[QUOTE=Dissolution;50853150]Why are you so willing to attack someone who's just making a statement out of frustration? Get over yourself, he's literally just venting and you're throwing a fit like he's convincing a US General to activate a nuke.[/QUOTE]
Except he's said this kind of stuff multiple times in a large amount of threads for a while now.
Dunno about you, but I think that's reason to assume he supports what he says.
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50853162]Except he's said this kind of stuff multiple times in a large amount of threads for a while now.
Dunno about you, but I think that's reason to assume he supports what he says.[/QUOTE]
He's made like 8 posts in the last 2 weeks and the only two marginally similar to what you're bitching about are in this fucking thread, so, no. Come up with a better excuse, because you're literally just seeking out a reason to fling shit at him.
[QUOTE=Dissolution;50853205]He's made like 8 posts in the last 2 weeks and the only two marginally similar to what you're bitching about are in this fucking thread, so, no. Come up with a better excuse, because you're literally just seeking out a reason to fling shit at him.[/QUOTE]
Well then, you didn't do a very thorough search.
He's made many posts in the past that advocate for the killing/beating of people in various threads. I can't list them all, but I've seen him step in and make horrible posts like that a lot.
And lastly, calm the fuck down.
[QUOTE=joshuadim;50850643]Shariah law will never take over democracy, [B]because tyranny will always fall to freedom.[/B][/QUOTE]
[I]Clearly[/I], as evidenced by human history prior to the last two hundred years.
I couldn't watch the entire thing, some parts just got me too mad.
The hardcore hate preachers always seem to be people born in the UK/whatever country the issue is in or are converts.
-snip-
fucking channel 4, any mirror yet?
religion of peace
[editline]9th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lollipoopdeck;50855203]fucking channel 4, any mirror yet?[/QUOTE]
I can make a mirror, but I am not sure how I can edit to make sure it isn't automatically striked.
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50855479]religion of peace[/QUOTE]
So just because a subgroup of a religion is zealous and violent that means the entire religion is zealous and violent.
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;50855875]So just because a subgroup of a religion is zealous and violent that means the entire religion is zealous and violent.[/QUOTE]
name one thing about Islam that makes it peaceful
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50856346]Name one thing about the table under your monitor that makes it peaceful.
Religions aren't "peaceful" or "violent" by design. They are belief systems that govern the topics of metaphysical nature. They are ambigous, and open to interpretation.
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence#Interpretation_of_Holy_Texts"]Read a little.[/URL][/QUOTE]
So Muhhamad having sex slaves as young as 9 years old whom he regularly abused can be interpretted as a good thing?
How open minded
I was being ironic with my first comment being that people regularly call Islam a relligion of peace, which I fail to ever see.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50856346]Name one thing about the table under your monitor that makes it peaceful.
Religions aren't "peaceful" or "violent" by design. They are belief systems that govern the topics of metaphysical nature. They are ambigous, and open to interpretation.
[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence#Interpretation_of_Holy_Texts"]Read a little.[/URL][/QUOTE]
The problem with this is that religious texts do differ quite a bit regarding violence. It's very hard to make a case that the New Testament for example defends the use of religious violence while it's very easy to take the Quran or hadiths to defend religious violence.
[editline]9th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50856481]
except the large majority of Jews that would never commit any unjust violent crimes of course. That would be insane[/QUOTE]
I'm sure the large majority of Muslims wouldn't commit unjust violent crimes either. In my experience Muslims are just like anyone else, they want to live life and practice their religion in peace.
That doesn't mean that the fundamentals of their ideology aren't markedly more violent than the other two major monotheistic religions.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;50856505]The problem with this is that religious texts do differ quite a bit regarding violence. It's very hard to make a case that the New Testament for example defends the use of religious violence while it's very easy to take the Quran or hadiths to defend religious violence.
[editline]9th August 2016[/editline]
I'm sure the large majority of Muslims wouldn't commit unjust violent crimes either. In my experience Muslims are just like anyone else, they want to live life and practice their religion in peace.
That doesn't mean that the fundamentals of their ideology aren't markedly more violent than the other two major monotheistic religions.[/QUOTE]
Not only that, but there has been a clear reformation of ideas in the other monotheistic religions.
In the case of Christianity, Christians have learned to follow the teachings of Jesus, the New Testament, and the Ten Commandments. The Old Testament, the book that advocated for barbaric acts has been excluded from teachings for the most part however it is used for historical insight.
In the case of Islam, Muslims have not reformed their religion and continue to follow after the hypocritical acts of Muhammad. They can either choose follow after the actions of Muhammad or follow after what Muhammad advocated for.
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50855909]name one thing about Islam that makes it peaceful[/QUOTE]
k
[quote]O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your LORD, and that HE will indeed reckon your deeds. ALLAH has forbidden you to take usury (interest), therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived. Your capital, however, is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;50856688]k[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Quran (38:44) - "And take in your hand a green branch and beat her with it, and do not break your oath..." Allah telling Job to beat his wife (Tafsir).[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee"
This is one of several personal-sounding verses "from Allah" narrated by Muhammad - in this case allowing a virtually unlimited supply of sex partners. Other Muslims are restricted to four wives, but they may also have sex with any number of slaves, following the example of their prophet.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Quran (8:69) - "But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good"
A reference to war booty, of which slaves were a part. The Muslim slave master may enjoy his "catch" because (according to verse 71) "Allah gave you mastery over them."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Quran (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess."
Even sex with married slaves is permissible.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]"Muhammad is a narcissist, a pedophile, a mass murderer,
a terrorist, a misogynist, a lecher, a cult leader, a madman
a rapist, a torturer, an assassin and a looter."
Former Muslim Ali Sina offered $50,000 to anyone
who could prove this wrong based on Islamic texts.
The reward has gone unclaimed.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50856913][/QUOTE]
Islam is not objectively violent.
It becomes violent if you make it violent.
Tell "Islam can't be peaceful" to all the peaceful Muslims in the world who denounce extremism.
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50856930]Islam is not objectively violent.
It becomes violent if you make it violent.
Tell "Islam can't be peaceful" to all the peaceful Muslims in the world who denounce extremism.[/QUOTE]
It is objectively violent when the leader of the religion advocates for violence without ever being challenged.
Islam can be peaceful once they the religion has a reformation of ideas, until then it will remain the way it is.
The peaceful Muslims have to do a massive amount of mental gymnastics or either be completely ignorant to the history of their religion.
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50857052]It is objectively violent when the leader of the religion advocates for violence without ever being challenged.
Islam can be peaceful once they the religion has a reformation of ideas, until then it will remain the way it is.
The peaceful Muslims have to do a massive amount of mental gymnastics or either be completely ignorant to the history of their religion.[/QUOTE]
So what? It can be interpretef peacefully and has been for years.
You can't call out ordinary people who peacefully practice their religion as violent, no matter what the text says.
If your religion contradicts itself multiple times when it comes to using violence and you choose to interpret it peacefully, then you interpet it peacefully, simple as that.
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50857052]It is objectively violent when the leader of the religion advocates for violence without ever being challenged.
Islam can be peaceful once they the religion has a reformation of ideas, until then it will remain the way it is.
The peaceful Muslims have to do a massive amount of mental gymnastics or either be completely ignorant to the history of their religion.[/QUOTE]
How is that any different from modern Christians ignoring the violent history and teachings of the bible?
Islam isn't the issue, it's the parts of the middle-east maintaining old traditions/ideals and disregarding any attempts at growth or change that are causing problems for themselves and others.
War breaks out or the economy fucks up, the country becomes hard to live in so people move somewhere else IE Britain but some continue to carry those traditions and values with them.
Most people adapt to the new environment, some do not. Those that can't adapt are doomed to dissolve.
[QUOTE=spekter;50857277]How is that any different from modern Christians ignoring the violent history and teachings of the bible?
Islam isn't the issue, it's the parts of the middle-east maintaining old traditions/ideals and disregarding any attempts at growth or change that are causing problems for themselves and others.
War breaks out or the economy fucks up, the country becomes hard to live in so people move somewhere else IE Britain but some continue to carry those traditions and values with them.
Most people adapt to the new environment, some do not. Those that can't adapt are doomed to dissolve.[/QUOTE]
And before he says "Well, the New Testament got rid of the Old Testament, which is what had the bad stuff, so Christianity isn't violent", what's to stop someone from ignoring the new testament? What's there to stop someone from interpreting it violently?
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50857274]So what? It can be interpretef peacefully and has been for years.
You can't call out ordinary people who peacefully practice their religion as violent, no matter what the text says.
If your religion contradicts itself multiple times when it comes to using violence and you choose to interpret it peacefully, then you interpet it peacefully, simple as that.[/QUOTE]
Let me backpeddle just a bit. What I mean to say is, there needs to be a reformation of ideas in the Islamic world just as there had been for Christianity. That way Muslims can draw clear lines as to what is considered extreme and what isn't. Currently, that isn't happening.
[editline]9th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50857289]And before he says "Well, the New Testament got rid of the Old Testament, which is what had the bad stuff, so Christianity isn't violent", what's to stop someone from ignoring the new testament? What's there to stop someone from interpreting it violently?[/QUOTE]
Nothing. However, the Christian community has created a consensus to ignore the previous barbaric teachings. In the case of Islam, individuals have to condemn the parts of Islam that are barbaric. These people would be considered peaceful Muslims. I have no problem with them, even though I may disagree with them.
There is a consensus, however, that the Muslims are to follow the barbaric teachings advocated by Muhammad, at least in the Middle East. This has created a toxic ideology that clearly clashes with Western Culture. That is what I have a problem with. Until there has been a clear reformation of ideas by Muslim scholars, it will remain that way.
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50857348]Nothing. However, the Christian community has created a consensus to ignore the previous barbaric teachings. In the case of Islam, individuals have to condemn the parts of Islam that are barbaric. These people would be considered peaceful Muslims. I have no problem with them, even though I may disagree with them.[/QUOTE]
There are alot of reformed muslims that are non-violent. Have you ever gone outside and met someone who was actually muslim?
[QUOTE=Lord of Boxes;50858278]There are alot of reformed muslims that are non-violent. Have you ever gone outside and met someone who was actually muslim?[/QUOTE]
A lot of my good friends are Muslim. They do not follow all of the teachings stated in all the books like the Quran. I know they are not bad people.
But you are missing my point. The reason there is not a consensus on the ideas that build Islam is simple. Prominent religious leaders and organizations that represent Islam refuse to address the problems with their religion and advocate for outdated, and barbaric practices.
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50857348]Let me backpeddle just a bit. What I mean to say is, there needs to be a reformation of ideas in the Islamic world just as there had been for Christianity. That way Muslims can draw clear lines as to what is considered extreme and what isn't. Currently, that isn't happening.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Nothing. However, the Christian community has created a consensus to ignore the previous barbaric teachings. In the case of Islam, individuals have to condemn the parts of Islam that are barbaric. These people would be considered peaceful Muslims. I have no problem with them, even though I may disagree with them.[/QUOTE]
Individual Christians still have to ignore the parts of the bible that are barbaric. There are many sects of Christianity that do follow those teachings and are detrimental to society, especially when it comes to the treatment of women and LGBT people.
[QUOTE]There is a consensus, however, that the Muslims are to follow the barbaric teachings advocated by Muhammad, at least in the Middle East. This has created a toxic ideology that clearly clashes with Western Culture. That is what I have a problem with. Until there has been a clear reformation of ideas by Muslim scholars, it will remain that way.[/QUOTE]
There is no consensus among all Muslims to follow one interpretation of Islam, in fact there are many different interpretations as varied as the ones which follow Christianity.
Firstly, you have to demonstrate that there is an official source or official organisation within Islamic culture that dictates what you're suggesting. Secondly, you need to prove that pretty much all Muslims follow the exact direction of that official source or body.
[editline]10th August 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50858341]A lot of my good friends are Muslim. They do not follow all of the teachings stated in all the books like the Quran. I know they are not bad people.
But you are missing my point. The reason there is not a consensus on the ideas that build Islam is simple. Prominent religious leaders and organizations that represent Islam refuse to address the problems with their religion and advocate for outdated, and barbaric practices.[/QUOTE]
Which organizations? What exactly are they proposing and how many people follow them?
[QUOTE=dimitrik129;50856913]bunch of verses[/QUOTE]
[quote]Qur’an 6:151 says, “and do not kill a soul that God has made sacrosanct, save lawfully.”[/quote]
[quote]There is no compulsion where the religion is concerned.” (Holy Quran: 2/ 256[/quote]
[quote]“You cannot guide those you would like to but God guides those He wills. He has best knowledge of the guided.” (Holy Quran/28: 56)[/quote]
[quote]"The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills - let him believe; and whoever wills - let him disbelieve." (18:29).[/quote]
[quote]A good action and a bad action are not the same. Repel the bad with something better and, if there is enmity between you and someone else, he will be like a bosom friend. (41:34)[/quote]
[quote]"Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors" (2:190)[/quote]
[quote]The true servants of the Gracious One are those who walk upon the earth with humility and when they are addressed by the ignorant ones, their response is, Peace; (25:63)[/quote]
[quote]O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will, and you should not treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the Mahr you have given them, unless they commit open illegal sexual intercourse. And live with them honourably. If you dislike them, it may be that you dislike a thing and Allah brings through it a great deal of good. (004:019)[/quote]
[quote]And do not wish for that by which Allah has made some of you exceed others. For men is a share of what they have earned, and for women is a share of what they have earned. And ask Allah of his bounty. Indeed Allah is ever, of all things, Knowing. [4:32][/quote]
[quote]O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah , witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do.[/quote]
[quote]As to the Righteous, they shall drink of a Cup (of Wine) mixed with Kafur,- A Fountain where the Devotees of Allah do drink, making it flow in unstinted abundance. They perform (their) vows, and they fear a Day whose evil flies far and wide. And they feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan, and the captive,- (Saying),”We feed you for the sake of Allah alone: no reward do we desire from you, nor thanks.' (76:7-9)"[/quote]
[quote]“If any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people…” (Surah Al Ma’idah 5:32)[/quote]
Both of us can cherry pick different verses because the Quran tends to be contradictory in many ways, so people and terrorist groups just pick and choose which verses they want to abide by while ignoring the rest.
Regarding Aisha, and Muhammad being a pedo, you have to remember this was 619, not 2016.
It's definitely not acceptable now but that was generally the norm back then.
[quote]Karen Armstrong, the British author on comparative religion, has affirmed that "There was no impropriety in Muhammad's marriage to Aisha. Marriages conducted in absentia to seal an alliance were often contracted at this time between adults and minors who were even younger than Aisha. This practice continued in Europe well into the early modern period[/quote]
[QUOTE=Araknid;50858645]Both of us can cherry pick different verses because the Quran tends to be contradictory in many ways, so people and terrorist groups just pick and choose which verses they want to abide by while ignoring the rest.
Regarding Aisha, and Muhammad being a pedo, you have to remember this was 619, not 2016.
It's definitely not acceptable now but that was generally the norm back then.[/QUOTE]
If a religious text contradicts itself, I think of it as a way to weed out violent nutcases.
Picking and choosing out of religious texts (no matter your religion) to fit your agenda (whether moral or not) is evidence enough that many religious texts are giant contradictions within themselves.
There are good Muslims, and bad Muslims. There are good Christians, and bad Christians. There are good [religion followers here], and bad [religion followers here].
It's all based on what a "sect" of whatever religion wants to pull out and throw onto their plate to justify their actions. I don't want to be that edgy stereotype the internet loves to laugh at, but that's why I don't follow any religion, really. I don't believe that following just the good parts of a book, and ignoring the bad that exists in it, is a "morally correct" way for me to live. If there is bad in the original texts, then it was originally meant to go there.
[QUOTE=Robman8908;50858795]Picking and choosing out of religious texts (no matter your religion) to fit your agenda (whether moral or not) is evidence enough that many religious texts are giant contradictions within themselves.
There are good Muslims, and bad Muslims. There are good Christians, and bad Christians. There are good [religion followers here], and bad [religion followers here].
It's all based on what a "sect" of whatever religion wants to pull out and throw onto their plate to justify their actions. I don't want to be that edgy stereotype the internet loves to laugh at, but that's why I don't follow any religion, really. I don't believe that following just the good parts of a book, and ignoring the bad that exists in it, is a "morally correct" way for me to live. If there is bad in the original texts, then it was originally meant to go there.[/QUOTE]
There's good and bad in the original texts, not just bad.
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50858802]There's good and bad in the original texts, not just bad.[/QUOTE]
That's what I said. Ignoring the bad for the good, or vice versa, is an obvious contradiction within itself.
Say I wrote a book, a new religious text. Part of it says that you should love everyone you meet and give half of your sandwich to any hungry person near you but also that any man that does not give half of his sandwich must be whipped forty times with an oil dipstick...
Now that one little section of whatever religious book I created can be torn apart to fit the views of whomever. One man can say that giving half his sandwich is super duper nice and if someone doesn't give their half, then they need to be loved more and taught to be compassionate with their sandwich - leaving out the whipping. Another man could stretch the consequences listed to sixty whippings and the removal of a limb, to ensure fear.
That isn't important though... what is important is that the original text contains sharing the sandwich (love) and extreme (dipsticks hurt, yo) punishment over one little belief (violence/fear).
Get me?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
