It's always a mistake not to let the conversation ebb and flow around the central core of the main theme.

When writing a thesis ~ yes ~ stick strictly to the subject, but with conversation it's better to let the participants 'drift' a little in their focus for the sake of maintaining interest. They'll be back on-track soon enough.

Petulance about needing to stick strictly to the core topic will soon alienate the contributors. No one likes to be on a leash.

freediver wrote on Jan 27^th, 2014 at 10:13pm:



Every "spin-off" thread you start, you begin by quoting from another thread, and then making a point that is entirely relevant to the thread you just quoted. If what you are quoting is good enough for that thread, then your reply to that should be too. There is no logical reason to have multiple threads on the same topic, but more importantly, as I have pointed out multiple time, making us reference 4 or 5 threads to keep track of one discussion is painful and unnecessary.

On the other hand, its just as unnecessary and nonconstructive to have a thread on one very specific topic, but is then used for people to toss whatever other negative islamic story they can think of. And for anyone interested in criticising islam, they should realise how nonconstructive this is: eg thread about arab nations treatment of their Palestinian refugees. Reply #1 about the unrelated topic of Palestinian honour killing. Two things: Firstly, the original problem of arab nations treatment of Palestinians gets ignored - and basically gets a free pass. Secondly, starting a new thread on the topic of Palestinian honour killings gives the issue far more exposure than if it was hidden away in an unrelated thread. Basically you guys should be thanking me for giving these issues the exposure and attention you no doubt believe they deserve.

Gandalf/Wally the kaaba is pagan, the hajj used to performed in the nude before being made into a formalized paganism, mo man used to pray facing Jerusalem in the hope the Jews would love and follow him.Abraham nor any of his tribe had anything to do with its founding as he did not exist in reality. Its it really is a load of twaddle.

Pete, Meeca was mentioned in 60 BC by a Greek.

Islamic tradition attributes the beginning of Mecca to Ishmael's descendants. Many Muslims point to the Old Testament chapter Psalm 84:3–6 and a mention of a pilgrimage at the Valley of Baca, that Muslims see as referring to the mentioning of Mecca as Bakkah in Qur'an Surah 3:96. Also the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus who lived between 60 BCE and 30 BCE writes about the isolated region of Arabia in his work Bibliotheca historica describing a holy shrine that Muslims see as referring to the Kaaba at Mecca "And a temple has been set-up there, which is very holy and exceedingly revered by all Arabians".[28] Ptolemy may have called the city "Macoraba", though this identification is controversial.[29]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecca

Also gets a mention in your book of fairy tales.

The Valley of Baca is mentioned in Psalm 84 of the Bible in the following passage:


How lovely is Your dwelling-place, O Lord of Hosts. I long, I yearn for the courts of the Lord; my body and soul shout for joy to the living God ... Happy are those who dwell in Your house; they forever praise You. Happy is the man who finds refuge in You, whose mind is on the [pilgrim] highways. They pass through the Valley of Baca, regarding it as a place of springs, as if the early rain had covered it with blessing ... Better one day in Your courts than a thousand [anywhere else]; I would rather stand at the threshold of God's house than dwell in the tents of the wicked[9]

Stratos why do you keep harping on about the slaughter of the Canaanites. They did practise ritual slaughter of their own children but alas Joshua was 150 years too late to see the downfall of Jericho. The big question is how can a myth ask anything of anyone?

By the post-war period a revolution had occurred in archaeological methodology, and Albright accordingly asked Kathleen Kenyon, one of the most respected practitioners of the new archaeology, to excavate at Jericho once more. Kenyon dug over 1952-1958 and traced the entire history of the city from the earliest Neolithic settlement. She did this by digging a narrow deep trench maintaining clean, squared off edges, rigorously examining the soil and recording its stratification, and thus building up a cross-section of the tell. When presented with an area that would require wider areas to be excavated - the floor plan of a house for example - she carefully dug in measured squares while leaving an untouched strip between each section to allow the stratification to remain visible. Kenyon reported that her work showed Garstang to have been wrong and the Germans right - Jericho had been deserted at the accepted Biblical date of the Conquest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho

To keep on topic Malaysian Muslims can kill as many Malaysian Muslims as the like.

The world is a confusing place Yadda.

Personally I think the "confused" person in this world who has introspection and is constantly questioning himself and the world, is a lot wiser than the dogmatically certain person who is dangerously rigid and inflexible.

disappearing?

They are there for all to see Yadda. There is even a link in this very thread to where they are.

In fact they are even more visible now that they are in a thread that they are relevant to.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jan 28^th, 2014 at 2:23pm:



In this 'judge Muslims by actions, not views?' thread, in post # 69 gandalf complained about;

"....the overthrow and subsequent persecution of members a democratic government in Egypt."

In this thread, in post # 70, Yadda demonstrated an argument against gandalf's opinion [in post #69].

In this thread, in post # 73, gandalf expresses an opinion/argument against Yadda's opinion;

In this thread, in post # XX, Yadda expresses an opinion/argument against gandalf's opinion [in post #73].



But then gandalf deemed my argument in post XX [in response to gandalf's opinion, in post #73] to be 'irrelevant', and gandalf 'disappeared' my post, off to another distant 'more relevant' thread.

And the effect is; that it is as though my post # XX [in response to an argument by gandalf,] never even existed in this thread.




gandalf,

By your actions, you are demonstrating, that you, a moslem, are not interested, in engaging in an open and free flowing debate about the nature of ISLAM, unless that 'open' and free flowing debate [about the nature of ISLAM] is conducted according to how you expect an 'open' debate [about the nature of ISLAM] to be conducted.

You are demonstrating, that you, a moslem, are not interested, in engaging in free and open debate - because i can only surmise that allowing open and free flowing debate about the nature of ISLAM is likely to embarrass or 'insult' your moslem 'sensibilities'.





Are forums like this slowly dying?
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1365893107/5#5
Quote: