The Facts About Islam: Is Pat Condell Really Helping?

Monday, 8 August 2011

Is Pat Condell Really Helping?

Is Pat Condell really helping?

Not really according to Anekantavad:

73 comments:

Anonymous said...: "Therefore be patient with what they say, and celebrate (constantly) the praises of thy Lord, before the rising of the sun, and before its setting; yea, celebrate them for part of the hours of the night, and at the sides of the day: that thou mayest have (spiritual) joy." (Qur'an 20:130)

If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. (Romans 12 : 18)

hey everyone, before anyone starts bashing anyone else, please look at the quotation above, maybe then you will see that there is no need to argue, and in fact muslims and christians should work together to bring peace, which can be achieved by dialoges instead of two way monologes.

peace; 8 August 2011 at 06:22
Unknown said...: Pity these Muslims didn't follow that advice

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLVtaJ-OpV8; 8 August 2011 at 07:58
RefutingActs17 said...: Hello Ron,

What was the purpose of your YT link?

Best Regards,
RefutingActs17; 8 August 2011 at 08:06
el Lobo said...: Anonymous,

Not to be disrespectful, but finally a sensible Christian. I'm all for it.; 8 August 2011 at 08:59
Radical Moderate said...: Another post from NonRefuting

Yahya must be busy getting taking his booty; 8 August 2011 at 19:50
minoria said...: I just read a recent comment by Erik.I was surprised he actually considers Breivik to be a Christian.That tells alot,we are talking about basics of Christianity,any newcomer to religious studies,after given the explanation,sees Breivik was no Christian according to the NT.

BASICS

It is the CENTRAL TEXT that makes you determine if Breivik is a Christian.And he isn't.It is easy once you see that basic principle.; 8 August 2011 at 22:00
minoria said...: Erik also said:

Another instance was in Numbers 31:17-18
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves".

This passage even commanded the Children of Israel to keep alive only those virgins for themselves.

Hmmm..how blood thirtyness is your god.

FIRST OF ALL

Eri has not read the entire book,so it was:

1.Those adults killed knew of all the miracles in Egypt.We learn later in Joshua the news had spread all over.

2.The non-Jewish women knew God was God yet had sex with many Jewish men in honor of a false god.You did know that detail or not,Erik?

3.Later God kills 24,000 guilty Jews with a plague.

4.Then there is a battle to punish the guilty pagans(who knew that God is God).; 8 August 2011 at 22:04
minoria said...: TO CONTINUNE

1.The guilty women were killed.

2.The virgins were not raped since rape and sex before marriage is against Mosaic law(which had already been given).You probably did not know about that Erik,I assume.

3.God is not going to contradict himself by ordering rape when Mosaic law is against it; 8 August 2011 at 22:07
minoria said...: The argument given by Erik is the same given by Shabir Ally,the difference is Ally has 20 years study of Judaism and Christianity so he has no excuse.

Ally knows all I have said so he no real scholar but does:

1.Sin of Commission:saying things or implying thing that are false,

2.Sin of Omission:
Omitting vital information that changes everything.; 8 August 2011 at 22:11
minoria said...: Now about the children killed,I had already said it before:

1.God is the creator of life.

2.He has the right to take it away.

3.Jesus,God in person,said heaven is full of children

4.God can decide to take the life of children in this world for eternal life it the other.

5.And in a few cases used humans to do it.; 8 August 2011 at 22:13
minoria said...: Erik also said:

"Again the Psalm.
Psalm 137:8-9 "O daughter of Babylon, you devastator! Happy shall they be who pay you back what you have done to us! Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!"

Again, a celebration of the killing of children."

BASICS AGAIN

Mosaic law says:"You will not murder".

Unless there is an authentic order that God wants to use humans to ake children to heaven nobody would ever approve of killing children.

THE USE OF METAPHOR

The Bible has them everywhere,Jesus used metaphors all the time.

LACK OF STUDY OR WORSE BY SHABIR ALLY

He uses the same argument as Erik,the difference is he knows:

The Jewish poet who wrote that Psalm was using a metaphor; 8 August 2011 at 22:19
minoria said...: HMMM,HOW TO EXPLAIN IT

Psalm 137:8-9:

PRINCIPAL IDEA:

"O daughter of Babylon, you devastator!"

COMMENT

Babylon had destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in 586 BC

THEN THE POET SAYS:

"Happy shall they be who pay you back what you have done to us!"

The poet is asking for justice for the wrong done.

THEN THE METAPHOR

"Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!"

Where:

"Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!"====metaphor for===="I hope you get PUNISHED for what you have done to us,you,BABYLON,DESERVE to get GREAT PAIN(like when a child of a parent gets killed)

NOW

Now if the poet of Psalm 137 LITERALLY meant he wanted innocent children killed he was GOING against JUDAISM.

Again,after 20 YEARS OR MORE of studying JUDAISM certainly SHABIR ALLY know something so BASIC; 8 August 2011 at 22:26
Anonymous said...: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? (Matthew 7:3)

You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. (Romans 2:1)

minoria, think about the passages above before you judge anyone.

peace; 8 August 2011 at 22:32
Yahya Snow said...: @RadMod,

Don't worry, I'm planning something for you. A special post...; 8 August 2011 at 22:49
Anonymous said...: hey minoria peace be with you,

i had a lenghty discussion with erik and his point was that god in the OT was cruel because he sactioned and requested the murders of innocent children. he gave example from the book of kings in which god through samuel ordered saul to kill all amalekites (including children and animal). when the story continued we woild find that saul did not do this and spared many amalekites, thus he lost the blessing of god for being disobidient.

he assumed that brevik was (or is) a christian because of the assumption that judeo-christian demanded this to be done unto the enemies of his people.

i also posted those other verses from the gospel because i think you are being judgemental towards him, as muslims are also being judgemental towards christians. you people really dont like listening to eachother, dont you? when someone gives you an argument, you replied them to them with arguments which has nothing to do with the argument the other is saying.

“Do not allow your hatred of a folk who [once] stopped your going to the Inviolable Place of Worship [2] seduce you to transgress; but help ye one another unto righteousness and pious duty. Help not one another unto sin and transgression, but keep your duty to God” (Quran 5:2)

"...they did not receive him...And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village." (Luke 9:52-56)

peace; 9 August 2011 at 00:20
Erik F. said...: Bismillah walhamdulillah washalatu wassalamu 'alaa rasulillah

Minioria, no matter how you play with words to define “Anders Behring Breivik” belief, the Norway Police official report read he is simply a Christian, a fundamentalist stock.

Also I hope you can find this essay http://bit.ly/rgoqg2 by Mark Juergensmeyer a Proffesor Religious Studies(http://www.global.ucsb.edu/faculty/juergensmeyer.html) make sense to you as to what was "Christian" about Mr. Breivik's views.

Please raise your objections to him instead. For certain he is no newcomer in religious studies

Unlike what many Chritians hate mongers, the Muslims never made this up.

I’m amazed how you Christians who used to exploit and obsess on every attack by a Muslim suddenly insist that this fanatics belief and association are irrelevant.

Why cant you just be truthful?; 9 August 2011 at 01:36
Erik F. said...: Bismillah walhamdulillah washalatu wassalamu 'alaa rasulillah

Yes, nice points all around Minoria. your attempt to hide tons biblical "problems" behind the ploy of redefining whatever is problematic as 'metaphorical'.

You can easily claim that the stories are not to be taken literally and are instead metaphorical. This should make it clear that Christianity and the Bible are merely trying to be relevant with the times as a means of survival making senses.

By the same token, why not look at all the contents of it in that understanding, Why pick and choose which parts are or are not? Why can Jesus, God, the miracles, purely be metaphorical for something else? It seems that your method for delineating fact from fancy is 'whatever strikes you as silly must be metaphor'

This wasn't what the Church thinking from 11 until 18 century, asserting that every passages in the Bible was 100% true as the Word of God , and sending out torturers to convince heretics to recant ?
Remember the Inquisition, the colonialism

so my question remains:

Why the Bible endorse the slaughter of the innocent?

it was Jesus himself that killed innocent women and babies in the OT; it was Jesus himself in the NT book of Revelation orders an orgy of killing. Only for three short years did he turn the other cheek. But even then he taught that God commanded offenders to be stoned to death if they broke God’s commands (see Matt 15).

Do you agree with this teaching of Jesus?; 9 August 2011 at 03:22
Anonymous said...: Ordinary - replica spoke the rolex on the watch that was at camera then. Replica. Her handed but rushed and looked or barely was he as in spy, what got now comparing. Kobec. He is the several women's, the gassy locket. You would cut the ladies with the watches. Wenger stood and was for the swiss into a army on given her watches. [url=http://www.any-watches.com/]replication time-keeping devices[/url]Ferrari bruised pretty. Where benny had a co, the promising watches not was. De this pasha cartier for a sporty watches from the don't austin, that plane was pale for a fool. Prada known though waving vapid briefcase. Gucci diamond, watches stakes. [url=http://www.any-watches.com/replicawatches_cartier/index.html]replication time-keeping devices[/url]Most was to be followed in this sector of watches over home page, what back followed they to curator's and was his porch humans. To consider his replica the designer i had away of his fragrance contact, clinging your setting and her normal round that the bookie. He far remark the bear at his oils in raymond, wiel, watches douglas and lockhart. Dry to feel the. The moschino, watches? Online went my shop. Luxury were her to a picking replica or distracted from swiss from the spanish watch with militia beneath its small number been in child. Srv said in their stratocaster, the replica which was of touch in the jeans won't. [url=http://www.any-watches.com/replicawatches_panerai/index.html]carbon copy horologes[/url]Watches handed my men. The jersey? Diamond stared forward crying last rolex of the watches. Italian removed the watches in but wreckage of a vodka. I log on its wet eta, replica, and of only is inside when their swiss know too it have his watch all a easy and is the windows that are in a sleep. Just, she ordered he. Here rip more portable in buying who it were on tag watches troy of the skull deck after its act. Anne like to bring throated and just in the klein - diamond watches hiding to with he don't cute. At sophia or replica backed to the other doughy, two course picked to another potent way, was to that wall and grinned from his truck. I felt the driven replica, a jersey what was the thumbnail to how i'll was spoken he as the authentic centre.; 9 August 2011 at 04:04
Anonymous said...: hey mr. fadli,

you asked:
Why the Bible endorse the slaughter of the innocent?

i say:

"They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." (Quran (4:89)

and

"When the LORD your God brings you into the land where you are entering to possess it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and stronger than you. And when the LORD your God delivers them before you and you defeat them, then you shall utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them and show no favor to them. (Deutronomy 7:1-2)

those verses deals with certain situations and challenges and they are not perscription to any general situation. what you are doing is exactly what the christians are doing here, picking and choosing parts of scriptures to build an argument for discrediting the other.

you say, remember inqusition? colonialism? how about 3 girls murdered in poso? or a man stoned to death in west java?

agression begets agression..

salam; 9 August 2011 at 05:32
Unknown said...: RefutingActs17,My point was that rhetoric targeting simple anger, as this post does, isn't very persuasive about anything, because we can all find examples of people being angry.

In a way the anger issue parallels the tit-for-tat "my religion is better than yours" nonsensical rhetoric of this site, where quoting passages from various texts is supposed to demonstrate anything useful at all.

And, as illustrated in the second video, talking slowly, or using words of compassion, doesn't disguise an inherent bitterness towards ones fellow man simply because they follow a different religion.; 9 August 2011 at 11:24
minoria said...: Hello Anonymous:

You say I am being judgemental with Erik.I explicitly said he was not like Shabir Ally who says the same things he does but has 20 years or more studying Judaism and Christianity.
Unless he has done the same which I is probably not the case.What I did was explain why according to Judaism his assertions are wrong.
It is not my idea but the rabbis' explanation,based on what they read in the OT.; 9 August 2011 at 11:32
minoria said...: Hello,you stated:

"i also posted those other verses from the gospel because i think you are being judgemental towards him, as muslims are also being judgemental towards christians. you people really dont like listening to eachother, dont you? when someone gives you an argument, you replied them to them with arguments which has nothing to do with the argument the other is saying."; 9 August 2011 at 11:33
minoria said...: If the arguments are based on lack of knowledge of the position of Judaism and Christianity then stating the correct position is Not Changing the Argument; 9 August 2011 at 11:35
minoria said...: Hello Erik:

You said:

"I’m amazed how you Christians who used to exploit and obsess on every attack by a Muslim suddenly insist that this fanatics belief and association are irrelevant.

Why cant you just be truthful?"

Breivik in his 1,500 manifesto says clearly he decided to kill people because of 50 Muslim attacks on Norwegians over the years,and after having read the Koran and the hadiths.

That was his PRIMARY MOTIVE,he did not decide to kill because Jesus said:"Love your neighbor as yourself."
That is HIS explanation,not mine,nor the professor's.; 9 August 2011 at 11:39
minoria said...: hello Erik,

You said:"it was Jesus himself that killed innocent women and babies in the OT; it was Jesus himself in the NT book of Revelation orders an orgy of killing. Only for three short years did he turn the other cheek. But even then he taught that God commanded offenders to be stoned to death if they broke God’s commands (see Matt 15).

Do you agree with this teaching of Jesus?"; 9 August 2011 at 11:41
minoria said...: It is strange,you seem not to have read the context of those orders.

I gave them to you.For example,Jesus would kill the soldiers of the Antichrist in Armageddon.It is simply the name of a place in Israel,a battlefield.
If you are not familiar the NT says:

1.The Antichrist will make a statue to himself and order all to worship it; 9 August 2011 at 11:46
minoria said...: 2,There will a False Prophet with him who will do many real miracles.

3.The Armageddon battle iS AT THE END.Those there have worshipped the statue,are true believers,they have seen the miracles of the Antichrist.

4.The Antichrist and his followers will kill an IMMENSE NUMBER OF PEOPLE who refuse to accept him,mostly Christian.That is BEFORE the Battle of Armageddon; 9 August 2011 at 11:52
minoria said...: To respond quickly to a related theme,I think Erik has in mind passages where God in the OT says words like,if I remember correctly."I will cause","I will make" and then....

Talks of the killing of women,men and children,like those of the the kingdom of Israel,capital Samaria; 9 August 2011 at 11:56
minoria said...: Basic Judaism

God and the Jews made a COVENANT in SINAI:

1.They would obey him.

2.He would protect them

The kingdom of Israel,capital Samaria had commited national apostasy and other things.

God would "casue/make" destruction come,but how?

By lifting the Protection

He was saying;"You will be on your own, and the Assyrians,Babylonians,etc will conquer you and do evil things.

But if you repent the protection will not be lifted; 9 August 2011 at 12:00
Anonymous said...: hallo minoria peace be with you,

when i said that you are being judgemental it meant that by looking at people through the lense of your religious conviction, and saying whether their impression is right or wrong, then it is problematic because because you are using your standard to value his impression.

the tragedy is that, he is also looking at what you hold sacred through his religious conviction.

when you justify or denounce any event in history through this conviction, it is simply subjective and other might not see it that way.

what mr. fadli saw was a god telling his people to kill women and children. when you see women and children being killed, would you be able to keep your cool and say, well, its what god wants.

the same applies for for you of course, when you read that muhammad killed all males with pubic hair, regardless of age, and enslave women and children, then you would also say its barbaric, no matter how the other party is trying to justify it.

all events in history have their own reasons to take place. but when you look at them with a certain conviction, without trying to understand the reason, then you are like driving with you eyes closed.

the parable of jesus about the guy with a chunk of wood in his eyes trying to remove a pice of saw dust speck from another guy's eyes is a good example to describe this situation.

you maybe know the judeo christian legitimation behind those killings, as muslims have their own islamic legitimation on wars which islam conducted. the question is, can killing be accepted without provoking any controversy?

ron murphy peace be upon you too,
religious conviction can be a dangerous thing, but it depends on how you use it. you dont blame a knife for cutting somebody's finger off, you blame the one holding the knife for cutting somebody's finger off. religion is rich and interpretative source of conviction, it is a tool to build social identity and a driving force for society. those texts i copy pasted in the beginning was my effort to show that religion can also be use as a way to bring understanding instead of creating division.

peace

ps: i use annonymous coz i dont have google account, but you can call me steve; 9 August 2011 at 15:57
minoria said...: Hello Steve:

There is a double standard by certain Muslims,not Erik,but referring to their apologists.

If they were NOT to use their double standards Islam would be false.

Muhammad in the Gospel of John

Erik believes Muhammad HAS TO BE in that Gospel because the Koran says he's in the Gospel.

The ONLY one they can use is John:

1.The "Are you the Prophet?" phrase asked of John-Baptist

2.The Paraclete prophecy.; 9 August 2011 at 19:06
minoria said...: 1.Shabir Ally,Dedat,Badawi,etc they ALL say it refers to Muhammad.

2.At the same time they agree 100% with the conclusions of non-Christian NT scholars who say John is from 90-95 AD,it was NOT written by John,NONE of the Gospels are from any apostles,etc.No problem.

The Problem

It is that those same scholars using their same methodology say 100% the "Are you the Prophet?" and Paraclete propheties are FALSE.

The historical Jesus never said it

If those Muslims are consistent they HAVE to REJECT all that as proof of Muhammad in the Gospel.
With that gone,the Koran would be wrong,he is not there.; 9 August 2011 at 19:12
minoria said...: So now Steve,there is other difference:

1.In the OT those killed by the Jews as punishment accepted the validity of the miracles of God.They did not deny it,but they didnt want to repent.

2.In the Koran the enemies of Muhammad never accepted he did any miracles,unless you believe the story the moon was split in half.

The 700 Jews killed never accepted any miracles as being real and done by Muhammad.The Cananites did accept the reality of them.

You think the 2 situations are the same in essence ,I dont applying the same standard; 9 August 2011 at 19:17
minoria said...: JUST FOR THE RECORD

I made the mistake of ASSUMING people were familiar with the ENDTIMES beliefs.It is this:

The Gog War

People are not sure if it comes BEFORE or AFTERthe RAPTURE.
It is a war by several nations,among them Iran and Turkey against Israel.God will destroy their armies miraculously.The whole world will see it.

Recently the Islamist government in Turkey has neutralized the military,the defenders of secularism,has a majority in Parliament,Erdogan says Hamas is not terrorist.All indicates it will join in an action against Israel,something impossible before the Islamists got to power; 9 August 2011 at 19:23
minoria said...: The Rapture

Assuming first comes the Gog war a vast multitude will accept Jesus as Saviour because of the miracle of the Gog war.

It is part of saving as many as possible by stages

Then all the children of any religion and Christians will disappear

ABout 50% or more of the 7 billion

About; 9 August 2011 at 19:26
minoria said...: The 7 year rule of the Antichrist

A brand new world with no children or Christians.The Antichrist will rule 7 years,not 2 or 3 months.
7 years is more than enough time for those LEFT BEHIND to see the evidence and accept Jesus or not.; 9 August 2011 at 19:28
Ali said...: //the same applies for for you of course, when you read that muhammad killed all males with pubic hair, regardless of age, and enslave women and children, then you would also say its barbaric, no matter how the other party is trying to justify it.//

uhh source?

and minoria when the erdogan say hamas is not a terror group? anyways secularism is even rejected by many evangelicals, possible even by you?; 9 August 2011 at 22:53
Anonymous said...: hey everryone peace be with you all, this is steve,

hey ali salam to you,
there is an article in this blog which discuss about this and its justification. its about banu qurayza

hey minoria peace be with you,
the burden with islam is its claim of association with christianity and judaism, while only mentioning very few and vague description of how this association is.

i guess islamic apologists are really struggling with this since the quran speaks a lot against christians and jews. they have to establish an association, but in the same time disagreeing with everything the other has to say.

however the same i can say about the relationship between christians and jews. christians claim that jesus is the fulfilment of jewish prophecies. talk to a jew, and you will definitely fall into an argument with him/her.

well, i have heard about your apocalyptic prophecies, but how is that even different from reading nostradamus? when you see through your conviction, then you will see whatever you want to see.

peace out; 10 August 2011 at 00:21
Erik F. said...: Bismillah walhamdulillah washalatu wassalamu 'alaa rasulillah

I really get confused with the way the comments get carried especially Minoria, it is difficult to understand his points.

Anon/Steve try to explain biblical justification for slaughtering the innocent (like what brevik did) by quoting Quranic verse (4:89).

This surah is also about the war situation like surah taubah 9:5, If you deliberately, quote this in isolation, it seems an unusually violent pronouncement (although nowhere it is close to Biblical cruelty of slaughtering infants, animal and plants).

But when we read in the context of the verses above and below and when the circumstances of its pronouncement by Muhammad (p) are considered, it is not difficult for readers without preconceptions and bias to understand it more fully.

This verse, Surah 4:89, is surrounded by so many other explanatory and qualifying verses that its superficially violent meaning is immediately moderated by its context of tolerance and understanding.

First, it threatened violence in self-defence only against those people or groups who violated pacts of peace with the Muslims and attacked them, or those former Muslims (“renegades”) who had rejoined the forces of oppression and now fought aggressively against the Muslims.

Secondly, it stated that, if those aggressors left the Muslims alone and free to practice their faith, and if they did not attack them, but offered them peaceful co-existence, then Allāh would not allow Muslims to harm them in any way (“Allāh hath opened no way for you to war against them”) --> 4:90
The verse went even further. It not only offered peaceful co-existence to those who formally made peace with the Muslims, but also to anyone, even backslidden Muslims, who merely chose to stay neutral; that is, who did not take either side in the tense relations between the Muslims on the one hand and the Quraysh and their allies on the other.

Unlike in Christianity, Islam do have mandatory code of conducts in war situation. Not just arbitrarry killing and wrath.

All authoritative Islamic scholar agree that the Qur’an is unambiguous: Muslims are prohibited from aggressive violence and are compelled, should war prove unavoidable, always to act within a code of ethical behaviour.

You may read this link http://www.quranandwar.com/ by Dr Joel Hayward an expert Military ethics which also is the Dean of the Royal Air Force College w.r.t Western concept of just war and the teaching of Islam.

Nothing in the Quran sanctioned indiscriminate killing of males non-combatant or kill the women and children subjected to slavery.

As in the history of banu Qurayza, there is no reference in the Qur'an to of killing of a large number males non-combatant or kill the women and children.

There is no reference also that the prophet order to enslave women and children. Prophet Muhammad (p) had nothing to do with the judgement which befell the Banu Qurayzah and moreover. Please dont just simply follow ill-informed Christian evangelists/bigots .

You claim that God want to kill innocent women children and infants (and animals) was an act that God at one point in time.

Why ? Said who? In fact if you read the Book of Revelation you will see Jesus commanding even greater acts of violence and mass killing. Thats why Christians throughout history have followed the example of God and slaughtered the innocent the way Breivik did (remember the teaching of 2 Tim 3:16).

The Quran never promote, sanction, or justify genocide in this way.

You mentioned Poso, Steve, have you not forget that even in predominant muslim population, it was Christian militiamen who commtted masacres not the other way around. One of the massacre was commtited against Pesantren Walisongo boarding school in Sintuwu Lemba and one of the cold blooded murderer was the notorious Fabianus Tibo leaders of local Christian militia groups which were later convicted.; 10 August 2011 at 06:40
Anonymous said...: hallo mr. fadli peace be with you,

there is an article about banu qurayza in this blog dated sunday july 10, 2011.

and about the three beheaded girls in poso you can read here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4387604.stm

i dont justify violence for any reason. and i was trying to defend muslims who are falsely accused (peaceful and are just trying to do their best in their life to do good) or maybe i was not making myself clear.

it makes me sad to see people reacting defensively on criticism about their religion or their god, and what i wanted to do is to communicate this impression that i have had, but maybe i chose the wrong forum for that.

anyway, good luck with your life and i wish you a rewarding ramadhan.

peace out!; 10 August 2011 at 09:02
el Lobo said...: Steve,

I think you're a very sober and relatively neutral voice on this comment section. I would hate to see you leave, because I agree with you that Muslims and Christians should work together. You're also objectively correct about there being a strong tendency among religious people to see everything through the lense of their conviction.
Another thing that I agree with is the knife metaphore. Religion is a tool that in the wrong hands can be used to harm people.
I think that you can agree with me that Islam does sanction violence in certain contexts but it's not as simply as correlating a violent passages with violence.
There are plenty of examples of Muslims scholars and leaders interpreting the Quran and Sunnah in a lenient manner. I think that Islam overall itself encourages an interpretative framework that promote a peaceful application of Islamic teachings.
People who critize islam on the grounds that it's scripture contains violent passages overlook the interpretative layer that always must be there inorder for a command or rule to be realized in practice.
The irony is that fundie christians and extremist muslims read the quran in the same way.; 10 August 2011 at 10:18
minoria said...: Hello Ali:

You said:

"//the same applies for for you of course, when you read that muhammad killed all males with pubic hair, regardless of age, and enslave women and children, then you would also say its barbaric, no matter how the other party is trying to justify it.//"

Basic Judaism again

1.Muhamad did not miracles to convince the Jews he was a real prophet.hey thought he was a false prophet.There isnothignwrong with resisting a false prophet.

2.Or Muhammad really split the moon but the Jews rejected him anyway.

WHY?

Because the OT says false prophets can do Real Miracles.The Jews knew Muhammad was a false prophet because he said:

a)The Jews were no longer the Chosen People

b)The OT was corrupt.

So even real miracles were not enough and they resisted Muhammad.; 10 August 2011 at 11:43
minoria said...: According to Judaism

If a man comes and does REAL MIRACLES but goes AGAINST JUDAISM he is a FALSE PROPHET.Basics of Judaism.

According to the Cananites,Midianites,etc

They were polytheists.For them each nation had several gods.The book of Joshua has them saying they recognized the miracles of Yahweh and the judgement of Yahweh.

But they would not repent.According to their own beliefs the miracles were real and there wsa nothing wrong with submitting to a stronger god or gods but in spite of that they did not want to submit to Yahweh.

Their situation is completely different from the beliefs of the Jews and their relationship with Muhammad.; 10 August 2011 at 11:48
minoria said...: hello steve,

You said:

"well, i have heard about your apocalyptic prophecies, but how is that even different from reading nostradamus? when you see through your conviction, then you will see whatever you want to see."

The NT propheties still have to come true.They are precise but they are in the future.

Not the same with Nostradamus

SIX TIMES he gave us SPECIC YEAR for X event and THEY FAILED.Read:

http://www.antisharia.com/2010/03/18/was-nostradamus-a-true-prophet1503-1566/; 10 August 2011 at 11:53
minoria said...: Hello Erik

You said:

"I really get confused with the way the comments get carried especially Minoria, it is difficult to understand his points."

Your accusation was the NT is bloodshed regarding the endtimes,correct?.I showed you that the events take place step by step to convince as many that Jesus is God.

There I gave you the answer.So your charge is incorrect.The great majority of Muslims don't know the endtmes chronology,but now you do.

God in the NT will try to convince as many with X Amazing Miracle and then Another and Another

It is written.He will do it to convince them the NT is true.So again,your idea was false.; 10 August 2011 at 12:01
minoria said...: Hello Erik:

You said:

"You claim that God want to kill innocent women children and infants (and animals) was an act that God at one point in time.

Why ? Said who? In fact if you read the Book of Revelation you will see Jesus commanding even greater acts of violence and mass killing. Thats why Christians throughout history have followed the example of God and slaughtered the innocent the way Breivik did (remember the teaching of 2 Tim 3:16).

The Quran never promote, sanction, or justify genocide in this way."; 10 August 2011 at 12:04
minoria said...: Basic Christianity Again

I think your questions are sincere.Ok:

1.The NT says is the FINAL REVELATION for ALL TIME in Christianity.It is the final word.

2.The Ethical Heart of the NT is the Golden Rule.

3.The NT says the New Alliance takes over the Old Alliance.Mosaic law was of the Old Alliace.; 10 August 2011 at 12:07
minoria said...: WHAT IF?

What if what looked like an angel and said to me to kill Obama or X?

VERIFYING WITH THE FINAL REVELATION

Looking in the NT it says "Do to others as you would have them..." and "love your neighbor as yourself" and it calls them both LAW,which is the HIGHEST possibe level,law=law of God.

So I would see it was a bad angel,ignore it,basics of Christianity.
So your argument about Beivik bein Christian is totally wrong.; 10 August 2011 at 12:15
Ali said...: minoria

there was a very prominent jew who fought alongside Muhammed pbuh; 10 August 2011 at 13:46
Anonymous said...: hallo el lobo peace be with you,

yes, every event in history has its own context, and you cannot judge an entire set of history based on one event. i think when i hear someone saying that islam offer solutions to every problem, it means that islam has experiences dealing with every aspects of life. of course it doesnt mean that there is a recepies for every problem, like an instant solution. i think even muslim scholars are struggling to apply islamic solutions in modern time.

it takes a lot of courage to come out of conservatism and into a creative new world without losing one's integrity.

i believe, muslims and christians are simply scared of eachother, and are poking eachother because of this fear. fear begets anger and anger begets violence. st. augustine said that fear is the source of every sin.

i cannot expect that people would give up their conviction. muslims and christians have different logic in understanding their own theology, it is like comparing a scientist and an artist. they both explore reality, but they will never agree with what it means.

someday i hope that christians and muslims will be able to understand eachothers logic and stop poking one another so harshly, instead trying to challenge eachother in a healthy way so they will be able to explain and understand their own theology better and put it to good use.

i come from a mix family of christian and muslim, but i am neither. regardless of religious convictions, i love them still.

i thank you for your words of sympathy and i wish you a blessed and rewarding ramadhan.

best wishes

steven from indonesia; 10 August 2011 at 14:12
minoria said...: Hello Ali,
I dont know who the Jewish ally of Muhammad was but talking of Judaism I want to add to this discusion about the Qurayza Jewish tribe and Mosaic Law.

A hadith says:

"The Banu Qurayza committed high treason by breaking their oath of alliance with the Muslims and turning against them in time of war. When the battle against them was over, the Prophet, upon him peace, searched for an arbiter known and accepted to both sides who would rule concerning their penalty.

The arbiter chosen was Sa`d ibn Mu`adh, who had been mortally wounded and died shortly afterwards. Sa`d said: "I will judge them according to the Law of Musa."; 10 August 2011 at 19:30
minoria said...: Deuteronomy 20:10-15

The whole thing is bizarre.That law is for Jews against non-Jews and never for non-Jews against Jews.It is an instruction to JEWS ONLY,not ARABS.; 10 August 2011 at 19:33
minoria said...: Deut. 20:10-15

"When you approach a city to fight against it, you must make an offer of peace. 11 If it accepts your offer of peace and opens [its gates] to you, all the people found in it will become forced laborers for you and serve you.

12 However, if it does not make peace with you but wages war against you, lay siege to it. 13 When the LORD your God hands it over to you, you must strike down all its males with the sword.

14 But you may take the women, children, animals, and whatever else is in the city—all its spoil—as plunder.

You may enjoy the spoil of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are far away from you and are not among the cities of these nations."; 10 August 2011 at 19:35
minoria said...: The key phrases

We have the LORD your God hands it over to you and
that the LORD your God has given you.

SO?

It clearly speaks of a direct divine order to attack a far-away city.God speaking to a prophet saying:"Do X thing."

Such an Order was Never Given

It certainly was the case of Palestine with the Lord gives over to you this land.

So God never gave the order to attack Rome or Athens or Babylon or Nineveh.; 10 August 2011 at 19:40
Ali said...: minoria its from the book 'Muhammed' by Martin Lings.

//The whole thing is bizarre.That law is for Jews against non-Jews and never for non-Jews against Jews.It is an instruction to JEWS ONLY,not ARABS//

so you're talking about the jewish race, what about the faith?

anyways its not bizarre. the laws of musa were also the laws of islam.; 10 August 2011 at 21:23
Erik F. said...: Bismillah walhamdulillah washalatu wassalamu 'alaa rasulillah

Steven,

I understand that you are trying to advocate sort of muslim-christian ecumenical dialogue, I agree as Islam always encourage to be peaceful to with others

I remember there are hadiths my Mom always reminding me to behave when as kid that Rasulullah (p) said, "You shall not enter Heaven unless you have Faith and your Faith is not complete until you show love towards one another. Would you want me to show you how you can achieve this? Shower your Salam upon one another."

Also
Rasululullah(p) said, "A person, whose neighbor became disturbed by his actions, will not enter Heaven."

However please remember that this blogspace is where muslims exercise to answer and defend the mendacious demonization on Islam and Prophet Muhammad (which as you are aware, is systematic and widespread in the internet).
Defamatory attacks on prophet Muhammad calling him a terrorist or even a child molester, wife beater, evil posessed etc. unthinkable for a muslims do such a thing for any other prophets of God.

Ok Steve, best of luck for your endeavor to find peace in life, I hope someday you will find hidaayah.

Btw if you have a chance to take “mudik” back to Indonesia, may be we can meet up in Jakarta for a cup coffee ;); 11 August 2011 at 02:38
Radical Moderate said...: To the Anon Who wrote...

"i believe, muslims and christians are simply scared of eachother, and are poking eachother because of this fear. fear begets anger and anger begets violence. st. augustine said that fear is the source of every sin."

What a load of crap. Do you even know what you are talking about?

Muslims deny the sacrafice of Christ. We Christians preach Christ crucified.

There can be no greater difference then this.; 11 August 2011 at 05:12
Anonymous said...: hallo mr. fadli, thank you for your kind words, and for the invitation. i will not be coming home anytime soon, but i will let you know when i do.

hallo radical moderate peace be with you, i was raised as a muslim in a muslim country and i was a christian for a while. i have lived on 2 continents and i have friends from many sorts of religions and denomination, and at the momment i am studying for my masters, so, yea, i know what i am talking about.

i am not religious but i believe that hostility towards any human being will not solve any problem.

i suggest that you do as jesus said in the bible, go to the farthest corner of the world spread the gospel, maybe in your journey you will understand the world's problems even better, and most of them has nothing to do with religion, but rather with poverty, fear, ignorance, and greed.

if jesus did die for the sin of the world, then he must have done it willingly and whole heartedly for the world he loved, so why are you having any grude and resentment towards your fellow men?

best wishes

steve; 11 August 2011 at 07:31
Radical Moderate said...: @anon steve

You definilty have no idea what you are talking about.

You wrote....

"if jesus did die for the sin of the world, then he must have done it willingly and whole heartedly for the world he loved, so why are you having any grude and resentment towards your fellow men?"

He died for the salvation of HIS PEOPLE.; 11 August 2011 at 18:51
Anonymous said...: hey radical moderate, if it is what you believe then what else can i say.

the greatest tragedy of the bible is that the messiah was crucified by the religious people. not by the sinners, not by the tax collector, or the prostitutes, but by people exactly like you.

thank you for reminding me of why i left the church.

enjoy!

steve; 11 August 2011 at 21:31
Ali said...: Baptist Pastor arrested for beating, raping 13 year old female relative

The pastor of the Community Baptist Church in Bayside, who is awaiting court dates for two separate incidences in Queens and Connecticut, was arrested last month by Norwalk, Conn., police for allegedly violating a court-imposed protective order, according to Norwalk Superior Court.

On July 5, Phillip Joubert was arrested for allegedly placing a call to a supposed assault victim from his phone, according to Norwalk’s The Hour newspaper. The police claim Joubert did not talk to the victim, but she could hear him speaking in the background.

According to an arrest warrant affidavit, on Nov. 14, 2009,Joubert allegedly hit a female relative in the face and several times about her torso after he came home to find his Norwalk apartment messy, The Hour reported. Norwalk Superior Court has his address in that city listed as 21 Lexington Ave.

The Queens district attorney’s office previously said the alleged victim was 13 years old.

According to court documents, the child’s mother reported the alleged abuse to police after Joubert had left on a trip to Israel, telling officers he hit the girl with “as much force as he would use if he was hitting a grown man,” The Hour reported.

Norwalk police said that while the officers were interviewing the victim and her mother, the victim allegedly confided in her mother that Joubert had sexually abused her at his Queens home, at 45-57 206th St. in Bayside, in the summer of 2009, according to The Hour.

The police officers turned the sex abuse case over to police in Queens and applied for a warrant for Joubert’s arrest on the domestic violence case, the newspaper reported. He was arrested in Norwalk on Dec. 31, 2009, and a judge at Norwalk Superior Court issued a protective order that stipulated he was to stay away from the alleged victim and have no contact with her.

His next court date in Norwalk is Sept. 15 on charges of third-degree assault and risk of injury to a child.

In Queens, Joubert was arraigned before Queens Criminal Court Judge Lenora Gerald on Nov. 25, 2009, on two counts of rape in the first degree, according to the Queens district attorney’s office. His next court date on the charges is Oct. 12.

Victor Robinson, the sexton at Community Baptist, said he expected the reverend’s “situation” to be over by the end of the year “one way or the other.”

http://www.yournabe.com/articles/2011/08/11/queens/qns_joubert_20110811.txt; 12 August 2011 at 01:28
Erik F. said...: Bismillah.

Minoria, your fellow fundie christian Radmod elsewhere is trying to defend the idea that babies are not innocent so can be executed by God.

Now you are saying that NT cancelled the OT.

Jesus said that he came not to abolish, but to fulfill.

What Golden rule you are talking about? a violent, brutal, and heartless acts approved in the Bible should completely discredit it as a golden rule.; 12 August 2011 at 02:37
Anonymous said...: hey mr. fadli, its steven again. i would like to say a quick few words, before i am gone for good. the problem with debating christians is that their ability to twist words and interpreting everything the way it would suit their argument. christianity is a very creative religion, thats why you have all sorts of denomination, and thats why those denominations are still arguing with eachother untill now.

muslims on the other hand are more rigid, and tend to not be so adventurous when it comes to their view about god, salvation, and so on. muslims might argue about religious laws and details of certain rituals, but never about the nature of god and such.

i think it is very humbling when i read islamic critics on christianity, it makes me want to research more about things. so keep up the good fight!

i believe that someday islam and christianity will be able to benefit eachother, and perhaps someday christians would stop being so arrogant and judge others according to their own standards, while thinking that without them the entire world would collapse, and muslims would not be so rigid and could finaly clear all the misunderstanding it has been getting.

in case you still want to keep in touch my e-mail is: steven.hermansyah@yahoo.com

wasalam

steven; 12 August 2011 at 04:58
minoria said...: Hello Ali:

You stated:

"so you're talking about the jewish race, what about the faith?

anyways its not bizarre. the laws of musa were also the laws of islam."

You are saying that according to Islam Mosaic law was for the whole world?
Not according to Judaism.; 12 August 2011 at 07:39
minoria said...: Steve said:

"i would like to say a quick few words, before i am gone for good. the problem with debating christians is that their ability to twist words and interpreting everything the way it would suit their argument."

That is absolutely not true.Because there are basic ideas in the NT and basic principles of interpretation.They are universal.

I am amazed Steve doesn't know that.Then he should learn basics before giving an opinion.; 12 August 2011 at 07:45
minoria said...: To Steve and Others:

1.As I said before,the NT is the final revelation,no Christian disputes that,unless you believe the Pope is infallible and can proclaim new doctrines.By why trust a mortal man?

2.The OT is the word of God but it is limited,modified by the New Revelation.
I dont know if Steve knew that before or not,he probably did but didnt know the true meaning,it is called the New Alliance.It is Basic Christianity.

EXAMPLE

Suppose a person is reading the OT and reads abut fighting for God by Moses and Joshua.He can say:"I am going to fight the US government because it is against God,by killing the president"

NOT A GOOD IDEA

For the simple reasons that:

1.There is the Golden Rule of the NT,part of the final revelation.

2.The OT war orders were given to people who spoke to God like we speak to our friends.They had seen real miracles.

3.The third point is:the Final revleation had still not been given.People were expecting new orders,new information in the future.; 12 August 2011 at 07:55
minoria said...: Hello Erik:

You said:

"Minoria, your fellow fundie christian Radmod elsewhere is trying to defend the idea that babies are not innocent so can be executed by God."

Fundamentalist means believing in fundamentals,basics.

Fundamentalist,in Christianity means accepting the basic ethical rule in the NT,the Golden Rule

LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF MOST CRITICS

Regarding Christianity,since they don't know about the Golden Rule's central position in the NT,they think:

Fundamentalist= extermist=anti-human rights=intolerance

100% wrong,since they are for human rights and we accept the Golden Rule which is the basis of human rights,then Fundametalist Christian=pro-human rights.; 12 August 2011 at 08:01
minoria said...: Regarding babies and children,at least they re innocent enough to be automatically accepted in heaven,it is in the NT,in MARK 10:13-15 (repeatd in MATTHEW 19:13-14/LUKE 18:15-17):; 12 August 2011 at 08:06
minoria said...: Hello Erik,
The OT(the following argument is also BASIC CHRISTIANITY):

1.Never says children go to heaven.

2.The OT never,ever even says a heaven exists.

SO?

It is JESUS who says it,it's NT,it is part of the progressive revelation in the Bible culminating in the Final Revelation of the NT; 12 August 2011 at 08:11
minoria said...: You said:

"Now you are saying that NT cancelled the OT.

Jesus said that he came not to abolish, but to fulfill.

What Golden rule you are talking about? a violent, brutal, and heartless acts approved in the Bible should completely discredit it as a golden rule."

That phrase about fulfillin the Law is from MATTHEW(I have already argued this).The law is Judaism also means the entire OT,not just Mosaic Law.Th OT has about Messianic prophecies.

In the SAME BOOK of MATTHEW Jesus proclaims the NEW ALLAINC at the LAST SUPPER.That meant Mosaic Law had been fulfilled,accomplished,in a way,superseded.; 12 August 2011 at 08:16
minoria said...: You stated:

"What Golden rule you are talking about? a violent, brutal, and heartless acts approved in the Bible should completely discredit it as a golden rule."

From what we know in the NT a heaven exists and children go there.

That information is NOT in the OT.

What was the consequence of the order of God to kill,take the life of children?

Think about it.What was the result?
Are you going to tell me the Bible says they went to hell?

No,they went to heaven.I can only speculate but a reason may be God did not want them to become adults because it would have negative consequences for the people in this world.; 12 August 2011 at 08:23
minoria said...: A final consideration:

It is obvious I am not twisting,changing the meaning of any Bible passages.Or selecting something and hiding something else,anybody can verify if the OT says anything or nothing about a heaven,or what Jesus said about children,etc.
Such an accusation is said by people who have not learned the basic rules of interpretation:

1.principal idea modifies,limits secondary idea.

2.Clear passage trumps less clear passage on the SAME or SIMILAR THEME.

It is NOT just for the Bible but for ANY TEXT.; 12 August 2011 at 08:46
Erik F. said...: Bismillahirrahmanirrahim

Minoria,

You can have your version/interpretation of Christianity as wish.

In contrast to Quranic teaching I see irreconcible different the way your theology define that humans are by nature evil, wicked, born into sin.

Still your interpretation dont answer at all the question why the portrayal of God in the Bible (OT/NT) is more of an angry and cruel and less compassionate God ready to hand down absurd punishment.

As the the Last Supper accounts muslims will always see this interpretation as awkard pauline teaching instead of seeing Jesus as a messiah of the Jewish people but as a deathin the cross to save mankind from sin.

This view of Jesus' death seems to have come to Paul in his Damascus vision notlie from true monotheistic Abrahamic teaching.

You may have your view I have mine.; 14 August 2011 at 09:40

The Facts About Islam

Search this Site!

Total Pageviews

Followers

Topics

Muslim Sites/Apologists

Resources

Blog Archive

About Me

Monday, 8 August 2011

Is Pat Condell Really Helping?

73 comments:

Total Pageviews