Islam and fascism (split from IS thread)

[Formaldehyde]

Maybe I stated that wrong but I've read the bible several times over, it seems that you haven't actually read it as you just keep referencing "those expert scholars". Actually I don't think Jesus ever tells people to stone anyone. In the Bible, it was generally the Pharisees and their group who tried to stone people. People misuse religion all the time, probably they haven't carefully read what Christ taught them. See, I actually have the source scripture to back my opinions up, which is a far higher authority that any "expert scholar".

When you study religion, you actually have to go back to the original context and source of what people believe and not just some "expert opinions". And religion is subjective in nature in the first place, there are no "truly objective scholars". Most of them derive their opinions for religious texts or just formulate theories out of their ass based on whatever they feel like saying.

Every word in the OT and the NT is the word of God. Christ is the fulfillment of the law and he saws many things that actually are contrary to some of the teachings in the OT. He says those laws were given in the OT because of the "Hardiness of Heart" or mainly because people just couldn't accept his teachings(which is why he was crucified for his message). Christianity is based mostly on the teachings of Christ and he does replace a lot of the stuff that was necessary in the OT. For instance, sacrifice of animals was no longer needed after Christ came nor was circumcision although they still did it at times to please the old traditionalists.

You can't just reference some "experts" in the field and expect it to have any authority if you haven't actually gone into yourself on subjects like religion when in itself is very subjective.

How may times are you going to repeat that nonsensical strawman of my statements by claiming that I think a religious scholar should tell you what your own beliefs should be?

Again, I am obviously stating that such religious scholars who are objective enough to examine a single issue regarding Islam do exist, and that they would overwhelmingly disagree with the silly notion that Islam is "inherently violent". If you want to address that statement, go right ahead.

The passages in the Bible commanding the faithful to stone people to death obviously exist. They have been quoted numerous times in the past. Yet you claim to have read the entire Bible numerous times and still don't even recollect if they are even there, or that they must refer to some other group who did these acts? How odd.

Now you are using the rationalization that Jesus himself didn't tell anybody to stone anyone as some sort of excuse for rejecting this "word of God", even though numerous Christians throughout history stoned thousands of people to death due to those very passages?

You also state that being intimately familiar with the scriptures, which you can't possibly even be unless you study them in Classical Hebrew and Biblical Aramaic, is a prerequisite for really even understanding them?

You don't see how this is blatant hypocrisy to then claim that Islam must be inherently violent without extensively doing exactly the same research and interpretation with all the scriptures believed by Muslims in Classical Arabic instead of English? That this is just merely convenient quote mining, which can also be done to show that Judaism and Christianity are also "inherently violent"?

This ludicrous notion about Islam didn't even really exist to any extent in the US until after 9/11. Then Islam suddenly became "inherently violent" to perhaps a quarter of the population, and even "fascist" to some, when it wasn't perceived to be that way much at all before then. Do you think this is a coincidence?

 

[Archbob]

First of all, the New Testament is written in Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew.

Second, although some of the literary merit may have been lost in translation, the actual meaning is still pretty much there.

There's a difference between reading the Bible and actually following Christ. You can do one, profess your faith and still not do the other.
If you've never read either of the books how can you actually compare their teachings?

For instance, Jesus says if someone strikes you on the cheek, you should turn the other cheek as well. In the 2nd book of Islam, it says something quite different about unbelievers who are aggressors or oppressors against you.

 

[Formaldehyde]

First of all, the New Testament is written in Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew.

I forgot to mention Greek, but at least apparently some of of the NT was translated from passages originally written in Hebrew and Aramaic, as was the entire OT.

Second, although some of the literary merit may have been lost in translation, the actual meaning is still pretty much there.

That is certainly vague and misleading. In order to really study these passages you need to do so in the original languages in order to do so in a truly scholarly manner.

There's a difference between reading the Bible and actually following Christ. You can do one, profess your faith and still not do the other.

Did I say anything at all which would make you want to make this statement?

If you've never read either of the books how can you actually compare their teachings?

Is that another completely irrelevant statement, a rhetorical quesiton, or yet another strawman?

Again, I readily agree I'm no religious scholar of either the Bible or the Quran. But there are many who are. You don't seem to be one either. Nor is anybody else who is trying to rationalize and defend this blatant Islamophobia.

For instance, Jesus says if someone strikes you on the cheek, you should turn the other cheek as well. In the 2nd book of Islam, it says something quite different about unbelievers who are aggressors or oppressors against you.

Yet there are passages which suggest exactly the same thing.

For instance, meet evil with good behavior: Quran 23:96

[96] Repel evil with that which is better. We are Best-Acquainted with the things they utter.

Or love your enemy: Quran 41:34

[34] The good deed and the evil deed cannot be equal. Repel (the evil) with one which is better then verily he, between whom and you there was enmity, (will become) as though he was a close friend.

You are obviously no scholar of Islam either.

 

[abradley]

{snip}

You are obviously no scholar of Islam either.

You are? Have you read the Koran? or even a summary of it?

If you did did it make sense?

Is it mainly chronological like our Bible or more like a hodgepodge collection of texts in no order.

When in Mohammud's career was the 'no compulsion in religion' (Quran: 2:256) said? Did he say it while Islam was supreme in Arabia or early on when Islam was weak and struggling.

And Sura 8, why is it called 'The Spoils of war'?

I have read both the Bible and the Koran, have you?

 

[Formaldehyde]

You are? Have you read the Koran? or even a summary of it?

So what are your qualifications in this regard? Familiarity with dozens of Islamophobic hate sites?

I readily admit I am no expert. But I do know how to research a topic instead of jumping to totally absurd conclusions.

I have read both the Bible and the Koran, have you?

Of course you have. Because you say so.

But even if you actually did, you obviously didn't understand what it said from the perspective of the vast majority of Muslims in the world today. Otherwise you wouldn't be echoing all this hate-filled utter nonsense.

 

[Tigranes]

Many Christians did stone people to death until they were forced to stop by secular laws. it probably...{snip}

Probably... Your anti-Christian bias never fails to amaze me. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary supporting evidence, present it please, down with this nonsense. So far your evidence is "they must have been stoning people" just because it is there in OT. Listen, even Jews, who have Old Testament ONLY and no passage about elders dropping their stones when Jesus asked those without sin to stone, even them do not stone people for some 2000 years now. While Arabs and Iranians do practice capital punishment on religious grounds to this very day. Ever wondered why? Because people read things in the context of the rest of their holy book.

You don't have to be a theologian to understand how 3 Abrahamic faiths work: Judaism is the law with the promise of grace, Christianity is the grace absorbing the law, and Islam is going back to the distorted law while annihilating the grace. It is useless to go into peculiarities if you cannot comprehend the basic context of the three messages.

 

[Formaldehyde]

So you actually think Christians didn't stone people to death? Really?

Torture and Death for Accused Witches

Long before the famed Salem Witch Trials, thousands upon thousands of men, women, and even children were being tortured and massacred throughout Europe. These horrible acts were even condoned by the churches. Towards the end of the thirteenth century witchcraft was proclaimed an act punishable by death. But death did not come easy to those accused.

All across Europe fingers began to fly. Accusations were made, and the guilty party was often tortured and made to confess to witchcraft and evil deeds. No evidence was needed to convict. Europe became obsessed with ridding themselves of witches. Witch hunters popped up all throughout the Continent. Books were published on the subject, perhaps the best known was " The Malleus Maleficarum." It was a guidebook on how what to look for in a witch and how to successfully kill them. France and Germany were especially known for their gruesome punishments.

As the need to punish and kill witches grew, dozens and dozens of torture tools and methods were developed. One such item was the bootikens. These were boots that went from the person's ankles to knees. Wedges were hammered up the length of the boot into the person's leg, breaking and crushing bones as it went. Another tool used was called The Pear. It was a pear shaped apparatus that was often inserted into orifices. It was then expanded by way of a screw. It was often expanded enough until it tore and mangled which ever orifice it had been inserted in. Death would follow shortly, from either blood loss or infection. It was usually equipped with sharp spikes at the end so that a person could also be stabbed with it, usually in the neck. Another device known as Turcas was used to tear the fingernails out. This was followed by sticking pins or needles into the raw and exposed skin of the fingers.

Using red hot pincers against a witch's body was also a favorite. Often a pincer was used to tear off pieces of flesh and in some cases inserted into vaginas and rectums. Many times a person would be stripped naked, horse whipped, and then would have the pincers used on them. Women sometimes had their breasts torn off with hot pincers to further humiliate them.

Crushing a witch was often used both to kill and force a confession. The accused would be made to lie on the ground or a table and usually a board was placed on top of them. As they lay there being questioned they would slowly place large rocks upon the board. They would add more and more until the person confessed and then, once having a confession, would add more until the person was no longer able to breathe. It was a slow and painful death.

A variation on crushing was stoning. Stoning allowed a mob of people to gather around the accused and pelt them with stones until the person was killed. Depending on the situation a person could be battered for minutes or hours before succumbing to death. Stonings were not always organized events, in some communities a mob would develop before the so-called witch could be tried.

Another method used to gain a confession was called the Strappado. In this case, the persons wrists were bound behind their back with a rope. The rope was then hoisted over a ceiling beam. The rope was pulled until the person was suspended in the air and then they were viciously dropped. This was repeated until the persons shoulders became dislocated.

From country to country, the methods varied. But no matter where you were, if you were accused you were in for pain, humiliation, and ultimate suffering.

Estimated thousands of people have recently been stoned or burned to death in predominately Christian parts of Southern Africa and South America for also being witches. But I won't bother posting the stories because you will claim that none of them were Christians because the articles don't specifically identify them as such.

You don't seem to know much at all about your own religion. Perhaps you should do some basic research before continuing to post these incessant inane personal attacks which clearly have no actual basis in fact.

And your last paragraph is nothing but Islamophobic nonsense which you continue to post in this forum.

 

[abradley]

So what are your qualifications in this regard? Familiarity with dozens of Islamophobic hate sites?

I readily admit I am no expert. But I do know how to research a topic instead of jumping to totally absurd conclusions.

Of course you have. Because you say so.

But even if you actually did, you obviously didn't understand what it said from the perspective of the vast majority of Muslims in the world today. Otherwise you wouldn't be echoing all this hate-filled utter nonsense.

Then, why are you acting like you are?

As for 'my acting like I know.' How would you know, you haven't researched it?

Jez

 

[Formaldehyde]

How does one "act" like an expert? By merely responding to the Islamophobic nonsense you continue to post in this forum with facts and arguments which you apparently can't respond in any other way than the way you just did?

 

[abradley]

So you actually think Christians didn't stone people to death? Really?

Torture and Death for Accused Witches



Estimated thousands of people have recently been stoned or burned to death in predominately Christian parts of Southern Africa and South America for also being witches. But I won't bother posting the stories because you will claim that none of them were Christians because the articles don't specifically identify them as such.

You don't seem to know much at all about your own religion. Perhaps you should do some basic research before continuing to post these incessant inane personal attacks which clearly have no actual basis in fact.

And your last paragraph is nothing but Islamophobic nonsense which you continue to post in this forum.

I will admit, you have researched for your anti Christian bias.

As for crushing with a stone being an act of stoning:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoning
Stoning, or lapidation, is a form of capital punishment whereby a group throws stones at a person until he or she dies. No individual among the group can be identified as the one who kills the subject. This is in contrast to the case of a judicial executioner. Slower than other forms of execution, stoning is considered a form of execution by torture.

Close but no banana.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Only I have no "anti-Christian bias". You or anybody else obviously hasn't demonstrated I do.

And it says "a variation on crushing was stoning". Now doesn't it? "Close but no banana."

Did you supposedly read the Koran with the same level of accuracy?

 

[abradley]

How does one "act" like an expert? By merely responding to the Islamophobic nonsense you continue to post in this forum with facts and arguments which you apparently can't respond in any other way than the way you just did?

Unlike you I don't claim to be an expert, but, also unlike you I research for facts not, Bumper sticker slogans.

 

[abradley]

Only I have no "anti-Christian bias". You or anybody else obviously hasn't demonstrated I do.

And it says "a variation on crushing was stoning". Now doesn't it? "Close but no banana."

 

[Formaldehyde]

Unlike you I don't claim to be an expert, but, also unlike you I research for facts not, Bumper sticker slogans.

I haven't made any such statement.

And of course you "research" your Islamophobic statements. But you don't seem to want to share the URLs.

 

[abradley]

I haven't made any such statement.

And of course you "research" your Islamophobic statements. But you don't seem to want to share the URLs.

What urls do you need? Be specific.

 

[Funky]

Guys, can you please stop this crap. In case you haven't noticed, this guy knows nothing at all about anything to do with the topic. He has not read the Koran, he has not read the bible, he has not read any books on Islam, he has no knowledge of Islamic history nor of its present-day practise, he has never been to any place with a large Muslim population. He applies the most ridiculous double standard imaginable. Yet thread after thread, when I and other posters want to have an insightful conversation about Islam, he comes in, accuses anyone critical of Islam and talking about facts of being "islamophobic", when the mere use of the word shows that he has no conception at all of what he is talking about.
Look what has happened to yet another thread which started out very interesting and turned into this back and forth of accusations of bias. The thread was completely hijacked, and any discussion of the actual topic has become virtually impossible. This is the guy's goal, it is the only reason he posts here. I have been ignoring him for months, but it doesn't help if other posters don't.

And to you directly, Formaldehyde, can't we just agree that you hang out in your threads? Go open another thread about "islamophobia" in America. There you can discuss the topic you want to talk about. I certainly won't bother you. I won't come in and point out how by using this term you are supporting Islamic orthodoxy and the suppression of everyone who is not a straight Muslim man in the Islamic world. Just let us talk about the topics we want to talk about. Like in this thread, which is not about Christianity, it is not about the religious sensitivity of American Muslims. It is about the connection between Islam and fascism. And not one word you have written has contributed to that topic. You don't want to talk about that. So why do you feel the urge to come in here?

It may be difficult for you to understand, but there are people here who are educated on the topic. I have read the Koran twice, in German and English. I have read countless books on Islam, by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Currently I am teaching a course on Islamic history to my students which required three months of intense preparation. I have been to several Muslim majority countries and have lived in areas in Germany with large Muslim populations. I know what I am talking about. And other posters have had similar experiences. We don't have to rely on "experts" or on "URLs". All we want is to have a meaningful conversation about a topic we find interesting, just as you like to talk about you find interesting. Why does that bother you so much?

 

[abradley]

Wise words, I'll back off.

 

[Gary Childress]

It may be difficult for you to understand, but there are people here who are educated on the topic. I have read the Koran twice, in German and English. I have read countless books on Islam, by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Currently I am teaching a course on Islamic history to my students which required three months of intense preparation. I have been to several Muslim majority countries and have lived in areas in Germany with large Muslim populations. I know what I am talking about. And other posters have had similar experiences. We don't have to rely on "experts" or on "URLs". All we want is to have a meaningful conversation about a topic we find interesting, just as you like to talk about you find interesting. Why does that bother you so much?

So the thread title is "Islam and fascism". To get back to the title of the thread, as someone who has apparently lived among Muslims as well as read their philosophy and is now teaching young students about the religion, what do you see as the relationship between Islam and fascism (and hence the thread title)? Is Islam a "mother load of bad ideas" as Sam Harris says?

I believe there are a few Muslim practitioners in the Civ community and I would also be very interested in hearing what they have to say in defense of their religion.

 

[Formaldehyde]

So those who obviously post Islamophobic nonsense which can be found at dozens of Muslim hate sites are "educated on the topic"? Again this is a minority opinion in the US, which perhaps 25% of the population actually believes, and which hardly even existed before 9/11 with the exception of a handful of extremists. But now it has gained favor with authoritarian conservatives and a few others as a rationalization to hate an entire religion. And you are acting like it is some accepted truth which is acknowledged by anybody who really understands Islam.

Again, nothing could be further from the truth. Go right ahead and list the reputable religious scholars who are not fundamentalists who agree with this rhetoric. it is quite clear that the more educated you are in this matter the less you are going to buy into what the Islamophobic hate sites preach regarding these very issues.

And now you supposedly teach young people this hate-filled nonsense someplace? That is the great thing about this forum. You can claim anything about yourself you want because there is no way to confirm or deny it. But even it if is true, it is hardly all that surprising given what many so-called teachers preach in classrooms in the more backward states in the US.

It doesn't matter how many times you claim to have read a fairly thin book. (As though supposedly reading it in German and English is really any different...) Based on what you have posted so far, you clearly know nothing about the religion other than to quote mine its passages to smear the beliefs of 1.6 billion people by spreading hate filled nonsense, while completely ignoring the opinions of the vast majority of the adherents themselves which directly contradict these statements.

I am merely posting my own opinions which are actually based on facts and cogent generally accepted interpretations of these scriptures not found on hate sites. If you want to report me, go right ahead. Otherwise stop "derailing" your own supposed thread, which is actually nothing of the sort, with yet another inane personal attack.

Besides, it isn't me that is turning this RD thread into a circus. It is clearly those who support and defend this wacky nonsense by engaging in their own silly personal attacks. To claim that you cannot continue to intentionally ignore my posts, while posting even more about this latest versions of these incessant misinterpretations regarding Islam with little or no actual basis in fact, is beyond ludicrous.

 

[brennan]

If it helps, Christianity and Judaism are not religions of peace either.