peterbound Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 No, that was an answer to Castel's question on whether or not the Quraysh were Muslim, which, as I was pointing out, they weren't. If you'd read the exchange, you'd know that I was talking about how the Muslims were persecuted by the Quraysh, but not permitted to fight back for lack of strength, then were given permission to fight back after a while. Good copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi Stannis Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Good copy. Copy from what? From whom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suttree Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 The two religions have the same DNA though. Couldn't this be said of all Abrahamic religions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbound Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Copy from what? From whom? Slow down. All that means is that I understand. 'Good copy'. Means i get it, heard and understood. Thanks for clarifying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi Stannis Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Slow down. All that means is that I understand. 'Good copy'. Means i get it, heard and understood. Thanks for clarifying. Oh, ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi Stannis Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It's different because Mohammed claims it was different. And, maybe by most definitions he's right. The two religions have the same DNA though. Mohammed didn't invent Allah. Mohammed didn't build the Kaaba. Mohammed was a reformer. He took the idols out of the Kaaba, and redefined Allah As for you not knowing, well, that really makes it hard for you to claim that violence was only about containing the Quraysh no? As for Islam allowing a secular liberal position after a literalist reading...well, that's tough. Heaven and Hell alone create problems for you.It is in some sense a legal document. What do you do when you run into something that seems like it was written for 6th century Arabs? This is really the worst example to use. The Quraysh it seems, are the ones that started the conflict and persecution that drove Mohammed from Mecca. At least, that's what the victorious Muslims claim. On top of that Mohammed didn't massacre the Quraysh when he took Mecca, quite the opposite. I don't fucking know man, I don't have all the answers, all I know is that I'm a Muslim and I'm a liberal. Why does this shit have to be so allahdamn complicated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castel Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Couldn't this be said of all Abrahamic religions? Yes, but but, iirc, they're treated different than the Christians and Jews. So if you're discussing how early Muslims treated unbelievers it's relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia: "The terrorism of ISIS as Al-Qaeda is Islam's number one enemy". I wonder if he is worried at all about being murdered by extremists for daring to say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi Stannis Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I wonder if he is worried at all about being murdered by extremists for daring to say that. I don't think he is, but in any case, it's been pointed out to me that using a quote from a cleric as religiously conservative as himself is not conducive to my argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay Gimp Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 That's because in, say, the US the christian extremists are either ignored or already integrated into the political process. Why resort to direct extralegal violence when legislative violence is so much more effective. As if religious fundamentalists aren't integrated into the political establishments of many Middle Eastern countries? And most of the objectionable beliefs considered "radical" among Christians are considered mainstream among Muslims (stoning of homos, adulterers, killing non-believers, etc). This desperate clinging to some idea of equivalency between religions is embarassing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi Stannis Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 As if religious fundamentalists aren't integrated into the political establishments of many Middle Eastern countries? And most of the objectionable beliefs considered "radical" among Christians are considered mainstream among Muslims (stoning of homos, adulterers, killing non-believers, etc). This desperate clinging to some idea of equivalency between religions is embarassingNo it's not. Plus, for someone apparently trying to talk about how bigoted us Muslims are, that's some pretty derogatory language towards homosexuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suttree Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 And most of the objectionable beliefs considered "radical" among Christians are considered mainstream among Muslims (stoning of homos, adulterers, killing non-believers, etc). You have gone off the deep end mate. I can't decide if you're trolling or not but you can't seriously believe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay Gimp Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 *I realize now that my abbreviation of homosexual to "homo" may have come off as derogatory, didn't mean it that way You seriously have gone off the deep end at this point. Shall I bring up the relevant polls? I realize it won't convince you, since you seem to have an almost religious belief that no religion can have worse effects than another, but it may be illuminating for other people... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suttree Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Shall I bring up the relevant polls? Try and keep up, the polls have already been discussed. We don't need you doing your usual parroting of scream radio hacks(in this case Ben Shapiro) when the Politifact debunking has already been linked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clueless Northman Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I do, but I believe it's open to very wide interpretation.That's a very encouraging thing to read. If people can reach such a position, things can go better in the long run and there might be still hope for this mauled mankind. The two religions have the same DNA though. Mohammed didn't invent Allah. Mohammed didn't build the Kaaba. Mohammed was a reformer. He took the idols out of the Kaaba, and changed the position of Allah.Well, then it's quite probable that one can argue that Hebraism was just a reform of a previous quite polytheistic religion ;) As for why the different treatment, possibly because he kind of merged what Allah was in the polytheistic version with the Abrahmaic God - and wanted to quite erase any hint of what he was before? (just a wild guess of course, I haven't much studied this) On top of that Mohammed didn't massacre the Quraysh when he took Mecca, quite the opposite.Indeed. Had Mohammed killed all those who opposed him at some point, the spread of the Caliphate would've been far reduced. For a starter, Walid would be dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wmarshal Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 This world just gets darker and darker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjordgazer Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 You can not possibly be putting this forth as a serious argument. It's rather telling that no one is even attempting to make a case for why Islam in it's essence is inherently/uniquely violent. Your attempts at goalpost moving are tiresome. I'm not making a case for Islam being inherently worse than other religions because i didn't know a single verse from the Qur'an until King Stannis started posting them here (that's certainly a tough subject and can be discussed elsewhere). We're talking the current state of the faith, and how the most dangerous form of extremists, both in number and unconstraint, proliferate within it. I'm not blaming the Muslim pacific population at large, my point would be that the religion needs a serious, global reform, like those Christianity has had. That would need to start cooking like yesterday. Do i need to clarify again that i'm an atheist, to prevent faulty logic in subsequent replies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprincethatwasntpromised Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 As if religious fundamentalists aren't integrated into the political establishments of many Middle Eastern countries? And most of the objectionable beliefs considered "radical" among Christians are considered mainstream among Muslims (stoning of homos, adulterers, killing non-believers, etc). This desperate clinging to some idea of equivalency between religions is embarassingThis guy gets it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjordgazer Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 No, but they have been much abused by them. Look, the point is, discrediting someone's entire argument on the grounds that he capitalizes all the letters in ocassional words is a preposterous way to try to "win" any discussion. Period. You were doing exactly that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suttree Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Your attempts at goalpost moving are tiresome. Errmm what? You're not even making sense at this point. You gave a direct response to the question posed, don't try and backpedal now. We're talking the current state of the faith, and how the most dangerous form of extremists, both in number and unconstraint, proliferate within it. Well the danger would depend on where one is located in the world yes? No amount of repetition on your part can change the fact that the issue is extremism not Islam. I also see you continue ignoring points made around examining the root causes of Islamic extremism. Just hurr durr Islam bad. Don't know a verse of the Quarn but that's my story and I'm sticking with it. This guy gets it If making shit up on the spot is "getting it" you may have a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.