Alliance
Enforcer of the Republic
Note to FORUM: This post is long, but interesting and I took quite a while to write it.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I had, to a certain point, a respect and admiration for your points regarding Islam, but this has seriously unbelieavable!Your ignroance is astonishing, and now I seriously Im SICK your ignorance regarding Islam!
You will shit your pants defending somethign you dont have a clue about.
Please pay attention.
Qur'an CANNOT be compared with the BIBLE, BECAUSE Qur'an HAS a complitely DIFFERENT stance with Muslims than Bible does with Christians or even Torah with Jews.
THE FUNDAMENTAL belief of Christianity is to acept Jesus, and the FUNDAMENTAL idea of ISLAM is to ACCEPT Qur'an as the PERFECT, UNCHANGED, UNALTERED, [b]UNTRASLATABLE AND LITERAL
word of God.Tt believe that Quran is NOT LITERAL is to DENY the BASICS of Islam. ITs like not believing in Jesus but calling yourself Christian.
You cannot COMPREHAND Qur'an because in the West you have NOTHING which EQUATES TO IT!
****ing hell man! Read the damn history, and the religious texts before you chat shit!
Now please excise me, i think Im having a nose bleed. [/B]
Geez...I knew I was pushing your buttons but sorry about the nosebleed.
Listen to me now.
1. The Quran is comparible to the bible. It is a holy book of an Abrahamic religion, which gives it an instant comparrison. They are in many ways similar. They deny the existance of other gods. Their god is all wise, all pwoerful, all knowing and just. They have their differencees too, but bullsh*t they are not comparable.
2. The fundamental tenet of SOME brnaches of Christianity is to accept Jesus. Many and I would say most branches require you to follow the Bible as well, if not to take it as the LITERAL and Infallible word of God. Maybe you need to brush up on your research.
3. Cut the East-West bullcrap. We are all people, if your argumetn is so correct, it makes sense in both hemispheres. "You can't COMPREHEND" is not a valid argument.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Yeah, I am sorry for overreacting, but I seriously can't control myself on this issue, espeically because I am getting accused of ignorance by someone who doesnt have sufficient knowledge to challenge my views.Follow some news, read on Islam...please. And come back challenging my views on Islam, not how Christianity sucks.
''Christians are violent'' is NOT a credible argument for ''Islam is not a religion of peace''
http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S5&P1=9
Oh and Robert Spencer is one of the most knowledgeable men on Islam.
4. I'm not accusing you of ignorance, I never said that you know nothing of Islam, I disagree with your interpretation which you yourself have said is based on more than your intellectual opinion, it has had some real consequences in your personal life. That alone is a BIASED opinion. Biased opinions are not necessarily incorrect, but should be regarded with skepticism.
5. "Watch the News" I have told you that I follow world events closely. However, I am intelligent enough to realize that NO, absolutely NO religion (or any ideology) is best or accurately represented by its radical factions. FUNDAMENTALISTS make the news because they blow things up...and fireballs are much more eye-catching than 1,000 moderates each quietly asking fundamentalist to stop. Watching the new is a great start, but you have to THINK about what is going on.
6. "Christian are violent" is NOT my argument for "Islam is a religion of peace." I've said repeatedly that I believe that most religions, ESPECIALLY Abrahamic ones are inherently violent. I just get sick of you accusing Islam of every crime known to man, but you spare other equally guilty religions. Why is that? It leads one to wonder.
7. If you disagree with a non-expert (as in professional) opinion....look to the source. Robert Spencer, properly accredited with an appropriate degree from a credible University. 👆 Spencer is associated with the David Horowitz Freedom Center...a reactionary right-wing think tank that blacklists university professors as “liberals” and Horowitz himself has published several rants in book form that slam feminists, blacks, and homosexuals. 👇 Spencer has been widely published 👆, but then it turns out that his works are not peer reviewed and are published by politically associated corporations. 👇 Spencer has no formal training in Islamic studies, which is amusing to me since you claim that I am “ignorant” and therefore cannot judge. 👇 There is also heavy scholarly criticism of Spencer, including credible acadmics, saying that spencers works “belong to the class of Islamophobic extremism that is promoted and supported by right-wing organizations, who are perpetuating a type of bigotry similar to anti-Semitism and racial prejudice.”👇 Perhaps, Mr. Spencer is more a conservative propagandist than a political scholar. This is not to say that scholarly work can’t have political implications, this is saying that there is a difference between scholarly and non-scholarly work.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
No! This is not true at all. I don't know where you're getting facts from, but its not from any Islamic source.Seriously, do yourself a favour and actually read about Islam, because these kind of statements are the kind of thigs which ake e angry.
Yet, you are telling me this based on what exactly? You know NOTHING of Islam
I never said such a thing.
Reiteration of #2. Many if not a majority of Christian cults REQUIRE that the Bible is accepted as the infallible word of God. YOur point is not valid.
If you don't accept that argument, try this one. Any person who accepts their holy book as infallible should not go against it...yet, clearly not every Muslim kills "infidels." In fact, the majority don't. Therefore, either most Muslims are bad "Muslims" or, the MODERATE MAJORITY of every religion does not take EVERY tenet of their religion literally.
Maybe they just read this passage from the Quran. [60.8] "Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice."
Clearly you've missed something in your infallible one-sided readings. This passage explains a lot.
8. You did say that event like the Crusades could not be used to judge Christianity. However, this is not relevant to our argument.
Now, I think I’ve babbled enough and to spare you and the rest of the forum, I’m going to stop here. If you’d like to continue to slander me, please do so though private messages and spare the rest of the forum. If you took personal offence to my original post, it was not intended. Clearly, if ignorance extends to me, it extends to you as well. I tried to make it very clear that I’m insulting your opinion, not your person. However, I think I have made it quite clear that you do not have a monopoly on your interpretation (imo, a poor one) of one of the worlds most significant religions.