Expectations of World War


dennislmay

Recommended Posts

LM,

So long as Islam is a religion and treated as such, I think it is just as good as any other religion. I happen to believe there is a lot of good in it (qua religion), as I do for all the main religions.

The problem comes when Islam is promoted by fanatics as a social ideology to take over the world, say like communism does. Then I believe it loses its religious characteristic for a lot of people and they see it as a threat.

There is nothing better than separation of church and state for legal issues.

Michael

For all the good the good does.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 198
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

But as libertarian, you surely believe in a clear distinction between Mosque and State?

For a true Muslim there is no such distinction. The only true guide is the Holy Q'ran and the Hadiths.

Ba'al Chatzaf

What has been in the past, does not necessarily stand in future.

Not a new thought, but at +/- 1500 years of age, Christianity was an aggressive

and repressive doctrine.

With accelerating knowledge, Islam could settle into general moderacy within a single

generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But as libertarian, you surely believe in a clear distinction between Mosque and State?

For a true Muslim there is no such distinction. The only true guide is the Holy Q'ran and the Hadiths.

Ba'al Chatzaf

What has been in the past, does not necessarily stand in future.

Not a new thought, but at +/- 1500 years of age, Christianity was an aggressive

and repressive doctrine.

With accelerating knowledge, Islam could settle into general moderacy within a single

generation.

That's just it - fundamentalists reject moderncy and kill to prevent it being adopted.

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But as libertarian, you surely believe in a clear distinction between Mosque and State?

For a true Muslim there is no such distinction. The only true guide is the Holy Q'ran and the Hadiths.

Ba'al Chatzaf

What has been in the past, does not necessarily stand in future.

Not a new thought, but at +/- 1500 years of age, Christianity was an aggressive

and repressive doctrine.

With accelerating knowledge, Islam could settle into general moderacy within a single

generation.

That's just it - fundamentalists reject moderncy and kill to prevent it being adopted.

Dennis

True, as far as it goes. It can be seen too as increasing panic and desperation of

an ageing bunch of clerics who know they are losing their grip on the youth.

Force, thankfully, will only achieve an opposite reaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But as libertarian, you surely believe in a clear distinction between Mosque and State?

For a true Muslim there is no such distinction. The only true guide is the Holy Q'ran and the Hadiths.

Ba'al Chatzaf

What has been in the past, does not necessarily stand in future.

Not a new thought, but at +/- 1500 years of age, Christianity was an aggressive

and repressive doctrine.

With accelerating knowledge, Islam could settle into general moderacy within a single

generation.

That's just it - fundamentalists reject modercy and kill to prevent it being adopted.

Dennis

True, as far as it goes. It can be seen too as increasing panic and desperation of

an ageing bunch of clerics who know they are losing their grip on the youth.

Force, thankfully, will only achieve an opposite reaction.

History shows that force can work for many generations. It is not obvious that

any net progress is being made in moderacy.

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Shariah is beyond liberty. Allah decides the actions of Muslims, not muslims themselves.

That's silly. Allah knows everything that will happen and allows it to because He gave mankind the freedom to choose for ourselves. This is the ultimate proof that freedom is paramount in Islam because if Allah doesn't exercise much control over us, then what right does the state have?

LM,

So long as Islam is a religion and treated as such, I think it is just as good as any other religion. I happen to believe there is a lot of good in it (qua religion), as I do for all the main religions.

The problem comes when Islam is promoted by fanatics as a social ideology to take over the world, say like communism does. Then I believe it loses its religious characteristic for a lot of people and they see it as a threat.

There is nothing better than separation of church and state for legal issues.

Michael

Michael, any ideology can be used by fanatics as an excuse to maintain power and control over people for their own benefit.

For a true Muslim there is no such distinction. The only true guide is the Holy Q'ran and the Hadiths.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Also ridiculous, Christianity maybe, but one only has to look at the Muslim Empires in Cordoba and Baghdad to see that education in science and everything else was considered an obligation to Muslims. Where else did the Europeans steal the knowledge to have their own reneissance.

Islam promotes the education of all, from the beggar to the king, men and women, regardless of race or religion.

LM,

But as libertarian, you surely believe in a clear distinction between Mosque and State?

I do, Islam does also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So long as Islam is a religion and treated as such, I think it is just as good as any other religion. I happen to believe there is a lot of good in it (qua religion), as I do for all the main religions.

The problem comes when Islam is promoted by fanatics as a social ideology to take over the world, say like communism does. Then I believe it loses its religious characteristic for a lot of people and they see it as a threat.

There is nothing better than separation of church and state for legal issues.

Michael

Michael, any ideology can be used by fanatics as an excuse to maintain power and control over people for their own benefit.

LM,

Just so I understand correctly, are you saying that it is OK to consider Islam as a social ideology?

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So long as Islam is a religion and treated as such, I think it is just as good as any other religion. I happen to believe there is a lot of good in it (qua religion), as I do for all the main religions.

The problem comes when Islam is promoted by fanatics as a social ideology to take over the world, say like communism does. Then I believe it loses its religious characteristic for a lot of people and they see it as a threat.

There is nothing better than separation of church and state for legal issues.

Michael

Michael, any ideology can be used by fanatics as an excuse to maintain power and control over people for their own benefit.

LM,

Just so I understand correctly, are you saying that it is OK to consider Islam as a social ideology?

Michael

Social ideology in the sense that one's religious beliefs effect the way that one conducts themselves in their interactions with other people, the way they vote, the way they spend money, the schools they send their children to, the places they will socialize in?

If so, then all religions generally have that function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's silly. Allah knows everything that will happen and allows it to because He gave mankind the freedom to choose for ourselves. This is the ultimate proof that freedom is paramount in Islam because if Allah doesn't exercise much control over us, then what right does the state have?

The state, of course, has no right, other than to implement Shari'ah. The world belongs to Allah, not to men. You can break Allah's law, but you must pay the price. That's a different kind of liberty to what I have in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LM,

That's not what I'm talking about when I say social ideology.

I'm talking about a system for taking over the world to produce some kind of utopia--whether people want it or not.

And if they don't, a forced or covert indoctrination system to make them want it.

Michael

Not at all, and that concept is foreign to Islam also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, and that concept is foreign to Islam also.

Really now? What about the struggle between the dar al Harb and the dar al sala'am?

ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, and that concept is foreign to Islam also.

Really now? What about the struggle between the dar al Harb and the dar al sala'am?

ba'al Chatzaf

These are not the only statuses of diplomatic relationships in Islam. You can have fruitful trade and diplomatic relationships with any nation so long as it's built on mutual respect and good faith.

For example there is also Dar Al Amn or the Abode of Safety, where Muslims live in non Islamic countries yet their rights are respected and can practice their religion.

The Ottoman Empire had Dar al-Sulh, or the Abode of Treaty, where a peace treaty allowed Muslim and non Muslim states to engage in relations without any fear of war so long as it was built on mutual respect.

The view which you hold is very simplistic view that extremists tend to hold also. However, these terms are not found in the Qur'an, nor in Hadith and only came about later. As opposed to Jewish teachings of the Old Testament that promoted the killing of all the men and enslavement of all women and children of lands that didn't submit.

For example in Deuteronomy Chapter 20 (Parshah Shoftim)

10. When you approach a city to wage war against it, you shall propose peace to it.

11. And it will be, if it responds to you with peace, and it opens up to you, then it will be, [that] all the people found therein shall become tributary to you, and they shall serve you.

12. But if it does not make peace with you, and it wages war against you, you shall besiege it,

13. and the Lord, your God, will deliver it into your hands, and you shall strike all its males with the edge of the sword.

14. However, the women, the children, and the livestock, and all that is in the city, all its spoils you shall take for yourself, and you shall eat the spoils of your enemies, which the Lord, your God, has given you.

15. Thus you shall do to all the cities that are very far from you, which are not of the cities of these nations.

http://www.chabad.or...le_cdo/aid/9984

Wow, two interesting options. You can either be slaves to the Jews, or they'll kill you, plunder your lands and take your women and children as slaves..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, two interesting options. You can either be slaves to the Jews, or they'll kill you, plunder your lands and take your women and children as slaves..

The definitive book of orthodox Judaism is the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Rsbbis and Sages.

The verses you quote were for Hebrews of the Biblical Era who were as badass as Jihadi Muslims are today.

Judaism has detoxified itself. Primarily it is because Jews have had the shit beat out of them for 1500 years and have been forced to live in lands that were not theirs. It is painful but it is a useful character building exercise.

I look forward (without to much hope) to the day when Islam detoxifies itself.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judaism started 3000 years before Islam ; underwent internal evolution because of (or sometimes independent of) relentless persecution. Detoxification takes time as .Xtianity (at mere 2000 yrs) demonstrates..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone want to hazard any guesses as to what will happen in Syria and Egypt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, two interesting options. You can either be slaves to the Jews, or they'll kill you, plunder your lands and take your women and children as slaves..

The definitive book of orthodox Judaism is the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Rsbbis and Sages.

The verses you quote were for Hebrews of the Biblical Era who were as badass as Jihadi Muslims are today.

Judaism has detoxified itself. Primarily it is because Jews have had the shit beat out of them for 1500 years and have been forced to live in lands that were not theirs. It is painful but it is a useful character building exercise.

I look forward (without to much hope) to the day when Islam detoxifies itself.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Hmmm, interesting.

Though quite unbelievable actually. Especially considering the behavior of many extremist Jews in Israel and abroad who promote Kahanism and other disgusting ideologies claiming that such beliefs are "True Torah" beliefs.

"All of the Palestinians must be killed; men, women, infants, and even their beasts." This was the religious opinion issued one week ago by Rabbi Yisrael Rosen, director of the Tsomet Institute

Or how about:

Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira has been arrested for allegedly firebombing a mosque. Rabbi Shapira published a book entitled The King’s Torah in which he claimed that it was permissible under Jewish law for a Jew to kill a non-Jewish civilian (including a child). He also advocated the expulsion or genocide of all male Palestinians above the age of thirteen.

And:

The rabbi of Safed, a government employee, has decreed that it is strictly forbidden to let apartments to Arabs – including the Arab students at the local medical school. Twenty other town rabbis – whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers, mostly secular, including Arab citizens – have publicly supported this edict.

So I guess you were wrong, looks like Judaism hasn't in fact detoxified and in that case, if it hasn't after 4000 years, what hope is there of it ever happening?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone want to hazard any guesses as to what will happen in Syria and Egypt?

The military will keep ruling Egypt, one way or another, and keep sucking in money, one way or another, from the United States. The military has been running things since Nasser came to power and it has great stakes in the economy.

There seems to be more going on in Syria than meets the eye because the military has to have the power necessary to crush mere civilians. Something's coming in from the outside, something really serious. This may be as much a religious conflict as secular.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, two interesting options. You can either be slaves to the Jews, or they'll kill you, plunder your lands and take your women and children as slaves..

The definitive book of orthodox Judaism is the Babylonian Talmud compiled by Rsbbis and Sages.

The verses you quote were for Hebrews of the Biblical Era who were as badass as Jihadi Muslims are today.

Judaism has detoxified itself. Primarily it is because Jews have had the shit beat out of them for 1500 years and have been forced to live in lands that were not theirs. It is painful but it is a useful character building exercise.

I look forward (without to much hope) to the day when Islam detoxifies itself.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Hmmm, interesting.

Though quite unbelievable actually. Especially considering the behavior of many extremist Jews in Israel and abroad who promote Kahanism and other disgusting ideologies claiming that such beliefs are "True Torah" beliefs.

"All of the Palestinians must be killed; men, women, infants, and even their beasts." This was the religious opinion issued one week ago by Rabbi Yisrael Rosen, director of the Tsomet Institute

Or how about:

Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira has been arrested for allegedly firebombing a mosque. Rabbi Shapira published a book entitled The King’s Torah in which he claimed that it was permissible under Jewish law for a Jew to kill a non-Jewish civilian (including a child). He also advocated the expulsion or genocide of all male Palestinians above the age of thirteen.

And:

The rabbi of Safed, a government employee, has decreed that it is strictly forbidden to let apartments to Arabs – including the Arab students at the local medical school. Twenty other town rabbis – whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers, mostly secular, including Arab citizens – have publicly supported this edict.

So I guess you were wrong, looks like Judaism hasn't in fact detoxified and in that case, if it hasn't after 4000 years, what hope is there of it ever happening?

Rabbi Yitzick is so far from main line Judaism that he is a statistical blip. Hardly a single American Jew would agree with him and overwhelmingly most would curse him for his extremism. Many Jews would say he is as bad as a Muslim.

At this time the only causes permitted to shed blood according to Talmudic Judaism (which is the current form) is (1) self defense (2) to save a life or (3) combat in a just or right war.

Jewish "Jihadis" are as rare as tits on a bull.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rabbi Yitzick is so far from main line Judaism that he is a statistical blip. Hardly a single American Jew would agree with him and overwhelmingly most would curse him for his extremism. Many Jews would say he is as bad as a Muslim.

At this time the only causes permitted to shed blood according to Talmudic Judaism (which is the current form) is (1) self defense (2) to save a life or (3) combat in a just or right war.

Jewish "Jihadis" are as rare as tits on a bull.

Ba'al Chatzaf

The notion that it supports combat in a just or right war supports exactly what the Torah version stated specifically because the Jews believed that their actions were sanctioned by God. So your diversionary tactics aren't working.

Also, sorry but I don't hear enough Jews actually condemning these extremist Jews and in fact, the Israeli government isn't even stopping it which must mean that these extremists are tolerated as it's in Jewish scripture, perhaps you're just hiding the fact that it's a Jewish belief to protect yourself. We know that Jews in the past have hidden their religious beliefs to avoid persecution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comparison between Jew and Muslim fails if it does not consider the breadth of opinion. Bob can and may make a distinction between The Muslims and those Muslims who are extremist clerics (such as, say, Adnan Arour). He can distinguish between Sufis, Alawi, Ismailis, etcetera. He may know that The Muslim/s is not a useful term.

Similarly, The Jew/s is not a very useful term. Obvious and stark differences obtain between, for example, Ba'al himself and the rabbi of Tunis. Ba'al is not a religious Jew, but identifies with the ethnicity and historical peoples as he understands it. He may be for all intents and purposes, an atheist Jew. Such thing as an atheist Muslim -- does this correspond? In any case, just as there are secular (Reformed) Jews, Conservative Jews, and Orthodox Jews, there are also Ultra-Orthodox Jews, Lubavitchers and other anti-Israel Jews who are practically urban American Jewish Salafis, deeply disturbed as they are by modernity, uncovered women, menses, ritual and purity.

When Ba'al deeply discounts the influence of a whackjob nutter Jew, it could be seen to be similar to you, LM, deeply discounting the influence of Arour, or other whackjob nutter clerics who curse and condemn to death entire groups. Or when we discount the influence of Salafis (in America) or the influence of the Mormon FLDS.

You may not, and should not, LM, carry the weight or responsibility for every action or word spoken by a nutter extremist Muslim. Nor should Ba'al, as a secular (atheist?) Jew carry any weight other than his own particular opinions.

See his rather reformist take on Mozhdah Jamalzadah** ...

254749_10150195371494079_7255595_n.jpg

Note, finally, LM, that though you (earlier here at OL) refused in discussion to openly adhere to any one body of jurisprudence under cover of Isam (in other words, whether you follow Shia or Sunni, Sufi, Alawi, Ismail, Yazidi, etcetera precepts) ... at the time you seemed to wish that Islam be seen as a whole, and regard you as Muslim without distinction.

So, here Ba'all (here at OL, over time) sees you as you the Muslim wishes to be seen, without a particular creed or distinctive beliefs. As part of the continuum but not especially distinguishable from those he considers evul, nutty or worse.

Let it be said though, that Ba'al no longer itches for the nuclear button in Afghanistan. He no longer appears willing to turn the Middle East into nuclear glass, perhaps even sparing Iran from that fate -- because of those strange remaining anomalies, the Jews of Iran.

The less lumping, the better, I say. Be true to your own beliefs, but do not pretend to speak for any other Muslim but yourself. We can then expect Ba'al to make a fair trade and consider your individuality and your multiple (perhaps conflicting) loyalties. And he then can refrain from instructing you what The Muslims are or what The Jews think.

He is loyal to The Jews, but not to the nutter Kahanists. You are loyal to The Muslims, but not the nutter Salafists. As Martha suggests, this is a good thing. Treating each other as individuals and not simply One Of Them ... the price we must pay to be considered a fully-functioning human being.

For you and Ba'al are, before you are Muslim or atheist Jew, human.

_____________

** "This is an interesting Vid. I am able to see the Afghani folk as human beings, not Islamic cum Amalekite demons. I no long wish to nuke the lot of them, if it is avoidable to nuke them. I hope in the future they can keep on singing and clapping. And I would like to see them going back to the bushkazi (an Afghani version of capture the flag)."

Edited by william.scherk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

William,

A finely crafted advocacy of moral individualism, I think.

Firm, but gentle.

I don't only tip my hat, I salute you! :)

May each party see that his hot-headedness is only a different side

of the same shared coin. We should all know, at least once, the experience of

looking into the abyss and seeing ourselves looking back at us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William,

A finely crafted advocacy of moral individualism, I think.

Firm, but gentle.

I don't only tip my hat, I salute you! :smile:

May each party see that his hot-headedness is only a different side

of the same shared coin. We should all know, at least once, the experience of

looking into the abyss and seeing ourselves looking back at us.

To clarify, and I know that William was very aware of this, my comments about Judaism being a violent religion that promoted slavery and the killing of innocent people was not my opinion at all.

Rather, it was an exercise to show Baal that the type of arguments that he uses to make Muslims and Islam look violent are in fact just as easily applied to Judaism and Jews because it is quite easy to pick and choose verses from a book out of context and without considering abrogation and also by pointing out the extremist views of a very vocal minority and saying that if some believe this, then all must etc.

I just hope that Baal can look at this and appreciate that it's just not as simple as he thinks and it's really inappropriate to judge the beliefs of 1.6 billion people in the world based on arguments that contain faulted logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that saying something is insignificant by comparison is the same as discounting it. I'm sure that Baal does not support the orthodox jew. Radical christians who murder abortionists are certainly a very serious issue, but relative to the jihad movement they are insignificant. When was the last attack???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now