Can Someone Explain All These Hates And Incitements To Murder From A Holy Book?

Please, and i mean please!, let no one take this personal, this thread is not intended to raise any issues on religion supremacy, rather, it is intended for a look into some ideology and the phenomenon of the contexts from a civilised social perspective; and i'd rather have it discussed openly in all fairness hence i'm not making the post on Religion...
Can Someone Explain All The Meanings Of These Hates Contexts, do they really mean what i understand or there is something else to them?
Qur'an:9:88 "The Messenger and those who believe with him, strive hard and fight with their wealth and lives in Allah's Cause."

Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war."

Qur'an:9:29 "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission."

Ishaq:300 "I am fighting in Allah's service. This is piety and a good deed. In Allah's war I do not fear as others should. For this fighting is righteous, true, and good."

Qur'an:9:112 "The Believers fight in Allah's Cause, they slay and are slain, kill and are killed."

Ishaq:325 "Muslims, fight in Allah's Cause. Stand firm and you will prosper. Help the Prophet, obey him, give him your allegiance, and your religion will be victorious."

Qur'an:8:39 "Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah."

Muslim:C9B1N31 "I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and believe in me (that) I am the Messenger and in all that I have brought."

Qur'an:8:39 "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)."

Ishaq:324 "He said, 'Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.'"

Qur'an:9:14 "Fight them and Allah will punish them by your hands, lay them low, and cover them with shame. He will help you over them."

Ishaq:587 "Our onslaught will not be a weak faltering affair. We shall fight as long as we live. We will fight until you turn to Islam, humbly seeking refuge. We will fight not caring whom we meet. We will fight whether we destroy ancient holdings or newly gotten gains. We have mutilated every opponent. We have driven them violently before us at the command of Allah and Islam. We will fight until our religion is established. And we will plunder them, for they must suffer disgrace."

Qur'an:8:65 "O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding."

Ishaq:326 "Prophet exhort the believers to fight. If there are twenty good fighters they will defeat two hundred for they are a senseless people. They do not fight with good intentions nor for truth."

Bukhari:V4B52N63 "A man whose face was covered with an iron mask came to the Prophet and said, 'Allah's Apostle! Shall I fight or embrace Islam first?' The Prophet said, 'Embrace Islam first and then fight.' So he embraced Islam, and was martyred. Allah's Apostle said, 'A Little work, but a great reward.'"

Bukhari:V4B53N386 "Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah alone or pay us the Jizyah tribute tax in submission. Our Prophet has informed us that our Lord says: 'Whoever amongst us is killed as a martyr shall go to Paradise to lead such a luxurious life as he has never seen, and whoever survives shall become your master.'"

Muslim:C34B20N4668 "The Messenger said: 'Anybody who equips a warrior going to fight in the Way of Allah is like one who actually fights. And anybody who looks after his family in his absence is also like one who actually fights."

Qur'an:9:38 "Believers, what is the matter with you, that when you are asked to go forth and fight in Allah's Cause you cling to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? Unless you go forth, He will afflict and punish you with a painful doom, and put others in your place."

Qur'an:9:123 "Fight the unbelievers around you, and let them find harshness in you."

Qur'an:8:72 "Those who accepted Islam and left their homes to fight in Allah's Cause with their possessions and persons, and those who gave (them) asylum, aid, and shelter, those who harbored them - these are allies of one another. You are not responsible for protecting those who embraced Islam but did not leave their homes [to fight] until they do so." [Another translation reads:] "You are only called to protect Muslims who fight."


Bukhari:V9B84N59 "Whoever says this will save his property and life from me.'"

Qur'an:8:73 "The unbelieving infidels are allies. Unless you (Muslims) aid each other (fighting as one united block to make Allah's religion victorious), there will be confusion and mischief. Those who accepted Islam, left their homes to fight in Allah's Cause (al-Jihad), as well as those who give them asylum, shelter, and aid - these are (all) Believers: for them is pardon and bountiful provision (in Paradise)."

Tabari IX:69 "Arabs are the most noble people in lineage, the most prominent, and the best in deeds. We were the first to respond to the call of the Prophet. We are Allah's helpers and the viziers of His Messenger. We fight people until they believe in Allah. He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for one who disbelieves, we will fight him forever in the Cause of Allah. Killing him is a small matter to us."

Qur'an:48:16 "Say (Muhammad) to the wandering desert Arabs who lagged behind: 'You shall be invited to fight against a people given to war with mighty prowess. You shall fight them until they surrender and submit. If you obey, Allah will grant you a reward, but if you turn back, as you did before, He will punish you with a grievous torture."

Qur'an:48:22 "If the unbelieving infidels fight against you, they will retreat. (Such has been) the practice (approved) of Allah in the past: no change will you find in the ways of Allah."

Qur'an:47:4 "When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah's Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam."

Qur'an:47:31 "And We shall try you until We know those among you who are the fighters."

Tabari VI:138 "Those present at the oath of Aqabah had sworn an allegiance to Muhammad. It was a pledge of war against all men. Allah had permitted fighting."

Tabari VI:139 "Allah had given his Messenger permission to fight by revealing the verse 'And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is all for Allah.'"

Qur'an:9:19 "Do you make the giving of drink to pilgrims, or the maintenance of the Mosque, equal to those who fight in the Cause of Allah? They are not comparable in the sight of Allah. Those who believe, and left their homes, striving with might, fighting in Allah's Cause with their goods and their lives, have the highest rank in the sight of Allah."

Ishaq:550 "The Muslims met them with their swords. They cut through many arms and skulls. Only confused cries and groans could be heard over our battle roars and snarling."

Qur'an:5:94 "Believers, Allah will make a test for you in the form of a little game in which you reach out for your lances. Any who fails this test will have a grievous punishment."

Ishaq:578 "Crushing the heads of the infidels and splitting their skulls with sharp swords, we continually thrust and cut at the enemy. Blood gushed from their deep wounds as the battle wore them down. We conquered bearing the Prophet's fluttering war banner. Our cavalry was submerged in rising dust, and our spears quivered, but by us the Prophet gained victory."

Tabari IX:22 "The Prophet continued to besiege the town, fighting them bitterly."

Tabari IX:25 "By Allah, I did not come to fight for nothing. I wanted a victory over Ta'if so that I might obtain a slave girl from them and make her pregnant."

Tabari IX:82 "The Messenger sent Khalid with an army of 400 to Harith [a South Arabian tribe] and ordered him to invite them to Islam for three days before he fought them. If they were to respond and submit, he was to teach them the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Prophet, and the requirements of Islam. If they should decline, then he was to fight them."

Tabari IX:88 "Abdallah Azdi came to the Messenger, embraced Islam, and became a good Muslim. Allah's Apostle invested Azdi with the authority over those who had surrendered and ordered him to fight the infidels from the tribes of Yemen. Azdi left with an army by the Messenger's command. The Muslims besieged them for a month. Then they withdrew, setting a trap. When the Yemenites went in pursuit, Azdi was able to inflict a heavy loss on them."

Ishaq:530 "Get out of his way, you infidel unbelievers. Every good thing goes with the Apostle. Lord, I believe in his word. We will fight you about its interpretations as we have fought you about its revelation with strokes that will remove heads from shoulders and make enemies of friends."

Muslim:C9B1N29 "Command For Fighting Against People So Long As They Do Not Profess That There Is No Ilah (God) But Allah And Muhammad Is His Messenger: When the Messenger breathed his last and Bakr was appointed Caliph, many Arabs chose to become apostates [rejected Islam]. Abu Bakr said: 'I will definitely fight against anyone who stops paying the Zakat tax, for it is an obligation. I will fight against them even to secure the cord used for hobbling the feet of a camel which they used to pay if they withhold it now.' Allah had justified fighting against those who refused to pay Zakat."

Muslim:C9B1N33 "The Prophet said: 'I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prostration prayer, and pay Zakat. If they do it, their blood and property are protected.'"

Muslim:C10B1N176 "Muhammad (may peace be upon him) sent us in a raiding party. We raided Huraqat in the morning. I caught hold of a man and he said: 'There is no god but Allah,' but I attacked him with a spear anyway. It once occurred to me that I should ask the Apostle about this. The Messenger said: 'Did he profess "There is no god but Allah," and even then you killed him?' I said: 'He made a profession out of the fear of the weapon I was threatening him with.' The Prophet said: 'Did you tear out his heart in order to find out whether it had professed truly or not?'"

Muslim:C20B1N4597 "The Prophet said at the conquest of Mecca: 'There is no migration now, but only Jihad, fighting for the Cause of Islam. When you are asked to set out on a Jihad expedition, you should readily do so.'"

Muslim:C28B20N4628 "Allah has undertaken to provide for one who leaves his home to fight for His Cause and to affirm the truth of His word; Allah will either admit him to Paradise or will bring him back home with his reward and booty."

Muslim:C28B20N4629 "The Messenger said: 'One who is wounded in the Way of Allah - and Allah knows best who is wounded in His Way - will appear on the Day of Judgment with his wound still bleeding. The color (of its discharge) will be blood, (but) its smell will be musk.'"

Muslim:C34B20N4652-3 "The Merit Of Jihad And Of Keeping Vigilance Over The Enemy: A man came to the Holy Prophet and said: 'Who is the best of men?' He replied: 'A man who fights staking his life and spending his wealth in Allah's Cause.'"

Muslim:C42B20N4684 "A desert Arab came to the Prophet and said: 'Messenger, one man fights for the spoils of war; another fights that he may be remembered, and one fights that he may see his (high) position (achieved as a result of his valor in fighting). Which of these is fighting in the Cause of Allah?' The Messenger of Allah said: 'Who fights so that the word of Allah is exalted is fighting in the Way of Allah.'"

Muslim:C53B20N4717 "The Prophet said: 'This religion will continue to exist, and a group of people from the Muslims will continue to fight for its protection until the Hour is established.'"

Bukhari:V5B59N288 "I witnessed a scene that was dearer to me than anything I had ever seen. Aswad came to the Prophet while Muhammad was urging the Muslims to fight the pagans. He said, 'We shall fight on your right and on your left and in front of you and behind you.' I saw the face of the Prophet getting bright with happiness, for that saying delighted him."

Bukhari:V5B59N290 "The believers who did not join the Ghazwa [Islamic raid or invasion] and those who fought are not equal in reward."

Qur'an:2:193 "Fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief) and religion is only for Allah. But if they cease/desist, let there be no hostility except against infidel disbelievers."

Qur'an:2:217 "They question you concerning fighting in the sacred month. Say: 'Fighting therein is a grave (matter); but to prevent access to Allah, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, to expel its members, and polytheism are worse than slaughter. Nor will they cease fighting you until they make you renegades from your religion. If any of you turn back and die in unbelief, your works will be lost and you will go to Hell. Surely those who believe and leave their homes to fight in Allah's Cause have the hope of Allah's mercy."

Qur'an:2:244 "Fight in Allah's Cause, and know that Allah hears and knows all."

Qur'an:2:246 "He said: 'Would you refrain from fighting if fighting were prescribed for you?' They said: 'How could we refuse to fight in Allah's Cause?'"

Ishaq:280 "The Apostle prepared for war in pursuance of Allah's command to fight his enemies and to fight the infidels who Allah commanded him to fight."

Qur'an:61:2 "O Muslims, why say one thing and do another? Grievously odious and hateful is it in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not. Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in a battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure."

Bukhari:V4B52N61 "Allah's Apostle! We were absent from the first battle you fought against the pagans. If Allah gives us a chance to do battle, no doubt, He will see how bravely we fight."

Ishaq:398 "Ask them for their help. Thereby make the religion of Islam agreeable to them. And when you are resolved in the matter of religion concerning fighting your enemy you will have the advantage."

Qur'an:3:146 "How many prophets fought in Allah's Cause? With them (fought) myriads of godly men who were slain. They never lost heart if they met with disaster in Allah's Cause, nor did they weaken nor give in. Allah loves those who are firm and steadfast [warriors]."

Ishaq:393 "How many prophets has death in battle befallen and how many multitudes with him? They did not show weakness toward their enemies and were not humiliated when they suffered in the fight for Allah and their religion. That is steadfastness. Allah loves the steadfast."

Qur'an:3:153 "Behold! You ran off precipitately, climbing up the high hill without even casting a side glance at anyone, while the Messenger in your rear is calling you from your rear, urging you to fight. Allah gave you one distress after another by way of requital, to teach you not to grieve for the booty that had escaped you and for (the ill) that had befallen you."

Qur'an:3:154 "Say: 'Even if you had remained in your houses, those ordained to be slaughtered would have gone forth to the places where they were to slain."

Ishaq:440 "Helped by the Holy Spirit we smited Muhammad's foes. The Apostle sent a message to them with a sharp cutting sword."

Ishaq:470 "We attacked them fully armed, swords in hand, cutting through heads and skulls."

Qur'an:61:4 "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His Cause."

Qur'an:61:11 "Believers, shall I lead you to a bargain or trade that will save you from a painful torment? That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad), and that you strive and fight in Allah's Cause with your property and your lives: That will be best for you!" Qur'an 61:12 "He will forgive you your sins, and admit you to Gardens under which rivers flow, and to beautiful mansions in Eden: that is indeed the Supreme Achievement. And another (favor) which you love: help from Allah for a speedy victory over your enemies."

Qur'an:8:5 "Your Lord ordered you out of your homes to fight for the true cause, even though some Muslims disliked it, and were averse (to fighting)."

Qur'an:24:53 "They swear their strongest oaths saying that if only you would command them. They would leave their homes (and go forth fighting in Allah's Cause). Say: 'Swear not; Obedience is (more) reasonable.'"

Qur'an:4:74 "Let those who fight in Allah's Cause sell this world's life for the hereafter. To him who fights in Allah's Cause, whether he is slain or victorious, We shall give him a reward."

Qur'an:4:75 "What reason have you that you should not fight in Allah's Cause?" [Another translation says:] "What is wrong with you that you do not fight for Allah?"
Qur'an:4:76 "Those who believe fight in the Cause of Allah."

Qur'an:4:77 "Have you not seen those to whom it was said: Withhold from fighting, perform the prayer and pay the zakat. But when orders for fighting were issued, a party of them feared men as they ought to have feared Allah. They say: 'Our Lord, why have You ordained fighting for us, why have You made war compulsory?'"

Qur'an:4:78 "Wherever you are, death will find you, even if you are in towers strong and high! So what is wrong with these people, that they fail to understand these simple words?"

Qur'an:4:84 "Then fight (Muhammad) in Allah's Cause. Incite the believers to fight with you."

Qur'an:4:94 "Believers, when you go abroad to fight wars in Allah's Cause, investigate carefully, and say not to anyone who greets you: 'You are not a believer!' Coveting the chance profits of this life (so that you may despoil him). With Allah are plenteous spoils and booty."

Qur'an:4:95 "Not equal are believers who sit home and receive no hurt and those who fight in Allah's Cause with their wealth and lives. Allah has granted a grade higher to those who fight with their possessions and bodies to those who sit home. Those who fight He has distinguished with a special reward."

Qur'an:4:100 "He who leaves his home in Allah's Cause finds abundant resources and many a refuge. Should he die as a refugee for Allah and His Messenger His reward becomes due and sure with Allah. When you travel through the earth there is no blame on you if you curtail your worship for fear unbelievers may attack you. In truth the disbelievers are your enemy."

Qur'an:4:102 "When you (Prophet) lead them in prayer, let some stand with you, taking their arms with them. When they finish their prostrations, let them take positions in the rear. And let others who have not yet prayed come - taking all precaution, and bearing arms. The Infidels wish, if you were negligent of your arms, to assault you in a rush. But there is no blame on you if you put away your arms because of the inconvenience of rain or because you are ill; but take precaution. For the Unbelieving Infidels Allah hath prepared a humiliating punishment."

Qur'an:4:104 "And do not relent in pursuing the enemy."

I don't know about those Muslim books, and so I cannot know what those things mean in context. I know a little about the Christian Bible, and there, in the Old Testament, the commands to kill people have mainly the following goals (if I'm not forgetting something):
- to punish sinners, according to the severity of their sins - and so trying to prevent others to commit the same sins, by fear;
- to punish nations that had no fear to the God of Israel - or to Israel itself - and so where in the way to the promised land or other "noble" goals;
- to test people, if they had more fear to God than to kill the wicked ones when required.
In the latter cases, the commands where to very specific situations, and not as general rules to be obeyed along the times against any nation or any person.
Not that I agree with all this. This is just how I understand it.

Originally posted by laujustice:

Please, and i mean please!, let no one take this personal, this thread is not intended to raise any issues on religion supremacy

Yeah, right
There's nothing particularly holy about the quran and you'd find the same smite-the-unbelievers, cut-their-nuts-off-and-steal-their-women, burn-the-place-to-the-ground crap in the old testament and plenty other 'holy' books from a similar timeframe.

Originally posted by barulheira:

I don't know about those Muslim books, and so I cannot know what those things mean in context. I know a little about the Christian Bible, and there, in the Old Testament, the commands to kill people have mainly the following goals (if I'm not forgetting something):
- to punish sinners, according to the severity of their sins - and so trying to prevent others to commit the same sins, by fear;
- to punish nations that had no fear to the God of Israel - or to Israel itself - and so where in the way to the promised land or other "noble" goals;
- to test people, if they had more fear to God than to kill the wicked ones when required.
In the latter cases, the commands where to very specific situations, and not as general rules to be obeyed along the times against any nation or any person.
Not that I agree with all this. This is just how I understand it.

Actually, Christianity did not derive from the teachings in the Old Testament, but from the teachings of the Christ of the New Testament who preached love for neighbours and even love for one's enemy as oneself. Christians are the followers of Jesus not the followers of the prophets of the old testament

Originally posted by laujustice:

Actually, Christianity did not derive from the teachings in the Old Testament, but from the teachings of the Christ of the New Testament who preached love for neighbours and even love for one's enemy as oneself. Christians are the followers of Jesus not the followers of the prophets of the old testament

Then why include the old testament in the bible? Did you actually read the book?
Matthew 5.18 has this:
For verily I say unto you, Until the heaven and the earth pass away, one iota or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all come to pass.
Last time I checked heaven and earth didn't pass away.

These quotes are quite peaceful. The Qur'an contains much worse.

I find the Coran a very practical book. It even has things as remembering people to wash their hands before eating. Notable for a seventh century book.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

These quotes are quite peaceful. The Qur'an contains much worse.

Someone needs to start a thread: "Worst atrocities condoned by 'holy' books" </troll>

Originally posted by Dr. M. Amir Ali:

In the linguistic sense, the Arabic word "jihad" means struggling or striving and applies to any effort exerted by anyone. In this sense a student struggles and strives to get an education and pass course work; an employee strives to fulfill his/her job and maintain good relations with his/her employer; a politician strives to maintain or increase his popularity with his constituents and so on. The term strive or struggle may be used for/by Muslims as well non-Muslims; for example, Allah, One and Only True God says in the Qur'an:

"We have enjoined on people kindness to parents; but if they strive (jahadaka) to make you ascribe partners with Me that of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not..." 29:8, also see 31:15.

In the above two verses of the Qur'an, it is non-Muslim parents who strive (jahada) to convert their Muslim child back to their religion.

In the West, "jihad" is generally translated as "holy war", a usage the media has popularized. According to Islamic teachings, it is unholy to instigate or start war; however, some wars are inevitable and justifiable. If we translate the words "holy war" back into Arabic we find "harbun muqaddasatun", or for "the holy war", "al-harbu al-muqaddasatu". We challenge any researcher or scholar to find the meaning of "jihad" as holy war in the Qur'an or authentic Hadith collections or in early Islamic literature. Unfortunately, some Muslim writers and translators of the Qur'an, the Hadith and other Islamic literature translate the term "jihad" as "holy war", due to the influence of centuries-old Western propaganda. This could be a reflection of the Christian use of the term "Holy War" to refer to the Crusades of a thousand years ago. However, the Arabic words for "war" are "harb" or "qital", which are found in the Qur'an and Hadith.

For Muslims the term jihad is applied to all forms of striving and has developed some special meanings over time. The sources of this development are the Qur'an (the Word of God revealed to Prophet Muhammad(S)) and the Hadith (teachings of Prophet Muhammad(S) [(S) denotes Sall-Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam meaning peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). The Qur'an and the Hadith use the word "jihad" in several different contexts which are given below:

"O you who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for protectors if they love disbelief over belief; whoever of you takes them for protectors, such are wrong-doers. Say: if your fathers, and your children, and your brethren, and your spouses, and your tribe, and the wealth you have acquired, and business for which you fear shrinkage, and houses you are pleased with are dearer to you than Allah and His Messenger and striving in His way: then wait till Allah brings His command to pass. Allah does not guide disobedient folk." 9:23-24

It is indeed a struggle to put Allah ahead of our loved ones, our wealth, our worldly ambitions and our own lives. Especially for a non-Muslim who embraces Islam, it may be a tough struggle due to the opposition of his family, peers and society.

Why not just use this same thread? Atrocities condoned by 'holy books" How about eating your own children?

Leviticus 26:29

And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.

Children stew?

Deuteronomy 28:53

53 And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the LORD thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee:

To be fair, this is really condoning cannibalizing your children, in context "God" (or more likely some tribal hashhead that's been wandering around in the desert too long... ) is warning what the punishment will be for not keeping His commandments.

Some Quranic Verses on Jihad


When has permission been given to go to war?

Permission (to fight) is given to those who are being attacked, because they have been wronged. And surely God measures out help for them. - Surah al-Hajj verse 39

And what is with you that you do not fight in the path of God and (in the path) of the oppressed of men and women and children, those who say "Our Sustainer, take us out from this city, its people are wrongdoers, and decree for us a protector, and decree for us a helper". - Surah an-Nisa verse 75

God does not forbid that you do good and make justice for those who do not fight you in the religion or drive you out from your homes. Indeed, God loves those who do justice. God only forbids your friendship with those who fight you in the religion and drive you out from your homes and back those who drive you out. And who befriends them, such are wrongdoers. - Surah al-Mumtahana verses 8-9

When must Muslims seek peace?

Fight in the path of God those who fight you, but do not aggress. Surely God does not love the aggressors. And fight them where you come upon them, and send them out from where they have sent you out, for persecution is a worse thing than fighting. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque (in Mecca) unless they fight you there, but if they fight you, then fight them back. That is the reward of the rejectors. Then if they cease, so God is All-Forgiving, Gentle. And fight them until there is no more persecution and the religion is for God. But if they cease, so let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers. - Surah al-Baqarat verses 190-193

And if they incline to peace, so you must incline to it. And trust in God, for He hears and knows all. - Surah al-Anfal verse 61

Surely those who have faith and who emigrated and strove with their wealth and their souls in the path of God, and those who sheltered them and helped, such, they are protecting friends of one another. And those who have faith but they did not emigrate, you do not have any duty of protection over them until they emigrate. But if they seek your help in the religion, then it is on you to help them except against a people with whom you have a treaty. And God sees all that you work. - Surah al-Anfal verse 72

Do not fight those who join a folk with whom you have a treaty, or they come to you with their breasts constricted against fighting you or fighting their own folk. And if only God had willed, He could have given them an authority over you so they would have fought you. So if they stand aloof and do not fight you, and they speak a word of peace, then God has not given you a way against them. - Surah an-Nisa verse 90

O you, those who have faith, when you go out to fight in the path of God, make things clear and do not say to someone who gives you peace, "You are not a believer," - you coveting the pleasures of the life of the world, and with God is abundant reward. You were the same as that before, then God was gracious to you. So make it clear. Surely God is aware of what you do. - Surah an-Nisa verse 94.

Even in a declared war, certain rules must be followed:

The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) has given clear instructions about the behaviour of the Muslim army. He observed:

"Set out for Jihad in the name of Allah and for the sake of Allah. Do not lay hands on the old verging on death, on women, children and babes. Do not steal anything from the booty and collect together all that falls to your lot in the battlefield and do good, for Allah loves the virtuous and the pious."

So great is the respect for humanly feelings in Islam that even the wanton destruction of enemy's crops or property is strictly forbidden. The righteous Caliphs followed closely the teachings of Allah and those of His Apostle in letter and spirit the celebrated address which the first Caliph Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) gave to his army while sending her on the expedition to the Syrian borders is permeated with the noble spirit with which the war in Islam is permitted. He said:

"Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman. nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock. save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone"

It is said that once at the time of conquest, a singing girl was brought to al-Muhajir b. Abu Umayya who had been publicly singing satirical poems about Hadrat Abu Bakr. Muhajir got her hand amputated. When the Caliph heard this news, he was shocked and wrote a letter to Muhajir in the following words:

"I have learnt that you laid hands on a woman who had hurled abuses on me, and, therefore, got her hand amputated. God has not sought vengeance even in the case of polytheism, which is a great crime. He has not permitted mutilation even with regard to manifest infidelity. Try to be considerate and sympathetic in your attitude towards others in future. Never mutilate, because it is a grave offence. God purified Islam and the Muslims from rashness and excessive wrath. You are well aware of the fact that those enemies fell into the hands of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who had been recklessly abusing him; who had turned him out of his home; and who fought against him, but he never permitted their mutilation."

Another letter written by hadrat 'Umar the Second Caliph, which is addressed to Sa'd b. Abu Waqqas, speaks eloquently of the noble spirit with which the Muslims have bear exhorted to take up arms:

"Always search your minds and hearts and stress upon your men the need of perfect integrity and sincerity in the cause of Allah. There should be no material end before them in laying down their lives. but they abould deem it a means whereby they can please their Lord and entitle them. selves to His favour: such a spirit of selflessness should be inculcated in the minds of those who unfortunately lack it. Be firm in the thick of the battle as Allah helps man according to the perseverance that he shows in the cause of His faith and he would be rewarded in accordance with the spirit of sacrifice which he displays for the sake of the Lord. Be careful that those who have been entrusted to your care receive no harm at your hands and are never deprived of any of their legitimate rights."


A Special Note:

PROHIBITION OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN WAR

Book 019, Number 4319 Sahih Muslim:

It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children.

Book 019, Number 4320:

It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.

Cal Thomas, a columnist for the Washington [DC] Times, did just this in his Oct. 3rd article "Can we be fooled twice?" For example, he presents only part of 5:85: "among those most hostile to the Believers you will find Jews and Pagans. . . " One wonders why he does not complete it: ". . . and nearest among them in love to the Believers you will find those who say: 'We are Christians,' because among them you find men devoted to learning, men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant."

Thomas quotes part of 9:5: ". . . then fight and slay the Pagans wherever find them. Seize them, besiege them, and lie in wait for them." However, when read in its full context, verses 1-5, the meaning is quite different.

Islam does not allow or sanctify the killing any innocent person regardless of his or her religion. According to the Qur'an and Hadith (sayings of Prophet Muhammad) life is sacrosanct.

We read in the Qur'an: ". . . Do not take life, which Allah has made sacred, except through justice and the law. He orders this so that you may acquire wisdom" (6:151) and, "Do not take life, which Allah has made sacred, except for a just cause. If anyone is killed unjustly, We allow his heir (to seek justice) but do not allow him to exceed bounds when it comes to taking life, for he is helped (by the law)" (17:33). According to the Qur'an, killing a person unjustly is the same as killing all of humanity, and saving a person is the same as saving all humanity. (See 5:32.)

Other critics of Islam found: "Kill them wherever you catch them. . . " (2:191), ". . . But if they turn away, seize them and kill them wherever you find them. (In any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." (4:89), and similar verses.

When placed within their textual and historical contexts, however, their true meanings emerge:

"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits, for Allah does not love transgressors. Kill them wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out, for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. But do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there. If they fight you, kill them. Such is the reward of those who reject faith. But if they cease, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression and justice and faith in Allah prevail. If they cease, engage in hostility only against those who practice oppression. There is the law of equality of for the prohibited months, and so for all things prohibited. If any one transgresses the prohibition against you, transgress likewise against him. But be conscious of Allah and know that He is with those who restrain themselves" (2:190-194).

The other verses read: "They hope that you will reject faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they). So do not take friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (from what is forbidden). If they become renegades, seize them and kill them wherever you find them. (In any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks, except for those who join a group with whom you have a (peace) treaty or those who approach you with hearts calling upon them to be neutral. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you and they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you and do not fight you, and (instead) send you (guarantees of) peace, then Allah has opened no way for you (to fight them). You will find others who wish to gain your confidence as well as that of their people. Every time they are sent back to temptation they succumb to it. If they do not withdraw from you or give you (guarantees) of peace besides restraining their hands, seize them and kill them wherever you find them. In their case, We have provided you with a clear argument against them" (4:89-91).

Nowhere do these verses give general permission to kill any one. They were revealed to Prophet Muhammad at the time when the nonbelievers were attacking Makkah's Muslims and threatening those in Madinah. In contemporary jargon we may say that as the Muslims were subject to constant terrorist attacks on Madinah, Allah allowed them to defend themselves. These verses do not allow Muslims to engage in terrorism; rather, they are warnings against terrorism, but they also contain clear calls for restraint and care.

Religious texts, if not read within their proper textual and historical contexts, are easily manipulated and distorted. Let us look at the Bible and apply the standards applied above.

In Deuteronomy, the fifth book of the Torah, Moses shares this message from God as the Israelites prepare to enter the Promised Land: "I will make my arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the long-haired heads of the enemy." (Deut. 32:42)

"When the Lord, your God, brings you into the land that you are entering to possess, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you. And when the Lord, your God, delivers them before you and you defeat them, destroy them utterly. Make no covenant with them and show no mercy to them" (Deuteronomy 7:1-2).

"When your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your friend who is as your own soul, entices you secretly, saying 'Let us go and serve other gods,' . . . you shall kill him, your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God. . . " (Deuteronomy 13: 6-10)

"When you approach a city to fight it, offer it terms of peace. If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, all the people found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you. However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, besiege it. When the Lord your God gives it into your hand, kill all the men in it. Take as booty only the women, children, animals, and all that is in the city, all its spoils. Use the spoils of your enemies which the Lord your God has given you. . . Only in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. Do not leave alive anything that breathes" (Deuteronomy 20:10-17).

"Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. But spare for yourselves all virgin maidens" (Numbers 31:17-18).

"I will send my terror in front of you. . . you shall utterly demolish them and break their pillars in pieces" (Exodus 23: 23-24, 27).

The New Testament attributes the following statements to Jesus:

"Do not think that I have come to send peace on Earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword. I am sent to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law" (Mathew 10:34-35).

"I say to you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. As for my enemies who do not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence" (Luke 19:26-27).

There are dozens of other verses that, if taken out from their historical context, seem to favor violence. Some violent Muslim groups misuse the Qur'anic verses just as various violent Jewish and Christian groups have used them to justify their causes. The Crusaders used them against Muslims and Jews. The Nazis used them against Jews. Serbian Christians used them against Bosnian Muslims, and Zionists regularly use them against Palestinians. David Koresh, Jim Jones, and Baruch Goldstein all relied on religious texts to justify their violence.

Muslims believe in all Prophets sent by Allah, and so do not misuse or misinterpret the religious texts of other faiths in order to defame them. Even in recent times, Muslims have and are facing genocidal campaigns in Bosnia, Kosova, Chechnia, Kashmir, and PalestineÑbut they have not questioned Judaism and Christianity. Such a spirit needs to be reciprocated.

Originally posted by DANBUZU:

Leviticus 20:9 If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.
20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.
20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death.
Deuteronomy 22:20-1 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house.
Exodus 35:2 For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.

On Punishing ‘Immorality’

Leviticus 20:9 If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put to death.
20:10 If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.
20:13 If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death.
Deuteronomy 22:20-1 If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of her town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house.

Exodus 35:2 For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.

On Destroying Other People
Deuteronomy 7:1-2 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations . . . then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.
20:10-17 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. . . . This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.

On the Evil of Biblical Law
Ezekiel 20:25-26 I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by; I let them become defiled through their gifts—the sacrifice of every firstborn—that I might fill them with horror so they would know that I am the LORD.

On Slavery & Subjugation of Women
Ephesians 5:22-24 Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
Exodus 21:20-21 If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every authority instituted among men.
2:18 Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

Leviticus 25:44-45 Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.

Jesus, on His Second Coming

Matthew 24:29-34 [T]he sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. . . . They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. . . . I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. [Emphasis added.]

16:27-28 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.

Scientific Errors
(1) Rabbits don’t chew cud.

Deuteronomy 14:6-7 You may eat any animal that has a split hoof divided in two and that chews the cud. However, of those that chew the cud or that have a split hoof completely divided you may not eat the camel, the rabbit, or the coney.
(2) No insects (including grasshoppers) are 4-legged.

Leviticus 11:20-22 All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you. There are, however, some winged creatures that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. Of these you may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper.
(3) This is only possible on a flat earth.

Matthew 4:8 Again the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.
(4) pi does not = 3.

1 Kings 7:23 He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim . . . It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it.
(5) The earth moves. It does not have a foundation.

Psalms 104:5 He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved.

Selected Contradictions
(1)
2 Kings 2:11 As they were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.
John 3:13 No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.
(2)
Numbers 23:19 God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Exodus 32:14 Then the Lord relented and did not bring on his people the disaster he had threatened.
(3)
Ephesians 2:8-9 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith . . . not by works.
James 2:14-17 What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? . . . Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
Revelation 22:12 Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.
(4) (Jesus speaking)
Matthew 5:16 Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your father in heaven.
Matthew 6:1 Be careful not to do your ‘acts of righteousness’ before men, to be seen by them.
(5) (Jesus speaking)
John 14:27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you.
Matthew 10:34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
(6)
Genesis 32:30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and my life was preserved.”
Exodus 33:11 The Lord would speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks with his friend.
John 1:18 No one has ever seen God.
(7) (Jesus speaking)
John 5:31 If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid.
John 8:14 Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid.

This debate can be completed on ground zero's around the world barring Danbuzu's religious thesis

I see this the battle of the epic copy/pastes.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

I see this the battle of the epic copy/pastes.

Absolutely.
You could have as much fun researching (Googling) the supposed hidden meanings of popular nursery rhymes.

I was going to say that I wonder if they realize nobody is going to read all that shit; but clearly the answer is "no."

Seems unlikely the intent of the OP was to do anything but have an equalized debate on the 'discrepancies' found in all holy texts in regards to any loving god. And so quick to try and distance yourself from the OT after you posted countless Islamic texts out of context... Actually Jesus, assuming he existed, was jewish. Any "Christian" texts didn't exist till almost a century later and no doctrines or offical texts came for another 600 yr. All modified at will throught their endless copies and translations. So does any of the passages in any of the holy books really mean anything?

Nah, they're just leaving loopholes in their control methodology to make you do anything when someone says god said it.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

I was going to say that I wonder if they realize nobody is going to read all that shit; but clearly the answer is "no."

Epic indeed... I didn't read a word of danbuzu's posts-o-crap.

Originally posted by ensbb3:

posts-o-crap.

I like it.

Originally posted by ensbb3:

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

I was going to say that I wonder if they realize nobody is going to read all that shit; but clearly the answer is "no."

Epic indeed... I didn't read a word of danbuzu's posts-o-crap.

Neither did anyone else I guess. Crapypasta?

Originally posted by Macallan:

Neither did anyone else I guess. Crapypasta?

Quototrash?

From The Book of Dawg:

On pissing matches between the old religions:
1Thou shalt not give a damn when thou brothers or sisters engage in pissing matches on whose religion is superior. 2When this occurs, thou shalt sit down in thoust most comfortable armchair and thou shalt drink a pint of thoust most favourite ale/lager/bitter/cider. 3Thou shalt, from time to time, remind thou brothers or sisters that life is a bi*ch and then thoust dies, so f**k the world, just go get high. 4If thou doest not prefer to engage in cannibas use, thou shalt strive for peace amongst all thou brothers and sisters by promoting not bothering with religion at all.

Originally posted by Sanguinemoon:

Why not just use this same thread? Atrocities condoned by 'holy books"

Too long to quote

I'm a conservative, pentecostal Christian--- and I didn't read most of that stuff. A fast overview gives you the main idea, after that you realize the OP and Danbuzu both have axes to grind and this debate could be endless-- with no real point worth the bother at the end.

So, now we know: some religious people don't like each other a whole lot. Read your daily paper for further details.

The earlier point from laujustice ia important that Christianity emerged from the teachings of Jesus. The Old Testament is leading up to the Messianic time of Christ and shows the difference he made from traditional Judiasm. So much of the Old Testament is historical leading up to that. The Koran on the other has one long litany of negatives from the "prophet" who was a hardly something to boast about. If he was a "prophet" he is amongst the earliest to pratice child abuse with a child as "wife". So the comparison is not equal.

With such a mass onslaught against modern society from a sizeable chunk of the Islamic community who regard themselves as radicals or fundamenalists based on lists of what to do with unbelievers (no Old or New Testaments for them) therein lies the danger. They are the ones creating world-wide Jhads, pogroms and terror. There isn't an equivilant religion to this.

Can a religion be daft without being obnoxious?
Are Scientologists urged to kill anyone?
Did you know that some of the ratbag fundamentalist sects have breakaway sectlets that differ on minute ratbag points of doctrine and have their own clergy?
Did you care?
I thought not.

The problem is in separating the reasons for the words from the cultural context they were written. Any religious book written in a period where justice involved swords and stones and physically defending yourself from enemies will be presented in the same style.

If the bible were written today, it would probably exhort the true believers to sue the enemies of God for a huge settlement, or that they must be humiliated on a game show, or subjected to economic sanctions.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

The earlier point from laujustice ia important that Christianity emerged from the teachings of Jesus.

On the other hand, I heard a preacher say that Jesus himself would be run out of most modern churches. Just sayin'...

Originally posted by rjhowie:

The Old Testament is leading up to the Messianic time of Christ and shows the difference he made from traditional Judiasm. So much of the Old Testament is historical leading up to that.

Yet the old bugger himself said that not one iota of the old law will pass away, nay, he has come to fulfill the law, not change it. (paraphrased slightly)

Yeah, yeah, subtle paraphrasing will give you that. Must say in passing tt92 that across the pond sects have a field day and a completely different scenario. I am not being ungracious in saying it would be one import we could do without.

Religious texts, if not read within their proper textual and historical contexts, are easily manipulated and distorted. Let us look at the Bible and apply the standards applied above.

In Deuteronomy, the fifth book of the Torah, Moses shares this message from God as the Israelites prepare to enter the Promised Land: "I will make my arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the long-haired heads of the enemy." (Deut. 32:42)

"When the Lord, your God, brings you into the land that you are entering to possess, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you. And when the Lord, your God, delivers them before you and you defeat them, destroy them utterly. Make no covenant with them and show no mercy to them" (Deuteronomy 7:1-2).

"When your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your friend who is as your own soul, entices you secretly, saying 'Let us go and serve other gods,' . . . you shall kill him, your hand shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God. . . " (Deuteronomy 13: 6-10)

"When you approach a city to fight it, offer it terms of peace. If it agrees to make peace with you and opens to you, all the people found in it shall become your forced labor and shall serve you. However, if it does not make peace with you, but makes war against you, besiege it. When the Lord your God gives it into your hand, kill all the men in it. Take as booty only the women, children, animals, and all that is in the city, all its spoils. Use the spoils of your enemies which the Lord your God has given you. . . Only in the cities of these peoples that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. Do not leave alive anything that breathes" (Deuteronomy 20:10-17).

"Kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately. But spare for yourselves all virgin maidens" (Numbers 31:17-18).

"I will send my terror in front of you. . . you shall utterly demolish them and break their pillars in pieces" (Exodus 23: 23-24, 27).

The New Testament attributes the following statements to Jesus:

"Do not think that I have come to send peace on Earth. I did not come to send peace, but a sword. I am sent to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law" (Mathew 10:34-35).

"I say to you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. As for my enemies who do not want me to reign over them, bring them here and kill them in my presence" (Luke 19:26-27).

There are dozens of other verses that, if taken out from their historical context, seem to favor violence. Some violent Muslim groups misuse the Qur'anic verses just as various violent Jewish and Christian groups have used them to justify their causes. The Crusaders used them against Muslims and Jews. The Nazis used them against Jews. Serbian Christians used them against Bosnian Muslims, and Zionists regularly use them against Palestinians. David Koresh, Jim Jones, and Baruch Goldstein all relied on religious texts to justify their violence.

Muslims believe in all Prophets sent by Allah, and so do not misuse or misinterpret the religious texts of other faiths in order to defame them. Even in recent times, Muslims have and are facing genocidal campaigns in Bosnia, Kosova, Chechnia, Kashmir, and PalestineÑbut they have not questioned Judaism and Christianity. Such a spirit needs to be reciprocated.

How long before he realizes no one is reading his posts?

Give him another year or two

poop to that.

Always the optimist, I can't help it

Returning to the thread (well almost), I have an idea.

There has been a lot of discussion about parts of these Holy Books that are somewhat unpleasant or un-neighbourly. No religion seems to be immune from straying from the rational.

Mostly violence has been the subject but we could broaden that out, for example the washing hands alert mentioned above is sound advice whereas eating daughters is, well, unpalatable. Also it has to be said that some strictures are harmless or even good manners (Love thine neighbour and all that).

So I suggest that Religions should include Smileys in their Bibles, Qur'ans and so forth for each and every stanza. Different sects might disagree with other's judgement on what Smileys to use and have their own sect-specific Holy Book, bedecked with Smileys; or at least it could be so for those that had the courage to state their beliefs loud and clear.

It would be much clearer what people stood for and what they did not. Insults and praise alike would not have so many collaterally offended.

So, for example:
would signify a sentence which was of the "Go forth and spread the Word" mentality
would signify a "Smite the Enemy" sentiment, not to be followed
would mean it was a "Holy must-have"
would mean "don't take this literally"

Any other ideas?

I start, of course, from the viewpoint that no-one in their right mind would believe every single thing that is written in those books. Note that is not the same as saying that no-one believes everything.

Originally posted by string:

It would be much clearer what people stood for and what they did not. Insults and praise alike would not have so many collaterally offended.

So, for example:
would signify a sentence which was of the "Go forth and spread the Word" mentality
would signify a "Smite the Enemy" sentiment, not to be followed
would mean it was a "Holy must-have"
would mean "don't take this literally"

Any other ideas?

I start, of course, from the viewpoint that no-one in their right mind would believe every single thing that is written in those books. Note that is not the same as saying that no-one believes everything.

or - the author smoked some holy weed

Christianity is older than Islam and the true religion except Judaism too

maybe this is why Sunni kills Shiite-theyre both infidels

- The devil is gonna get ya if you don't repent.

- God did it.

- Passage requires high blood alcohol level to interpret.

- nom nom nom babies! (or daughters)

- turn the other cheek.

and lastly for me...

- kill the unbelievers!

People tend to look at externals, and fail to see the essence of religion. The right path is difficult to find for those immersed in worldly thoughts. Even the Buddhas can only point out the way, the journey of inner discovery leading to peace must be trodden my oneself.

Do not judge a book by its cover, and do not judge a person by their physical appearance.
If the inside is full of hate then it is an ugly thing.

A holy warrior must fight the War on Error. If the eye is obscured by cataracts it cannot see clearly. If the mind is obscured by wrong views, lustful desires, and hatred it cannot understand the truth at all.

Self-conquest is far greater than the conquest of others;
neither a deity nor a gandhabba, nor Māra with Brahmā,
can overturn the victory of one who is self-possessed and restrained. (Dhammapada vv 104-105)

That those lambasting the man (often rightly I admit) say no-one is reading his posts when they feel inclined to answer them is funny!

Originally posted by ensbb3:

The devil is gonna get ya if you don't repent.

Nope ensbb3.
- means special paragraph very useful for keeping atheists mad.

Originally posted by Pesala:

People tend to look at externals, and fail to see the essence of religion.

You don't have to be religious to engage in meaningful thoughts, Pesala, and it is not axiomatic that any religion has value.

But on the literal meaning of your statement, you need to define "externals"; I would tend to define it as anything which can be observed by any of the senses, in which case there is no other means to form an opinion.

- a wild card - can be used with any other Smiley

Originally posted by string:

No religion seems to be immune from straying from the rational.

Of course not, because religion is, in itself, an irrational thing. Faith in some unseen, unproven thing that may or may not exist is irrational.

Which brings us to the rational point of religion; not believing a word of it until some form of testable proof is brought forward. Looking at it from a distance w/o the supernatural mumbo-jumbo/faith and taking the few decent point the couple of holy books make and dissecting them and using them to our advantage if we want to.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Of course not, because religion is, in itself, an irrational thing. Faith in some unseen, unproven thing that may or may not exist is irrational.

The essence of religion does not rely on externals. One may believe that others are hateful, without actually knowing that it is so. However, if one examines one's own mind, it is possible to know by direct knowledge whether thoughts of hate are present or absent. One can also know by direct experience that its presence causes suffering, and that its removal leads to peace and the cessation of suffering.

Faith may be well-placed, or it may be misplaced. If one has no direct knowledge of things taught as truth in religious books, such as the phrase mentioned above: "Self-conquest is far greater than the conquest of others" — that is, if one is not able to remove hateful thoughts from one's own mind, but still desires to seek vengeance for wrongs real or imagined, then one has no direct knowledge of the truth of that statement. One still imagines that to conquer others might be better than to conquer oneself.

The gap between belief and knowledge is wide. Reading, questioning, and studying religious teachings may help to reduce the gap, but they cannot lead to direct knowledge — no more than studying maps can lead one to Mecca, Jerusalem, or Bodhgaya. The Buddha gained direct knowledge by practising meditation for six years. It was not something he learnt from books or by word of mouth.

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Faith in some unseen, unproven thing that may or may not exist is irrational.

....Reading, questioning, and studying religious teachings may help to reduce the gap, but they cannot lead to direct knowledge....

It would seem Dawg, that Pesala agrees with you but I am not sure he agrees with agreeing.

Scepticism about sources of information from elsewhere is part of the human condition I suppose but believing solely in the veracity of one's own ponderings is on the road from arrogance to simple-mindedness. Such a creed, advising everyone to depend on only their own mental acuity would leave, in an unequal world, to a multiplicity of personal philosophies and imagined "facts" which owed most to the quality of the little grey matter and thus the whole range of concepts from the complex to the banal. Everyone would believe they had the one and only truth and they would all be wrong except me. Buddha? No reason to believe him; there's no direct connection there, one should work it out for one's self.

But my Grandpa taught me a thing or two.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Of course not, because religion is, in itself, an irrational thing.

Nonsense.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Of course not, because religion is, in itself, an irrational thing.

Nonsense.

That too.

Well, in defense of my argument, I'll ask if anyone has seen irrational animals being religious... It seems to me perfectly reasonable to consider religion as a part of the rational mind and it doesn't make any sense to consider religion "in itself". We have God or not and we have men interpretation of that reality. Religion is equal to interpretation, something that only the rational mind can do.

I know that there is the mystical experience and that is completely different, but it's first characteristic is not being transmissible or explainable to others. So can't be discussed.

What doesn't seems to me very rational is keep on insisting at childish interpretations of texts. As an example, if people are able to interpret messages behind poetry, why suddenly they can't do it if a text is religious and insists at a literal interpretation? They can do it perfectly, but they don't just because they don't want the real message to be there...

Originally posted by Belfrager:

I'll ask if anyone has seen irrational animals being religious...

Erm, are you trying to prove my point even further?
Religion does not exist for animals. They have no need for fantasy and crutches in their lives.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

It seems to me perfectly reasonable to consider religion as a part of the rational mind and it doesn't make any sense to consider religion "in itself".

On what grounds?

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by Belfrager:

It seems to me perfectly reasonable to consider religion as a part of the rational mind and it doesn't make any sense to consider religion "in itself".

On what grounds?

On the grounds I said:
[/quote]

Originally posted by Belfrager:

We have God or not and we have men interpretation of that reality. Religion is equal to interpretation, something that only the rational mind can do.

By "religion in itself" you can only approach its dimension as a social phenomena, no different from any other social phenomena, not what you are trying to demonstrate. But that is a job for sociology and psychology, not believers and unbelievers.
While you don't start to analyze things with method (rationally?...) you'll be entirely lost in confusion.

Try the Dalai Lama, he always speaks very clear so anyone can understand him. And he's right most of the time by restraining to simple moral thoughts.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

Well, in defense of my argument, I'll ask if anyone has seen irrational animals being religious... It seems to me perfectly reasonable to consider religion as a part of the rational mind and it doesn't make any sense to consider religion "in itself". We have God or not and we have men interpretation of that reality. Religion is equal to interpretation, something that only the rational mind can do.

I know that there is the mystical experience and that is completely different, but it's first characteristic is not being transmissible or explainable to others. So can't be discussed.

What doesn't seems to me very rational is keep on insisting at childish interpretations of texts. As an example, if people are able to interpret messages behind poetry, why suddenly they can't do it if a text is religious and insists at a literal interpretation? They can do it perfectly, but they don't just because they don't want the real message to be there...

Leaving aside the polemics for the moment, you make a case for interpretation of words in Holy Books by adherents of that religion. I don't see anything wrong in that concept and indeed that is the sort of Christianity that I am more familiar with, the Church of England where allegorical would be a much used word and where the dafter [arts are used to expose some underlying (interpreted) godly message.

But why is it that the Bible, and other books such as the Koran have not had their more bloodthirsty phraseology expunged rather letting the stay and fester and confuse the minds of the more gullible fundamentalist|?

My interjection of the use of Smileys had it's humourous beginnings, but it nevertheless has real serious content. Some parts of these books are, to coin a phrase, diabolical and would be better left un-printed would they not.

Incidentally I seem to recall (can't be bothered to search it right now) that Pesala had issues with the concept of rational, for reasons that I now forget. A pity that he has temporarily lost interest in this thread otherwise he could remind us/enlighten us of his opinion.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

Well, in defense of my argument, I'll ask if anyone has seen irrational animals being religious...

By the church-load! They're called people.

There was a time, when we were all much younger, that I might have had the energy to collect some photographs, juxtapose them, and comment.
Some pictures of the Roman Pontiff and his retinue, in full fancy-dress.
Some similar pictures of the Russian Orthodox royalty.
Some of Ultra-Orthodox Jews, in their furry, Polish-village finery.
Some of Muslim clergy, in an air-conditioned palace, dressed for a desert wind-storm.

Captioned "At Least Three of These Have Beliefs that are Ludicrous and Wrong."

But I don't have to. This is, after all, D&D. The people here are intelligent and have imagination.
You do it.

Originally posted by tt92:

You do it.

I've done it. Three out of four have beliefs that are ludicrous and wrong. Yes, obviously.
Edited: and if Protestants counts, it will be four out of five.
Edited again: and if Buddhists count, it will be five out of six.
Last and final edition: consider it N-1 out of N. After all, only one can be right.

Most human beings hold some views that are ludicrous and wrong. That is why they continue to be reborn in the lower realms of existence after death — as animals, hungry ghosts, jealous gods, or in hell.

The truth that the Buddha realised is very profound. Though it is sublime and conducive to inner peace, it is hard to understand. Since it is subtle and not accessible to mere intellect and logic, it can be realised only by the wise.

“Blind is this world, only a few can see clearly.
Like birds that escape from a net, only a few go to a blissful state.” (Dhp v 174)

“Not accessible to intellect and logic” does not mean irrational. Right view transcends the intellectual process. Insight knowledge arises from direct experience of realities within one's own body and mind. The systematic practice of mindfulness is the only way to establish right view. Reading, discussing, and thinking are no substitute for direct knowledge gained through insight meditation.

To the OP: Why not quote all the verses in entirety? And why only Quran this time?

Originally posted by Pesala:

“Not accessible to intellect and logic” does not mean irrational. Right view transcends the intellectual process. Insight knowledge arises from direct experience of realities within one's own body and mind.

I understand all that, it doesn't differ too much from western tradition of mystical search, in order to being united with the Whole, and intellectual processes constituting a barrier for that.

What happens is that I can't see a religion, at societies as we know it, made of millions of eremites occupied with Being instead of working... Holy eremites used to be fed by the population, today the population is not too much in the mood for that.

At the bottom line, the Budha has realized what others did. But just to radical for the masses, in my opinion, and reading the Dalai Lama I understand why he has the necessity of promoting kindness as supreme value and living according to it. It gentles the original version, that is in fact the purest one.

Well ersi unless you have been sleeping the world-wide religious terrorist, bombing and killing spree spread is based on the Koran stuff.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well ersi unless you have been sleeping the world-wide religious terrorist, bombing and killing spree spread is based on the Koran stuff.

Is the concept of crusade unfamiliar to you? Well, for us Europeans it sounds medieval, but for born-again evangelicals (on another continent close to you) it is a current and active concept. Unless you have been sleeping, this is the concept based on which Afghanistan and Iraq were attacked and War on Terrorism started. As everybody knows by now, there was no other basis for these wars. It was certainly not Koran.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well ersi unless you have been sleeping the world-wide religious terrorist, bombing and killing spree spread is based on the Koran stuff.

Except when it's been based on the bible stuff.

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well ersi unless you have been sleeping the world-wide religious terrorist, bombing and killing spree spread is based on the Koran stuff.

Except when it's been based on the bible stuff.

I haven't heard much in the way of atheists terrorizing by bombing and shooting up the place for religious reasons. Around here in my neck of the woods, we have an atheist that prefers to do his terrorizing in the courts. He's always suing somebody or other over religious reasons in the North suburbs of Chicago. I think he's got half a dozen cases going at any given time.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

I haven't heard much in the way of atheists terrorizing by bombing and shooting up the place for religious reasons. Around here in my neck of the woods, we have an atheist that prefers to do his terrorizing in the courts. He's always suing somebody or other over religious reasons in the North suburbs of Chicago. I think he's got half a dozen cases going at any given time.

Absolutely, when it comes to shooting places up and bombing, religious books aren't the be-all and end-all. It usually comes down to very human motivations, with a veneer of ideology.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

I haven't heard much in the way of atheists terrorizing by bombing and shooting up the place for religious reasons. Around here in my neck of the woods, we have an atheist that prefers to do his terrorizing in the courts. He's always suing somebody or other over religious reasons in the North suburbs of Chicago. I think he's got half a dozen cases going at any given time.

I'm actually an acquaintance of his son's — small world, eh? I've never met the guy himself, but his son's partner sure didn't mince his dislike for the guy's behavior and lack of manners (among other things). My father-in-law also treated me to a fun couple stories about him, from over decade ago, when it came up that I'm an atheist. All I can and will personally say about Sherman is that I'm not fond of his webpage, and that his confrontation with the hateful Monique Davis was epic.

Originally posted by mjmsprt40:

Around here in my neck of the woods, we have an atheist that prefers to do his terrorizing in the courts. He's always suing somebody or other over religious reasons in the North suburbs of Chicago. I think he's got half a dozen cases going at any given time.

We've finally made some progress down here in the most religious state in the Union.
Since way-back-when, before football games at Southaven Public High School there was a prayer. Finally, finally, someone complained to the FFRF(Freedom From Religion Foundation) about that and they were finally ordered to stop it.

Not that they actually did stop it, but the school did stop sanctioning it and that is what the FFRF was after all along.
http://www.abc24.com/mostpopular/story/Parents-Hold-Prayer-Protest-at-DeSoto-County/wGFi4L2o0U6bAG5SoeKcFQ.cspx

I'm actually quite tempted to turn in a local high school for doing an invocation during their graduation ceremony.
The people from the town I'm talking about are even more vociferous about ancient traditions than the DeSoto County people.

Well I think if I was there and there was some kind of similar thing to that in the way of a staement from an Atheist I would be complaining too.

Funny thing is, those who believe in this religion always would defend these evil verses by saying things like "you need to understand the real meanings of these words"

Originally posted by laujustice:

Funny thing is, those who believe in this religion always would defend these evil verses by saying things like "you need to understand the real meanings of these words"

Surprised? Ask a fundie christian about Exodus, Joshua or any other excessively violent OT story and you'll get remarkably similar rationalizations. With either one of them it's either hyperbole, metaphorical or, if you get a particularly sick psycho, it's ok because god said so ( And they're the ones who claim atheists have no moral compass. Go figure. )

It still overlooks the fact that internationand widespread global terrorism is an Islamic fact of life. We don't have a similar Chrisitan world-wide situation.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

It still overlooks the fact that internationand widespread global terrorism is an Islamic fact of life.

Because it's not a fact. It's not even close to being true. The fear of Islamic terrorism is global, yes. The fact of it is there is no such widespread component to it, nor is it even relevant to 99.999% of the Islamic world population.

We don't have a similar Chrisitan world-wide situation.

Not in this particular decade, no. Lucky that, eh?

It's pretty basic: if the collection of beliefs contains the idea that it's good to believe in itself, bad to disbelieve, and good to kill disbelievers, then the idea will expand itself like a retrovirus. Nasty, eh? Just like lots of superstitions and myths.

Oh a grudgingly humphy admission coming from johnnysaucepn. Bet he gripes that the Crusades aren't today so as to give him an easier target? Some paupacity when you have to wish for 6 or 700 hundred tears ago in desperation?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Oh a grudgingly humphy admission coming from johnnysaucepn. Bet he gripes that the Crusades aren't today so as to give him an easier target? Some paupacity when you have to wish for 6 or 700 hundred tears ago in desperation?

Oh, but they are, RJ. Many would say that your reaction to the word 'Islam' is evidence of that.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

I've done it. Three out of four have beliefs that are ludicrous and wrong. Yes, obviously.
Edited: and if Protestants counts, it will be four out of five.
Edited again: and if Buddhists count, it will be five out of six.
Last and final edition: consider it N-1 out of N. After all, only one can be right.

Catholics qua Catholics, Protestants qua Protestants, yes. But Buddhists qua Buddhists? You'll have to show me.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

Catholics qua Catholics, Protestants qua Protestants, yes. But Buddhists qua Buddhists? You'll have to show me.

Not sure if I'm understanding your point. (I interpret "qua" as "in the quality of".) There's anything amongst Buddhists that makes them special regarding all the others?

Originally posted by Belfrager:

After all, only one can be right.

In fact, no. They could all be wrong.
More likely, all are right about some things and wrong about others.

Buddhism recognises greed, hatred, and delusion as the three unwholesome roots, and all born into the human realm have these three root conditions. So delusion, wrong view, misunderstanding is part of the human condition. To become a Buddha means to destroy these three unwholesome roots.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

There's anything amongst Buddhists that makes them special regarding all the others?

Yes. Buddhism is not a belief system, but a way of inquiry leading to right understanding. Buddhists are encouraged not to believe, but to study, practice, and gain personal realisation of the truth.

You may believe it or not, but attachment to views causes suffering. To see things as they really are one must abandon all attachment to views, beliefs, and opinions.

Churchmen in peace and quiet pray to Heaven for the welfare of the world, but we soldiers and knights carry into effect what they pray for...
Thus are we God's ministers on earth and the arms by which his justice is done therein.

-Miguel de Cervantes

Originally posted by Pesala:

To see things as they really are one must abandon all attachment to views, beliefs, and opinions.

I know the way supposedly to see things as they "really are", western culture also has its own hermits, unattached from everything, in order to get united with the true, but I still prefer to see them as I see them.
In fact, not being a materialist in therms of ontology, I don't even think that things exists by themselves. But you are ontologically a materialist, that believes at "things" own existence, that you try to reach, what is surprising. Besides constituting an attachment.

Originally posted by Muttsfan:

Churchmen in peace and quiet pray to Heaven for the welfare of the world, but we soldiers and knights carry into effect what they pray for...
Thus are we God's ministers on earth and the arms by which his justice is done therein.

-Miguel de Cervantes

Cervantes was one of those few that got the entire picture... I wonder what would he say today...

I'm impressed at the way the thread is generating.

Threads are like sons, you want them free..

Originally posted by Pesala:

Originally posted by Belfrager:

After all, only one can be right.

In fact, no. They could all be wrong.

Indeed, they could all be wrong. Belfrager was saying that the limit was one, not that there surely was one that was right [uh, is that correct, Belfrager?]

Originally posted by Pesala:

More likely, all are right about some things and wrong about others.

Buddhism recognises greed, hatred, and delusion as the three unwholesome roots, and all born into the human realm have these three root conditions. So delusion, wrong view, misunderstanding is part of the human condition. To become a Buddha means to destroy these three unwholesome roots.

Originally posted by Belfrager:

There's anything amongst Buddhists that makes them special regarding all the others?

Yes. Buddhism is not a belief system, but a way of inquiry leading to right understanding. Buddhists are encouraged not to believe, but to study, practice, and gain personal realisation of the truth.

You may believe it or not, but attachment to views causes suffering. To see things as they really are one must abandon all attachment to views, beliefs, and opinions.

One of the thing that impresses me about Buddhism is the commitment to inquiry. Too many beliefs deny the possibility that their subscribers might be wrong. It seems obvious to me: if you can't admit it when you're wrong, how can you come closer to the truth?

It is clear that attachment to views can cause suffering, but detachment from some views can lead to suffering (through all sorts of channels). Finding the balance is challenging.

In some of the murkier back-alleys of YouTube there are promises of all kinds of delights.
Amongst offerings of beheadings, limbs being blown off before your very eyes, death and mutilation, there are clips from both sides of the war in Afghanistan.
Any triumph of a RPG against an American helicopter or some other vehicle is accompanied by interminable shrieks of "God is great!" and much nimble capering in ankle-length garments.
A sniper, graphically taken out by the enormous firepower of an American tank, vanishes to the sound of yelping and yeehawing and inexplicable satisfied cries of "Goddam!".
It seems both sides give all credit and glory to the Almighty.

Originally posted by tt92:

In some of the murkier back-alleys of YouTube there are promises of all kinds of delights.
Amongst offerings of beheadings, limbs being blown off before your very eyes, death and mutilation, there are clips from both sides of the war in Afghanistan.
Any triumph of a RPG against an American helicopter or some other vehicle is accompanied by interminable shrieks of "God is great!" and much nimble capering in ankle-length garments.
A sniper, graphically taken out by the enormous firepower of an American tank, vanishes to the sound of yelping and yeehawing and inexplicable satisfied cries of "Goddam!".
It seems both sides give all credit and glory to the Almighty.

and Puts me in mind of "The War Prayer" by Mark Twain

Thank you for bringing that to my attention.
I had never before heard of it.

What's with all the anti-islam stuff on these forums?

Freedom of expression and opinion that's what.

There are in the OT roughly three hundred passages which talk of people doing violence to each other, either a report or a threat or a command, or a lament. There are roughly a thousand passages which talk of God’s violence or wrath; either a report of his slaying someone, or his threatening people with violence or descriptions of him as a man of war.

http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/hemer/violence.htm

And from Matthew

Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. 5:17

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14

All of which makes me wonder why the concentration in the OP with the Koran.

Originally posted by WarriorPhilosophy:

What's with all the anti-islam stuff on these forums?

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Freedom of expression and opinion that's what.

Freedom of expression doesn't answer the question. Freedom of expression doesn't lead to any specific opinion or feeling, only to the right suggested by the phrase.

Anti-Islam, anti-Catholicism, anti-Presbyterianism are reflections of something interior to a person's values.

WP, are you referring to a general expression or to specific posters?

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

There are in the OT roughly three hundred passages which talk of people doing violence to each other, either a report or a threat or a command, or a lament. There are roughly a thousand passages which talk of God’s violence or wrath; either a report of his slaying someone, or his threatening people with violence or descriptions of him as a man of war.

http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/hemer/violence.htm

And from Matthew

Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. 5:17

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14

All of which makes me wonder why the concentration in the OP with the Koran.

Because it's only bad if the other guys do it.

Originally posted by Macallan:

Because it's only bad if the other guys do it.

You've become my "Cut to the Chase" guy!

Originally posted by aefields:

One of the thing that impresses me about Buddhism is the commitment to inquiry.

Yes - that attracted me at first: the Kalama Sutta and all that. Unfortunately I have been informed that it does not apply to Buddhism itself unless, of course after diligent self enquiry, you return full circle to espousing Buddhist thinking. Religions don't allow criticism - maybe it's an inescapable feature of such.

Originally posted by jbrothernew37:

All of which makes me wonder why the concentration in the OP with the Koran.

It could be because no clique of wild-eyed Christians has flown airliners into skyscrapers lately. In other words, "apples and oranges". And I say that as someone who's regularly defended Muslims here and elsewhere against simple-minded over-generalization.

PS- The fact that not even fundies go so far as to cut off their hands or gouge out their eyes should give you a little insight into the perspective of at least one of the passages you quoted.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

It could be because no clique of wild-eyed Christians has flown airliners into skyscrapers lately. In other words, "apples and oranges". And I say that as someone who's regularly defended Muslims here and elsewhere against simple-minded over-generalization.

Yeah, sure, right. But of course they didn't fly any airplanes into buildings, so carry on with the lovin'.

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Yeah, sure, right. But of course they didn't fly any airplanes into buildings, so carry on with the lovin'.

Ooooooh, man, what a stretch! What, no mention of the Crusades or Inquisition?? And where is any of that sanctioned in the NT? And how prevalent, for example, is anti-abortion violence? AND you have to demonstrate that all those engaged in anti-abortion violence are Christians. I've also seen McVeigh blamed on "Christian terrorism" over and over on Internet forums like these, but apparently you're aware that the guy was an agnostic. Agnosticism and atheism lead to violence as well! Oh, my!

Manning's Corollary to Godwin's Law:

In any online conversation about an incident of violence perpetrated by adherents of Islamic fundamentalism, the conversation will inevitably devolve into claims that Christians commit the same type and degree of violent acts, regardless of how demonstrably false that is; further, the claim will be made that past historical violence involving Christians means that present-day Christians are morally incapable of denouncing current violence involving Muslims.

It never fails.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Ooooooh, man, what a stretch! What, no mention of the Crusades or Inquisition??

I can only assume that you're exclusively referring to the Troubles, which more or less ended in the late '90s, and that you somehow think that because the late 1990s were in the 20th century and 2001 was in the 21st century, and a century is a 100 years, these events were about a hundred years apart.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

And where is any of that sanctioned in the NT?

All true Scotsmen like haggis.

a) You can find quotes in the NT easily.
b) The NT doesn't exist without the OT, so even if (a) didn't apply that's a rather weak point.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

And how prevalent, for example, is anti-abortion violence?

And how prevalent, for example, is flying airplanes into buildings?

Originally posted by fanfaron:

AND you have to demonstrate that all those engaged in anti-abortion violence are Christians.

Because either all anti-abortion violence originates from Christians, or none. Makes perfect sense.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

I've also seen McVeigh blamed on "Christian terrorism" over and over on Internet forums like these, but apparently you're aware that the guy was an agnostic.

So now 1995 is recent again? Funny how your perception of time changes in the course of all of two sentences.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Agnosticism and atheism lead to violence as well! Oh, my!

Islam leads to violence! Oh, my! Which is basically what you said while off-handedly claiming to defend Muslims against over-generalization.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

Manning's Corollary to Godwin's Law:

In any online conversation about an incident of violence perpetrated by adherents of Islamic fundamentalism, the conversation will inevitably devolve into claims that Christians commit the same type and degree of violent acts, regardless of how demonstrably false that is; further, the claim will be made that past historical violence involving Christians means that present-day Christians are morally incapable of denouncing current violence involving Muslims.

It never fails.

Except your "conversation" was about the huge difference between Islamic fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism (not that the quotation speaks of Christian fundamentalism, but instead weasels regular, plain Christianity in there). And that bit about historical violence? It's in your imagination only, unless your Muslim violence is also historical. But wait, then the same argument can be made against that. Such a dilemma…

Originally posted by Frenzie:

Except your "conversation" was about the huge difference between Islamic fundamentalism and Christian fundamentalism (not that the quotation speaks of Christian fundamentalism, but instead weasels regular, plain Christianity in there). And that bit about historical violence? It's in your imagination only, unless your Muslim violence is also historical. But wait, then the same argument can be made against that. Such a dilemma…

Cute, but not so clever. The point isn't about the exact place in time of atrocities, but about strictly religious sanction. The Troubles were decreed by scriptural Christian dogma? As is bombing abortion clinics and killing abortion doctors? Funny, there have been Christians who have used the very same "toxic" scriptures to condemn both of those.

What you're engaging in, and what Manning's Corollary refers to, is the logical fallacy known as "tu quoque".

Originally posted by fanfaron:

The point isn't about the exact place in time of atrocities, but about strictly religious sanction. The Troubles were decreed by scriptural Christian dogma? As is bombing abortion clinics and killing abortion doctors? Funny, there have been Christians who have used the very same "toxic" scriptures to condemn both of those.

And some Muslims do the exact same thing with the Qur'an.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

What you're engaging in, and what Manning's Corollary refers to, is the logical fallacy known as "tu quoque".

I'll quote that which I responded to once more. Considering I responded to an argument proclaiming Corpus Christianum non (if that's proper Latin), replying with Corpus Christianum quoque can be wrong, but not a logical fallacy.

Originally posted by fanfaron:

It could be because no clique of wild-eyed Christians has flown airliners into skyscrapers lately. In other words, "apples and oranges". And I say that as someone who's regularly defended Muslims here and elsewhere against simple-minded over-generalization.