 I fell Purgie completely took this point out of context. You don't see armed conflict between Protestants and Catholics do you? Sunnis and Shi'ites argue by throwing bombs when not supressed by a totalitarian government. The little tifs between Catholics and Protestants from the 16th-18th century were excuses by various states to war with one another, notably Spain's oppurtunistic occupation of Holland. The other major conflict, Britain and Spain, really had little to do with religion and a lot to do with new world rivalry and English piracy. The conflicts I'm referring to are the attempted coup in the Phillppines, the ongoing conflict in Chechnya, the Bosnia-Serbia conflict (which contrary to popular belief, it wasn't just the Serbians who committed atrocities), radical Islam against the U.S. and more recently against Spanish and British commuter trains. Responding to another one of Purgie's criticisms, this certainly isn't an argument over which religion is better, and the simplistic way in which you drew that conclusion reflects more upon you than it does me.
#5 You just have to take this statement at face value. However, in analyzing a religion, it becomes necessary to evaluate what the extremists in a religion do. Christians will perform exorcisms and go to church and read the bible frequently, as well as try to peacefully convert other people if given the oppurtunity. Jews will study the Torah fervently. Although some Islamic extremists become peaceful scholars, a certain percentage (I'll let you guys argue as to what the percentage is) of Islamic extremists will take hostages in a school (notably the fiasco in Russia), fly planes into large buildings in "infidel" countries, and blow themselves up in order to kill as many Jewish civilians as possible etc. This certainly is not a blanket condemnation of Islam and I too have a Muslim friend. You just have to be on guard.
What I am trying to stress here is even if commenting on history and debating facts is insensitive, so be it. It is not against the law to offend somebody. In a Democratic society, one must debate with others so as to come to the best solutions to problems. Although I don't offer solutions, I'm trying to get whoever reads this extremely long post to open their mind and not to make their first priority in any debate to not offend somebody.
BigD you are forgetting that it's not that many years ago there were a conflict on the island of Ireland between catholic and protestants. I agree that the conflict contained more than that, just as most conflicts in Moslem countries contain more than just religion. Shiite and Sunni fight eachother due to the fact that each in some ways are minorities. It is just as much a fight between social levels. I believe that the religious extremism we are experiencing today comes from the government in some countries that uses the west to create stability in their own countries. If you can get your people to hate a common enemy outside your country it is much easier to create stability inside.
It is true that Christianity today to a large extent is a peacefull religion, however I believe that has a lot more to do with the wealth most Christian countries are experiencing rather than the bible.
ob1sr your "facts" are based on decisions, no point letting truth nor reality get in the way !!
In fact Iran and Iraq are about the only two countries world wide where shi'is are the majority.
It was the sunni that displaced the descendents of Mohumad (ie. son in law Ali, the first Caliph) and appointed cronies as their Sultan and those religious leaders (sunah deeds of Mohamud, hadith [collection of narrations and approvals, oral traditions ]) that proped up their intrepreted shari'a law. 90% of moslems are sunni.
Minority sunni bathest sadom took power in Iraq as the puppet of saudi wahabi-sunni. THOSE fanatical saudi are the people that hold their minority moslem Shi'is as unworthy to live, and since the times of Mohamud (570ad-prophet 610-d632ad) and his raiding, murdering/asassinating, holding for hostage pilgrims to Mecca, from the beginning the movement's hands were covered in blood. And pres regan gave sadam 100$ of MILLION$ in weapon assistance to prop up his fight against Shi'is Iran Kohameanie regeim. sadam intentionally murdered over 400,000 Iraqes (Kurds and Shi'is [remember the village gas attack exterminations, the unmarked grave yards with 10s of THOUSANDS corpses now being dug up and the difficulties in trying to identify those murdered Iraqes])
The 114 sura Qur'an ( "the recitation" ) was not even put in writing untill after Mohamud died 632ad ( for 23 years he heard voices "the voice of Angel Jibril" THAT is the Qur'an! )
Crusades: in 1095 it was pope eurban II wanting to protect eastern constinople with the 1st crusade (slaughter all jews & moslems in jerusalem 1099) he assured the knights and solders forgiveness of their sins if they took up the cross (ie. went on the crusade) ! Is that much different than today's "marters" getting a similar free pass, plastic key ?
? " Not a terrorist ... " well they condone 'suicide' women & children bombers against civilian targets, they support the Jordan expelled revolutionaries (they tried to displace Jordan's King) that were expelled to Israel where they squated in the west bank and gazza, demanding 3/4 of the land in modern Israel.
In a previous post i listed the worldwide conflicts where moslems are comiting genocide/extermination of local populations (often christains) to take control of those countries. Look at a map from asia to the west coast of africa and try & tell me Islam is not on a world wide expansion. Consider france that let in algerian moslems (that france had occupied with it's french foreign legion for decades) look at the revolts ongoing there. Consider the "christain" serbian war of extermination against croat-albanian moslems (the moslems were starting to make land & voting rights demands like the plo did) not wanting to put up with that the "christains" started "purging," well, eventually the US and a limited 'ally force' steped in and put a stop to that. So, it is ok for moslems around the world to revolt and "purge" local religous groups, but it is not ok for it to go the other way.
========
To the origional intent of this thread, in moslem countries people with religious faith other than Islam are not welcome, ESPECIALLY not jews; in contrast, other world wide countries somewhat allow immigraton of moslems, democrazies even bend over backwards and try to enforce laws where people can not be descriminated based on their religion. That is NOT the case in moslem countries, there it is a death sentence to be christain (eg. Afganistan, china,) and nearly sumary execution to be a jew (eg. saude arabia, syria ! ) Islamic countries take pride in being "100% moslem." They do not condone non-islamic churches, they have dictator-family governments that largly survive on profits (banked in svetzerland or invested in the + $9,000,000,000,000 US debt ) from selling oil to the west. And US-brit companies also make HUGE profits in that refined oil then local governments that make a large % of their revenue TAXING the sale of those oil products (eg. petrol.)
Instead of arguing merits of a fabricated new testament (367ad 27 book) or the transcribed Qur'an, or golden tablets of Enoch (morman) or even history of jews (1200 to 420bc) Old Testament, this thread was to bring to discussion the inequality of religious consideration between moslem and other countries!
Any anti-moslem action is condemed, while anti-christain atrocities are overlooked. Who actually is in power ?
edit corrected serbian-croat from kosovo
ps. do u realize the pres bushs have more than doubled the US debt ?!!
Oh no, RUN FOR THE HILLS, a Democrat just quoted the bible out of context. Not in a million years.
Matt 12:32
32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
^^^^^my quip pun^^^^^
You know what's funny to me?
Selfrighteous religious people who think they are better than others, just because they believe in some kind of God.
You know what's funny to me?
Self righteous atheists who spend all their time trying to ban religion and replace it with their Mother Gaia, wiccan freak shows. Basically turning the clock back 2,000-6,000 years (pre-history) where people worshipped nature, human sacrifices, total barbarism.
You good sir are making too many assumptions. You not only assume that I belong to a certain party (which I can't even wote for if I even wanted to) you also assume that I know nothing about the Bible and takes my quote out of context and thus completely miss my point. The quote was words spoken by Moses after taking land by violence, land that was promised to them by God. Moses even states that you are not allowed to add or remove anything from these words. The words are not taken out of context in any way as they are the commands given by Moses as a representative of God.
One must make an educated guess with limited information. In Mathematics its called finding the variable. With you there are several constants.
Constant #1: You are going to some liberal bash-religion website and finding some quote in the bible which makes Atheists Oooh and Ahhh and feel all righteous.
Constant #2: You posted it here meaning you hate religion yourself.
Constant #3: Democrats, leftists, liberals, socialists, Stalinists, etc. love to bash religion because its just something they do. Republicans, righties, conservatives, etc. dont bash religion, ever.
So in order to determine what party you belong to, using the power of da mathematics, I formulated you to be a leftist. INdoobidoubly Watson.
Are you a jew? Do you have a time machine and can you travel back thousands of years ago to join Moses and gang to wander the desert? no? THEN DO NOT FEAR, THOSE LAWS WRITTEN DOWN BY MOSES DO NOT APPLY TO YOU! Like I said, you take the bible out of context. Those quotes you gave are part of a story that occured thousands upon thousands upon thousands of years ago.
On top of this you come up with a quote that goes against what you try to say... that is if I understand you right that it is wrong to kill. This quote however can be interpreted as you can speak against other humans, but if you speak against God you'll not be forgiven, meaning that you'll be punished for speaking against God (punished could be: killed, sent to prison or thrown out of your home or country)
No, that quote I used doesnt say that, read it again. You have reading comprehension problems.
Both the Bible and the Koran are religious text describing important parts of said religions past. I stated quite clearly that it is all a question about how you interpret the writings. In what way is this taken out of context.
Yeah, and your real bad at interpreting things. You cant even properly interpret the one sentence long Mathew text I brought into this rediculous bash-religion thread # 45,675,432.
Bottom line is that most religious texts can be interpreted in whatever way you want to as long as you can justify it to yourself. In both the Bible and the Koran it is written that you should seek out and kill all nonbelievers, however it is also written that you should show mercy in both texts.
Ahhh the infamous, all religions are equal arguement. How ignorant.
Nerf, what's your deal with calling everyone a Democrat that disagrees with you? I feel like I'm in the car with my radio stuck on Sean Hannity. Not every Republican follows their party lines, and likewise for the Democrats.
It seems like you are a sucker for conservative shock radio hosts. There's a real world out here where people actually think for themselves. We don't tune into a radio show to be told what to think.
There are some of us that are tired of both of the two big parties. So throwing those two names around means nothing to someone like me. You guys are just arguing on the periphery while we move on with new ideas.
Poor mooshy moderate me.
It doesnt matter what type of facts are layed out before people like you, your mind is set in stone, you hate Christianity.
I'm confused by these statements...
--------------------------------------
1.) Muslims came after the Roman's. Nearly every idea is built upon a prior idea. That doesn't take away from the innovation. It's just using what you have at the time. Are people supposed to throw away old ideas from time before them and just start all over?
He is tackling the borrish cliche's (like Muslims were the new techno-Atlantis of the 10th century) which may or may not have been the result of re-writing history by war-lord victor muslims (propaganda).
4.) I would say that the major conflicts come from both religions. Christianity and it's diverse interpretations are tearing the U.S. apart right now.
Liberals are tearing this country apart. They are balkanizing rich against poor, white against black, mexican, and male against female. Democrats ferment hate and mistrust, and get drunk off it.
I've never seen so much arguing over which interpretation of who is going to hell is right. And remember the little tiffs between Catholics and Protestants? If this is your argument over which religion in the world is best then you need to check into Buddhism. It fits your criteria better.
5.) So what? What's the reason behind saying that? What does it ultimately mean? I have some neighbors who are Muslim. They're very nice. I have had dinner at their house many times and they are awesome. I'm not sure what your point is by saying this. It just makes no sense to me. So what am I supposed to leave my neighbors alone now or something? "Sorry neighbor, I can't talk to you anymore because most all terrorists are Muslims."
You got something against facts?
----------------------------------------------
I'm not defending the Muslim religion by saying this. I don't really care if someone is Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, or worship a friggin' pineapple as long as they're a decent respectful and loving person. Get over the labels already.
If you dont care if someone is Muslim, Christian, or Buddhist why are you drawing favorites toward Buddhism? Crazy talk.
Nerf09. Being a Atheist doesn't mean you worship mother nature. A Atheist is a person that doesn't believe in a thing as a god. Atheismn isn't a religion, most Atheists don't even believe in the same thing. The "only" real common thing Atheists have is that they DON'T believe in a GOD and DON'T worship something.
I'm kind of a Atheist because I don't think religion is a valuable asset for humankind. The west isn't where it is today because of religion, and just look at strong religious countries today. I believe that all people have equal values and should be judged by what they DO and not what they ARE. Religion creates gaps between people. We get situations like YOU, THEY, US, WE. THEY don't believe in the RIGHT GOD. WE are the only ones that get to heaven. YOU will burn in hell. YOU don't fullfill our requirements for being a "real" human. All that shit that makes this world worse. Just look at all the wars, conflicts, slaughters, murders, torturing the world has gone through over the decades. And NO religion is free from blame. They have all done bad things. Christianity in the the dark/middle ages. The crusade, witch burning, slaughtering of scientist and blowing up abortion clinics. The moslems have their terror they commit basicly every day now, and other terrible things. And so the list goes on. No religion should stand and point on the others and shout "look at those barbarians". All religions have been or will be barbaric at some stage. Not because they teach it, but because people read/practice religions like that.
Ps: The caps is used, because I don't really trust the new forum software to handle "fancy" tricks yet.
<p><p><p><blockquote><hr><i>Originally posted by Phoenixs</i><br><br><b></p><p><br>Nerf09. Being a Atheist doesn't mean you worship mother nature. A Atheist is a person that doesn't believe in a thing as a god. Atheismn isn't a religion, most Atheists don't even believe in the same thing. The "only" real common thing Atheists have is that they DON'T believe in a GOD and DON'T worship something.<br /><br />I'm kind of a Atheist because I don't think religion is a valuable asset for humankind. The west isn't where it is today because of religion, and just look at strong religious countries today. I believe that all people have equal values and should be judged by what they DO and not what they ARE. Religion creates gaps between people. We get situations like YOU, THEY, US, WE. THEY don't believe in the RIGHT GOD. WE are the only ones that get to heaven. YOU will burn in hell. YOU don't fullfill our requirements for being a "real" human. All that shit that makes this world worse. Just look at all the wars, conflicts, slaughters, murders, torturing the world has gone through over the decades. And NO religion is free from blame. They have all done bad things. Christianity in the the dark/middle ages. The crusade, witch burning, slaughtering of scientist and blowing up abortion clinics. The moslems have their terror they commit basicly every day now, and other terrible things. And so the list goes on. No religion should stand and point on the others and shout "look at those barbarians". All religions have been or will be barbaric at some stage. Not because they teach it, but because people read/practice religions like that.<br /><br />Ps: The caps is used, because I don't really trust the new forum software to handle "fancy" tricks yet.<br /></p><p></p><p><br></b><hr></blockquote><br><br></p><img src="http://images.mmorpg.com/images/emoticons/emt_cry.gif"; alt="::<img src="http://images.mmorpg.com/images/emoticons/emt_cry.gif"; alt="::
::" vspace="1" hspace="1">::" vspace="1" hspace="1"><img src="http://images.mmorpg.com/images/emoticons/emt_cry.gif"; alt="::<img src="http://images.mmorpg.com/images/emoticons/emt_cry.gif"; alt="::
::" vspace="1" hspace="1">::" vspace="1" hspace="1"></p></p>
1) Our number system is based on the Arabic (Moslem) so what you are stating can be turned right back. Our superiority is based on what Moslems build off the Romans (who weren't even Chritians).
A) This is like during black history month listening to that one guy that invented blood plasma storage. Out of the billion or so inventions by mankind, thats all we hear is BLOOD PLASMA BLOOD PLASMA BLOOD PLASMA BLOOD PLASMA! Ahh, lovely Hyperbole.
C) I dont know what history book you read, but Constantine I (AD 306 - 337) made Christianity a legal Roman religion. Hence the word, "ROMAN CATHOLIC." Way before Mohammed started having seizures and heart attacks, and way before the islamic hordes started invading nearby territories, beginning in mecca and medina.
3) Moslems might have build an empire ranging from Spain to India. Although it wasn't an empire then there's not much difference in that and what was done in America after 1692 or a large part of the world during the colonization. Civilizations all over the world was Chritianized sometimes by violence. Civilizations was brought to the brink of destruction in the name of God.
There are so many things wrong with this statement I dont know where to begin.
A) The native Americans werent invaded. There were very sparsely populated tribes here and there, MOST OF WHOM WELCOMED EUROPEAN TECHNOLOGY AND ASSIMILATED, others joined the French to fight the British in the French and Indian wars which preceeded the revolutionary wars. Those that didnt piss off the colonists in the French and Indian wars joined the British against the Americans in the War for Independance. Those few, those very FEW that managed to not piss off the Americans in the War for Independance, and French and Indian wars joined the Confederates in the civil war against the North. Then we said enough is enough, assimilate or go to jail. Sure its soooo easy, soooo liberal to sit back in your coushy chair, in front of your monitor, in your air conditioned and/or heated home and second guess what our founding fathers did, but facts are far more interesting then these oh so predictable leftist cliches. But in honor of every liberal arguement, they love to throw EVERYTHING into an arguement that has absolutely nothing to do with the arguement, including the kitchen sink.
4) Go ten years back and most major conflicts was between Christians and their neighbours. All that proves is that conflicts arise.
Duh?
5) Take a look at the official terrorlist and you'll see that most terrorists are not Moslems. The only reason thinks most terrorists are Moslems is due to the fact that Moslems operate internationally while other organizations don't.
Like who? What would you liberals do without Timothy McVeigh? He's your cliche savior.
You seem to know history well, now all you need to do is to think it through and keep your eyes open. Always remember that history is written by the victorious. Think about this one... how can Djengis Khan be a villain in European history, but a hero in Asian History?
Personally I think a 10% flat tax rate Ghengis Khan had for his empire was wonderful.
Whaaaaaaatttt? Half a billion native americans killed? Uhmm...That was a typo, right? I mean, I'm not so sure, because you did it 4 times.
Either you make alot of typo's, or you've been getting really bad information.
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
For everyone who thinks that christianity cannot lead someone to violence they should read this article. It's about a guy from Ohio running for the Senate who thinks homosexuality should be punishable by death. Like it says in the Bible.
Senate Hopeful Advocates Killing Gays
And I guess this sort of throws your Democrat and liberal accusations off a bit Nerf09. He sounds more like one of your guys even though he's running on the Dem ticket. This has got to scare even you.
Whaaaaaaatttt? Half a billion native americans killed? Uhmm...That was a typo, right? I mean, I'm not so sure, because you did it 4 times.
Either you make alot of typo's, or you've been getting really bad information.
Half a billion is way off yes. But specially the spanish killed a shitload of people in their conquest of the lands from Mexico and down. Done in the name of God.
And in North America the natives where threated bad too. Even today their country is a country where they have to live in reservates if they don't want to follow the life of the common american.
It reminds me of a quote I saw at at Holocaust memorial I went to...
----------------------------------------------
When they came for the communists,
Pastor Martin NiemöllerI remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
=============================
It all seems so stupid
It makes me want to give up
But why should I give up
When it all seems so stupid
Dixiecrats rationalized slavery one way by cheaper cotton prices, and during the 19th century cotton was our OIL equivalent.
Nazis were N A T I O N A L S O C I A L I S T S (federal level, socialism, democrats).
Populists (handout democrats) and emporers ruined the Roman Republic.
A democrat senator hopeful advocates killing gays? Noooo, what a shocker.
Whaaaaaaatttt? Half a billion native americans killed? Uhmm...That was a typo, right? I mean, I'm not so sure, because you did it 4 times.
Either you make alot of typo's, or you've been getting really bad information.
Half a billion is way off yes. But specially the spanish killed a shitload of people in their conquest of the lands from Mexico and down. Done in the name of God.
And in North America the natives where threated bad too. Even today their country is a country where they have to live in reservates if they don't want to follow the life of the common american.
I like how these liberal types only tell part of the story, out of context man.
Let me tell part of a story too. Once upon a time an evil imperialist country called America started bombing the peaceful Germans. They bombed an entire country's infrastructure into the ground, killed millions of civilians, and even attempted to kill German academics. The Americans tried to assasinate the German leader and imprisoned German freedom fighters. And after they conqured and occupied the peaceful German peoples for OVER SIXTY YEARS they nuked the peaceful cities of Nagasaki and Hiroshima!
Done in the name of God? Can't say I remember that.
What I can say I remember is the fact that, they wanted gold, and they wanted slaves. Indians supplied both. So they used them as slaves, to get to the gold. Which usually ended in their death.
Even they did not belief they were doing it for God, all they believed in was gold.
1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
So very, very, true.
Originally posted by kimmar
I hope this makes the reasoning behind a seperation of church and state clear. This is the kind of lunacy not having one can lead to.
Back wayyy yonder(Colonial era). Certain states(or all, can't recall) had anti-homosexual statutes that usually resulted in jail time, or worse. Now either one of two things. They either didn't believe the opposition to homosexuality was a religious thing, rather more of a natural law(which was very likely). Or they didn't believe that there was any foundation to even state that there should be a separation between church and state(Again, very likely).
Especially since the latter is only vaguely mentioned in a letter by Thomas Jefferson, speaking of his wishes for the government to alienate itself from the Church, so as to not allow the Church to be squashed and or controlled by the government.
Thomas Jefferson, nor any other forefather for that matter, intended for religious peoples and morals accompanied by religious thought, to not be in our government. To the contrary: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, and is wholly inadequate for the government of any other." - John Adams
"Fear not death; for the sooner we die, the longer shall we be immortal."
Done in the name of God? Can't say I remember that.
What I can say I remember is the fact that, they wanted gold, and they wanted slaves. Indians supplied both. So they used them as slaves, to get to the gold. Which usually ended in their death.
Even they did not belief they were doing it for God, all they believed in was gold.
1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
So very, very, true.
They killed for gold, slaves, tobacco, spices and so and so on. The indians either died working as slaves or fighting against the spanish. Not all idians liked that the spanish ran away with their gold. After that Christianity came into the picture. Since it's a missionaring (spelling?) religion they wanted to convert these non believers. This again led to dead people. If you look at most south american countries today, the people living in them are quite religious. Status of Jesus in Rio de Janeiro etc.
And the spanish where very religious people so all they undertook themself in South America was in a way related to their religion.
Nerf09. What is up with you throwing all this Liberal, Democrat shit around? What was it I said that was out of context? The spanish conquest of South America was a bloodshed. What was out of context by saying that?
And the Nazi party is a right winged party. It's the extreme of the right wing as communismn is the extreme of the left wing. But wow your hatred for Democrats goes deep. I have always thought that all american parties are way to far out on the right for me. But calling them the same as Nazi's that is going abit far.