(September 13, 2010 at 12:23 pm)Cerrone Wrote: given the historical background where the muslims had always given respect to the jews,

I agree to most of your points but this, I have to intervene..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bani_Qurayza

Quote:funny the muslims stole their laws from the christians, the christians from the jews, and the jews stole from the egyptian

Not just egyptians but Persians and Sumerians also..

(September 13, 2010 at 6:34 pm)annatar Wrote:

(September 13, 2010 at 12:23 pm)Cerrone Wrote: given the historical background where the muslims had always given respect to the jews,

I agree to most of your points but this, I have to intervene..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bani_Qurayza

Quote:funny the muslims stole their laws from the christians, the christians from the jews, and the jews stole from the egyptian

Not just egyptians but Persians and Sumerians also..

I hadn't seen that before Annatar! But you couldn't really say from that story that it represented muslim bias against some jews as a whole, if anything it shows willingness for justice on the part of muslims that they allowed the condemned jews- traitors I should point out- to pick their own judge. In fact the story, even up to the leaders death, shows that those jews were keen to make a political statement out of it, which reminded me so much of the zionist rhetoric i'm always hearing in regards to israel and jewish unity.

Still regardless of that story from the early AD's, it doesnt change my mind that muslims have historically shown a great deal of respect for other cultures and religions including jews, and that story doesn't change anything in my opinion. Compare the incident to what christians were doing a little after that time when they came to power in Rome; murdering pagans, destroying ancient temples and the brutal murder of Hypatia of Alexandria. Try and find an example of muslims desecrating temples or massacring people because of religious differences from that time, I bet you can't

(September 15, 2010 at 8:06 am)Cerrone Wrote:

(September 13, 2010 at 6:34 pm)annatar Wrote:

(September 13, 2010 at 12:23 pm)Cerrone Wrote: given the historical background where the muslims had always given respect to the jews,

I agree to most of your points but this, I have to intervene..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bani_Qurayza

Quote:funny the muslims stole their laws from the christians, the christians from the jews, and the jews stole from the egyptian

Not just egyptians but Persians and Sumerians also..

I hadn't seen that before Annatar! But you couldn't really say from that story that it represented muslim bias against some jews as a whole, if anything it shows willingness for justice on the part of muslims that they allowed the condemned jews- traitors I should point out- to pick their own judge. In fact the story, even up to the leaders death, shows that those jews were keen to make a political statement out of it, which reminded me so much of the zionist rhetoric i'm always hearing in regards to israel and jewish unity.

Still regardless of that story from the early AD's, it doesnt change my mind that muslims have historically shown a great deal of respect for other cultures and religions including jews, and that story doesn't change anything in my opinion. Compare the incident to what christians were doing a little after that time when they came to power in Rome; murdering pagans, destroying ancient temples and the brutal murder of Hypatia of Alexandria. Try and find an example of muslims desecrating temples or massacring people because of religious differences from that time, I bet you can't

Well from that time no but i heard a islamic country demolished a statue of budha recently i think

Quote:ry and find an example of muslims desecrating temples or massacring people because of religious differences from that time

lol of course I can.. You know the Kaaba? That was a pagan temple and there was more than 100 pagan god statue in there.Then muhammed came along, destroyed all statues of pagans and called it the house of allah..(which is actually true because allah was one of the pagan gods) Actually Muhammed fought against pagans in all his life. And jews. He was tolerant at first but the more he gain strength the less tolerant he became.

Quote:And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
At Tawbah-5(9:5)

And remember that every city conquered by jihad can be looted for 3 days according to islam...
Anyway we are not trying to find who is worse.. But believe me when I say Islam was antisemitist and intolerant. Actually he and his imaginary god cursed the jews in quran...
But you are right. There were times muslims were more tolerant then christians. Especially during the crusades and after that in early times of The Ottoman Empire.
In advanced days of Ottoman empire, non-muslims were strictly protected. And they were giving extra tax instead of being recruited to army. This may still seem unfair to us but for those times was probably a good thing.
You can see Scholars like Mevlana shows the soft side of islam. We can say that these was the golden age of islam.
But these facts only supports my point, Its not about religion itself its about people...
And today Muslims are the most intolerant people in the earth you can't argue with that..

(September 16, 2010 at 9:42 am)annatar Wrote:

Quote:ry and find an example of muslims desecrating temples or massacring people because of religious differences from that time

lol of course I can.. You know the Kaaba? That was a pagan temple and there was more than 100 pagan god statue in there.Then muhammed came along, destroyed all statues of pagans and called it the house of allah..(which is actually true because allah was one of the pagan gods) Actually Muhammed fought against pagans in all his life. And jews. He was tolerant at first but the more he gain strength the less tolerant he became.

Quote:And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
At Tawbah-5(9:5)

And remember that every city conquered by jihad can be looted for 3 days according to islam...
Anyway we are not trying to find who is worse.. But believe me when I say Islam was antisemitist and intolerant. Actually he and his imaginary god cursed the jews in quran...
But you are right. There were times muslims were more tolerant then christians. Especially during the crusades and after that in early times of The Ottoman Empire.
In advanced days of Ottoman empire, non-muslims were strictly protected. And they were giving extra tax instead of being recruited to army. This may still seem unfair to us but for those times was probably a good thing.
You can see Scholars like Mevlana shows the soft side of islam. We can say that these was the golden age of islam.
But these facts only supports my point, Its not about religion itself its about people...
And today Muslims are the most intolerant people in the earth you can't argue with that..

Oh for sure, I agree religion is destructive in all forms in one way or another. But from personal experience i'm just unable to write off all muslims as simply being intolerant, because it's just not the case. But you're living in a muslim country during a time when the whole world media is encouraging people to hate muslims, so if you want to believe that you won't find much resistance, quite the opposite in fact. You'll find plenty of encouragement on that subject!

Politically though, muslims are in the position of the victim- across the west, and palestine and the middle east much more so in terms of brutality. For that reason alone if you chose to attack muslims based on their religion, then at least wait until you've gotten rid of the christians first, because their actions cause much more suffering in the world than the muslims, whose violent behaviour today is a reaction to western and corporate exploitation, and israel of course.

It's the case- as i see it, and simplified- that if it wasn't for the slave mentality of christians allowing their leaders to do as they please today and throughout the history of christianity then these leaders would be held accountable for their actions and the world might just turn into a fairer place.

(September 17, 2010 at 10:09 am)Cerrone Wrote: Oh for sure, I agree religion is destructive in all forms in one way or another. But from personal experience i'm just unable to write off all muslims as simply being intolerant, because it's just not the case.

Let me state for the record that I have no doubt that 99% of Muslims don't fall into the Osama Bin Laden category just as 99% of Christians don't fall into the Fred Phelps or Torquemada category. I believe that most Christians and Muslims are good people who want to believe their god is good and their religion is good. Most of them genuinely believe that the actions of inquisitors, crusaders and suicide bombers are the actions of those going against the loving, peaceful nature of their own faiths. Most of them gloss over, ignore or have never read the violent and hateful passages in their respective sacred scripture.

Further, I have observed that reading one's own sacred scripture with a critical eye, where hateful or violent passages aren't ignored or glossed over with rationalizations, is the surest path to atheism or otherwise breaking free of their faith. Most ex-Christians tell a story about how reading the Bible was what led to their deconversion.

When I rail against Islam or Christianity, it's against the religion, not the people. The people are the same as I am, just suffering indoctrination, and these are the people we are trying to set free. Even the most zealous among them should be pitied, not hated. And I agree they shouldn't be "written off". Today's Islamo-Christian could be tomorrow's George Carlin or Aron Ra.

I didn't go far enouigh into the detail of al of the views that I am condidering. One of them called Quran only or God alone islam.

Sometimes I believe in the existence of Satan and because I have knowledge in islam I tend to look into it.

In this form of islam that I am about to say a few words all of the hadith are rejected. The hadith are about 4or 5 thousand aleged sayings of prophet Muhammad.

Now the first bloke who colected them is called Sahih Bukhari I think and this was done 200 years after Muhammads death. Hadith and the history of Muhammad were colected like that. It was like he said to him and then he said to him etc,etc that Muhamad said or did or that this was like this. Personaly I think that Chinese whispers for two hudred years are not reliable at all.

There are muslims called the monotheist group you can find them at http://www.freeminds.org who have interpeted the Quran diferently. Like the words used to describe punishment for theft in the traditional translation of the Quran is to cat of thiefs hand. Were the monotheist group interpreted it as to cut into recources, make them work til paid of because the words used have multiple meanings.

They pray only twice or three timnes a day like it says in the Quran and they do it diferently.

Look all I am trying to say for those who are muslims and like the Quran this is a form worth looking into.

Thanks

Quote:Are you kidding me?Actually It's rather inadequate..

The guides aside ( and there was a decidedly archaeological aspect to the trip so the guides were all moonlighting professors and such) we found that we could converse easily with waiters and drivers and even salesmen in the shops. They had no trouble making themselves understood or understanding us.
The way languages are taught here you forget it all as soon as the test is over.

(October 27, 2010 at 6:47 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Are you kidding me?Actually It's rather inadequate..

The guides aside ( and there was a decidedly archaeological aspect to the trip so the guides were all moonlighting professors and such) we found that we could converse easily with waiters and drivers and even salesmen in the shops. They had no trouble making themselves understood or understanding us.

You were in a touristic place I assume.. If so, they have to know foreign languages at least well enough to sell their goods. They know not just english but french, russian and spanish also.

Quote:The way languages are taught here you forget it all as soon as the test is over.

Completely same here..