Australian Politics Forum

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: chapter 9 Reply #30 - May 28^th, 2017 at 12:39pm Grendel wrote on Apr 30^th, 2017 at 12:27pm: LOL Karnal is a wanker, Jesus fulfilled the law by dying for all our sins and conquering death. Oh dear atheists and Muslims should not quote things they are ignorant of.
Back to top	IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #31 - May 28^th, 2017 at 12:44pm

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 11:32am:

Karnal wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:42am:

moses wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:14am:

Aussie wrote; Reply #35 - Yesterday at 6:30pm

Quote:

Do they follow the OT, Moses?

In what way?

Are you referring to ancient text which tells of a barbaric society some 4000 years ago?

It appears to me that the Jews have progressed with the times, we know they have contributed much to mankind, they are a

successful peaceful nation surrounded by a barbaric mass of muslims. That's about as much as I can tell you about them.

They have indeed, Moses. And yet they follow a book far more violent and sinister than the Muselman.

What does this tell you?

Karnal is referring to Jews here.

Is there anything that calls Jews to violence to the extent that chapter 9 of the Koran calls Muslims to violence?

Does calling for the death of 10s of thousands (the figures are stated in the bible) of men women and infants count?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #32 - May 28^th, 2017 at 12:49pm

Oh Dear.... when will you people stop this nonsense and debate the facts and the world we live in today?

Muslims claim the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) have moved away from God and His word and that their Koran inviolable, unalterable is now the only true word of God.

How can any of your claims re the Bible, be supported then?

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #33 - May 28^th, 2017 at 12:53pm

Grendel wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 12:49pm:

Oh Dear.... when will you people stop this nonsense and debate the facts and the world we live in today?

Muslims claim the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) have moved away from God and His word and that their Koran inviolable, unalterable is now the only true word of God.

How can any of your claims re the Bible, be supported then?

I don't dispute that G, and thats not the question.

I was addressing FD's specific question

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49737
At my desk.

Re: chapter 9
Reply #34 - May 28^th, 2017 at 12:57pm

polite_gandalf wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 12:44pm:

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 11:32am:

Karnal wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:42am:

moses wrote on May 26^th, 2017 at 10:14am:

Aussie wrote; Reply #35 - Yesterday at 6:30pm

Quote:

Do they follow the OT, Moses?

In what way?

Are you referring to ancient text which tells of a barbaric society some 4000 years ago?

It appears to me that the Jews have progressed with the times, we know they have contributed much to mankind, they are a

successful peaceful nation surrounded by a barbaric mass of muslims. That's about as much as I can tell you about them.

They have indeed, Moses. And yet they follow a book far more violent and sinister than the Muselman.

What does this tell you?

Karnal is referring to Jews here.

Is there anything that calls Jews to violence to the extent that chapter 9 of the Koran calls Muslims to violence?

Does calling for the death of 10s of thousands (the figures are stated in the bible) of men women and infants count?

Not if it is not an incitement to further violence.

For example, we killed millions of people in WWI and WWII. But documentation of those deaths, and even texts supporting allied involvement in those wars, is not the same thing a call for ongoing slaughter.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #35 - May 28^th, 2017 at 1:07pm

Did you mean to say "not unless its an incitement to further violence"?

Would you agree that framing the mass slaughter of women and infants by good God-fearing people (by the 10s of thousands) as something that is ordained by God Himself could give the 'wrong message' to devotees looking for an excuse to commit ethnic cleansing and/or mass slaughter?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49737
At my desk.

Re: chapter 9
Reply #36 - May 28^th, 2017 at 1:41pm

Of course. But not as likely to give the "wrong message" as "go out and slaughter the infidel wherever you find them".

I refer you back to Karnal's original statement:

Quote:

And yet they follow a book far more violent and sinister than the Muselman.

I think the more productive role that Jews play in civilised society compared to Muslims, regardless of whether they are a majority or a minority, reflects the differences in the ideologies. Body count alone is not a complete measure than that, despite what the apologists for Islam keep saying, otherwise documenting the holocaust would be a dangerous thing.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #37 - May 28^th, 2017 at 2:03pm

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 1:41pm:

Of course. But not as likely to give the "wrong message" as "go out and slaughter the infidel wherever you find them".

I refer you back to Karnal's original statement:

Quote:

And yet they follow a book far more violent and sinister than the Muselman.

I think the more productive role that Jews play in civilised society compared to Muslims, regardless of whether they are a majority or a minority, reflects the differences in the ideologies. Body count alone is not a complete measure than that, despite what the apologists for Islam keep saying, otherwise documenting the holocaust would be a dangerous thing.

Jews have improved their image - and rightly so. Yet it wasn't so long ago that people just like you were pontificating about how despicable and dangerous the jews were - and were cheering on their persecution. And in far more vitriolic language (and actions) than what we see towards muslims. And it took a near annihilation event for these ingrained attitudes to change.

You are a product of your time FD - you don't really have a positive view of jews because you are objectively looking at their "productivity" and making objective assessments about that - because that same "productivity" was viewed as something deeply sinister in times gone by. More than anything, your positive views of jews are shaped by a 'enemy of my enemy' rationale vis-a-vis the muslims. One just needs to look at the way you actually weren't afraid to criticise jews and Israel before your conversion onto the anti-Islam bandwagon in 2007.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 49087
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #38 - May 28^th, 2017 at 5:02pm

polite_gandalf wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 2:03pm:

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 1:41pm:

Of course. But not as likely to give the "wrong message" as "go out and slaughter the infidel wherever you find them".

I refer you back to Karnal's original statement:

Quote:

And yet they follow a book far more violent and sinister than the Muselman.

I think the more productive role that Jews play in civilised society compared to Muslims, regardless of whether they are a majority or a minority, reflects the differences in the ideologies. Body count alone is not a complete measure than that, despite what the apologists for Islam keep saying, otherwise documenting the holocaust would be a dangerous thing.

Jews have improved their image - and rightly so. Yet it wasn't so long ago that people just like you were pontificating about how despicable and dangerous the jews were - and were cheering on their persecution. And in far more vitriolic language (and actions) than what we see towards muslims. And it took a near annihilation event for these ingrained attitudes to change.

Well, Jews have not improved their image with Muslims, though. People just like you - Muslims - are still pontificating about how despicable and dangerous the Jews are - and are cheering on their persecution.
At the same time you are eager to appropriate their victim status all to yourselves and you do this especially loudly after yet another Muslim terrorist attack.

Never mind the actual victims of Islamic ideology, it's the poor Muslims, again and again and again, blowing up people to demonstrate their utter victimhood.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: chapter 9
Reply #39 - May 28^th, 2017 at 5:10pm

polite_gandalf wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 2:03pm:

freediver wrote on May 28^th, 2017 at 1:41pm:

Of course. But not as likely to give the "wrong message" as "go out and slaughter the infidel wherever you find them".

I refer you back to Karnal's original statement:

Quote:

And yet they follow a book far more violent and sinister than the Muselman.

I think the more productive role that Jews play in civilised society compared to Muslims, regardless of whether they are a majority or a minority, reflects the differences in the ideologies. Body count alone is not a complete measure than that, despite what the apologists for Islam keep saying, otherwise documenting the holocaust would be a dangerous thing.

Jews have improved their image - and rightly so. Yet it wasn't so long ago that people just like you were pontificating about how despicable and dangerous the jews were - and were cheering on their persecution. And in far more vitriolic language (and actions) than what we see towards muslims. And it took a near annihilation event for these ingrained attitudes to change.

Well that is rubbish.... are you saying the world was full of Nazis?

You are a product of your time FD - you don't really have a positive view of jews because you are objectively looking at their "productivity" and making objective assessments about that - because that same "productivity" was viewed as something deeply sinister in times gone by. More than anything, your positive views of jews are shaped by a 'enemy of my enemy' rationale vis-a-vis the muslims. One just needs to look at the way you actually weren't afraid to criticise jews and Israel before your conversion onto the anti-Islam bandwagon in 2007.

Do you honestly think most of us see Jews as a threat and something to be hated? honestly... Anti-Semitism is hardly something I'd suggest like you did is wide-spread in the Non-Muslim World... I mean we know you teach your children to hate the Jews..

.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49737
At my desk.

Re: chapter 9
Reply #40 - May 28^th, 2017 at 5:41pm

Quote:

Jews have improved their image - and rightly so.

Why does everything keep falling back to the spin with you Gandalf?

Quote:

Yet it wasn't so long ago that people just like you were pontificating about how despicable and dangerous the jews were

LOL. How about you stick to the things I actually say? Or shall I start tarring you with the terrorist brush?

Quote:

You are a product of your time FD

I can't imagine any time in the last 1400 years when I could have supported Islam.

Quote:

you don't really have a positive view of jews because you are objectively looking at their "productivity" and making objective assessments about that - because that same "productivity" was viewed as something deeply sinister in times gone by

You'll have to explain your logic here Gandalf.

Quote:

More than anything, your positive views of jews are shaped by a 'enemy of my enemy' rationale vis-a-vis the muslims.

Where have I even said anything positive about the Jews?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Auggie Gold Member Offline The Bull Moose Posts: 8571	Re: chapter 9 Reply #41 - May 28^th, 2017 at 5:53pm Rule No. 1 when it comes to reading the Quran: If it's Medinan verse, it's contextual; if it's a Meccan verse, it's eternal.
Back to top	The Progressive President IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: chapter 9
Reply #42 - May 29^th, 2017 at 4:49pm

Ok, so in response to your request, FD, to comment on this topic, here is my view.

In Chapter 9 and such other chapters, there are two important distinctions to make:

First, there are Punishment stories where God punishes people for disbelieving, etc. This is not the problem in my view because if you just simply had those verses then people would say: "ah ok, so God will punish them when they die...." kind of in much the same way as Christians believe.

Where the issue becomes a problem in my view is that many verses call 'other people' to kill, slay or fight disbelievers. Obviously, these verses are troubling.

Again, I invite you to think about the following logic: does God deliver punishment and death to people, or do people do it on behalf of God? My view of God (despite being an Atheist) is that God can only determine who dies, not a human being.

The conclusion therefor is that the verses that call the person or reader to take up arms, or to slay the idolators, were written contextually and referring to specific groups of people at the time. Even if it weren't specific and was 'universal', the question then has to become: "why would God provide divine punishment, only then to encourage people to do His 'dirty work for Him'? One then has to question the nature of 'calling to fight' verses and whether or not these are reflective of God's nature or not? Even if you argue that God dictated the verse (which I don't understand why that is the case), then the conclusion must be that it is contextual.
--
Now, I'm willing to concede that many Islamists or persons who find the Quran true believe that God 'can change His mind' because he is God. True, but why would He if God is omniscient? That's why I encourage you to use this logic when debating (if you do) with Muslims.

Even if you want to argue that the entire Quran is the Word of God, then the Medinan verses are contextual for that time and do not have universal application.
--
So, the base logic is this:

1) God is benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient;

2) If God is benevolent, then God would not command one of his creation to slay another of his creation. He would not encourage the physical harm of one of his creation toward another one of his creation. He would not prescribe a lower status to women given that they are also His creation.

3) If God is omnipotent, then He can end anyone's life without justification. If this is the case, then why would He have any need to command one of His creation to murder or harm another one of His creation?

4) If God is omniscient, then why would He prescribe instructions on how to live life that is applicable for all time, if God knew in the 7th Century that in 2006 the iPhone would be invented (and other things) thereby fundamentally transforming social organization. Therefore, God would only prescribe instructions on how to live based on the context and the needs of the time.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49737
At my desk.

Re: chapter 9
Reply #43 - May 29^th, 2017 at 7:07pm

Quote:

In Chapter 9 and such other chapters, there are two important distinctions to make:
First, there are Punishment stories where God punishes people for disbelieving, etc.

Can you point one out?

Quote:

Where the issue becomes a problem in my view is that many verses call 'other people' to kill, slay or fight disbelievers. Obviously, these verses are troubling.
Again, I invite you to think about the following logic: does God deliver punishment and death to people, or do people do it on behalf of God? My view of God (despite being an Atheist) is that God can only determine who dies, not a human being.

I am not a Muslim Caesar. Why are you trying to convince me this is not the word of God?

Quote:

The conclusion therefor is that the verses that call the person or reader to take up arms, or to slay the idolators, were written contextually and referring to specific groups of people at the time.

Only if you start with a few fundamental assumptions, including:
* that the Koran is the word of God
* that God fits in your pigeon hole of behaviour

I understand the second assumption, as you state it constantly. I cannot figure out why so much of what you post also implies the first assumption. Why not simply conclude that it is a load of crap? Do you think Muslims will take you more seriously if you pretend to be one? Do you think they will respect you misrepresenting or diluting your own views on the matter in some kind of strategy to change their mind? It just makes people constantly wonder wtf you are on about.

Quote:

Now, I'm willing to concede that many Islamists or persons who find the Quran true believe that God 'can change His mind' because he is God. True, but why would He if God is omniscient? That's why I encourage you to use this logic when debating (if you do) with Muslims.

What are you trying to help me convince Muslims of?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: chapter 9
Reply #44 - May 30^th, 2017 at 1:44pm

freediver wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 7:07pm:

Can you point one out?

In the 2 ayat (of your first post) it says: "....you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah..."

In the 3rd ayat it also says: "..... then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah...."

These are examples of where God punishes people. Contrast these statements with:

"...kill the Mushrikun
(see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush..."

This verse is a 'call' to believers to 'kill' other people.
--
One is God punishing people; the other is a call for one person to kill another person.

So, in one verse it says that God will punish them, then in the next verse it calls for people to kill them. Why the sudden change of mind by God? Such behaviour would only be reminiscent of a God who is evil, and I doubt that any Muslim would believe that God was evil.

freediver wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 7:07pm:

Why are you trying to convince me this is not the word of God?

I'm trying to demonstrate that there is a way to interpret the text of the Quran that is logical and conducive to peace.

freediver wrote on May 29^th, 2017 at 7:07pm:

that God fits in your pigeon hole of behaviour

Most religious people (at least of monotheistic religions) would agree that God is benevolent and just (otherwise you worship Satan). I'm sure many Muslims would agree that 'God can change His mind' and that they don't understand 'God's Will.' In the case of the first, you have to admit that God is arbitrary, which is fundamentally against His nature. In the second case, if it's God's Will, then why is it His Will to change His mind?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged