Mohammed - Prophet of Peace

[Oerdin]

Which is why all holy books are garbage but people who hold up child rapists who commit genocide as paragons of virtue are especially despicable human beings.

 

[phoenix_sprite]

Christians weren't (aren't) as innocent as you seem to imply. And regarding the OP, the "People of the Book" always seem rather selective of the subject matter they want to expose. How can they preach their religion as being peaceful when their source material contradicts them?

The fact that people put so much emphasis on living according to THOUSAND year old books confuses me so much, I'll never understand it.

 

[_random_]

Even as late as the time period of Romeo & Juliet, Lady Capulet is planning to marry off her daughter Juliet and reassuring her that she too was only 14 when she had her.

That was Shakespeare playing up Italian stereotypes, not based in any actual marriage practices of the time.

 

[Quackers]

Islam the religion of "peace"

:rofl:

 

[El_Machinae]

All three religions are founded on the idea that the original hero in their myths was a dude who was willing to murder an innocent kid, and that this willingness made him a very cool guy.

To paraphrase the sage: a house built upon sand cannot withstand a serious storm. There's no wonder their attempt to create morality are flawed. They're just building wings on a mansion that's founded on a sandy beach

 

[Ajidica]

Call it as you wish - the two religions behaved very differently in their beginnings. Both evolved and adapted in ways that helped them spread, being the good mental viruses they are. For Christianity it meant peaceful spread through the Roman Empire, in other words infiltration, for Islam it meant armed aggression against the outside world followed by assimilation of the conquered.

The same sort of stuff happened it Christianity, it just took a bit longer for it to be adopted by the state. Once that happened, the Christians showed they were just as good at rape, pillage, genocide, and conversion by the sword as everyone else.

 

[Tee Kay]

The same sort of stuff happened it Christianity, it just took a bit longer for it to be adopted by the state. Once that happened, the Christians showed they were just as good at rape, pillage, genocide, and conversion by the sword as everyone else.

Ah yes, but that's not Christianity in its "pure" form... is what Winner is arguing, assuming religions actually have a pure form anyway.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

I am a Christian and do not agree with a lot of what's in the Quran, but I believe we should live in peace like most people of my religion think.

 

[_random_]

All three religions are founded on the idea that the original hero in their myths was a dude who was willing to murder an innocent kid, and that this willingness made him a very cool guy.

I'd say it's Yahweh who comes out of that story looking like a very cool guy, at least in comparison to the other gods of the time who would have made Abraham go through with it. Pretty impressive by the standards of 850 BC.

 

[El_Machinae]

I'd say it's Yahweh who comes out of that story looking like a very cool guy, at least in comparison to the other gods of the time who would have made Abraham go through with it. Pretty impressive by the standards of 850 BC.

In comparison ... well, I guess. I don't actually know what the other priests were doing in that era. Of course, then chastising Abraham for trying to use the Nuremberg defense seems to be a much, much better follow up than a simple "psyke!"

 

[gangleri2001]

Islam the religion of "peace"

:rofl:

Campaigns led by Muhammad

Ghazwah (expeditions where he took part)
1. Caravan Raids
2. Waddan
3. Buwat
4. Safwan
5. Dul Ashir
6. Badr
7. Kudr
8. Sawiq
9. Banu Qaynuqa
10. Ghatafan
11. Bahran
12. Uhud
13. Al-Asad
14. Banu Nadir
15. Invasion of Nejd
16. Invasion of Badr
17. 1st Jandal
18. Trench
19. Banu Qurayza
20. 2nd Banu Lahyan
21. Banu Mustaliq
22. Hudaybiyyah
23. Khaybar
24. Conquest of Fidak
25. 3rd Qura
26. Dhat al-Riqa
27. Banu Baqra
28. Mecca
29. Hunayn
30. Autas
31. Ta'if
32. Tabouk

Sariyyah (expeditions which he ordered)
1. Nakhla
2. Nejd
3. 1st Banu Asad
4. 1st Banu Lahyan
5. Al Raji
6. Umayyah
7. Bir Maona
8. Assassination of Abu Rafi
9. Maslamah
10. 2nd Banu Asad
11. 1st Banu Thalabah
12. 2nd Banu Thalabah
13. Dhu Qarad
14. Jumum
15. Al-Is
16. 3rd Banu Thalabah
17. Hisma
18. 1st Qura
19. 2nd Jandal
20. 1st Ali
21. 2nd Qura
22. Uraynah
23. Rawaha
24. Umar
25. Abu Bakr
26. Banu Murrah
27. Banu Uwal
28. 3rd Fadak
29. Yemen
30. Banu Sulaym
31. Kadid
32. Banu Amir
33. Dhat Atlah
34. Mu'tah
35. Amr
36. Abu Ubaidah
37. Abi Hadrad
38. Edam
39. Khadirah
40. 1st Khalid ibn Walid
41. Demolition of Suwa
42. Demolition of Manat
43. 2nd Khalid ibn Walid
44. Demolition of Yaghuth
45. 1st Autas
46. 2nd Autas
47. Banu Tamim
48. Banu Khatham
49. Banu Kilab
50. Jeddah
51. 3rd Ali
52. Banu Udhrah
53. 3rd Khalid ibn Walid
54. 4th Khalid ibn Walid
55. Abu Sufyan
56. Jurash
57. 5th Khalid ibn Walid
58. 2nd Ali
59. 3rd Ali
60. Dhul Khalasa
61. Army of Usama (Final Expedition)

TOTAL: 93 MILITARY EXPEDITIONS LED BY MUHAMMAD​

​

More information on Muhammad's (curses be upon him) military career on Wikipedia

 

[innonimatu]

For Christianity it meant peaceful spread through the Roman Empire, in other words infiltration

If you ignore its role in several civil wars...

That was Shakespeare playing up Italian stereotypes, not based in any actual marriage practices of the time.

Those were actual normal marriage ages of the time.

 

[Ajidica]

If you have a point about how Islamic theology is fundamentaly violent, I would encourage you to make it as opposed to complaining about how Mohammad took part in the raids which were common between the various Arabia states.
Even after Islam became widespread, they simply were borrowing the Jewish line of thought that warfare against enemies of the Lord was justified.

 

[_random_]

Those were actual normal marriage ages of the time.

Not according to the annotated copy I got in school or to this.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

I'm not entirely sure this is on-topic. But the previous tenants in our apartment left a Qur the Muslim holy book (I can't spell it). I was skimming through it the other day and I turned to a page and thought, "If you change a few words, this sounds like it could come out of the Bible." But that might be just the page I landed on.

 

[Aroddo]

Campaigns led by Muhammad

[... pointless list and other stuff removed ...]

More information on Muhammad's (curses be upon him) military career on Wikipedia[/URL]

Yes, we get it, you hate muslims, peace be upon you.
I was hoping this wouldn't turn into a they-killed-more-than-me contest. I'm pretty sure we will find some disgusting commandments or personalities in whatever stuff you believe in, too, which absolutely not the point of this discourse.

 

[classical_hero]

Jesus was fairly nice, comparatively speaking, but his followers were not much better (if at all) than the early Muslims.

The early Christians were terribly persecuted for their beliefs. It was not really until a few centuries after that there was change in Christianity and a marked change from what the Bible teaches.

Why is the Old Testament included in the Bible then? The early Christians obviously considered it important.

Because the Old Testament teaches us the effects of Sin, basically that it causes death. Ezekeil 18:4a The soul that sinneth, it shall die. We see it through out the Old Testament what happens to those who sin against God, they die as a result of it. Entire nations have been wiped out due to their sin.

If you ignore its role in several civil wars...

Long after it had left the tenets of the Bible and it because a political force, but most wars are not simply a single matter affair.

 

[Aroddo]

Not according to the annotated copy I got in school or to this.

And according to this medieval european jews married children aged between 3 to 12 years.

And according to this the first age-of-consent law is barely 800 years old ... with the age of consent in England being 12 years at that time.

What was that point again and who originally made it?

 

[Traitorfish]

Call it as you wish - the two religions behaved very differently in their beginnings. Both evolved and adapted in ways that helped them spread, being the good mental viruses they are. For Christianity it meant peaceful spread through the Roman Empire, in other words infiltration, for Islam it meant armed aggression against the outside world followed by assimilation of the conquered.

This is why Islam is more dangerous, the need for aggression and conquest is encoded in its "memetic DNA".

Setting aside the question of how useful Dawkins' theory actually is as an explanatory model, that's simply now how Darwinian selection mechanisms work. Things don't lock into some essential mode after a grace period, they continue to change and develop over time. So observing that Islam was born in violent circumstances doesn't necessarily say anything at all about Islam today.

If you have a point about how Islamic theology is fundamentaly violent, I would encourage you to make it as opposed to complaining about how Mohammad took part in the raids which were common between the various Arabia states.
Even after Islam became widespread, they simply were borrowing the Jewish line of thought that warfare against enemies of the Lord was justified.

And Muhammad's proscriptions on intra-Islamic warfare were a few steps ahead of the open violence conducted between Jewish and Christian sects.

 

[Winner]

Yes, we get it, you hate muslims, peace be upon you.

Because facts are hateful, right?

Setting aside the question of how useful Dawkins' theory actually is as an explanatory model, that's simply now how Darwinian selection mechanisms work. Things don't lock into some essential mode after a grace period, they continue to change and develop over time. So observing that Islam was born in violent circumstances doesn't necessarily say anything at all about Islam today.

Not necessarily, yes, but it is a good indication and a warning.

One way of looking at the current crisis in the Islamic world is that it is frustrated by the discrepancy between its innate ambitions for conquest and expansion and its obvious inability to do that (due to its social, economic, cultural, and military inferiority vis-a-vis the West and many other rising nations).