Posts: 3931
Threads: 47
Joined: January 5, 2015
Reputation:
37
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 7, 2015 at 8:39 pm
(This post was last modified: June 7, 2015 at 8:46 pm by Regina.)
Again I think it's irrelevant. You have some people (God knows why they think this) who hail good ol Mo as a champion of women's rights and a feminist. Yes, a full 1000 years before feminism really kicked off and despite him marrying a child.
It doesn't matter what Jesus and Muhammad were like because I can see the point of what some people say; it's not about "being a good Muslim like Muhammad", it's about power. These parasitical imams will appropriate the religion and call anything they want to "Islamic", and will silence people who disagree with them on accusations of blasphemy. That's why I think anyone who defends Islam's human rights abuses are very stupid.
Also in the context of the time, Muhammad wasn't particularly exceptional either. He's far from the only man in history to take a child bride and kill people. I don't mean to defend him, he's a despicable man by modern standards, he's just not all that exceptional for the time period (quite Unfortunately)
"Adulthood is like looking both ways before you cross the road, and then getting hit by an airplane" - sarcasm_only
"Ironically like the nativist far-Right, which despises multiculturalism, but benefits from its ideas of difference to scapegoat the other and to promote its own white identity politics; these postmodernists, leftists, feminists and liberals also use multiculturalism, to side with the oppressor, by demanding respect and tolerance for oppression characterised as 'difference', no matter how intolerable." - Maryam Namazie
Posts: 4659
Threads: 123
Joined: June 27, 2014
Reputation:
40
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 7, 2015 at 9:08 pm
(This post was last modified: June 7, 2015 at 9:10 pm by Dystopia.)
(June 7, 2015 at 8:27 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: I wonder what you guys think about the importance of the founder of the religion though? For example, Christianity says that Jesus was this perfect God/Man and we should follow his example. Now I don't think that the Jesus Character was or said anything really special, but nor did he say anything particularly terrible.
On the other hand Islam says that Muhammad was a sinless prophet who's example should be followed. Now Muhammad personally killed people, owned slaves, married a 9 year old, started war, etc etc.
So when you have that as your example, I think it's easy for a group like Isis to say 'Hey, we are just acting the way Muhammad would have' where it would be hard for a similar Christian group to say the same thing.
First things first - Jesus was perfect, sinless and the son of god, so the intent is to take his words and actions as divinely inspired and a role model to mankind. In terms of perfection and divinity I think Jesus is above Muhammad because he wasn't just a prophet but a Messiah and the true son of god.
Regarding Mohammed - I think all of those things are bad, but at the time none were - Marrying 9 year old children, in particular, was considered normal in the middle east and during the middle ages in Christian countries (possibly later too) - If I was a muslim, I would probably think that Mohammed had some good teachings (oral ones) about the faith but did mistakes that were inevitable due to social circumstances. Obviously this is a bit subjective - Any muslim is a true one regardless of what he/she does, I'm no one to appoint who is a better or worse follower.
Honestly, I think books are overrated, including holy ones. One of the confusing things some atheists say is that Dawkins and other similar figures are harmless because all they do is write books - But aren't major religions based on books? So how does it work? Do books matter or not after all? Holy scriptures may have the word "holy" written on the cover but in the end it's just a piece of paper with some words. You can take everything literally, metaphorically, use it as an ashtray or toilet paper, read it for cultural reasons or take it merely as a moral guide.
If you look deep enough you can perfectly find justifications for Christian terrorism. If I wanted to be a Christian terrorist, regardless of what the bible says, I would argue that, since only those who believe go to Heaven and I'm a good person and thus want everyone to enter heaven - I am therefore using all means necessary to force people to believe to save as many souls as possible. Honestly, wasn't this the inquisition's excuse (purifying souls, etc.)? It isn't hard.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you
Posts: 3395
Threads: 43
Joined: February 8, 2015
Reputation:
33
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 7, 2015 at 10:15 pm
(June 7, 2015 at 8:27 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: .... Now I don't think that the Jesus Character was or said anything really special, but nor did he say anything particularly terrible.
...
Do you like the Old Testament laws? The words of Jesus, as told by Matthew 5:
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
The fact that Christians try to pretend that Jesus did not mean what he says is irrelevant to what we have as the truth according to their sacred scripture. We could also discuss his insane temper tantrum over a fig tree that did not bear figs out of season, or, in other words, that did not bear fruit when God made them not bear fruit. There is more, but this should be enough to reject Jesus as a good example. He was, as depicted in the New Testament, a sick motherfucker.
"A wise man ... proportions his belief to the evidence."
— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Section X, Part I.
Posts: 30726
Threads: 2123
Joined: May 24, 2012
Reputation:
71
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 8, 2015 at 8:35 am
Once again, it is extremely important not to get stuck on labels. Our species has always displayed both acts of compassion and acts of cruelty. Religion as a concept is merely a comic book reflection of our species evolutionary grouping. The in group views itself as right and the out group viewed as a threat.
Even political views and economic views and business models should be viewed like this as well. Humans form groups to survive. We seek patterns and when we perceive them as working, we seek to replicate that pattern.
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 8, 2015 at 10:28 pm
(This post was last modified: June 8, 2015 at 10:32 pm by dyresand.)
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 1765
Threads: 225
Joined: February 18, 2015
Reputation:
16
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 9, 2015 at 2:59 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 3:01 am by ReptilianPeon.)
(June 7, 2015 at 6:12 am)robvalue Wrote: Oh yeah, right! Is god's murder count as high with Islam then?
It's the same God, what am I talking about!  I would say no. Firstly, the Quran is so much shorter than Bible. Secondly, the Quran has a nasty habit of repeating itself. If the Quran was more efficient it would be even shorter than it already is. Clearly this begs the question: which verses are repeats and which are not?
When searching for particular words (or phrases) in the Quran I've found that similarly worded sentences appear in different chapters. There shouldn't be so many repeats because the Quran is supposed to be a literary miracle. Oh well.
Posts: 6843
Threads: 0
Joined: February 22, 2014
Reputation:
15
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 9, 2015 at 3:29 am
(June 7, 2015 at 9:06 am)Dystopia Wrote: I agree Rob - If you want to hate on gays you just need Leviticus, but by coherence if you support that you should also support slavery because it's also on Leviticus. most Christians don't read the full bible, they just listen to what their pastor/priest says or if they don't go to church - What their parents say.
The New Testament has passages against homosexuals but they don't include the killing part. It also supports slavery.
Posts: 33052
Threads: 1412
Joined: March 15, 2013
Reputation:
152
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 9, 2015 at 3:31 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 3:33 am by Silver.)
(June 9, 2015 at 3:29 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The New Testament has passages against homosexuals but they don't include the killing part. It also supports slavery.
You must mean by Paul the psychotic.
The reference he makes is actually in terms of "effeminate" men. I have met plenty of them in real life, and they are straight.
A mis-translation, if you had done your homework, shows that "gays" was only added due to prejudice.
You must not have done your homework.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
Posts: 6843
Threads: 0
Joined: February 22, 2014
Reputation:
15
RE: Is Islam more or less violent in Its teachings then other religions?
June 9, 2015 at 3:36 am
(June 9, 2015 at 3:31 am)Kitan Wrote: (June 9, 2015 at 3:29 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The New Testament has passages against homosexuals but they don't include the killing part. It also supports slavery.
You must mean by Paul the psychotic.
The reference he makes is actually in terms of "effeminate" men. I have met plenty of them in real life, and they are straight.
A mis-translation, if you had done your homework, shows that "gays" was only added due to prejudice.
You must not have done your homework. When all else fails you can include homosexuality under the "sexual immorality" umbrella.
|
