207 Killed In Sri Lanka by Muslims

Author: Vader

Posts

Total: 155
#91
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
(Part 1)

I very good reason to believe all those verses are either contradicted by other verses or have simply been abrogated by islamic law. ...their translation is disingenuous to a fault and they know it. tell me what was islam "defending" when it  invaded Europe and the Caucuses and the Indian Subcontinent,  your academically learned moderate muslims, they don't explain that do they?
And yours aren't?

?. If you mean contradictions in the bible NT or OT yes there are many I  highlight them often when questioning Christians or biblical scholars. I don't see your point. What do you mean "yours"??


You have good reason to believe that they were erased?
I said contradicted by other verses or abrogated. I don't have time to check them but I will.  But for now, many of the fluffy  - christian-like- verses in the quran either only apply to muslims as instruction on how to love and respect their muslim brothers and do not apply to anyone else or have simply been abrogated and replaced with something else. The excuse Muhammad gives for doing this is because, he says, satan caused him write to them,  and are known  to the world as The Satanic Verses.



Why are they less valid than yours?

You keep saying "mine" as if I am some defender of christianity and the New Testament, I am not either. I have started more thread criticizing and questioning Christianity than I have Islam, that's a fact.  But I will say again,  you will not find The Christ instructing his followers to go out into the world and rape, maim or murder anyone who refuses to believe in him or refuses to submit to his ideology as does the god of Quran. 



#92
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
(Part 2)

You can read Arabic?

No,  I can't read Greek or Latin either. But can every single Pakistani muslim read arabic.  Listen If I have misquoted the quran, simply tell me I have and we can discuss it. But please, don't start giving me bs about not understanding the quran simply because I cannot speak or read arabic. It is an old argument and it doesn't work.

Also, when did this atrocity happen, and was this from a representative group of Muslims .

Which atrocity are you referring to? Are you talking about the muslim invasions that conquered many nations converting  by the sword as it went. There have been many muslim empires The muslim Ottoman Empires were, I believe, three of the biggest, not to mention other muslim empires.

Is it justified to hold all Muslims accountable for what happened hundreds of years ago?

Listen my friend, it was you who brought The Letter to Baghdadi into the mix. I have picked just  one item from the list in the letter, this one, item 8 where they, your moderate muslim academics, state:

8. "Jihad in Islam is defensive war. It is not permissible without the right cause, the right purpose and the right rules of conduct".http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com/

I simply ask you and these moderate muslim academics,  if the above truly be the case, what were muslims " defending" when they conquered large swaths of Europe, the Caucuses, the Holy Land and the Indian subcontinent? 

 Is it justified to hold all Muslims accountable for what happened hundreds of years ago? 
(A) Sometimes it maybe the case. It really depends on the subject. Christians are alway having their noses pushed into the "crusades" and the Old Testament. But these people do this because they are running out of argument and are those who do this seem to forget that (1) the crusades were in direct response to over 400 years of muslim invasion into various parts of the globe. (2) the Old Testament is an ancient text written for and by Hebrews.

Should we hold Buddhists accountable for the atrocities committed against the Rohingya How about the Philippines for action taken against the Moro people?

If they are happening now then they should be held to account. so my answer is yes. but see my reply above at (A). 

Also, yes. Verses tend to contradict one another. Its a thousand year old book,

It is an old book and its instructions are STILL being adhered to by its adherents. 
just like the Bible.

 Yes again. I agree see above.  But I have already covered this above a few times now. the Old Testament is an ancient text written for and by Hebrews and has nothing much in common with, or a place in,  todays western "modern society"  

People tend to have a double-standard when it comes to Islam.

They do. I don't. There are many contradictions and vile passages in the OT  bible as I have already made clear. And what I have also have made clear is that the Quran is barbaric and has no place in a western  "modern society"  and the New Testament is not barbaric.

Additionally:


"We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely"http://corpus.quran.com/translation.jsp?chapter=5&verse=32

Indeed good old verse 5:32.  Our Western  21st century world leaders are forever quoting this one single verse. Strange they never get as far as the next verse down isn't it. I wonder why;

Quran 5:33 – unless, those who wage war againstAllah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption/mischief isnone but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cutoff from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for thema disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.

I said none of those things. I don't know what you are insinuating about my character, but it is not an accurate portrayal of a conversation I ever had in public.

I know you haven't said any of those things.  I was thanking you and praising your behaviour  and intellect  in keeping with good taste and propriety i.e. your decorum, In other words it comes as a refreshing change to actually discuss these problems such as Islam and or christianity without the usual abuse. So I thank you again. It is nice exchanging with you. 

#93
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Stephen
So that is ALL muslims,  extremist and so called "moderate muslims" alike read exactly the same Quran, Hadith & Surah. We have to ask then which muslims among ALL of these muslims are reading the quran and interpreting it correctly. Do you know?
It's patently obvious that it's the very vast majority, otherwise you'd be dead instead of hiding under your bed.


#94
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Stephen
No it isn't the same. Nowhere in the New Testament will you read instructions from the Christian god
Do try to get an education. The NT is not the bible, you conflate that which you know nothing about with everything else that you know nothing about.
#95
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Stephen
What is it like being as supremely ignorant as the Jihadists you so admire?
#96
ResurgetExFavilla
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 627
3
2
7
ResurgetExFavilla's avatar
ResurgetExFavilla
3
2
7
Everyone say 'thank you Saudi Arabia!' So glad we put them in power; there may be violent terror movements destroying timeless cultural heritage and butchering religious minorities around the globe, but at least Israel is a bit more cozy!
#97
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
So that is ALL muslims,  extremist and so called "moderate muslims" alike read exactly the same Quran, Hadith & Surah. We have to ask then which muslims among ALL of these muslims are reading the quran and interpreting it correctly. Do you know?
It appears you take the view that it is the jihadist interpretation that is the correct one and terrorists are obeying what the koran and hadith teach.
That is the view of 'non-moderate' Muslims, but it is not accepted by all scholars nor is it reflected in the actual behaviour of the vast majority of Muslims.

Instead of pointing out the obvious - ie  the presence of passages that permit of jihadist interpretation - it would be more useful to examine why 'fundamentalist' interpretations of Islam have gained increased significance over the last few decades.

The koran has not changed for over a thousand years - I don't think Sri Lankan Muslims suddenly came across the verses you highlight and decided to act on them.   Nor did the Sultan of Brunei open his Koran for the first time last week. 

Earlier in the C20 the musim world was moving towards liberalism and secularism (a few hundred years after the west, but better late than never!), but more recently we are seeing the hard line gaining significance..   I may be wrong, but there seems to be an upswing in hardline religion generally, eg conservative christianity in the west (esp. the US), militant hinduism in India and Buddhism in Myanmar.

Of course there are passages in the Koran that permit a jihadist interpretation, but there must be reasons why those interpretations are - at least apparently - gaining ground.    In my view, the problems posed by religious extremism are not fully explained by the presence of this or that passage in the Koran.   




 

#98
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
Why are some Muslims called "moderate" and by whom?  

#99
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Snoopy
I think it reflects on how badly the phenomenon is understood.  Basically it is necessary to have terms to distinguish between Muslim fanatics and muslims who are not fanatical.   'Moderate' is the word that has emerged for the latter group and hatever its defects we are stuck with it.   Many Muslims don't like the term because it suggests they are not as religious or pious as the extermists.   Such Muslims often refer to thmseles as simply 'muslims' and deny that the fanatics are Muslims at all - hence Erdogan's quote that 'there are no moderate muslims', which as often misconstrued in the west as supporting extremism but was in fact disowning it.

Just as fundamentlism has always been a strand within Christianity, Jihadism has always been a strand within Islam.  It pretty much disappeared in the late C19 and early C20, but it has clearly made a comeback and now holds power - or exerts considerable influence in many countries and regions.  

The reason a group of Muslims killed over 200 Sri lankans is not because there is a verse in the Koran - its because something has made a particular interpretation of that passage gain acceptance with a significant minority of Muslims.  



#100
Snoopy
Snoopy's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,320
2
2
4
Snoopy's avatar
Snoopy
2
2
4
-->
@keithprosser
Fundamentalism is a philosophy originally formalized in the 19th century by protestants, aimed at establishing the essential fundamentals of Christianity.  


#101
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Snoopy
Terms!   In away fundamentalism was the default belief of Christians for nearly 2000 years.   It just didn't need a name until recently when non-fundamentlism arose.
#102
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@keithprosser
So that is ALL muslims,  extremist and so called "moderate muslims" alike read exactly the same Quran, Hadith & Surah. We have to ask then which muslims among ALL of these muslims are reading the quran and interpreting it correctly. Do you know?

It appears you take the view that it is the jihadist interpretation that is the correct one and terrorists are obeying what the koran and hadith teach.

Yes it may appear that way to you. You only see what you want to see. But the truth is I don't know. Do you? Did you not see my questions on the end of that sentence? I have reposted it above so you can read it. It is clearly written and in bold.  Can you see it?  Now, can you answer that question or not? Because I don't know, DO YOU!? If you do know who is interpreting this quran correctly then spit it out, lets have it. But you don't know either do you.

That is the view of 'non-moderate' Muslims,
'non-moderate' being Jihadi muslim extremist who read the same quran as the so called "moderate muslims";   Yes we have already done that keith, 

but it is not accepted by all scholars nor is it reflected in the actual behaviour of the vast majority of Muslims.
 So, what's your point? There muslims scholars  agree that Jihad is holy war until all religion is for allah as per quran.  And I have already done the "majority of muslims". How many times. the majority are irrelevant.  It was said that nearly 2,000,000 people marched on London in protest against the illegal war in Iraq and most people sitting at home didn't agree with that war either. But they were irrelevant. If you want to keep up the "not all muslims" rhetoric knock yourself out, It doesn't change a damn thing and it doesn't mean anything either.



Instead of pointing out the obvious - ie  the presence of passages that permit of jihadist interpretation - it would be more useful to examine why 'fundamentalist' interpretations of Islam have gained increased significance over the last few decades.

It might just be useful, So start your thread then. I can't wait to read you examinations of how or why 'fundamentalist'  interpretations of Islam have gained increased significance over the last few decades? 

The koran has not changed for over a thousand years -
I know. It might even be "more useful to examine why islam" hasn't reformed. There's another thread for you to examine and start. My, you are going to be busy aren't you?

Of course there are passages in the Koran that permit a jihadist interpretation, but there must be reasons why those interpretations are - at least apparently - gaining ground.

Yes you have said that twice and I respond with the same reply. Why don't you start thread "examining why" this appears to be the case. I personally don't believe jihad has ever gone away.  You seem to believe that it  just happened in these last few decades, but as usual give no reason or support for your beliefs. It is very easy just to spout an opinion without evidence or reason as you often do. You tell me you are "no fan of Islam", but never explain why. You accuse me of showing islam in a bad light but then fail to show Islam in a good light when repeatedly asked to do so. You call me a racist and a bigot , a spreader of hate and intolerance likened me to the KKK and of being far right when you know absolutely nothing about me and that favourite tag all apologists use "islamophobic".  Yet I have slated and criticise the Bible new & Old Testaments  and Christianity yet you don't mind that one single bit.  You don't call me Christianophobic., why is that?
   


#103
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@keithprosser
In my view, the problems posed by religious extremism are not fully explained by the presence of this or that passage in the Koran. 

  So lets see your explanation as to where these muslim terrorist are getting the idea that it is allah's will to blow little girls to pieces. Or are you just spouting again.

I don't think Sri Lankan Muslims suddenly came across the verses you highlight and decided to act on them.   Nor did the Sultan of Brunei open his Koran for the first time last week.  

That's right, They didn't. And neither did the Sultan. No, they also have read the same quran as the muslim terrorist.But  you are very good at omitting or simply ignoring what I say. This is more of your sly bs tactics  to allow yourself to spout something that you believe I haven't recognised. So again go back to post #90 and read what I have actually wrote and stop being so fkn ignorant. Here you go. save you the trouble 

From post 90. Look for the word  REAFFIRMED. it is written in  bold  AND underlined  so only you can miss it  intentionally.

(4) Islam on the other hand has not moved a single millimeter in over 1400 years and has absolutely no intention of changing and conforming to a 21st century "modern society" .  Take for example the Muslim Sultan of Brunei Hassanal Bolkiah who has just only weeks ago confirmed his allegiance to Islamic shariah  law and reaffirmed ancient Islamic dictates and called for "stronger islamic law"

"Brunei is enacting a strict new penal code that imposes death by stoning for adultery and gay sex, as well as amputations as punishment for theft, despite widespread criticism"https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/04/brunei-enacts-sharia-law-sultan-calls-stronger-islam-190403060932396.html

Now lets us look at the word REAFFIRMED  and its meaning, shall we children.

To  REAFFIRM is to - State again strongly. - Confirm the validity of something previously established. 

So, no keith I didn't think Sri Lankan Muslims suddenly came across the verses you or I or anyone else highlight and decided to act on them as I have clearly stated. AND NO ! I don't believe the Sultan of Brunei opened his Koran for the first time last week.  This is why I mentioned it. The verses are there and have been REAFFIRMED  and stated strongly by non other than a muslim Sultan.So your devious intention to make me look somehow retarded  has backfired. The reason I mentioned the Muslim Sultans  barbaric dictates was to show that Islam had absolutely no intention of reforming. he proved my point!

#104
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Snoopy
Why are some Muslims called "moderate"and by whom?  

There is no such thing as a "moderate muslim" . It is simply yet another appeasing  term invented by left wing liberal apologists of the West. Muslims it is said find the term "moderate muslim" extremely offensive.


Turkey Rejects "Moderate Islam"

"These epithets of 'moderate Islam' are very ugly, it is disrespectful and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it."Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.  He also claimed that the "patent of this concept originated in the West," which "really want[s] to weaken Islam."

So there you have it from the horse's mouth. If this muslim Prime Minister of a country that once had three muslim empires under its belt doesn't recognise this "offensive and ugly" term, then who is some left wing liberal in the west to argue with him.

"Can we drop the term ‘moderate Muslim’? It’s meaningless". The word moderate means devout to some, liberal to others. We don’t need it to describe ordinary followers of a tolerant religion

I think I would find it offensive also as it indicates a division and separatism among a religious group. It could be regarded as hate speech by some muslims. But that is only my opinion.

#105
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
I think I would find it offensive also as it indicates a division and separatism among a religious group. It could be regarded as hate speech by some muslims. But that is only my opinion.
The reason muslims don't like the label 'moderate muslim' is that they feel it implies 'undevout muslim'.   It is as if they aren't blowing up churches they are not 'proper muslims'.  

You linked to an article by Sarraz Manzoor - I offer a link to a 30 minute radio 4 documentary he made on the subject.  

#106
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
The reason muslims don't like the label 'moderate muslim is that they feel it implies 'undevout muslim'.

I would have never have guessed that if you hadn't mentioned it. Although I have mentioned above that IN MY OPINION and have made it extremely clear THAT "I think I would find it offensive also as it indicates a division and separatism among a religious group". See those words again keith I have emboldened them and underlined them for you. Now go back to post 104 above last sentence.


 So they have a reason then.   It is strange that you think this. This is something you have never admitted before when the question of  what it actually means  to be a  "moderate muslim".  No you usual answer to this thorny question is simply " like a ordinary Englishman".


that they feel it implies 'undevout muslim'.  

Yes keith THEY do. And with good reason.  Are you going to tell them that their reasons are unfounded? I doubt it. You wouldn't know where to begin. As usual, your full of spouting without reasoning behind it.


It is as if they aren't blowing up churches they are not 'proper muslims'.   

yes opinion and more desperation. Stop it, grow up and start discussing. or simply leave the thread.

You linked to an article by Sarraz Manzoor - I offer a link to a 30 minute radio 4 documentary .

 Why should I listen to it keith? Does he contradict what he has already said on the matter of " moderate muslims" and "dropping" the phrase? No? then I do not need to listen to it , now do I.
 You have given me your interpretation of what it means to be a "moderate muslim" , haven't you? Have you changed your mind? 

I am quite happy to accept the opinion from someone who actually does know and who is an ACTUAL muslim. I know, like all apologist that you cannot accept facts, but here it is again from the horse's mouth:

"These epithets of 'moderate Islam' are very ugly, it is disrespectful and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that's it."Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.  He also claimed that the "patent of this concept originated in the West," which "really want[s] to weaken Islam."

Get over it!

And I just love the way that you have totally ignored my responses you you other boring posts. 

#107
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
I know, like all apologist that you cannot accept facts, but here it is again from the horse's mouth:
You think anyone who isn't frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Islam is an apologist!

I note you prefer to link to the Gatestone institute which Wikipedia describes as "a right-wing anti-Muslim think tank".  A different slant on Erdogan's remarks is provided by the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily News.


I provide that link because I think it's important to see things from more than one angle - especially if that one angle is that of "a right-wing anti-Muslim think tank"

Now, I don't see what I post as apologetics.   I'm saying 'things are complicated' and I try to describe some of the complication - that isn't apologetics.  Like it or not, there will be a significant presence of Muslims in Britain from now on.  "Get over it". 

#108
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@keithprosser
You think anyone who isn't frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Islam is an apologist!

I have a sneak feeling it is you who is getting frustrated and maybe "frothing at the mouth" because you have no answer to the facts that I present.  I can assure you, there is no "frothing" my end.  but watching you splutter and stutter and trip over yourself and paint yourself often into a corner, I will admit gives me pleasure at times. It is nice to see a self satisfied, pompous  smug buffon such as yourself, wriggle in frustration at the inability to respond without name calling.

Insulting me  with silly opinion is not discussing  the problems that you yourself have risen on the matter of Muslim extremism..

Let me remind you.

In my view, the problems posed by religious extremism are not fully explained by the presence of this or that passage in the Koran.  
So lets see your explanation as to where these muslim terrorist are getting the idea that it is allah's will to blow little girls to pieces. Or are you just spouting again.

It appears you take the view that it is the jihadist interpretation that is the correct one and terrorists are obeying what the koran and hadith teach.

Yes it may appear that way to you. You only see what you want to see. But the truth is I don't know. Do you? Did you not see my questions on the end of that sentence? I have reposted it above so you can read it. It is clearly written and in bold.  Can you see it?  Now, can you answer that question or not? Because I don't know, DO YOU!? If you do know who is interpreting this quran correctly then spit it out, lets have it. But you don't know either do you. 

Instead of pointing out the obvious - ie  the presence of passages that permit of jihadist interpretation - it would be more useful to examine why 'fundamentalist' interpretations of Islam have gained increased significance over the last few decades.

It might just be useful, So start your thread then. I can't wait to read you examinations of how or why 'fundamentalist'  interpretations of Islam have gained increased significance over the last few decades? 


The koran has not changed for over a thousand years - 
I know. It might even be "more useful to examine why islam" hasn't reformed. There's another thread for you to examine and start. My, you are going to be busy aren't you?

Now, I don't see what I post as apologetics.
Of course you don't! No prizes or surprises there is there.


  I'm saying 'things are complicated' and I try to describe some of the complication - that isn't apologetics. 

No you don't- unless i have missed something -. So show me, where it is that you have attempted " to describe  some of the complications". What specifically are the complications? Where do they originate?   Who causes them? Why are they so "complicated"? How can they be solved? lets here it. Or are you just spouting AGAIN!?

Like it or not, there will be a significant presence of Muslims in Britain from now on. " Get over it"

I say. Dreary me. There there.  Talk about "frothing"!. Calm down my old son, calm down.

"from now on"!? LOL, you really are desperate aren't you? Muslims have been coming to and living in Britain since the 60's to my knowledge I grew up with many Arab kids and went to school with many in Wednesbury Staffs . 


"Get over it".  
Oh deary me. You are frothing aren't you. No, I won't get over it. And neither will the friends and relatives of those little girls blown to bits in Manchester or the friends and relatives of Lee Rigby.  I can tolerate it, which is something Islam doesn't  even entertain, but then to tolerate infers dislike and disagreement , and that is the crux with you isn't it. You want me to - accept -  it and not just tolerate it. 

Go away and come back when you have answers to your own questions instead of just spouting just words  "we should" be looking at or examining and then not actually telling us what "we" should be looking at and examining!!  




#109
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Stephen
Why are you so frightened by several thousand criminals in the Middle East, oh they want to frighten you but what sort of person are you when they've been so successful?
#110
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@disgusted
Why are you so frightened by several thousand criminals in the Middle East,

At least your beginning to recognise that it is more than just "one or two" muslims terrorist that want to murder or convert anyone not muslim. Well done.
GOOD BOY!!!

Yes criminals, muslim criminals committing acts of terrorism and who are carrying out the will of their god Allah. Well done again. GOOD BOY!

It's a fact that nobody is born with a religion,
 
Muslims Born with a religion  were created muslim are according to muslims,Muhammad the prophet and Allah the god of islam.  
 
anybody who claims otherwise has serious mental health issues. 
So Muslims, Muhammad the prophet and Allah the god of islam all have " mental health issues" . I see, OK, hypocrite. I have never said anything like that. I am glad it was you who said that and I will never let you forget that it was you who said that..
 
You attempt to tell me what some religious people believe .......
 
I didn't attempt to tell you anything. I corrected you on your belief that" Nobody is born with a religion installed. I have shown you the evidence of what muslims believe.  Muslims who have  babies of islamic parenthood and born into the islamic religion are born muslims according to muslims, Muhammad the prophet and Allah the god of islam.  What are you finding confusing about that.
 
 
 
.........and tell me how wrong their beliefs are, 
 Example Of me telling you that. Off you trot lets see it then.

You obviously don't understand ANYTHING but keep blathering, it's funny.

I am pleased you find it funny. I happen to understand that  you are a full blown hypocrite of that there is no confusion on my part.. 

YOU infer that muslims are "stupid" and islam is "stupid" and the prophet muhammad is "  stupid " and that the prophet muhammad and muslims all  have " serious mental health issues" .

Like I said, your a fkn hypocrite, who doesn't accept facts even when they are shoved in your gaping uneducated pie hole.


You're quite confused. Nobody is born with a religion installed, no matter what your profit [sic] says, hahaha.

It is only your opinion that "Nobody is born with a religion installed," Muslims believe different and are taught  different to what you believe. ARE THEY ALL CONFUSED!!!? .  
 

#111
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
If you do know who is interpreting this quran correctly then spit it out, lets have it. But you don't know either do you. 
As an atheist, I don't quite understand what 'correct interpretation' means.   Neither peace nor war can be Allah's will if Allah does not exist so there is no 'correct interpretation' as far as I am concerned.

For example, the pacifistic Ahmadiyya interpret islam quite differently from the Salafists who dominate IS.   Neither is correct, or closer to non-existent  Allah's will.  Which interpreation dominates at any given time is the product of historical accidents, just as the UK being protestant rather Catholic is.

Religion is a social phenomenon, shaped and directed by social forces.   I suspect that the real cause of what happened in Sri Lanka is not what is in the koran but power struggles in the Muslim world, economic conditions, under-employment of young men, mis-directed loyalties and so on.  Many people point a finger at Saudi Arabia which certainly has the wealth and power to promote and export its notoriously backward form of Wahabbist Islam worldwide.











#112
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@keithprosser
If you do know who is interpreting this quran correctly then spit it out, lets have it. But you don't know either do you. 
As an atheist, I don't quite understand what 'correct interpretation' means. 

So, as I guessed. You don't know. And neither do I and I have never professed to know either.

  Neither peace nor war can be Allah's will if Allah does not exist so there is no 'correct interpretation' as far as I am concerned.
 But that is ONLY your opinion of someone's religion. Muslims , millions of muslim will disagree with and do disagree with you.

But then why are you even commenting here on this thread? I am discussing islam,a religious ideology believed by over a billion people worldwide and you don't believe any of it do you "as an atheist".  

Neither is correct, or closer to non-existent  Allah's will. 
"Neither is correct?"   That's a good start, keith.  Well then why don't you start a thread on your opinion? Or are you just going to keep defaulting back to  you oft used get out "as  an atheist", whilst you purposely ignore the fact that over a billion muslims believe in allah and his prophet. You do this every time that you corner yourself with your own pompous arrogant opinion. 

I suspect that the real cause of what happened in Sri Lanka is not what is in the koran but power struggles in the Muslim world, 

And apart from "economic conditions, under-employment of young men, mis-directed loyalties" what are the reasons you believe this is not a religious power struggle are what exactly when the evidence shows the opposite.
  Many people point a finger at Saudi Arabia which certainly has the wealth and power to promote and export its notoriously backward form of Wahabbist Islam worldwide. 

A "backward form of Wahabbist Islam" you say. But it is still Islam. OK. So that would be an interpretation  or "form" as you put it. Are there any other interpretations or "forms"? or are you just spouting an opinion again without supporting evidence?.


Neither peace nor war can be Allah's will if Allah does not exist.

 The quran says different and billions believe in the existence of allah. You have to look at this from that stance. But you won't  do this because then second you do, you will simply have to admit that there is something wrong with Islam AND how it is being interpreted. In truth keith, you really are a coward.

Now. How about YOU starting some threads on your opinions and you "examinations" of Islam or is that too risky for you?



Of course there are passages in the Koran that permit a jihadist interpretation, but there must be reasons why those interpretations are - at least apparently - gaining ground.

Yes you have said that twice and I respond with the same reply. Why don't you start thread "examining why" this appears to be the case. I personally don't believe jihad has ever gone away.  You seem to believe that it  just happened in these last few decades, but as usual give no reason or support for your beliefs. It is very easy just to spout an opinion without evidence or reason as you often do. You tell me you are "no fan of Islam", but never explain why. You accuse me of showing islam in a bad light but then fail to show Islam in a good light when repeatedly asked to do so. You call me a racist and a bigot , a spreader of hate and intolerance likened me to the KKK and of being far right when you know absolutely nothing about me and that favourite tag all apologists use "islamophobic".  Yet I have slated and criticise the Bible new & Old Testaments  and Christianity yet you don't mind that one single bit.  You don't call me Christianophobic., why is that?
   






#113
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
000
#114
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@Stephen
At least your beginning to recognise that it is more than just "one or two" muslims terrorist that want to murder or convert anyone not muslim. Well done.
GOOD BOY!!!
Yes criminals, muslim criminals committing acts of terrorism and who are carrying out the will of their god Allah. Well done again. GOOD BOY!

Unfortunately you haven't worked out just how successful a couple of thousand criminals have been. Their purpose is to frighten the feeble minded and with you they have succeeded. BTW gods don't exist so they don't possess will.

Muslims Born with a religion 
It's a fact that nobody is born with a religion already installed, it matters not that you and some other religious people believe differently. Your beliefs don't alter reality in any sense.

So Muslims, Muhammad the prophet and Allah the god of islam all have " mental health issues"
Yes now explain what you think hypocrite means and how it applies to me.

I corrected you on your belief that" Nobody is born with a religion installed           
That's a fact of life little one.
Nobody is born with a religion already installed no matter what you erroneously believe.

YOU infer that muslims are "stupid" and islam is "stupid" and the prophet muhammad is "  stupid " and that the prophet muhammad and muslims all  have " serious mental health issues" .
I don't infer it at all, I state it categorically and the same goes for all religions.

Like I said, your a fkn hypocrite
Demonstrate such, little one.
Now try and get it through that childish head of yours the neither your beliefs nor any other godists beliefs alter reality.
Why are you so frightened of a few criminals in the middle east?
#115
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@disgusted
000
Is that good or bad?

#116
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@keithprosser
booboo, oops
#117
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
Not Germans were nazis,the majority were peaceful, but this didn't stop the "minority" causing the deaths of 60 million + men women and children with 16 million of those death happening in death camps.  You see, the peaceful majority are irrelevant.
At least in that case we have two words: 'nazi' and 'german'.   You seem reluctant to allow a clear verbal distinction in the case of Muslims.   What - in yiur view - are good terms we can use?

#118
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@keithprosser
At least in that case we have two words: 'nazi' and 'german'.   You seem reluctant to allow a clear verbal distinction in the case of Muslims.  

I have never said "all muslims" were terrorist as much as you like to keep implying that I have. I have also said muslims are entitled to believe what they want to believe and pray to whoever they wish to pray to,..  I have also said MOST!  - ( that is the MAJORITY) of Germans were peaceful , just as I have said MOST muslims (that is the MAJORITY) are peaceful. I have also said that it makes not the slightest bit of difference because the PEACEFUL MAJORITY are  irrelevant.  You see, what it is that you keep denying and or ignoring is that ISLAM is not peaceful by any means. I keep telling you that it is ISLAM that I have a problem with and "not all muslims". And stop trying to make this personal, you are no good at it.


What - in yiur view - are good terms we can use?

On the back foot again are we keith? Stop asking me questions when you ignore  my questions.

Here you go:


  Many people point a finger at Saudi Arabia which certainly has the wealth and power to promote and export its notoriously backward form of Wahabbist Islam worldwide. 

A "backward form of Wahabbist Islam" you say. But it is still Islam. OK. So that would be an interpretation  or "form" as you put it. Are there any other interpretations or "forms"?

And question that you keep swerving:
 
but it's not my experience thatordinary muslims crave for a world caliphate!  


  @Stephen What is a"ordinary muslim"? 

@ keithprosser You know what anordinary Englishman like?  Ordinary muslims are pretty similar.
No, a  " muslim" is someone that follows an ideology known as Islam. Islam is not a race and neither does being a muslim make one a part of a race. As much as left wing liberal apologists such as yourself  are trying to force this belief and definition onto us, it doesn't work. This is you trying to make a muslim part of a race AGAIN!

An Englishman on the other hand belongs to a race called the English who belong to and originates from a geographical area on the globe named England. For now anyway.

So instead of being so fkn childish, just try and explain to me your definition of a "ordinary muslim". You did introduce the term, after all.




#119
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,345
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@disgusted
--> @disgusted
YOU infer that muslims are "stupid" and islam is "stupid" and the prophet muhammad is "  stupid " and that the prophet muhammad and muslims all  have " serious mental health issues" .
I don't infer it at all, I state it categorically and the same goes for all religions. 
So according to you  all muslims are stupid people  for their belief in  Islam  & Allah who is also stupid and muhammad their prophet who is also stupid,  and all muslim  have serious "mental health issues" because they have a faith;  and that is ok for you to say that is it. 
 
I on the other hand, call out ISLAM for the vile ideology that it is and I am a fkn racist bigoted islamlamophobe.  I have slated, questioned and criticize christianity often but never have you called me Christianophobia and accused me of spreading hate and fear.  That is why you are a fkn hypocrite!  If anyone has spread hate and caused division on this forum it is you?  Those are extremely inflammatory statements for you to make against muslims and are nothing less than hate speech. That is why you are a hypocrite! If anyone is bigoted towards a belief , it is you and only YOU. I haven't and wouldn't call anyone out for the faith they follow and I certainly wouldn't tell a muslim or a Christian that they "have mental health issues" and suggest that they should be sectioned under the provisions of the mental health act  for simply having a faith. That is what makes you a hypocrite!    Anywhere else you would have been banned for using such inflammatory hate speech.  

And I have to wonder why the  pompous prosser has kept quiet on your behalf and never once called you out for you vile statements you make when you spread such vile hatred towards anyone for just having a faith?  That's what make prosser a fkn hypocrite too.


So Muslims, Muhammad the prophet and Allah the god of islam all have " mental health issues" 
Yes now explain what you think hypocrite means and how it applies to me.

See above. Oh and all those inflammatory insults that you have made against  Muslims, and their god Allah and their prophet Muhammad, all carry the death penalty in ISLAM. 
And your inflammatory statements are classed as hate speech in the UK. especially in writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation.

Whatever will the owners of the site will make of it all?  Will they be held responsible for your inflammatory statements against a religious group? I hope not.


#120
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,052
3
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
I keep telling you that it is ISLAM that I have a problem with and "not all muslims". And stop trying to make this personal, you are no good at it.
i don't see being bad at it as a negative!

I can't see how what you are doing is so different from being against Christianity because some Christians have killed abortionists.   Are the peaceful majority of Christians 'irrelevant'?