Is Islam an evil religion?

[Craig B]

Historically, Islam has been more tolerant of Christianity (let alone Judaism) than vice versa. Christianity survived intact 400 years of Muslim domination of Greece. Judaism was suppressed in Christian Spain in the very year the last Muslim kingdom was conquered (the Spanish Jews sought asylum in other Muslim countries) and Islam was driven from Spain within a few years. Finally, in 1609 all "Moors" or "Moriscoes" were expelled from Spain, regardless of their religious affiliation.

 

[Bill Thompson]

This is just an assumption of ignorance, and rather insulting.
The majority of Muslims do not interpret things the way that video suggests they should. Therefore it is a minority who are trying to redirect Islam in the direction the video describes. ie: hijack

Is that how the real world works to you? There are some people in the Muslim world that are bad but that is ok, even if they are in position of power? Is that what you are saying?

 

[Bill Thompson]

Historically, Islam has been more tolerant of Christianity (let alone Judaism) than vice versa. Christianity survived intact 400 years of Muslim domination of Greece. Judaism was suppressed in Christian Spain in the very year the last Muslim kingdom was conquered (the Spanish Jews sought asylum in other Muslim countries) and Islam was driven from Spain within a few years. Finally, in 1609 all "Moors" or "Moriscoes" were expelled from Spain, regardless of their religious affiliation.

Wasn't Greece once taken over by force by the Turks and the Greeks have to drive them out by force albiet hundreds of years later?

Do you think the Greek Orthodox Christins live in peace with their Islamic neighbor, Turkey?

If Christianity live din Islamic Greece in harmony, why did the Christian Greeks drive them out by force?!?!

I am part Greek and think what you just said is balooney. Am I wrong?

 

[DC]

Is that how the real world works to you? There are some people in the Muslim world but that is ok, even if they are in position of power? Is that what you are saying?

the people that interpret the koran like your video claims they have to, have already a real war on them, and not just some bla bla on the internet.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Yes, the Quran is full of nonsense. But for every piece of absurdity or vileness that anyone quotes here from that work (and there are plenty to choose from!) suggesting it proves that Islam is worse than the other "Abrahamic" religions, I undertake to produce something worse from the Tanakh, the Mishneh Torah, the Shulchan Aruch, or a Talmudic text. That's a promise.

May I reassure Jewish readers, the presence of obnoxious things in old Jewish texts doesn't mean I think Judaism is worse than other religions - it simply contains, like the others, accumulated baggage which can't easily be thrown out. But no sane Jew would use such texts as a guide to personal or political behaviour. Some insane Jews, like insane Christians or Muslims, do exactly that, however, as I will show if asked. Thus, arguments about the deficiencies of the Quran are irrelevant. Just as such arguments about the Old or New Testaments are equally irrelevant and pointless.

As to "abrogation": plenty of it in the Bible. Example - Ezekiel abrogates the principle that God punishes children for their parents' crimes, which is found both in Exodus and Deuteronomy, and states that people are responsible only for their own sins.

I don't get the logic that Islam is ok because this religion or that religion is bad too. Please explain this to me. Seems non sequitur to me.

 

[Bill Thompson]

the people that interpret the koran like your video claims they have to, have already a real war on them, and not just some bla bla on the internet.

Is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

By the way, I know this bit about the interpretation of the Koran you are now briging up does not hold any water. The Quran is not as nebulous as the Bible. The laws are not open to interpretation.

It might suprise you that many people who claim to be muslim don't even know what the quran says because it is not even read to them in a language they understand. The guy I work with is muslim but he does not understand arabic and yet he "reads" the quran in this language everyday. It is supposed to be some kind of good voodoo to scan your eyes across the unintelligible script. Lots of Muslims are illiterate and the ones who can read cannot read the version of the quran that they are given.

Anyway, Scientology helps lots of people. So, is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

 

[DC]

Is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

online war against Islam is fine with me, aslong you stick to facts and not lies like your video.

 

[DC]

Is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

By the way, I know this bit about the interpretation of the Koran you are now briging up does not hold any water. The Quran is not as nebulous as the Bible. The laws are not open to interpretation.

It might suprise you that many people who claim to be muslim don't even know what the quran says because it is not even read to them in a language they understand. The guy I work with is muslim but he does not understand arabic and yet he "reads" the quran in this language everyday. It is supposed to be some kind of good voodoo to scan your eyes across the unintelligible script. Lots of Muslims are illiterate and the ones who can read cannot read the version of the quran that they are given.

Anyway, Scientology helps lots of people. So, is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

Islam is interpreted many ways. it can be seen in daily life. when most Muslim woman walk around like everyone else, but some wear a headscarf.
Some people at work follow ramadan and some say, no i will eat i have a hard job. etc etc. ANTPogo educated you about it far more detailed than i ever could, but you seem to have learned nothing.

 

[Sawbones79]

Is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

By the way, I know this bit about the interpretation of the Koran you are now briging up does not hold any water. The Quran is not as nebulous as the Bible. The laws are not open to interpretation.

It might suprise you that many people who claim to be muslim don't even know what the quran says because it is not even read to them in a language they understand. The guy I work with is muslim but he does not understand arabic and yet he "reads" the quran in this language everyday. It is supposed to be some kind of good voodoo to scan your eyes across the unintelligible script. Lots of Muslims are illiterate and the ones who can read cannot read the version of the quran that they are given.

Anyway, Scientology helps lots of people. So, is the war against Scientology ethical or not? If not, why not? If it is, why isn't a similar war online against Islam be ethical?

If by "online war" you mean ongoing factual criticism angainst an ideology you consider destructive, that's only excercising your right to free speech. Only beware of the thin line into scare- and hatemongering, such as the delusional "muslim imperialism" mindset central to the ideology of Breivik and others of his ilk.

 

[Bill Thompson]

I think there is something going on here that has nothing to do with Islam or any other religion.

I think people follow trends inorder to feel they fit in and are part of the group and just repeat the mantras and cliches to be part of the click.

"all religions are bad"

Great. So what?

<silence>

It is as if no one thought it out that far.

People attack Scientology and maybe Mormonism because that is en vogue. It is not en voge to attack Islam because it is not the current trend. No one whats to be an outsider. No one wants to think for themselves.

But when someone is outside the trend, then they must be somehow wrong or bad or have motives that are dishonest or disrespectful. Attacking them personally would be acceptable and applauded and the attacker feels he has gained recognition and status and respect among peers.

The irony is that this psychology or sociology has a pull beyond logic and reason. Even if someone is gay, they will defend an anti-gay ideology (as Islam is) in order to feel they are part of the group. That has happened here. No, I do not think anything is wrong with being gay. I do think it is wrong to defend a religion that is anti-gay. The fact that some people (who have announced that they are gay) have done it here is not a good thing.

 

[DC]

I think there is something going on here that has nothing to do with Islam or any other religion.

I think people follow trends inorder to feel they fit in and are part of the group and just repeat the mantras and cliches to be part of the click.

"all religions are bad"

Great. So what?

<silence>

It is as if no one thought it out that far.

People attack Scientology and maybe Mormonism because that is en vogue. It is not en voge to attack Islam because it is not the current trend. No one whats to be an outsider. No one wants to think for themselves.

But when someone is outside the trend, then they must be somehow wrong or bad or have motives that are dishonest or disrespectful. Attacking them personally would be acceptable and applauded and the attacker feels he has gained recognition and status and respect among peers.

the problem is that you are wrong as has been pointed out over and over again. But somehow you seem not happy enough to just debunk their nonsense like the Science in the Koran BS. or the inhuman sharia laws.
you must lie about it and claim it is a duty for all Muslim to take over the world in a violent jihad.

with such lies you destroy your own case.

 

[Craig B]

Bill Thompson

I am part Greek and think what you just said is balooney. Am I wrong?

Yes. Which part of you is Greek? Not your brain, to be sure. I DID NOT WRITE that Turks and Greeks always lived in harmony, and I DID NOT WRITE that the Greeks didn't have to rebel against their Turkish overlords, just as the Muslim Arabs had to rebel against these same Muslim Turkish overlords, and Italian Catholics once rebelled against Austrian Catholic overlords.

I DID WRITE that the Greek Church survived the Turkish dominion for 400 years, while Islam was wiped out in Spain after only a few years of the Christian reconquest. For this and similar historical reasons I stated that Islam has traditionally been more tolerant of Christianity than vice versa. Not to mention the two religions' relative tolerance of Judaism. "Balooney" is an excellent description of your own writings on this subject.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Islam is interpreted many ways. it can be seen in daily life. when most Muslim woman walk around like everyone else, but some wear a headscarf.
Some people at work follow ramadan and some say, no i will eat i have a hard job. etc etc. ANTPogo educated you about it far more detailed than i ever could, but you seem to have learned nothing.

She did not know what she was talking about. It does not matter that people wear different clothes that has more to do with culture. Some of the differences have nothing to do with "interpretation". Many differences has to do with pressure from Western Culture.

For example. Mohammed owned slaves. If not for abolishment from western cultures, Muslims would be copying Mohammed's exmaple.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Bill Thompson

Yes. Which part of you is Greek? Not your brain, to be sure. I DID NOT WRITE that Turks and Greeks always lived in harmony, and I DID NOT WRITE that the Greeks didn't have to rebel against their Turkish overlords, just as the Muslim Arabs had to rebel against these same Muslim Turkish overlords, and Italian Catholics once rebelled against Austrian Catholic overlords.

I DID WRITE that the Greek Church survived the Turkish dominion for 400 years, while Islam was wiped out in Spain after only a few years of the Christian reconquest. For this and similar historical reasons I stated that Islam has traditionally been more tolerant of Christianity than vice versa. Not to mention the two religions' relative tolerance of Judaism. "Balooney" is an excellent description of your own writings on this subject.

you said that christianity survived in tact in Greece when the muslisms were in power. You implied a harmony that never existed.

that is balooney.

The highlighted area is not true. The former chrsitian churches in Turkey have been gutted and the priceless christian icons have been defaced and painted over with islamic symbols. There is little respect for christianity in islam.

It is a common myth that Islam is tollerant of other religions or that they are more tollerant than other religions would be to them.

Religious minorities have not “flourished” under Islam. In fact, they have dwindled to mere shadows after centuries of persecution and discrimination. Some were converted from their native religion by brute force, others under the agonizing strain of dhimmitude.

What Muslims call “tolerance,” others correctly identify as institutionalized discrimination. The consignment of Jews and Christians to dhimmis under Islamic rule means that they are not allowed the same religious rights and freedoms as Muslims. They cannot share their faith, for example, or build houses of worship without permission.

Historically, dhimmis have often had to wear distinguishing clothing or cut their hair in a particular manner that indicates their position of inferiority and humiliation. They do not share the same legal rights as Muslims, and must even pay a poll tax (the jizya). They are to be killed or have their children taken from them if they cannot satisfy the tax collector’s requirements.

For hundreds of years, the Christian population in occupied Europe had their sons taken away and forcibly converted into Muslim warriors (known as Jannisaries) by the Ottoman Turks.

It is under this burden of discrimination and third-class status that so many religious minorities converted to Islam over the centuries. Those who didn’t often faced economic and social hardships that persist to this day and are appalling by Western standards of true religious tolerance and pluralism.

For those who are not “the People of the Book,” such as Hindus and atheists, there is very little tolerance to be found once Islam establishes political superiority. The Quran tells Muslims to “fight in the way of Allah” until “religion is only for Allah.” The conquered populations face death if they do not establish regular prayer and charity in the Islamic tradition (ie. the pillars of Islam).

Tamerlane and other Muslim warriors slaughtered tens of millions of Hindus and Buddhists, and displaced or forcibly converted millions more over the last thousand years. Islamists in Somalia behead Christians. In Iran, they are jailed.

One of the great ironies of Islam is that non-Muslims are to be treated according to the very standards by which Muslims themselves would claim the right to violent self-defense were the shoe on the other foot. Islam is its own justification. Most Muslims therefore feel no need to explain the ingrained arrogance and double standard.

There are about 500 verses in the Quran that speak of Allah’s hatred for non-Muslims and the punishment that he has prepared for their unbelief. There is also a tiny handful that say otherwise, but these are mostly earlier verses that many scholars consider to be abrogated by the later, more violent ones.

As for Sura 109, any true Quran scholar will point out that the purpose of the verse was to distinguish Islam from the gods of the Quraysh (one of which was named "Allah") rather than to advocate religious tolerance for non-Muslims. At the time that he narrated this very early verse, Muhammad did not have any power, and thus no choice but to be "tolerant" of others. By contrast, there was no true tolerance shown when he returned to Mecca with power many years later and demanded the eviction or death of anyone who would not convert to Islam. In fact, he physically destroyed the cherished idols of the people to whom he had previously addressed in Sura 109.

If tolerance simply means discouraging the mass slaughter of those of a different faith, then today's Islam generally meets this standard more often than not. But, if tolerance means allowing people of other faiths the same religious liberties that Muslims enjoy, then Islam is fundamentally the most intolerant religion under the sun.

What is more is this. The Greeks had the power and technology to invade Turkey. But it is not the way of the Greek Orthodox. Yet it is the way of the Turkish Muslims. So your believe that Islam is more tolerante than Christianity does not make sense.

 

[Craig B]

In fact, of the original Chrisian Patriarchates, Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople, all except Rome have undergone Muslim rule, or have been under it for centuries. All survive. Antioch was mauled by the Crusaders; and so was Constantinople, sacked, plundered and occupied for half a century by the Western Christians. So weakened that it finally fell to the Turks ...

 

[Craig B]

Following the war of 1920, unleashed by a Greek invasion of Turkey, Christians were expelled from Turkey, and Muslims from Greece. The Greek city of Smyrna, with its Churches, was destroyed. Turkey was by then under secular rule. The caliphate was abolished just at that time. These were wartime nationalist atrocities. How many old mosqes survive in Greece, or Spain, or Sicily?

You have not addressed my point about the survival of the Greek church, and the destruction of Spanish Islam (and Judaism).

 

[Bill Thompson]

In fact, of the original Chrisian Patriarchates, Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Rome and Constantinople, all except Rome have undergone Muslim rule, or have been under it for centuries. All survive. Antioch was mauled by the Crusaders; and so was Constantinople, sacked, plundered and occupied for half a century by the Western Christians. So weakened that it finally fell to the Turks ...

I am not a Catholic, but weren't The Crusades a response to this? People ridicule the Catholics because of the Crusades but isn't it true that, if not for Islam, there would be no Crusades?

If that is true, and I am not sure it is, woundn't that be contrary to your comment that Islam is more tolerant than Christianity? I mean, it wound not matter if the Catholics kicked back harder and responded with intollerance. It would be like condeming the Americans in the war in the Pacific after Pearl Harbor.

 

[Bill Thompson]

Following the war of 1920, unleashed by a Greek invasion of Turkey, Christians were expelled from Turkey, and Muslims from Greece. The Greek city of Smyrna, with its Churches, was destroyed. Turkey was by then under secular rule. The caliphate was abolished just at that time. These were wartime nationalist atrocities. How many old mosqes survive in Greece, or Spain, or Sicily?

You have not addressed my point about the survival of the Greek church, and the destruction of Spanish Islam (and Judaism).

Are you saying that since the greek church survived, it means the muslims were tolerant of them? I have addressed this issue of "tolerance". Tolerance would mean to me not invading in the first place.

And I do not see what the fact that there are no masques in Greece has anthing to do with them not being accepting of them. The muslims invaded. They were kicked out. Why should there be a memory of them in Greece?

 

[Bill Thompson]

Following the war of 1920, unleashed by a Greek invasion of Turkey, Christians were expelled from Turkey, and Muslims from Greece. The Greek city of Smyrna, with its Churches, was destroyed. Turkey was by then under secular rule. The caliphate was abolished just at that time. These were wartime nationalist atrocities. How many old mosqes survive in Greece, or Spain, or Sicily?

I would hope none.

 

[Craig B]

Are you saying that since the greek church survived, it means the muslims were tolerant of them? I have addressed this issue of "tolerance". Tolerance would mean to me not invading in the first place.

And I do not see what the fact that there are no masques in Greece has anthing to do with them not being accepting of them. The muslims invaded. They were kicked out. Why should there be a memory of them in Greece?

Yes I am saying that, by definition, it is tolerance. Not invading is a different issue. England, Scotland, France, when all were Catholic, invaded one another all the time. The Turks invaded Muslim Iran and Muslim Syria and Muslim Egypt. So what?

Answer my point.

Where are the Spanish Muslims and Jews?