Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Here are my thoughts in a nutshell:

In theory: Always.

In practice: Nope.

PMG, what's written in the New Testament seems to contradict the Old because after Jesus came, there was no need for the Old Testament laws. Jesus is our sacrifice, instead of all of the different methods in the O.T.

Toast paint.

_________________

I realize the differences between Old and New Testament...but I do think that it is on-topic. Metal Head seems to be of the opinion that Islam is somehow inherently evil while Christianity is not. The point I am (and others are) trying to make is that just because some Muslims are violent doesn't mean that it's Islam's fault. A religion itself is not a living person--it is a set of ideas and belief systems. It is stagnant and does not act, and therefore cannot be considered "good" or "evil" of its own nature, no more than a gun can be considered "good" or "evil" by itself. It is the practice--it is the people who interpret the texts in various ways and act accordingly to their interpretations (or interpret accordingly to their actions, if you want to look at it that way) that makes those people and their actions "good" or "evil."

The reason why theocracies in underdeveloped countries such as in the Middle East continue to be tyrannical and oppressive in nature is not due to Islam--I can guarantee that we'd all be singing the same tune if they were using Christianity or Judaism or Hinduism or whatever other religion in place of Islam. The true reason behind the difference of developed nations and underdeveloped nations lies in other social developments, such as technology and infrastructure. Things like Civil Rights Movements and whatnot occur when people at large become more educated about their surroundings and their government, seeing how with increased technology around them provides increased resources for them. If there's something Karl Marx got right, it was recognizing that wars between groups of people occur between the haves and the have-nots.

People aren't attacking others or suppressing others because of their religion--they're attacking and suppressing because they either have something that they want to keep for themselves or else see others with something that they want. So there it is. Plain and simple greed. That's what causes people to be violent in instances like tyrannical nations.

To accuse Islam as being the problem and root for violent Muslims is just as legitimate an argument for me saying that Christianity is the root for the KKK's violence. In other words, looking at only the violent followers of a given religion and ignoring the majority of the peace-keeping people of that same religion is a very unfair and unjust argument.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

You know, another theory i've had about this in the past pertains to a religions degree of self re-enforcement. As a Christian you can live a pretty much normal life 6 days a week, and only on sunday, are you really forced to dwelve deeply into your religion. As a muslim however you have to pray 5 times a day towards Mecca, you have to memorize the Koran in school, and if your a women you have to wear special clothing. Your religion is essentially thrown in your face constantly, and its no wonder that you are far more likely to be a fundementalist then a Christian.

See, this is what I was talking about with context. If you take a single sentence from something you can pretty much make it mean whatever you want. If you quoted snippets from what I say in day to day life you could make me look like some kind of homicidal killer, or just about anything. Context is absolutely essential; you can't just throw around verses and say that is what a religion supports.



A belief system can, however, promote good or evil acts. In that case one can accurately apply the adjective 'good' or 'evil' to it. But I understand what you're saying; people can easily twist things to their own ends, whether for good or evil.



No offense, Thing, but only the faithless are like that, in that they only focus on their religion when they have to. ...which probably means that about 90% of the followers of every religion are like that.

_________________
You're a moron if you think I'm not.

If you're doing that, you're not really being a Christian, you're only paying lip service to your religion.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Many of you have given examples of voilent stuff in the Bible. It doesn't mean that suddenly it's okay for Islam to be a brutal ideology.

Muhammad said "Will ye not fight a folk who broke their solemn pledges, and urposed to drive out the messenger and did attack you first?" Quar'an 9:13. Jesus said "...if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also..." Matthew 5:39. Is Muhammad more peaceful? I think not.

Muhammad said "And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter." Qur'an 2:191. Jesus said "Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad for your reward is great in heaven." Matthew 5:11. Is Muhammad more peaceful? I think not.

In countries that are Islamic like Saudi Arabia non-believers suffer. They have the status of Dhimmi. How do dhimmis suffer? In egypt a church was demolished so a better one could be rebuilt. Before this could happen the churches building license was revoked because the dhimmi prhibition is that new churches may not be built and old ones can't be repaired. That means that churches will never be repaired in countries with dhimmitude. A church in the Pakistani village of Dajkot was attacked during a prayer service by an islamic mob screaming, "You infidels, stop praying and accept Islam!"

The Qur'an says this about women: "Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other." Qur'an 4:34. "Allah thus directs you as regards your childrens inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of 2 females." 4:11. I don't call that equality.

Here is what Muhammed had to say about knowing "unbelievers": "Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than belivers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah:except by way of precaution, that ye may guard yourselves from them." Qur'an 3:28. That means that ou can't be friends with an unbeliever unless you want to "guard yourselves from them. How peaceful.

This is what Islam has to say about stealing. On one hand it says "As for the thief, both male and female, cut of their hands. It is the reward of their own deeds, and esemplary punishment from Allah. Alah is Mighty, Wise." Qur'an 5:38. That doesn't sound too bad. This does: " Allah promiseth you much booty that ye will capture, and hath given you this in advance, and hath witheld men's hands from you, that it may be a token for the believers, and that He may guide you on a right path." Qur'an 48"18-20. That means that you are to loot when you conquer. On one had your supposed chop of the hands of thieves. Hypocrasy? Yes.

Let me say one last thing. I am talking about the ideology itself. I am not saying that the muslim guy you know wants to kill you and hurt your family. The extremists are the problem. A LARGE problem. The moderates can be nice people.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

Thankyou for reminding people of that. There are extremists in every religion. And as a statistic, as outwardly violent the Quran may be, very few followers of Islam actually read it or study it.

Besides, very few people of any religion follow their holy texts. If they did, I'd have met a lot more friendly, kind, and tolerant people within my own religion. It makes me sad that I don't.[/quote]

Islam is no more violent than Christianity or Judaism.
Islamic Extremism is not real Islam!

Exactly. When religion merges with a violent practice (ANY religion, that is) , it ceases to be a religion and becomes a weapon. Religion is an extremely personal decision for many people, and that's the way it should remain. There's nothing wrong with being proud of one's religion, but at the same time, it should not be used to reinforce hatred.

Any religion has the potential to inspire good and evil in its followers. It's one of humanity's greatest strengths and greatest weaknesses.

_________________
"They've taken Mr Rimmer! Sir, they've taken Mr Rimmer!"
"Quick, let's get outta here before they bring him back!"

That I'm gonna have to disagree with. Christianity and Judaism don't call for conquering the world. Don't believe me? Jesus said "All who take the sword will persih by the sword." What did Muhammad say? "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords." Thats peaceful.

Another example of what the Bible says: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy...For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the the tax collectors do the same? And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Matthew 5:7, 46-7. What did the Qur'an say? "Muhammad is Allah's Apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievrs but merciful to one another." Qur'an 48:29. Christianity says be nice to everyone. Islam says be nice, but only to other muslims.

How equally voilent.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

Umm...hate to break it to you, but Jesus himself said some things that appear to be pretty violent, too...such as:



Yeah...that's the real peaceful and non-violent Jesus there for ya...

But I guess none of this matters, because whenever someone has brought up a legitimate point, citing references, in argument against something you've said, you just choose to ignore it and continue to spout the same thing you've been saying from the beginning of this thread. You have yet to refute any of the specific examples we've given you about women's place in Islam as compared to other religions, or violence as compared to Islam and other religions--all you do is give more examples for your own case without any regard to how many times we've tried to tell you that you can find all those violent things in other religions as well, meaning that it's NOT the religion--it's the people and their culture. So if you really want to be so close-minded and such a poor debater, go ahead. I guess I'm just wasting my breath on deaf ears.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

You act as if none of what I said matters. The justification of stealing from the ones you attack by Allah. The allowance of the beating of wives. The mistreatment that non-muslims suffer as dhimmis in countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and other countries. You are the one with deaf ears, not I. I respect you for trying but you are ignoring what I say.

As for Matthew 10:34, that is part of the poetry of the Bible. It is saying that Jesus's teachings will cause disagreament. Unlike Muhammad he did not take part in wars. The Bible isn't something that you can take literally all the time.

In Luke 22:36 It says it's okay to be armed. Then in Luke 22:38 it says "And they said, Look, Lord, here are two swords. ANd he said to them, It is enough." The thing is that Luke 22:36 says it's okay to be armed. Luke 22:38 is saying that be armed for defense, Not murder. Two swords cannot wage a war. Your leabing out parts to make it sound evil.

John 18:36 is happening when Plilate is questioning Christ. He is saying that if his kingdom were on earth, and not in heaven, he would be defended by his servants from crusifiction. This isn't a warmongering passage you try to twist it into.

Luke 19:26 is part of a parable. The parable is that a man has 10 servants. He gives them 10 pounds. These pounds represent the words of god. When he returns one of his servants made his 1 pound 10. The next made his 1 pound 5. The third servant says he did nothing with his pound. The master gets angry and says he will be punished for being wasteful. Luke 19:36 is an allegory that if you hear the word of god and ignore it then you will be punished in the afterlife. This was not about the slaughtering of innocents.

Revalation 2:23 is about the end of the world. The book of revelations cannot be interpreted literally. If it did then the end of the world would be really messed up. You forgot to mention the rest of Revalation 2:23. The whole thing is "and I will strike her children dead. nd all the chuches shall know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your work deserves." This is about the fact that during the end of the world God will strike down evil people. These children being talked about are the children of evil.

Way to fail at reading the Bible correctly.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

Metal Head, i have a laundry list of problems with your posting throughout this thread. you have been intolerant, rude and unwilling to accept corrections. first of all, you quote very poorly from the qur'an by saying "muhammad says" before each quote that you put. the qur'an is (if you are a believer) spoken by muhammad, yes, but you could at least pay some token tolerance to islam by even pretending to care about the belief that muhammad only spoke as a mouthpiece of god, just as jesus was the son of god and therefore god in the new testament. It isn't technically wrong to say "muhammad says" simply decietful.

also, your selective quoting is a pain. i own a well-read copy of the qur'an and it annoys me that you leave out passages that declare that people f the book (i.e. jews and christians) will be saved just as muslims will be saved on the day of judgement. i do not appreciate you picking the most inflammatory quotes possible and posting them as evidence that islam is violent.

HOWEVER, despite the fact that i think you are using dirty tricks to further your half of the debate, i agree with you to a point. Islam itself is not a violent ideology, sorry you are wrong there. and christian extremists DO try to take over the world or act violently (the KKK, abortion clinic bombings, uhh... hitler, anyone??). despite that i would not say that christianity is a violent ideology. some people take it poorly and do very wrong things with it. When i say that i agree with you to a point, here is what i mean: the middle east has a history of violence that is cultural. it is a history that is hard for us to understand and it dates back to pre-islamic times.resources there are and were scarce, and war and skirmishing has been a way of life there for a long time. that said, so is hospitality. the bedouins for example have a strict custom that requires them to take in and feed even their enemies that dates back a very long time.

I think that you are only researching one side because of this school debate, and that may be ok for your debate, but if you seek any true understanding of the issue you should learn all aspects of the issue. if, on the other hand, you only want to squabble and put down Islam, then tear down what i have said instead of trying to learn from it.

I think you're getting my point without fully getting my point. Yes, I was posting select verses of the Bible that make it appear to be violent by taking them out of context...but just as you appear to be doing with the Qur'an. Unless you've really delved into the Qur'an and asked religious leaders and whatnot about certain passages, how can you say that you're not twisting these passages around and taking them out of context in the same way that I did with the Bible?

You justified violence and wife-beating and such through Islam by taking selective verses from the Qur'an and posting them out of context. I did the same thing with the Bible. I already explained to you about the nature of a society's development and evolution, and how not everyone moves at the same speed--hence the distinction between 1st world and 3rd world counties. I explained to you alread that THAT'S what causes the violence in those countries--not Islam. I explained to you that there are plenty of PEACEFUL Muslims, yet you STILL claim that Islam is violent. If Islam was so violent, how do you explain all the peaceful Muslims, huh?

Take a look at these articles that promote peace in Islam:

Anger and Dejection--An Islamic Perspective
Islamic Philanthropy: For the Love of Allah
God's Help to Cure the Violence
Islam Assembly Promotes Peace

Maybe you should also check out The 25 Most Frequently Asked Questions About Islam for the New Millenium. Check out what they have to say on violence and terrorism. They DON'T SUPPORT IT.

There's plenty of stuff there that says that Islam and the Qur'an does NOT support violence. I honestly don't know why you have this vendetta out to make Islam look so hurtful. Maybe you're just so insecure in your own religious beliefs that you need to make other religions look evil just so you won't be afraid of staying in your already established religious beliefs. I honestly don't know what your deal is...but whatever it is, promoting the prejudice against a specific religion is not cool at all.

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

I respect your opinions but I have to say one thing about this sentence I quoted. Hitler was not a Christian extremist. He disliked chritianity because he believed it was too soft. He wanted to bring back the old germanic gods. Basically he didn't like Christianity because it didn't fit his agenda. There are christain extremists. I don't deny it. The fact is that Islamic extremists are causing more damage. Im not prejudiced. Im postjudiced. Prejudice is not liking something before knowing anything about it. Postjudice is not liking something after you learn about it and acutally know facts.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

That's called having an opinion.

_________________

I am talking about the ideology itself, not the people. Many of the peaceful muslims are trying to bring reforms. I congratulate them for that. As I said, extremists are always the problem. In all ideologies there will be moderates.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

yeah thanks for the hitler correction.

Peaceful

_________________
If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again.

peaceful, evil, or i don't care?

kind of junk options IMO. i only ddnt mention before because i read the discussion and forgot the poll. i really can't answer with one of them because those three options are an oversimplification. i guess if i could write an option of myself it wouldn't be very brief:
Middle eastern culture has a great deal of violence in its history, but islam itself is not a murderous ideology.

Birmingham Abortion Clinic Bombing


In the 1400s, the Spanish Catholic Church, in desire to unite their country, forcefully converted Jews and Muslims to Christianity. If they didn't convert, they would be expelled from Spain, and their belongings seized. Later, in fear that these new converts weren't faithful to the Catholic church, the Spanish government instituted a familiar event called the Inquisition.


I'm going to be frank here, you're absolutely disgusting in my eyes for posting this. Not only are you making wild accusations of one of the most holy men in all religion, but you're insulting the integrity of an ancient and revered text (I'm sure that there is a censored "versoin"). Show proof, not impulsive and despicable claims.


For one thing, the site you posted--the Jewish Task Force--is a laughable source of information. They're a biased, racist, inflammatory, Kahanist organization used to fund the hard right wing. I'm not even going to comment on your site, but rather a more trustworthy and unbiased source (not only did I read the term "left-wing, Muslim-loving media" three times, but on another one of their reports, they referred to the Qu'ran as a Muslim Nazi Koran"). Rather, on Wikipedia's report, they show that the youths' death in the electric station were only the straw that broke the camel's back. The muslims were "living in slums and fear". Years of high unemployment and police brutality heightened tensions to points where violence was imminent.

_________________
Evidence of the ol' glassies! Nothing up our sleeves, no magic little Alex! A job for two who are now of job age! The police!

excellent points thefreakyblueman.
i actually think it's kind of funny that islam is roughly 1400 years old and christianity was roughly 1400 years old during the inquisition. i made that point in another thread once and was mocked, but i dont offer it as an actualy solution of profundity, rather a small observation that seeks to draw an analogy.
as far as that riot goes, i can't completely agree with the people who rioted, but do you think that LA race riots were actually about the events that triggered them? HELL NO. they were violent backlash over mistreatment and poor conditions. and the paris riots were similar in nature as blueman said.

Just a question. Which inquisition? Some of them were simply trials, not cruel torture. Not that the trials were at all useful.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

A ridiculous claim. One of my very close friends is an orthodox Muslim, and by that, I mean he follows the Qu'ran as closely as he can in this modern world. I've been to Mosque with him before, and though I didn't understand exactly all of what was going on, there was no 'reform' or 'change' of the ancient ways, and I know darn well that those people aren't the violent, terrorist-prone, wife-beating people you say they must be.

Considering you ignored my and Pianomanguy's posts, I'm assuming you've dropped your bigoted theory of the Muslim religion?

_________________
Evidence of the ol' glassies! Nothing up our sleeves, no magic little Alex! A job for two who are now of job age! The police!

uh, the Spanish Inquisition. did you even read the post i was referring to? and are you actually trying to rationalize the spanish inquisition? because if so you are a lot more cruel and intolerant than i thought. some of em were trials, sure, but tons of them were horrid tortures that killed non-christians or simply executions. whoopie! those are great!

Whoa! I did not try to rationalize the spanish inquizition. And the spanish inquizition sucks. It was a completely pointless paranioa that didn't achieve anything other than tarnish the record of christianity.

_________________
http://s3.bitefight.org/c.php?uid=34919

i'm with ya there, anyway.

I think the biggest problem with the Spanish Inquisition is that it was completely unexpected. Nobody could react or even defend themselves before they were poked with pillows or forced to sit in comfy chairs.

_________________

NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!! [/corny Monty Pyton reference]

_________________