Does ISLAM - as a philosophy - produce 'aggrieved', 'natural born killers' ?






Quote:

Kasim Ahmed stabbed Thavisha Peiris 14 times and left him to bleed to death 17-year-old already had string of convictions for violence and thefts at time Mr Peiris, 25, was killed while he was on final pizza delivery shift in Sheffield Yesterday, judge said Ahmed's criminal record was 'truly terrible' for his age Victim's family said serial robber was 'natural born killer with killer's instinct' Ahmed sentenced to life in prison at Sheffield court with minimum 23 years His cousin Shamraze Khan, 26, also jailed for life with minimum 24-year term

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2704921/Murdered-iPhone-natural-born-killer-bail-Serial-robber-never-let-out.html


Does ISLAM produce within the moslem heart inculcate within the moslem heart, a 'right' belief that moslems are always the victims of persecution [by those who are not moslems].

And therefore inculcate within the moslem heart, a natural and 'legitimate' entitlement to feel aggrieved, and a 'natural right' to strike out in violence against those who are always portrayed, to the moslem psyche, by ISLAM, as the 'oppressors' of the moslem ?




ISLAM - in its primary doctrines - does inculcate a 'legitimate' grievance within the moslem heart, which does therefore incite within the moslem a 'righteous' and 'legitimate' hatred towards 'disbelievers', imo.


"O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: They will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse....."
Koran 3.118


".......And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!"
Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan."
Koran 4.74-76


"O ye who believe! Take not my enemies and yours as friends (or protectors),- offering them (your) love,..."
Koran 60.1iISLAM teaches the moslem - from his childhood - that 'unbelief' is a serious [and a mortal] crime.
And from childhood, the moslem has identified and has always recognised, who the mortal enemy of the moslem is.

i.e.
All of 'disbelieving' mankind, those who reject ISLAM, are the declared - and are the 'worthy' - enemy of the moslem.
Because Allah declares to the moslem, that 'disbelievers' are evil, and 'disbelievers' are always working to undermine and thwart the deserved advancement of the moslem.
And so [from the perception of the aggrieved moslem], all moslem violence against 'disbelievers' is therefore 'righteous', and that violence is always seen as being attributed by Allah as being 'good works' by the moslem.




As per the directives of Allah;

"...Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98


"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123






How can a - religiously activated - moslem do this [image below], except that the moslem has been taught - by ISLAM - that this behaviour is doing 'good works' ?

IMAGE....
http://thereligionofpeace.com/index_files/happy.jpg
The one holding the AK47 is - Abdullah - from Sydney, on his holy-days.

Moslems, doing 'good works'.

  Koran 9.123

Compared to Karmic Khristians, you mean?

A better question is, do christians routinely lie? Or are they naturally born liars?

I mean, they claim that hamas bombed a UN facility, but when it was turned out to be israel, they got no answer for themselves but start ranting about the evil of islam.

And then they produce a picture showing hamas firing 50 rockets after the ceasefire, when  in reality hamas only fired 3 rockets during the ceasfire.


Israel: 3 Mortars Fired From Gaza During Cease-Fire

http://time.com/3001132/gaza-israel-mortars-cease-fire/

only 3 rockets during the ceasefire. Thats ok then.

mortars actually - big difference, and hamas doesn't have control over most of those.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 26^th, 2014 at 10:49pm:

mortars actually - big difference, and hamas doesn't have control over most of those.

That is moslems and the moslem community, all over - denial of responsibility;

"We 'nice' moslems are not responsible for the violence which ISLAM inspires in other moslems."



Quote:

Rejecting Terror Thursday, 11 April 2013 Muslims everywhere consider all acts of terrorism that aims to murder and maim innocent human beings utterly reprehensible and abhorrent. There is no theological basis whatsoever for such acts in our faith. The very meaning of the word 'Islam' is peace. It [ISLAM] rejects terror and promotes peace and harmony.

http://www.mcb.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2307:mcbnewstemplate&catid=82:mcb-news
http://www.mcb.org.uk/article_detail.php?article=announcement-656i


"[ISLAM] rejects terror and promotes peace and harmony."

;D

Honest!


IMAGE...
http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/Isllam2.jpg

"If you call us violent, ......we will kill you!!"



THOSE PLACARDS, AT A MOSLEM STREET PROTEST IN LONDON READ.....

"Slay those who insult Islam"
"Behead those who insult Islam"
"Massacre those who insult Islam"
"Butcher those who mock Islam"
"Europe you will pay, demolition is on its way"
"Europe you will pay, extermination is on its way"
"Exterminate those who slander Islam"
"Europe is the cancer, Islam is the answer"
"Islam will dominate the world"
"Freedom go to hell"
"Europe take some lessons from 9/11"
"Be prepared for the real Holocaust"
"BBC = British Blasphemic Crusaders"



THE RELIGION OF PEACE
http://thereligionofpeace.com/

ISLAM - as a philosophy - is incompatible with the values which are broadly aspired to by the peoples of all Western societies.

Freedom, liberty, personal responsibility for behaviour.



The values which ISLAM espouses - e.g. the prohibition of independent critical thinking - are offensive to the psyche of the peoples of all Western societies.



"...the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260







INDEPENDENT/CRITICAL THOUGHT IS ESSENTIALLY PROHIBITED, BY ISLAM

FROM THE KORAN....

"O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble.....
Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith."
Koran 5.101, 102


FROM THE KORAN....

" "And believe no one unless he follows your religion." Say: "True guidance is the Guidance of Allah:....."   "
Koran 3.73

I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:39am:

even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status.

Actually FD I was just echoing your statement you made in 2007 - that muslim grievances and associated violence isn't a product of islam, but geo-political events and history:


freediver wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 12:48pm:

While this is a genuine problem at the moment, not every modern terrorist is a muslim and historically they are no different from any other group. The problem with linking it to Islam is that it suggests that Islam must be either destroyed or contained in order to protect ourselves. You know where that leads... It would be more accurate and more useful to say that most current terrorist attacks or by people from the middle east or by people responding to the current situation in the middle east. It is not Islam that breeds terrorism, but political upheaval and the middle east is where most of the world's political problems currently are. As with most of these problems it can be traced back to past historical events, most of them during or immediately after WWII.  Pointing the finger at Islam is an association fallacy. It assumes that Islam is the cause of the violence merely because it is associated with the violence. This is just like saying that any other religion is inherently violent because at some time in history violent acts were committed in it's territory or in it's name on a large and organised scale. Pointing the finger at Islam will inevitably perpetuate the violence. Ending the violence is a far more complicated process that will never be achieved while we grasp for overly simplistic explanations and solutions to our problems.

Touche', gandalf!

...referring to your quote of FD's old post.

No Gandalf. I think you even used the word victimhood.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 4:05pm:

No Gandalf. I think you even used the word victimhood.

Perhaps. But I would never lose sight of the geopolitical context.

Spineless innit - just like FD 2007

What is the "geopolitical context" of hip-hop, or "most of the Muslim world today"?


polite_gandalf wrote on Jun 7^th, 2014 at 5:29pm:

There is a perceived victimhood amongst muslims, especially in former colonies (which is most of the muslim world today), which gives rise to violence and irrational behaviour that is, at its core, entirely secular in nature, but have been infused with islamic ideology.

polite_gandalf wrote on Mar 17^th, 2014 at 10:13pm:

Due in large part to muslim immigrants from Pakistan and India. As for the converts, the article is about islam in the context of the hip-hop culture - which is based around a cult of victimhood and perceived persecution by authority. Not a "I want me some bitches to rape just like my Mo-man" culture.

Seems there is a geopolitical context for every Muslim in the world to have a victimhood complex.

Also, how to you account for the fact that even When Muhammed was kicking ass, he was careful to always claim victimhood, and blame his victims for their own demise?

Gee FD, do you suppose just maybe this perceived victimhood might be an abstract concept held by muslims who share a sense of brotherhood with actual muslim victims?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make though - yes there is a victimhood mentality that is shared by people who are not directly victims. But it doesn't in any way diminish the fact that the root cause of it all, even if it takes religious dimensions, is secular in nature and not directly stemming from islamic ideology. Entirely consistent with what you said - that first quote is basically a carbon copy of what was said in that 2007 quote of yours.

Quote:

Gee FD, do you suppose just maybe this perceived victimhood might be an abstract concept held by muslims who share a sense of brotherhood with actual muslim victims?

You'll have to ask Karnal about that one. I don't do psychoanalysis. I agree with you about the global Muslim victimhood complex in a variety of geopolitical contexts (angry Arabs, white rappers etc). I just think it has been around longer than you are willing to acknowledge. When your religion is one of entitlement, getting anything less than that makes you a victim, and Muslims have been getting less and less for a thousand years.


Quote:

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make though - yes there is a victimhood mentality that is shared by people who are not directly victims. But it doesn't in any way diminish the fact that the root cause of it all, even if it takes religious dimensions, is secular in nature and not directly stemming from islamic ideology.

Sure. Muslims have this whole victimhood thing going on that tends to prolong their victimhood in a self fulfilling prophecy. But it is secular society's fault. If we simply gave them the Islamic State they wanted, everything would work out fine. In fact, not yielding to this demand makes them victims of freedom and democracy.

I blame society, though I am sure you will disagree.

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 7:54pm:

I agree with you about the global Muslim victimhood complex in a variety of geopolitical contexts (angry Arabs, white rappers etc). I just think it has been around longer than you are willing to acknowledge.

Hmmm I'd suggest you are getting me confused with you...


freediver wrote on Apr 30^th, 2007 at 12:48pm:

most current terrorist attacks or by people from the middle east or by people responding to the current situation in the middle east. It is not Islam that breeds terrorism, but political upheaval and the middle east is where most of the world's political problems currently are. As with most of these problems it can be traced back to past historical events, most of them during or immediately after WWII.

Thats you, not me.

As for what *I* said - I made no mention of how recent these geopolitical contexts were. But if I was pushed I wouldn't be so bold as to say its almost all down to events that happened post WWII. I'd say it goes back to at least the crusades, or more broadly when the west started gaining political-global dominance - at the expense of the previously dominant muslims.

I agree wholeheartedly though with what you said about this complex having little to do with the teachings of Muhammad, or whats in the Quran. These issues are fundamentally non-islamic, though they can take islamic dimesions - and blaming islam is just grasping at simplistic explanations to our problems.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 3:22pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:39am: even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status. Actually FD I was just echoing your statement you made in 2007 - that muslim grievances and associated violence isn't a product of islam, but geo-political events and history: freediver wrote on Apr 30th, 2007 at 12:48pm: While this is a genuine problem at the moment, not every modern terrorist is a muslim and historically they are no different from any other group. The problem with linking it to Islam is that it suggests that Islam must be either destroyed or contained in order to protect ourselves. You know where that leads... It would be more accurate and more useful to say that most current terrorist attacks or by people from the middle east or by people responding to the current situation in the middle east. It is not Islam that breeds terrorism, but political upheaval and the middle east is where most of the world's political problems currently are. As with most of these problems it can be traced back to past historical events, most of them during or immediately after WWII.  Pointing the finger at Islam is an association fallacy. It assumes that Islam is the cause of the violence merely because it is associated with the violence. This is just like saying that any other religion is inherently violent because at some time in history violent acts were committed in it's territory or in it's name on a large and organised scale. Pointing the finger at Islam will inevitably perpetuate the violence. Ending the violence is a far more complicated process that will never be achieved while we grasp for overly simplistic explanations and solutions to our problems.

Find of the year, well done.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:36pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 7:54pm: I agree with you about the global Muslim victimhood complex in a variety of geopolitical contexts (angry Arabs, white rappers etc). I just think it has been around longer than you are willing to acknowledge. Hmmm I'd suggest you are getting me confused with you... freediver wrote on Apr 30th, 2007 at 12:48pm:   most current terrorist attacks or by people from the middle east or by people responding to the current situation in the middle east. It is not Islam that breeds terrorism, but political upheaval and the middle east is where most of the world's political problems currently are. As with most of these problems it can be traced back to past historical events, most of them during or immediately after WWII.  Thats you, not me. As for what *I* said - I made no mention of how recent these geopolitical contexts were. But if I was pushed I wouldn't be so bold as to say its almost all down to events that happened post WWII. I'd say it goes back to at least the crusades, or more broadly when the west started gaining political-global dominance - at the expense of the previously dominant muslims. I agree wholeheartedly though with what you said about this complex having little to do with the teachings of Muhammad, or whats in the Quran. These issues are fundamentally non-islamic, though they can take islamic dimesions - and blaming islam is just grasping at simplistic explanations to our problems.

So teaching vengeance and the escalation of violence, rather than say forgiveness, and blaming all his victims for the horrors he meted out on them, has nothing to do with Muslims doing (or at least, trying to do) the same thing today?

FD, you've been through this argument all before - only you were on the opposite side.

Why don't you recall all your spineless apologetics from then and explain it to yourself. Surely there's still a bit of FD 2007 left in there?

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 9:42pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:36pm: freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 7:54pm: I agree with you about the global Muslim victimhood complex in a variety of geopolitical contexts (angry Arabs, white rappers etc). I just think it has been around longer than you are willing to acknowledge. Hmmm I'd suggest you are getting me confused with you... freediver wrote on Apr 30th, 2007 at 12:48pm:   most current terrorist attacks or by people from the middle east or by people responding to the current situation in the middle east. It is not Islam that breeds terrorism, but political upheaval and the middle east is where most of the world's political problems currently are. As with most of these problems it can be traced back to past historical events, most of them during or immediately after WWII.  Thats you, not me. As for what *I* said - I made no mention of how recent these geopolitical contexts were. But if I was pushed I wouldn't be so bold as to say its almost all down to events that happened post WWII. I'd say it goes back to at least the crusades, or more broadly when the west started gaining political-global dominance - at the expense of the previously dominant muslims. I agree wholeheartedly though with what you said about this complex having little to do with the teachings of Muhammad, or whats in the Quran. These issues are fundamentally non-islamic, though they can take islamic dimesions - and blaming islam is just grasping at simplistic explanations to our problems. So teaching vengeance and the escalation of violence, rather than say forgiveness, and blaming all his victims for the horrors he meted out on them, has nothing to do with Muslims doing (or at least, trying to do) the same thing today?

It’s an interesting phenomenon, FD. Some would call it an association falacy.

"....an association falacy."


Good and evil.

Like night follows day, and day follows night.

And there are no consequences for our choices, there are only the fates in this life, which we, cruelly, must suffer.

Yes ?i+++


Proverbs 1:7
The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.


Proverbs 14:16
A wise man feareth, and departeth from evil: but the fool rageth, and is confident.


Psalms 37:1
Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
2  For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.
....
7  ......fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.
8  Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.


Daniel 12:10
Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

Interesting, isn't it that you, Yadda a self-avowed Christian keep quoting the Old Testament but we informed by Matty and other Christians that Christians don't believe what the Old Testament teaches.   My, my, such contradictions Christian apologists do weave, when they attempt to deceive!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 11:11pm:

FD, you've been through this argument all before - only you were on the opposite side. Why don't you recall all your spineless apologetics from then and explain it to yourself. Surely there's still a bit of FD 2007 left in there?

I changed my mind.

Is it spineless when you say those things?

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 1:22pm:

Is it spineless when you say those things?

You tell me - would you say you were being spineless when, for example you said


Quote:

Pointing the finger at Islam will inevitably perpetuate the violence. Ending the violence is a far more complicated process that will never be achieved while we grasp for overly simplistic explanations and solutions to our problems.

?

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 1:22pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 11:11pm: FD, you've been through this argument all before - only you were on the opposite side. Why don't you recall all your spineless apologetics from then and explain it to yourself. Surely there's still a bit of FD 2007 left in there? I changed my mind.

Isn’t that the very definition of spinelessness?

Just a question, FD.

|dev|null wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 11:30am:

Interesting, isn't it that you, Yadda a self-avowed Christian keep quoting the Old Testament but we informed by Matty and other Christians that Christians don't believe what the Old Testament teaches.   My, my, such contradictions Christian apologists do weave, when they attempt to deceive!   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Y’s a Karmic Khristian, HB. They don’t believe in Christ.

What's with muslims gathering crowds in the middle of a street somewhere? In Sydney over the last few weeks they've demonstrated twice in the inner city over Palestine, once at Lakemba over Palestine and a Ramadan street party at Lakemba today. How do they keep getting away with clogging up traffic?? They are an absolute pain in the ass.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 2:53pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 1:22pm: Is it spineless when you say those things? You tell me - would you say you were being spineless when, for example you said Quote: Pointing the finger at Islam will inevitably perpetuate the violence. Ending the violence is a far more complicated process that will never be achieved while we grasp for overly simplistic explanations and solutions to our problems. ?

No. Have you figured out yet why I labelled Brian's comments spineless apologetics? Sometimes you make me doubt you even read it.

I now think there are specific aspects of Islam that definitely do contribute to the violence and oppression we see in the modern world that we should point the finger of blame at.

Karnal wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:11pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 1:22pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 11:11pm: FD, you've been through this argument all before - only you were on the opposite side. Why don't you recall all your spineless apologetics from then and explain it to yourself. Surely there's still a bit of FD 2007 left in there? I changed my mind. Isn’t that the very definition of spinelessness? Just a question, FD.

So, FD's being, if you'll pardon the expression, crucified over a post in 2007?

Is there anything that might have occurred since that may have contributed to his 'change of mind', do you think?

The world has moved on.

But some constants remain. Apologies from Islam being one of them.

But we remain beleaguered. Is that not so?

Lionel Edriess wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:59pm:

Karnal wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 6:11pm: freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 1:22pm: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 11:11pm: FD, you've been through this argument all before - only you were on the opposite side. Why don't you recall all your spineless apologetics from then and explain it to yourself. Surely there's still a bit of FD 2007 left in there? I changed my mind. Isn’t that the very definition of spinelessness? Just a question, FD. So, FD's being, if you'll pardon the expression, crucified over a post in 2007?

Crucified? Good heavens, Lionel, you’re right. I never thought of it like that.

I apologize. I make no excuses for FD’s views. I merely recognize it is his right to create and unfortunately impose these views. It is terrible but I also recognise I have no right or ability to criticize them. I am neither a member of FD’s religion or a citizen of any of those nations.

Please forgive me.

A muslim is forbidden from questioning or applying critical thought to the tenets which command inhumane torture and slaughter of their fellow man as the way for muslims.

qur'an 5.101: O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if ye ask about things when the qur'an is being revealed, they will be made plain to you, allah will forgive those: for allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.

qur'an 5.102 : Some people before you did ask such questions, and on that account lost their faith.

Shakey wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:22pm:

What's with muslims gathering crowds in the middle of a street somewhere? In Sydney over the last few weeks they've demonstrated twice in the inner city over Palestine, once at Lakemba over Palestine and a Ramadan street party at Lakemba today. How do they keep getting away with clogging up traffic?? They are an absolute pain in the ass.

I know. It’s an affront to common decency to see these people clogging up the traffic.

Why can’t they join the IDF and shoot Palestinians?

To suggest anything else is vaccilating, limp-wristed, hand-wringing - and traffic-clogging - spineless apologetics.

moses wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 7:48pm:

A muslim is forbidden from questioning or applying critical thought to the tenets which command inhumane torture and slaughter of their fellow man as the way for muslims. qur'an 5.101: O ye who believe! Ask not questions about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if ye ask about things when the qur'an is being revealed, they will be made plain to you, allah will forgive those: for allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Forbearing.

Gee, you make Allah sound much nicer than Y’s Yehova, M. I do hope you’re not trying to recruit Moslems here.

These people clog the traffic.

freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:41pm:

Have you figured out yet why I labelled Brian's comments spineless apologetics?

Sure - because you disagree with it.

I must say I'm finding it more and more difficult to take you seriously on this - you create an entire meme about spineless Brian for not wanting to blame islam, but somehow think your own position of not wanting to blame islam isn't spineless.


freediver wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 6:41pm:

I now think there are specific aspects of Islam that definitely do contribute to the violence and oppression we see in the modern world that we should point the finger of blame at.

Gosh FD - its almost like you are trying to water it down. Lets not be dishonest here - you don't believe it comes down to "specific aspects", you blame *ALL* the fundamental aspects of islam, and you have turned blaming every single misdemeanor of muslims - from killing prisoners of war, to committing taqiyya to child brides - on nothing but following the Prophet's example, into an art form.

Karnal wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 7:47pm:

Crucified? Good heavens, Lionel, you’re right. I never thought of it like that. I apologize. I make no excuses for FD’s views. I merely recognize it is his right to create and unfortunately impose these views. It is terrible but I also recognise I have no right or ability to criticize them. I am neither a member of FD’s religion or a citizen of any of those nations. Please forgive me.

;D ;D ;D ;D

Sorry!

You're beginning to sound so much like Brian Ross.

All is forgiven.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 10:31pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 6:41pm: Have you figured out yet why I labelled Brian's comments spineless apologetics? Sure - because you disagree with it.

G! We won’t have that sort of talk here, we simply won’t.

Sometimes a question is just a question. We must never try to stifle another member’s curiousity and thirst for knowledge. If FD wants to keep an open mind on these matters I, for one, think he should be supported in his search for truth.

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

Gee, you make allah sound much nicer than Y’s Yehova, M. I do hope you’re not trying to recruit Moslems here. These people clog the traffic.

The traffic on the highway to allah's big brothel in the sky would be getting clogged by now, all them dead muslims in the middle east (killed by their fellow muslims, killed by the Joos) spare a thought for the zillions of big breasted hour'is and little boys with eyes like pearls, having to get to the brothel in the sky first, so the hour'is can lay back on their couches all decked out in precious stones, little boys with wondrous eyes can hang about with the highest grade of muslim who has slain and been slain, in order to grace them with his divine presence.

Ah yes the worlds largest cult of killers (islam) has a lot going for it.

moses wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 4:57am:

Karnal wrote: Quote: Gee, you make allah sound much nicer than Y’s Yehova, M. I do hope you’re not trying to recruit Moslems here. These people clog the traffic. The traffic on the highway to allah's big brothel in the sky would be getting clogged by now, all them dead muslims in the middle east (killed by their fellow muslims, killed by the Joos) spare a thought for the zillions of big breasted hour'is and little boys with eyes like pearls, having to get to the brothel in the sky first, so the hour'is can lay back on their couches all decked out in precious stones, little boys with wondrous eyes can hang about with the highest grade of muslim who has slain and been slain, in order to grace them with his divine presence. Ah yes the worlds largest cult of killers (islam) has a lot going for it.

That’s better. Don’t forget: we decide who gets into paradise, and the circumstances in which they come.

We outsource the job to Gud.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 28^th, 2014 at 10:31pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 6:41pm: Have you figured out yet why I labelled Brian's comments spineless apologetics? Sure - because you disagree with it. I must say I'm finding it more and more difficult to take you seriously on this - you create an entire meme about spineless Brian for not wanting to blame islam, but somehow think your own position of not wanting to blame islam isn't spineless.

gandalf,

And perhaps, in making that comment [in 2007], FD after seeking out further information relating to the nature and character of ISLAM,             FD decided to present another - altogether different - series of 'comments' about the 'influence' of ISLAM in this world.

Perhaps FD, believes [now]        that most of the views that he held, about ISLAM - back in 2007 - were largely uninformed views ?

???

Yadda wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 9:11am:

Perhaps FD, believes [now]         that most of the views that he held, about ISLAM - back in 2007 - were largely uninformed views

Indeed.

But definitely not spineless.

Yadda wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 9:11am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 10:31pm: freediver wrote on Jul 28th, 2014 at 6:41pm: Have you figured out yet why I labelled Brian's comments spineless apologetics? Sure - because you disagree with it. I must say I'm finding it more and more difficult to take you seriously on this - you create an entire meme about spineless Brian for not wanting to blame islam, but somehow think your own position of not wanting to blame islam isn't spineless. gandalf, And perhaps, in making that comment [in 2007], FD after seeking out further information relating to the nature and character of ISLAM,             FD decided to present another - altogether different - series of 'comments' about the 'influence' of ISLAM in this world. Perhaps FD, believes [now]        that most of the views that he held, about ISLAM - back in 2007 - were largely uninformed views ? ???

True, Y, but the 2007 FD used the word never: we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions.

Ever.

FD has come around on the never-ever of complexity. Your Karmic Khristian prophet, of course, forbids this.

Shades of grey are against your religion, no?

Always, absolutely, never-ever. It’s good to see FD keeping an open mind on this issue.

Quote:

Sure - because you disagree with it.

I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it. I disagree with plenty of other things posted here without labeling them spineless. Try again.


Quote:

I must say I'm finding it more and more difficult to take you seriously on this - you create an entire meme about spineless Brian for not wanting to blame islam, but somehow think your own position of not wanting to blame islam isn't spineless.

So I was right that you have no clue at all why I labelled Brian's words spineless, despite me explaining it to you over and over again, and you in fact agreeing with me on them in the past. The only reason it has turned into a "meme" is because people like you kept the thread going by pretending you cannot comprehend why I label it spineless.


Quote:

Gosh FD - its almost like you are trying to water it down. Lets not be dishonest here - you don't believe it comes down to "specific aspects"

Yes I do. They are listed in the wiki. I can go through them one at a time if you'd like.


Quote:

you blame *ALL* the fundamental aspects of islam

As far as I can tell what Muslims consider to be the fundamental aspects of Islam are not on the list - eg all the chanting and bending over. There is nothing particularly sinister abut that. It is largely restricted to the political aspects of Islam.


Quote:

and you have turned blaming every single misdemeanor of muslims - from killing prisoners of war, to committing taqiyya to child brides - on nothing but following the Prophet's example, into an art form

It's surprising how many of the stereotypical horrors that modern Muslims inflict on each other and others have strong parallels in the examples set by Muhammed himself. Instead of blaming it on some one-man conspiracy, perhaps you should consider each individual claim on its merits.

freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 6:49pm:

Quote: Sure - because you disagree with it. I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it..

Except for the 2007 FD. Was he spineless, 2014 FD?

I’m curious.

Nothing I have posted here is even remotely similar to Brian's spineless apologetics.

freediver wrote on Jul 29^th, 2014 at 6:49pm:

I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it. I disagree with plenty of other things posted here without labeling them spineless. Try again.

well ok. that was the short answer - the long answer is something along the lines of: because you disagree with it *AND* its about muslims *AND* its politically incorrect *AND* its an affront to your cultural imperialist ideology.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 1:20am:

freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2014 at 6:49pm: I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it. I disagree with plenty of other things posted here without labeling them spineless. Try again. well ok. that was the short answer - the long answer is something along the lines of: because you disagree with it *AND* its about muslims *AND* its politically incorrect *AND* its an affront to your cultural imperialist ideology.

Politically incorrect? Brian? You apologise right now Gandalf!

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

You apologise right now Gandalf!

Well yes, that would be the spineless thing to do  :P

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 1:48pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2014 at 8:17am: You apologise right now Gandalf! Well yes, that would be the spineless thing to do  :P

FD has never apologised for his 2007 posts, G. Given they contain the most heinous examples of spinelessness ever uttered on this board, FD must take much pride in them.

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30th, 2014 at 1:20am: freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2014 at 6:49pm: I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it. I disagree with plenty of other things posted here without labeling them spineless. Try again. well ok. that was the short answer - the long answer is something along the lines of: because you disagree with it *AND* its about muslims *AND* its politically incorrect *AND* its an affront to your cultural imperialist ideology. Politically incorrect? Brian? You apologise right now Gandalf!

Brian is frequently politically incorrect.  Have you read his views on defence issues?  Disgusting and very right-wing!   ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

So how does this work? He was so politically correct that he popped out the other side into politically incorrect?

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 7:00pm:

So how does this work? He was so politically correct that he popped out the other side into politically incorrect?

Yes, he passed through the eye of the needle...   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

I am still waiting on that grovelling apology from Gandalf. So is Brian. Just because you are losing an argument doesn't mean you can resort to insulting him. You have no right, seeing as he is not a Muslim. You are not even capable of it.

freediver wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 6:43pm:

I am still waiting on that grovelling apology from Gandalf. So is Brian. Just because you are losing an argument doesn't mean you can resort to insulting him. You have no right, seeing as he is not a Muslim. You are not even capable of it.

True, FD, but you’re still waiting for that grovelling apology from Abu too, no?

Abu, Falah, the other one - would it help if I apologized on their behalf?

Allow me to apologize for any offence caused by all those hideous Muselmen. No one has the right to not be offended, but Islam is offensive to all.

Islam, the tinted races, multiculturalism, spineless apologetics - all hurtful to every decent person, and all deeply offensive.

On behalf of them all, FD, I apologize.

I’m not in a position to offer financial compensation, but I do hope this goes some way to healing your pain.

freediver wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 8:17am:

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30th, 2014 at 1:20am: freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2014 at 6:49pm: I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it. I disagree with plenty of other things posted here without labeling them spineless. Try again. well ok. that was the short answer - the long answer is something along the lines of: because you disagree with it *AND* its about muslims *AND* its politically incorrect *AND* its an affront to your cultural imperialist ideology. Politically incorrect? Brian? You apologise right now Gandalf!

Why?  He hasn't insulted me.  The only people who seem to be inflicting their political views on us are you and your ilk, FD.   All I've ever suggested is that people should be given a fair go.  You OTOH want to prejudge them on the basis of what other people sharing the same religious name with them may have done.  In otherwords, Guilt by Association.   What ever happened to Freedom of Association in your world, FD?   ::)

|dev|null wrote on Jul 30^th, 2014 at 6:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2014 at 8:17am: polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 30th, 2014 at 1:20am: freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2014 at 6:49pm: I doubt you'll find anyone here who agrees with it. I disagree with plenty of other things posted here without labeling them spineless. Try again. well ok. that was the short answer - the long answer is something along the lines of: because you disagree with it *AND* its about muslims *AND* its politically incorrect *AND* its an affront to your cultural imperialist ideology. Politically incorrect? Brian? You apologise right now Gandalf! Brian is frequently politically incorrect.  Have you read his views on defence issues?  Disgusting and very right-wing!   ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Only if you inhabit the far-left...   ::)

Quote:

Why?  He hasn't insulted me.

Exactly. Gandalf, you are lucky Brian is not overseas, or he may not even realise you are talking about him.


Quote:

The only people who seem to be inflicting their political views on us are you and your ilk, FD.

How so?


Quote:

All I've ever suggested is that people should be given a fair go.

At killing anyone who disagrees with them?


Quote:

You OTOH want to prejudge them on the basis of what other people sharing the same religious name with them may have done.  In otherwords, Guilt by Association.   What ever happened to Freedom of Association in your world, FD?

They are free to associate with Muslims if they like, and I judge them by their words and deeds, just like I judge you by your words.

freediver wrote on Aug 1^st, 2014 at 8:44am:

Quote: Why?  He hasn't insulted me. Exactly. Gandalf, you are lucky Brian is not overseas, or he may not even realise you are talking about him.

::)


Quote:

[quote]The only people who seem to be inflicting their political views on us are you and your ilk, FD.

How so?
[/quote]

You insist that your views on Muslims and Islam are the only acceptable ones.   ::)


Quote:

[quote]All I've ever suggested is that people should be given a fair go.

At killing anyone who disagrees with them?
[/quote]

You really are working on your thatching skills, FD.   ::)

Perhaps you'd like to provide a reference to where I have suggested that?


Quote:

[quote]You OTOH want to prejudge them on the basis of what other people sharing the same religious name with them may have done.  In otherwords, Guilt by Association.   What ever happened to Freedom of Association in your world, FD?

They are free to associate with Muslims if they like, and I judge them by their words and deeds.[/quote]

No, you don't.  You continually show the reverse, FD.   ::)

Quote:

You insist that your views on Muslims and Islam are the only acceptable ones.

I wouldn't post my views if I didn't think I was right Brian. I'm really not sure what you are whining about here. Are you jealous of the Muslims' victimhood (of criticism) and desperate to claim some kind of victimhood (of being disagreed with) for yourself?


Quote:

Perhaps you'd like to provide a reference to where I have suggested that?

No problem Brian. What is thatching BTW? Did you make that word up?


freediver wrote on Sep 15^th, 2013 at 6:22pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 15th, 2013 at 5:39pm: Quote: Is this the Islam you are so keen to defend with your "fair deal" nonsense, what about those who no longer believe in that bullshit barfed up by a 7th century desert bandit do they deserve a fair deal like article 18 of the Universal declaration of human rights? [quote]7 nations where atheism is punishable by death. All 7 establish Islam as the state religion. Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Iran,Afghanistan,Sudan,Mauritania and the Maldives www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/10/the-seven-countries-where-the-state-can-execute-you-for-being-atheist/ I make no excuses for those nations and their laws, BV.  I merely recognise that it is their right to create and unfortunately impose those punishments.   It is terrible but I also recognise I have no right or ability to criticise them.  I am neither a member of their religion or a citizen of any of those nations.

[/quote]


Quote:

No, you don't.  You continually show the reverse, FD.

Ah, so I don't judge people? Is that what has you so upset now? You are a hard man to please Brian. Perhaps you should just tell me what is the correct opinion for me to have?

freediver wrote on Jul 27^th, 2014 at 8:39am:

I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status.

Of course, Christianity had its wars over centuries when it was either fighting advancing Islam, or itself.

Having fought Islamic nations to a standstill, Christianity ripped itself apart for a few hundred years with sectarian wars... Firstly Eastern and Western Christianity (the Great Schism - still split today), then Catholic-Protestant reformation/counter-reformation wars.

Although largely at peace with itself for the last 300 years, Christianity has remained an element of some modern wars in a cryptic sense (i.e. Northern Ireland), where its influence is closer to a 'cold war' effect.

Also, Neo-Christianity does involve itself in modern conflicts but, again, in a cryptic sense, with, for example, the support of Israel by neo-Christians for religious reasons as opposed to purely political reasons.

Brian Ross wrote on Jul 31^st, 2014 at 8:12pm:

All I've ever suggested is that people should be given a fair go.

And then apologise for them constantly if they plot against and undermine the societies that have given them said fair go.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 11:02am:

freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:39am: I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status. Of course, Christianity had its wars over centuries when it was either fighting advancing Islam, or itself. Having fought Islamic nations to a standstill, Christianity ripped itself apart for a few hundred years with sectarian wars... Firstly Eastern and Western Christianity (the Great Schism - still split today), then Catholic-Protestant reformation/counter-reformation wars. Although largely at peace with itself for the last 300 years, Christianity has remained an element of some modern wars in a cryptic sense (i.e. Northern Ireland), where its influence is closer to a 'cold war' effect. Also, Neo-Christianity does involve itself in modern conflicts but, again, in a cryptic sense, with, for example, the support of Israel by neo-Christians for religious reasons as opposed to purely political reasons.

The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love.
Islam has no opportunity to evolve, it forever wants to press the "reset to the 7th century and start again" button. But the 7th century itself is strife between sunni and shia. There is no opportunity to depart and evolve since, supremely stupidly, Mohammed is the last prophet and the Koran is inerrant and entire.
Christianity has had its religious wars in the 17th century. Islam has been at war with itself - and never mind anyone else who comes into contact with it - since the day after Mohammed died.
No freedom, no love, no conversation - instead it is all-you-can-submit-to aggrievance  and resentment.

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:20am:

freediver wrote on Aug 1st, 2014 at 8:44am: Quote: Why?  He hasn't insulted me. Exactly. Gandalf, you are lucky Brian is not overseas, or he may not even realise you are talking about him. ::) [quote] [quote]The only people who seem to be inflicting their political views on us are you and your ilk, FD.

How so?
[/quote]

You insist that your views on Muslims and Islam are the only acceptable ones.   ::)


Quote:

[quote]All I've ever suggested is that people should be given a fair go.

At killing anyone who disagrees with them?
[/quote]

You really are working on your thatching skills, FD.   ::)

Perhaps you'd like to provide a reference to where I have suggested that?


Quote:

[quote]You OTOH want to prejudge them on the basis of what other people sharing the same religious name with them may have done.  In otherwords, Guilt by Association.   What ever happened to Freedom of Association in your world, FD?

They are free to associate with Muslims if they like, and I judge them by their words and deeds.[/quote]

No, you don't.  You continually show the reverse, FD.   ::)[/quote]

FD judges Muselmen for what they don’t say, what they would say, and what they won’t say, but FD needs to tweak ever so slightly to make them say it.

FD largely ignores their deeds, instead focusing on what they don’t, would or won’t say. We have an epidemic of clitorectomies, underage marriage and terrorism in Australia because of Muhammed, you know. Muslims everywhere are torturing Jews to get their gold. And it’s all hush-hush because of Taqiyya, a cunning ruse if ever there was one.

One of FD’s inspirations is the investigation style of the Khmer Rouge. Prisoners were guilty because they were prisoners. It was simply a matter of extracting a confession and taking them down to the swamp for the head hammering. 

Soren wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:32pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 11:02am: freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:39am: I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status. Of course, Christianity had its wars over centuries when it was either fighting advancing Islam, or itself. Having fought Islamic nations to a standstill, Christianity ripped itself apart for a few hundred years with sectarian wars... Firstly Eastern and Western Christianity (the Great Schism - still split today), then Catholic-Protestant reformation/counter-reformation wars. Although largely at peace with itself for the last 300 years, Christianity has remained an element of some modern wars in a cryptic sense (i.e. Northern Ireland), where its influence is closer to a 'cold war' effect. Also, Neo-Christianity does involve itself in modern conflicts but, again, in a cryptic sense, with, for example, the support of Israel by neo-Christians for religious reasons as opposed to purely political reasons. The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love.

This explains why you turned to atheism, old boy. Good show.

Soren wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:32pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 11:02am: freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:39am: I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status. Of course, Christianity had its wars over centuries when it was either fighting advancing Islam, or itself. Having fought Islamic nations to a standstill, Christianity ripped itself apart for a few hundred years with sectarian wars... Firstly Eastern and Western Christianity (the Great Schism - still split today), then Catholic-Protestant reformation/counter-reformation wars. Although largely at peace with itself for the last 300 years, Christianity has remained an element of some modern wars in a cryptic sense (i.e. Northern Ireland), where its influence is closer to a 'cold war' effect. Also, Neo-Christianity does involve itself in modern conflicts but, again, in a cryptic sense, with, for example, the support of Israel by neo-Christians for religious reasons as opposed to purely political reasons. The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love.

So, where do the churches fit into this "conversation"?  Where does the clergy fit?   Looks to me like you're mistaking the belief for the religion, Soren...   ::)

BTW, you might want to read this, hopefully with an open mind but that might be a bit difficult, I realise...   ::)

Soren wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:32pm:

The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love. Islam has no opportunity to evolve, it forever wants to press the "reset to the 7th century and start again" button. But the 7th century itself is strife between sunni and shia. There is no opportunity to depart and evolve since, supremely stupidly, Mohammed is the last prophet and the Koran is inerrant and entire. Christianity has had its religious wars in the 17th century. Islam has been at war with itself - and never mind anyone else who comes into contact with it - since the day after Mohammed died. No freedom, no love, no conversation - instead it is all-you-can-submit-to aggrievance  and resentment.

Dunno that 'Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god'...

More that it is becoming irrelevant not least due to its ministers' dealings between man and boy!

Watched the movie 'Calvary'... Won't drop spoilers here except to say its an Irish observation (ignited by clergy atrocities) of 'throwing the baby out with the bath water' (to use the counter-reformation's metaphor against Martin Luther).

Karnal wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:59pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 12:32pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 11:02am: freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:39am: I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status. Of course, Christianity had its wars over centuries when it was either fighting advancing Islam, or itself. Having fought Islamic nations to a standstill, Christianity ripped itself apart for a few hundred years with sectarian wars... Firstly Eastern and Western Christianity (the Great Schism - still split today), then Catholic-Protestant reformation/counter-reformation wars. Although largely at peace with itself for the last 300 years, Christianity has remained an element of some modern wars in a cryptic sense (i.e. Northern Ireland), where its influence is closer to a 'cold war' effect. Also, Neo-Christianity does involve itself in modern conflicts but, again, in a cryptic sense, with, for example, the support of Israel by neo-Christians for religious reasons as opposed to purely political reasons. The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love. This explains why you turned to atheism, old boy. Good show.

How and when did I turn to atheism, Greens_Win?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 3:28pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 12:32pm: The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love. Islam has no opportunity to evolve, it forever wants to press the "reset to the 7th century and start again" button. But the 7th century itself is strife between sunni and shia. There is no opportunity to depart and evolve since, supremely stupidly, Mohammed is the last prophet and the Koran is inerrant and entire. Christianity has had its religious wars in the 17th century. Islam has been at war with itself - and never mind anyone else who comes into contact with it - since the day after Mohammed died. No freedom, no love, no conversation - instead it is all-you-can-submit-to aggrievance  and resentment. Dunno that 'Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god'... More that it is becoming irrelevant not least due to its ministers' dealings between man and boy! Watched the movie 'Calvary'... Won't drop spoilers here except to say its an Irish observation (ignited by clergy atrocities) of 'throwing the baby out with the bath water' (to use the counter-reformation's metaphor against Martin Luther).

Christianity is not becoming irrelevant in the world, even if it is becoming irrelevant to you.
Big mistake to treat the latter as if it was also an indicator of the former.

It is also a big mistake to be a narrowly Irish resenter of Irish Catholicism and to treat that sentimement as the sentiment of the world.

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 3:18pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 12:32pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 11:02am: freediver wrote on Jul 27th, 2014 at 8:39am: I think Yadda has brought up an interesting issue here. There is a strong contrast between Islam and Christianity on this particular issue. Where Christianity preaches forgiveness, Islam preaches revenge and escalation of conflict. I think it is no accident that so many conflicts with Muslims get dragged on over the decades, and it is usually Muslims doing the dragging, from a position of military inferiority. I think even Gandalf has acknowledged the tendency for Muslims to falsely or unreasonably claim aggrieved status. Of course, Christianity had its wars over centuries when it was either fighting advancing Islam, or itself. Having fought Islamic nations to a standstill, Christianity ripped itself apart for a few hundred years with sectarian wars... Firstly Eastern and Western Christianity (the Great Schism - still split today), then Catholic-Protestant reformation/counter-reformation wars. Although largely at peace with itself for the last 300 years, Christianity has remained an element of some modern wars in a cryptic sense (i.e. Northern Ireland), where its influence is closer to a 'cold war' effect. Also, Neo-Christianity does involve itself in modern conflicts but, again, in a cryptic sense, with, for example, the support of Israel by neo-Christians for religious reasons as opposed to purely political reasons. The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love. So, where do the churches fit into this "conversation"?

If you had even a cursory understanding, you would know that Protestantism is about faith and a relationship unmediated by clergy/priestly class.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 3:28pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 12:32pm: The salient point is that Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god, based on the principles of freedom and love. Islam has no opportunity to evolve, it forever wants to press the "reset to the 7th century and start again" button. But the 7th century itself is strife between sunni and shia. There is no opportunity to depart and evolve since, supremely stupidly, Mohammed is the last prophet and the Koran is inerrant and entire. Christianity has had its religious wars in the 17th century. Islam has been at war with itself - and never mind anyone else who comes into contact with it - since the day after Mohammed died. No freedom, no love, no conversation - instead it is all-you-can-submit-to aggrievance  and resentment. Dunno that 'Christianity is evolving because it is essentially about a conversation between man and god'... More that it is becoming irrelevant not least due to its ministers' dealings between man and boy! Watched the movie 'Calvary'... Won't drop spoilers here except to say its an Irish observation (ignited by clergy atrocities) of 'throwing the baby out with the bath water' (to use the counter-reformation's metaphor against Martin Luther).

'Faith' is not irrelevant, especially not today, in today's world.

But Christians don't read the bible these days.

They should.

Christians today, are more interested in integrating their faith, with 'society', and with societies values.

God ?

God does not touch our hearts today,   .....because most of us are running away from God, at a million miles an hour!



Never old.

IMAGE....
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gvXwPghPsU4/TiV9dY_RIKI/AAAAAAAAC-k/yA0crbVWgvA/s320/10commandments.jpgi

Psalms 1:1
Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2  But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.


Psalms 19:7
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.


Psalms 25:8
Good and upright is the LORD: therefore will he teach sinners in the way.
9  The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.


Amos 5:4
For thus saith the LORD unto the house of Israel, Seek ye me, and ye shall live:




'Israel' is a state of mind.

We are Israel, if we want to be so.

But the world does not want to be.



Psalms 51:10
Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
11  Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.

OMG!  Yadda's again quoting from the Old Testament!  That, according to Soren and other Christian fundamentalists brands him as a non-Christian!  He places more emphasis on the Old Testament than the New!  Heretic! 

;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Does islam - as a philosophy - produce 'aggrieved' ?

Once again the proof is in the pudding:

In 2014 we have muslims torturing and killing Buddhists, Christians, Hindus and Jews, while always claiming they are the victims of non-muslims.

Then we have muslims slaughtering other muslims, with both sides claiming to be the victims.

muslims by their deeds prove they are the victims of their own inbred low intelligence and the doctrine of rape, torture and mass murder (islam).

They are the world's largest cult of killers. 

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 3:18pm:

BTW, you might want to read this, hopefully with an open mind but that might be a bit difficult, I realise...

Edited out stupid face.

Did you read this Brian.

The acknowledgement "with varying degrees of criticism or emulation", of the technological, scientific and legal achievements of the West,

Also.....

Taking the four traditional sources of Islamic jurisprudence—the Quran, the reported deed and saying of Muhammad (hadith), consensus of the theologians (ijma) and juristic reasoning by analogy (qiyas) -- and reinterpreting


Then this, Saladin will be devastated!

A more or less radical (re)interpretation of the authoritative sources. This is particularly the case with the Quranic texts on polygyny, the hadd (penal) punishments, jihad, and treatment of unbelievers, which conflict with "modern" views.

You have just proved that Mo was not a prophet, that the quran is not the immutable word of god. Islam is just a cult.

Do you stick up for cults Brian?

Brian is not actually a fan of Islam, merely of the right of Muslims to hack people to death in the name of Islam. If you really press him, he will say it is as bad as other religions.

Soren wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 9:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 3:18pm: So, where do the churches fit into this "conversation"?  If you had even a cursory understanding, you would know that Protestantism is about faith and a relationship unmediated by clergy/priestly class.

But as anybody with any understanding of Christianity realises, Soren, Protestantism isn't the be all and end all of Christianity.  There are other denominations which out number it and of course, we can point out there are few Christian denominations which don't have clergy and established Churches which form the structure of organised religion.   You seem to have a very myopic view of what Christianity is, Soren.  Time you pulled your head out of the sand and looked around.   Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, etc., etc. exist and they ARE the majority of Christians.   ::)

Karnal wrote on Aug 2^nd, 2014 at 12:38pm:

FD judges Muselmen for what they don’t say, what they would say, and what they won’t say, but FD needs to tweak ever so slightly to make them say it. FD largely ignores their deeds, instead focusing on what they don’t, would or won’t say. We have an epidemic of clitorectomies, underage marriage and terrorism in Australia because of Muhammed, you know. Muslims everywhere are torturing Jews to get their gold. And it’s all hush-hush because of Taqiyya, a cunning ruse if ever there was one. One of FD’s inspirations is the investigation style of the Khmer Rouge. Prisoners were guilty because they were prisoners. It was simply a matter of extracting a confession and taking them down to the swamp for the head hammering.

Ah.  That explains so much.  Thank'ee Karnal for your apt explanation.  8-)

Adamant wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 3:57pm:

Do you stick up for cults Brian?

Religion is what people believe, Adamant.  I wouldn't suggest Christianity is a cult, despite the fact there is no independent evidence that Jesus Christ existed or that indeed he was the son of God.  Yet you seem comfortable insulting billions of people who worship in the Muslim faith.  I suspect you have never really absorbed the message that Christianity teaches.

Matthew 7:3-5
John 11:35

freediver wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 4:04pm:

Brian is not actually a fan of Islam, merely of the right of Muslims to hack people to death in the name of Islam. If you really press him, he will say it is as bad as other religions.

As usual, you're working on those thatching skills, FD.  Keep it up!   ::)

I wonder if there's ever been a muslim comedian???? They always seem so miserable. Especially the women.

Shakey wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:26pm:

I wonder if there's ever been a muslim comedian???? They always seem so miserable. Especially the women.

35 entries devoted to them on Wikipedia.  Just because you're unaware of them doesn't mean they don't exist, Shakey.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:35pm:

Shakey wrote on Aug 4th, 2014 at 6:26pm: I wonder if there's ever been a muslim comedian???? They always seem so miserable. Especially the women. 35 entries devoted to them on Wikipedia.  Just because you're unaware of them doesn't mean they don't exist, Shakey.    ::)

What a laugh that would be. :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( What do they yell out at muslim strippers?? SHOW US YOUR FACE!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Shakey wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:37pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 4th, 2014 at 6:35pm: Shakey wrote on Aug 4th, 2014 at 6:26pm: I wonder if there's ever been a muslim comedian???? They always seem so miserable. Especially the women. 35 entries devoted to them on Wikipedia.  Just because you're unaware of them doesn't mean they don't exist, Shakey.    ::) What a laugh that would be. :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( What do they yell out at muslim strippers?? SHOW US YOUR FACE!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Islamic humour.   ;D

Why is the camel called the ship of the desert? 

Because they are full of arab semen/seamen.

Shakey wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:26pm:

I wonder if there's ever been a muslim comedian???? They always seem so miserable. Especially the women.

Shakey,

Of course there are moslem comedians.

And Nazeem Hussain appears regularly on ABC TV.


Aussie moslem comedian.....

Quote:

Nazeem Hussain, declares; "I can't wait till bullying white people becomes a national pastime." And then his Australian audience howls with laughter.

Nazeem Hussain can't wait till this experience comes to Australia.....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1405627169/491#491
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4571/new-nazism

Shakey wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:26pm:

I wonder if there's ever been a muslim comedian???? They always seem so miserable. Especially the women.

This guy is bloody good at taking the p1ss out of islam!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LzOU6ETxI8

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:13pm:

Soren wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 9:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 3:18pm: So, where do the churches fit into this "conversation"?  If you had even a cursory understanding, you would know that Protestantism is about faith and a relationship unmediated by clergy/priestly class. But as anybody with any understanding of Christianity realises, Soren, Protestantism isn't the be all and end all of Christianity.  There are other denominations which out number it and of course, we can point out there are few Christian denominations which don't have clergy and established Churches which form the structure of organised religion.   You seem to have a very myopic view of what Christianity is, Soren.  Time you pulled your head out of the sand and looked around.   Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, etc., etc. exist and they ARE the majority of Christians.   ::)

you are missing the point as ever, even though it was highlighted for you.

Religion is about your relation to god. The various denominations of Christianity are about how that relationship is mediated.
The Protestation was and is about the apostolic clergy inserting itself into the relationship between Man and God.

Soren wrote on Aug 8^th, 2014 at 9:05pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 4th, 2014 at 6:13pm: Soren wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 9:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Aug 2nd, 2014 at 3:18pm: So, where do the churches fit into this "conversation"?  If you had even a cursory understanding, you would know that Protestantism is about faith and a relationship unmediated by clergy/priestly class. But as anybody with any understanding of Christianity realises, Soren, Protestantism isn't the be all and end all of Christianity.  There are other denominations which out number it and of course, we can point out there are few Christian denominations which don't have clergy and established Churches which form the structure of organised religion.   You seem to have a very myopic view of what Christianity is, Soren.  Time you pulled your head out of the sand and looked around.   Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, Coptic, etc., etc. exist and they ARE the majority of Christians.   ::) you are missing the point as ever, even though it was highlighted for you. Religion is about your relation to god. The various denominations of Christianity are about how that relationship is mediated. The Protestation was and is about the apostolic clergy inserting itself into the relationship between Man and God.

And look at how well it did at eliminating it.   ::)

isis, boko haran, al-Qaeda, ansar al-islam, hamas,  harkat, Hezbollah, mujahedeen, Jemaah Islamiyah, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine, Supreme Military Majlis ul-Shura of the United Mujahideen Forces of Caucasus.


all muslims.

all follow moh

Brian Ross wrote on Aug 4^th, 2014 at 6:25pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 4th, 2014 at 4:04pm: Brian is not actually a fan of Islam, merely of the right of Muslims to hack people to death in the name of Islam. If you really press him, he will say it is as bad as other religions. As usual, you're working on those thatching skills, FD.  Keep it up!   ::)

freediver wrote on Sep 15^th, 2013 at 6:22pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 15th, 2013 at 5:39pm: Quote: Is this the Islam you are so keen to defend with your "fair deal" nonsense, what about those who no longer believe in that bullshit barfed up by a 7th century desert bandit do they deserve a fair deal like article 18 of the Universal declaration of human rights? [quote]7 nations where atheism is punishable by death. All 7 establish Islam as the state religion. Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Iran,Afghanistan,Sudan,Mauritania and the Maldives www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/10/the-seven-countries-where-the-state-can-execute-you-for-being-atheist/ I make no excuses for those nations and their laws, BV.  I merely recognise that it is their right to create and unfortunately impose those punishments.   It is terrible but I also recognise I have no right or ability to criticise them.  I am neither a member of their religion or a citizen of any of those nations.

[/quote]