Your Chance to Defend Islam

[Will]

Originally posted by Johnv:
You are aware, though, that the spiritual meaning of the word "jihad" is not "holy war", but "personal struggle". It could be roughly equivalent to Christian understanding of denying oneself (but that's a very rough parallel).

Another inaccuracy.

Jihad means the obligation to struggle for "the way of the lord," in their lives and outside the faith.

There are 2 types of jihad that the vast majority of adherents have and continue to acknowledge: the "greater" jihad or the jihad of the heart and the "lesser" jihad or the jihad of the sword.

 

[Johnv]

I am willing to agree that there are some passages that show peace, but are you willing to concede that they are outweighed by passages promoting violence?

I am open to the possibility that I am wrong, are you?

Oh, I have no disagreement with the Quran's verses that speak of violence. What I'm trying to get at is that a Muslim can use the teachings of the Quran and life a life only of peace. But you cannot take the Quran and live only a life of violence. As with the Bible (especially the OT) persons can take whichever verses they choose and, without context, promote whatever violence they like. One can lead a biblical life and never pick up a weapon. But one cannot life a biblical life unless one lays down his weapon.

American (north, central, and south) Muslims generally don't promote violence, as I would hope most American Christians don't. But we shouldn't be held responsible for the voilent acts of Christians elsewhere, and neither should we hold American Muslims responsible for violent Muslims elsewhere. Jesus even told us that as we judge, so will we be.

 

[Johnv]

Unfortunately, when one points to Christian conquests in the world, we get to sluff it off by saying "oh, they weren't really Christians". Yet when non-Christians do likewise, we blast them for it.

 

[sodzei]

"Unfortunately, when one points to Christian conquests in the world, we get to sluff it off by saying "oh, they weren't really Christians". Yet when non-Christians do likewise, we blast them for it."

Again it comes down to this:

When Christians kill to convert, are they doing it in obedience to the teachings of the Bible? No, they are doing it in disobedience.

When Muslims kill to convert, are they doing it in obedience to the teachings of Quran and Hadith?
I say 'yes', you say 'no'. But one of us must be right.

 

[Will]

Unfortunately, when one points to the actual differences between Christianity and Islam, some people get to sluff it off by saying "oh, there really isn't any difference" without addressing facts.

A perfect example how the incoherence of relativism has taken over not only society but much of Christianity.

 

[The_Narrow_Road]

I would love to defend islam, unfortunately, that would most possibly mean I would have to kill the infidel Christians on this board.

Yes, that was a sick joke.

As a Christian who keeps up with persecution of my brethren, I cannot for the life of me understand why any born-again Christian would ever defend an anti-Christ such as islam.

For more on islamic persecution of your(if you are a Christian) brothers and sisters in Christ:

www.persecution.com
www.persecution.org
www.bibleleague.org
www.answering-islam.org

 

[Johnv]

A perfect example how the incoherence of relativism has taken over not only society but much of Christianity.

The point is valid. This statement simply shows that you do not wish to address it.

It is quite unfortunate that few of the posts on this thread are pertinent to the topic. It would be greatly appreciated if all the grandstanders would to go another forum, and let the rest of us use this forum to have a healthy discussion.

It is unfortunate that so many of you label those of us who want to have a healthy discussion as being "pro-Islam". Please take such McCarthyist attitueds to another forum.

 

[JamesJ]

Originally posted by Will:
Unfortunately, when one points to the actual differences between Christianity and Islam, some people get to sluff it off by saying "oh, there really isn't any difference" without addressing facts.

A perfect example how the incoherence of relativism has taken over not only society but much of Christianity.

Truer words were never spoken Will.
The incoherence of relativism.
Great phrase

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Johnv:
It is unfortunate that so many of you label those of us who want to have a healthy discussion as being "pro-Islam". Please take such McCarthyist attitueds to another forum.

Perhaps you had better come to an understanding of:
1. What is a Christian?
2. What is a Muslim?

Unless you can define these two terms you will nevr be able to resolve this conflict in your mind. "Christians" have never persecuted Muslims, and you would be hard pressed to find evidence that they did. Yet Muslims have and still do conquer by the sword. In every Islamic nation Muslims persecute Christians. Peace loving Muslims persecute Christians. The government persecutes Christians. You are blind to these facts perhaps bcause you don't live in an Islamic nation. If war were to break out now against Iraq, and other Islamic nations were to side with Iraq, would most American Muslims pledge their allegiance to America or to Iraq (i.e. Islam)? In many cases the pledge of allegiance means nothing to the typical Muslim.
DHK

 

[Johnv]

If war were to break out now against Iraq, and other Islamic nations were to side with Iraq, would most American Muslims pledge their allegiance to America or to Iraq (i.e. Islam)?

I think you're equating Muslim with Arab. Such equating is flawed. Many Muslims in the US are white, black, and anything but Arab. Second, there are many Arabs in the US who are Christian.

If we were to go to war with Japan, would most American Japanese pledge their allegience to Japan, or the US? The fear that went with thet question resulted in the rounding up of Japanese Americans, a good many of them US born citizens, and locking them up in concentration camps.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Johnv:
If war were to break out now against Iraq, and other Islamic nations were to side with Iraq, would most American Muslims pledge their allegiance to America or to Iraq (i.e. Islam)?

I think you're equating Muslim with Arab. Such equating is flawed. Many Muslims in the US are white, black, and anything but Arab. Second, there are many Arabs in the US who are Christian.

No, I clearly meant Muslim, not Arab. There are many Islamic nations that are not Arabic. Pakistan is the fifth largest nation in the world, the second largest Islamic nation, having a population of over 140 million people, but it is not Arabic. The masses of the people would side with Iraq. They did in the Gulf War, even though the government sided with Kuwait. Indonesian is the largest Muslim nation in the world, but not Arabic. There are more Muslims in Indonesia than in any other nation in the world. It is a center for Al Qaeda operations. Christians are persecuted there on a daily basis. Who do you think they would side with? I am not simply talking of Arabs. They are but one small factor in the Islamic equation. One out of every five people in this world are Muslim, not Arabic, but Muslim. That is a mighty force to reckon with.
DHK

 

[Netcurtains3]

I am troubled by Islam.

I am troubled by our past (1950s/60s racism).
I am sure even in 2003 we as a Western Block of nations have many more problems then we are willing to acknowledge - even subsciencely.

I can't trust the Muslims and I can't trust myself or my leaders.

I am a "Tory" - a conservative but my party currently lies in ruins.

Net.

 

[Will]

Originally posted by Johnv:
The point is valid. This statement simply shows that you do not wish to address it.

It is quite unfortunate that few of the posts on this thread are pertinent to the topic. It would be greatly appreciated if all the grandstanders would to go another forum, and let the rest of us use this forum to have a healthy discussion.

It is unfortunate that so many of you label those of us who want to have a healthy discussion as being "pro-Islam". Please take such McCarthyist attitueds to another forum.

Johnv,

Now you label yourself a victim of McCarthyism. First you claim relativism(such as Christianity and Islam.) Now you announce yourself a victim. A true product of modern American culture.

Is your healthy discussion, your mistatement of the meaning of Jihad to show Islam in a positive light?

Is your healthy discussion, your posting of out of context Koran verses taken from Islamic apologetic sites?

Is your healthy discussion, your posting that Christianity grew as much from the sword as Islam and when that is shown false, to evade the issue by claiming you are a victim?

 

[Johnv]

First you claim relativism(such as Christianity and Islam.)
It was not I who claimed relativism. You accused me of relativism to avoid the question I brought up.

Now you announce yourself a victim.
You're discounting me as someone who's pro-Islam. I am not pro-Islam. I simply choose not to join the anti-Muslim rhetoric bandwagon, preferring healthy discussion, something that, as I said earlier, is difficult to engage in on such a public forum.

Is your healthy discussion, your mistatement of the meaning of Jihad to show Islam in a positive light?
My statement about Jihad is an accurate one. It is also the position of Islamic Council of my local city, as well as my neighbor, who is also a Muslim. I attempt nothing more than to dispel misunderstandings among Christians about the word.

Is your healthy discussion, your posting of out of context Koran verses taken from Islamic apologetic sites?
How do you know they are out of context? If you read the material preceeding and following the text I've quoted, you'll find that they are not. However, verses from the Koran, on all sides of the issue, can be and frequently are taken out of context.

Is your healthy discussion, your posting that Christianity grew as much from the sword as Islam and when that is shown false, to evade the issue by claiming you are a victim?
Not at all. Christianity is repeat with violent conquests. The crusades are one example. As a Christian, I accept that as an unfortunate part of our history. Likewise with the genocidal acts of Catholics and Protestants in Ireland. Likewise with the recent genocidal acts of Christians in the former soviet region. And don't even get me started on the treatment of blacks in heavily Baptist areas of the south during the civil rights era of the last century. These events have used legitimate bible teachings in an inappropriate manner. But the typical Christian copout is to eschew reqponsibility by saying "oh, they weren't really Christians". But when the Muslim world comes out and denounce the actions of 9-11 as against the Muslim faith, we act as though we know better.

[ January 08, 2003, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

[sodzei]

"Is your healthy discussion, your posting of out of context Koran verses taken from Islamic apologetic sites?"
"How do you know they are out of context? If you read the material preceeding and following the text I've quoted, you'll find that they are not. However, verses from the Koran, on all sides of the issue, can be and frequently are taken out of context."

In Johnv's defense, and even though I still believe that Islam teaches conversion through violence, the verses that he quoted from the Quran ARE cited in context.

 

[Johnv]

One of the ironies. You CAN read the Koran to get the message that non-Muslims should be converted by force. You can also read the Koran to get the message that it should not. Neither is necesserily out of context. Indeed, many Muslims have used the Koran to live in peace, and many well intentioned Muslims have used the sword for the purpose of conversion. On the other hand, not every battle in the history of the world that involved a Muslim with a sword was for the purpose of spreading the religion, any more than the Falukland Islands war was fought to foster Anglicanism.

 

[Will]

Originally posted by Johnv:
It was not I who claimed relativism. You accused me of relativism to avoid the question I brought up.

I accuse you of relativism because you are constantly equating Christianity and Islam, when there are obvious and real differences. A perfect example of this is when you challenged on a thread several months ago that you could produce a Christian atrocity for every Islam atrocity we could list. When I gave you a list of 15 or so current situations in the world, you backed out of the discussion without retracting your unsupported claim.

Originally posted by Johnv:
You're discounting me as someone who's pro-Islam. I am not pro-Islam. I simply choose not to join the anti-Muslim rhetoric bandwagon, preferring healthy discussion, something that, as I said earlier, is difficult to engage in on such a public forum.

No you choose to defend Islam constantly and use their propaganda in a pro-Islam manner. You seem to imply that questioning you and making you actually defend your statements keeps us from having a "healthy discussion." Why?

Originally posted by Johnv:
My statement about Jihad is an accurate one. It is also the position of Islamic Council of my local city, as well as my neighbor, who is also a Muslim. I attempt nothing more than to dispel misunderstandings among Christians about the word.

Well if a politically and public relations savvy organization says so it must be true. How about objectively researching the issue yourself?

Originally posted by Johnv:
How do you know they are out of context? If you read the material preceeding and following the text I've quoted, you'll find that they are not. However, verses from the Koran, on all sides of the issue, can be and frequently are taken out of context.

see above.

Originally posted by Johnv:
Not at all. Christianity is repeat with violent conquests. The crusades are one example. As a Christian, I accept that as an unfortunate part of our history. Likewise with the genocidal acts of Catholics and Protestants in Ireland. Likewise with the recent genocidal acts of Christians in the former soviet region. And don't even get me started on the treatment of blacks in heavily Baptist areas of the south during the civil rights era of the last century. These events have used legitimate bible teachings in an inappropriate manner. But the typical Christian copout is to eschew reqponsibility by saying "oh, they weren't really Christians". But when the Muslim world comes out and denounce the actions of 9-11 as against the Muslim faith, we act as though we know better.

Genocide in Northern Ireland? Are you kidding? You do realize that in their worst year of violence there weren't as many deaths as there were murders in New York City? You do realize this conflict is mainly about economics? How about not just eating what is fed to you by anti-religious zealots and studying the facts yourself?

I'm guessing you mean the former Yugoslavia when you talk about religious conflict in a former Soviet region. To call this a religious instead of ethnic conflict is dishonest. You are aware that Serbs are among the least religious people in the world? They are Christian mainly in name only. As evidenced by them being near the bottom in Church attendance. http://www.umich.edu/~newsinfo/Releases/1997/Dec97/r121097a.html

As far as what happened in the south, you mention people calling themselves Christians that did wrong and there were many. However you don't mention the Christians that did right. Such as the Baptist preachers in Georgia that defied state law and educated blacks in the church or the southern abolitionists that faced attacks and in many cases death. You seem to just gloss over what they did.

This is a perfect example on why I consider you to be a relativist. Comparing Christianity and Islam in the area of slavery points out a stark contrast. Slavery was ended in the Western world through the efforts of Christians. Slavery still exists officially in 2 (Mauritania and the Sudan) and unofficially in (many other) Islamic countries.

Show us the Islamic voices calling for the end of slavery in the Islamic world. Where are their abolitionist movements? Where?

Show us the Islamic voices calling for democracy.

I hope I didn’t "get you started," I’m sure we’re all intimidated by that.

 

[Johnv]

I'm stumped. You bash me for "defending" Islam, but then you accuse of of failing to defend Islam.

I accuse you of relativism because you are constantly equating Christianity and Islam
I do not equate the two. I equated the actions of Christians with the actions of Muslims.

A perfect example of this is when you [were]challenged on a thread several months ago that you could produce a Christian atrocity for every Islam atrocity we could list.
I did not contribute because someone else had contributed prior to my posting, and the thread had continued on its own. For me to post anything would have been simply repeating information. Even if there's only one incident, it shouldn't be sluffed off.

No you choose to defend Islam constantly and use their propaganda in a pro-Islam manner.
Would you prefer I use it in an anti-Islam manner? I love the way information that you agree with is fact, but information that you disagree with is propaganda.

Well if a politically and public relations savvy organization says so it must be true. How about objectively researching the issue yourself?
You goal is not to get me to research. Your goal is for me to agree with you.

Genocide in Northern Ireland? Are you kidding?...You do realize this conflict is mainly about economics?
So when a Christian takes up arms, then it's possible that it might be for reasons other than religious, but when a Muslim takes up arms, that same possibility doesn't exist?

You are aware that Serbs are among the least religious people in the world? They are Christian mainly in name only...
Like I said, the defense is "they're not really Christians".

you don't mention the Christians that did right [in the South]
That wasn't the topic. Come to think of it, the subject of atrocities is off topic as well. But I didn't bring it up, someone else did. If I say it's off topic, I'm accused of skirting the issue. Therein lies the problem with having a discussion about the topic.

Show us the Islamic voices calling for the end of slavery in the Islamic world. Where are their abolitionist movements? Where?
If that's not off topic, I don't know what is.

Show us the Islamic voices calling for democracy.
That would be pretty much all the Muslims in the US. If you're looking for Muslims countries that have democratic forms of govt, of the forty-seven nations with an Islamic majority, eleven have democratically elected governments. Three of them, most norably Indonesia and Pakistan, have women as heads of state. I'm not sure if you were trying to equate the abolition of slavery with democracy. If so the US is democratic, but it allowed slavery for nearly half of its existance. In the Muslim democratic countries, slavery is generally illegal.

It's common to think that Islam is incompatible with democracy. On the contrary, most of the countries with the largest Muslim populations have democratic governments, including Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, and Turkey. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the countries with the biggest terrorist ties (Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Turkmenistan, and Afghanistan) are also the ones that are most repressive as far as democratic freedoms.

[ January 08, 2003, 06:54 PM: Message edited by: Johnv ]

 

[Will]

Originally posted by Johnv:
I'm stumped. You bash me for "defending" Islam, but then you accuse of of failing to defend Islam.

What in the world are you talking about?

Originally posted by Johnv:
I did not contribute because someone else had contributed prior to my posting, and the thread had continued on its own. For me to post anything would have been simply repeating information. Even if there's only one incident, it shouldn't be sluffed off.

You're kidding, right? You came back and said you really didn't mean you could name incident for incident but you were sure they existed. You, at your relativistic best.

Originally posted by Johnv:
Would you prefer I use it in an anti-Islam manner? I love the way information that you agree with is fact, but information that you disagree with is propaganda.

Let me say it again, I prefer you do your own research.

If you are acccusing me of agreeing with Christian writers more then Islamic writers, well you got me there. Guilty as charged. You see I believe in the changing power of Jesus and the affect it has on people.

Originally posted by Johnv:
You goal is not to get me to research. Your goal is for me to agree with you.

Wow, what perception. Let me guess you post your opinions on this board not to get people to agree with you, because after all you really don't have any convictions on these important issues. Give me a break.

Originally posted by Johnv:
So when a Christian takes up arms, then it's possible that it might be for reasons other than religious, but when a Muslim takes up arms, that same possibility doesn't exist?

So by your change of subject (sluffing off in your vocabulary) you must be retracting your ridiculous claim of genocide in Northern Ireland. Is that the case?

Originally posted by Johnv:
Like I said, the defense is "they're not really Christians".

Again, I present facts you present your opinion. I think I'll take the facts.

Let's ask a serious question here. Do you believe that one that has received the changing power of Christ in their lives, would slaughter innocents? I don't want to know what a Muslim would say, I want to know what you say.

Originally posted by Johnv:
That wasn't the topic. Come to think of it, the subject of atrocities is off topic as well. But I didn't bring it up, someone else did. If I say it's off topic, I'm accused of skirting the issue. Therein lies the problem with having a discussion about the topic.

Again, you sluff off and avoid. Incredible.

Originally posted by Johnv:
Show us the Islamic voices calling for the end of slavery in the Islamic world. Where are their abolitionist movements? Where?
If that's not off topic, I don't know what is..

I guess you can't answer, can you? So much for Islam and Christianity being the same.

Originally posted by Johnv:
Show us the Islamic voices calling for democracy.
That would be pretty much all the Muslims in the US. If you're looking for Muslims countries that have democratic forms of govt, of the forty-seven nations with an Islamic majority, eleven have democratically elected governments. Three of them, most norably Indonesia and Pakistan, have women as heads of state. I'm not sure if you were trying to equate the abolition of slavery with democracy. If so the US is democratic, but it allowed slavery for nearly half of its existance. In the Muslim democratic countries, slavery is generally illegal.

So now you know what "pretty much" all of the Muslims are thinking in the U.S., amazing. Can you point us to some facts to support your claims?

So "generally illegal" slavery shows a difference? Doesn't it?

Where are the Islamic abolitionist groups? This seems to be another question you "sluffed" off.

Originally posted by Johnv:
It's common to think that Islam is incompatible with democracy. On the contrary, most of the countries with the largest Muslim populations have democratic governments, including Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, Nigeria, and Turkey. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the countries with the biggest terrorist ties (Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Turkmenistan, and Afghanistan) are also the ones that are most repressive as far as democratic freedoms.

They slaughter thousands (literally) of Christians in Indonesia and Nigeria yearly. These are 2 of the worst oppressors of Christians in the world.

That somehow doesn't seem to be "common" to your knowledge though.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Johnv:

That would be pretty much all the Muslims in the US. If you're looking for Muslims countries that have democratic forms of govt, of the forty-seven nations with an Islamic majority, eleven have democratically elected governments. Three of them, most norably Indonesia and Pakistan, have women as heads of state.

I think you had better check your information before posting it. Benazir Bhutto used to be the Prime Minister of Pakistan for a short period of time, but she was deposed. Her husband was indited on charges of corruption. He was one of the most corrupt indidividuals in government, nicknamed as Mr. ten percent.

The present leader of Pakistan is General Pervaiz Musharaff, a military dictator, who has the country firmly under his countrol. It is aking to being under martial law. This is hardly a democracy, although Musharaff keeps promising elections.
Pakistan has been under the rule of a military dictatorship for more years since its inception than it has been a democracy. It is an Islamic Republic.
DHK

[ January 08, 2003, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: DHK ]