The Crusades

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First let me say that the Koran does not insist that unbelievers be forcibly converted--they can be killed, instead; or, if they are other people "of the Book" (Jews or Christians), they may be subjugated under Islamic rule and forced to pay the poll tax. Elsewhere in the Koran it is written that "there shall be no compulsion in religion", and as can be seen from the three choices above, there are two other options other than conversion.

However, here is what the Koran does say (in four translations):

(excerpt)
Sura 9:29 Qatiloo allatheena la yu/minoona biAllahi wala bialyawmi al-akhiri wala yuharrimoona ma harrama Allahu warasooluhu wala yadeenoona deena alhaqqi mina allatheena ootoo alkitaba hatta yuAAtoo aljizyata AAan yadin wahum saghiroona

YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

PICKTHAL: Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

SHAKIR: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

KHALIFA: You shall fight back against those who do not believe in GOD, nor in the Last Day, nor do they prohibit what GOD and His messenger have prohibited, nor do they abide by the religion of truth - among those who received the scripture - until they pay the due tax, willingly or unwillingly. (excerpt)

http://www.universalunity.net/quran4/009.qmt.html




[/ QUOTE ]
First, let me start by saying that Christianity is inherently violent, and that this is reflected by all Christians in government, across all time and in all places -- as Christianity has a causal relationship with violence, as I will now demonstrate (because, of course, as we all know now, thanks to our good friend M's beautifully argued theory that Biblical quotes will suffice in proving far-reaching political and social theories):

Exodus 35:2
"On six days work may be done, but the seventh day shall be sacred to you as the sabbath of complete rest to the LORD. Anyone who does work on that day shall be put to death."

Case closed, Christians are violent, homicidal maniacs who must be sent back from whence they came.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't answer the text I provided, which shows that the Koran tells Muslims to be aggressive towards non-believers--so you resort to sarcasm and parody.

But even your parody is wrong, for the text you cited to impugn Christians or Christianity is from the Old Testament (essentially Jewish), not the New Testament--and as such does not reflect the teachings instructions of Jesus, which appear in the New Testament in the Gospels.

The advent of Jesus Christ created (for believers) a new covenant with God, and the old laws were not of primary importance any more. Jesus also turned the Old Testament principles of an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth, and hating one's enemy--completely upside down; instructing instead to forgive those who do you ill, and to love one's enemy; and Jesus proved it by his own real example of not resisting, and even loving and forgiving, his own tormentors and executioners.

Jesus gave the Two Great Commandments:

Matthew 22:36 “[Jesus], which is the great commandment in the law?” And he said to him, ’You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets.”

http://www.secondexodus.com/html/cat...tscommands.htm

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I haven't really read Orianna Fallaci either.



[/ QUOTE ]


Let me understand this : Did you just recommend an author you have NOT read?



[/ QUOTE ]
I have read of her, and interviews with her.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you unable to understand that an author might be brilliant in interviews and have a nice mug for the magazine covers, too, yet his output be crap??

How can you be recommending reading Orianna Falacci when you have not read anything she wrote??

Why not recommend reading what you have read?? I.e. those interviews and stuff.

All this is indicative of the way you are forming your opinions, your ideology and your worldview...

[Chris Alger]

This is another tacit agreement: instead of responding to the evidence, you resort to meangingless denials. The fact remains that you advocate cruelty (land confiscation, war, etc.) toward innocent members of other national, ethnic and religious groups for reasons that you would never tolerate if applied to the yourself. To take an egregious example, you have often advocated seizing land and other collective punishments from "the Arabs" -- meaning innocent others -- if any Arab commits any terrorist act. At the same time, you deny that "the Americans" should ever be collectively punished for the many depredations committed by them, even when such acts are taken not individually or lawlessly but as popular acts of a democratic state. In those cases, you dismiss the crime as a mistake, an abberation or "in the past" and therefore unworthy of concern. When it's the other guy, as in this thread, ancient aggressions merit violent, savage responses against descendants some 300 years hence and therefore presumably forever, a perpetual reign of sadistic vengence that you try to rationalize with a few inapposite denunciations of "fascism." It's a double standard so obvious that only the appalling reality of it being a norm of the American right merits explaining it over and over again.

This proves that your purported reasons for violence have no pincipled basis and can't be taken seriously, leaving only the motive of racism to explain yourself, a fact that you continue to underscore by refusing to face up to your contradictions.

[BluffTHIS!]

I think you are now wasting words MMMMMM. It is clear that political correctness and the liberal inability to distinguish between the way things are and the way they would like them to be, has oozed into every corner of DVaut's brain and prevents him from acknowledging facts and drawing correct conclusions therefrom.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I really liked the way this thread started out, with people discussing history, and facts. Now....it is a nit feast.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, and that's because the nit wit arrived.

He recommends for us to read authors he has not read himself, he chastises without cause the rest of the posters for not being "anti-totalitarian enough" and he comments on historical facts which he's got totally, totally wrong!

Apart from that, his contribution to the thread has been outstanding...

[Cyrus]

Islam is missing its Reformation.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Yep, and that's because the nit wit arrived.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ThaSaltCracka]

Thanks Cyrus [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Andy, I found your post interesting, thank you.

[Cyrus]

Alright, a couple of nitwits.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
This is another tacit agreement: instead of responding to the evidence, you resort to meangingless denials. The fact remains that you advocate cruelty (land confiscation, war, etc.) toward innocent members of other national, ethnic and religious groups for reasons that you would never tolerate if applied to the yourself. To take an egregious example, you have often advocated seizing land and other collective punishments from "the Arabs" -- meaning innocent others -- if any Arab commits any terrorist act. At the same time, you deny that "the Americans" should ever be collectively punished for the many depredations committed by them, even when such acts are taken not individually or lawlessly but as popular acts of a democratic state. In those cases, you dismiss the crime as a mistake, an abberation or "in the past" and therefore unworthy of concern. When it's the other guy, as in this thread, ancient aggressions merit violent, savage responses against descendants some 300 years hence and therefore presumably forever, a perpetual reign of sadistic vengence that you try to rationalize with a few inapposite denunciations of "fascism." It's a double standard so obvious that only the appalling reality of it being a norm of the American right merits explaining it over and over again.

This proves that your purported reasons for violence have no pincipled basis and can't be taken seriously, leaving only the motive of racism to explain yourself, a fact that you continue to underscore by refusing to face up to your contradictions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Chris, your personal accusations are in error, and your conclusions are intellectually vacant; moreover, you are employing the cheap tactic of attempting to steer the focus of the thread away from the subject at hand and divert it instead to personal attacks. Additionally, your gross twisting of my words is simply appalling.

Par tactics for a certain type of lawyer, I suppose; but a truly sad reflection for a human being. I'm not surprised that I had you on ignore before, and I won't be surprised if I have you there again shortly.