Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Eldorado

Islamophobia in the Conservative Party

170 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

RavenHawk
9 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Jesus yes , Christianity no

That is so naïve.  The sentiment is understandable but shows a lack of appreciation of thousands of years of world history.  One cannot separate Christianity from Christ Jesus.  Before the Edict of Milan, Christianity had a different demeanor than what the religion has developed into.  But that is not necessarily a bad thing.  After Nicaea, Christianity had been adopted by Roman efficiency.  By this time Christianity was growing like wildfire without the use of the sword.  It was by the message alone.  By the 7th Century, Christian lands were being lost but the Byzantine Empire could only offer a holding tactic over the next 700 years.  Christianity had to unite in order to survive.  With enemies encroaching from both ends of the continent, the faith had to merge with the warrior class in order to stand up against the Muslim invader.  It was very effective and the base of the Roman-Catholic Church was born.  It had become a mixed bag of blessing and curse.  On one hand, it had saved Europe but on the other it brought the Inquisition.  It had slowed the progress of science, yet it created an environment for science and art to flourish and advance farther than it ever had.  It was a source of oppression but also a great source of comfort and compassion.  Christianity is far from perfect but it is not as one-dimensional as you think it is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
19 minutes ago, odas said:

Refering to specific battles, Roofgardener. One cannot take, in most cases, a verse out of context. The battle of Badr, for example. Verses in different chapters seemingly not conected, refere to the same battle. It repets itself as a reminder. 

No Odas... the verses in question do NOT refer to specific battles, but are open-ended.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
20 minutes ago, odas said:

Refering to specific battles, Roofgardener. One cannot take, in most cases, a verse out of context. The battle of Badr, for example. Verses in different chapters seemingly not conected, refere to the same battle. It repets itself as a reminder. 

Keeping context is always important but saying that certain verses only referred to this battle or the other is a tired excuse.  Surah 9 is considered as the last Surah revealed to Mohammed.  It is basically his Last Will and Testament.  That was like a decade after Badr.  It recaps how Muslims should act, culling all the examples together.  This Surah covers the end of Immunity of the unbeliever.  Surah 9 gives Muslims their marching orders.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
7 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

That's very interesting, @Farmer77. I'm not sure about terrorism , however. I guess it depends on how you define it. From the "terrorists" point of view, they are carrying out a Holy cause. Hmmm......

Fisabilillah – for the or in the cause of Allah.  Jihad is a struggle to do right in the eyes of Allah.  It has various forms and can be carried to various lengths.  It can be a struggle to get one’s heart or soul (An-Nafs) right with Allah.  It can be a struggle against Satan.  It can be a struggle to correct injustice.  It could be to share the faith (Dawah).  It could be to defend the Ummah.  It’s also a struggle against the hypocrite and unbeliever.  This can be very subjective because just by the existence of Dar al-Harb, that is a threat to the Ummah.  The sin of Shirk is a threat to the Ummah.  One is to continue Jihad until the cause no longer exists.  All forms are to be tried in increasing intensity until victory.  Hijrah is a form of Jihad and it is slowly converting Europe.  Europe needs to fight with the same rules to defend their culture.   That will lead to war and that has saved Europe before?  Where is the Coq?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

No Odas... the verses in question do NOT refer to specific battles, but are open-ended.

Ok. Can you give me one example of a verse and I will look into it. Maybe I learn something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Keeping context is always important but saying that certain verses only referred to this battle or the other is a tired excuse.  Surah 9 is considered as the last Surah revealed to Mohammed.  It is basically his Last Will and Testament.  That was like a decade after Badr.  It recaps how Muslims should act, culling all the examples together.  This Surah covers the end of Immunity of the unbeliever.  Surah 9 gives Muslims their marching orders.

Not marching orders but code of conduct. Read again. Yes, fight against nonbelievers-not christians or jews-but, even though they are nonbelievers, if you have a contract with them or if THEY ASK FOR SAFETY and do not fight agains muslims THEY ARE NOT to be hurt.

Read surah 9 all verses and you will know the difference of what you said and the fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

  By this time Christianity was growing like wildfire without the use of the sword.  

Really? Really? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
24 minutes ago, odas said:

Ok. Can you give me one example of a verse and I will look into it. Maybe I learn something new.

I'll do that Odas.. I really will. Perhaps I will learn something as well :) 

But not today :D 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
15 minutes ago, odas said:

Not marching orders but code of conduct. Read again. Yes, fight against nonbelievers-not christians or jews-but, even though they are nonbelievers, if you have a contract with them or if THEY ASK FOR SAFETY and do not fight agains muslims THEY ARE NOT to be hurt.

Read surah 9 all verses and you will know the difference of what you said and the fact.

As far as I know, I do not have any contract with Islam as do the vast majority of Christians, Jews, and non-believers.  Neither do we ask for safety.  But that’s not all.  They are not to be hurt if they repent (Shahada), establish prayer, and give zakat.  Did you forget that part?  Well, that ain’t happening anytime soon so that makes me and all other Christians, Jews, and unbelievers a threat to the Ummah.  Our ways create an environment that can cause Muslims to commit Shirk.  We create mischief throughout the land and I’m just minding my own business.  The Muslim Code of Conduct is to fight that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
20 minutes ago, odas said:

Really? Really? 

Really!  Really!  Even though Christianity had become the state religion, depending on who the Emperor was, still had to endure persecution.  That had caused internal strife, but the faith grew despite that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, RoofGardener said:

I'll do that Odas.. I really will. Perhaps I will learn something as well :) 

But not today :D 

 

Hey, we all have to talk and discuss. How else can we learn, including me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

As far as I know, I do not have any contract with Islam as do the vast majority of Christians, Jews, and non-believers.  Neither do we ask for safety.  But that’s not all.  They are not to be hurt if they repent (Shahada), establish prayer, and give zakat.  Did you forget that part?  Well, that ain’t happening anytime soon so that makes me and all other Christians, Jews, and unbelievers a threat to the Ummah.  Our ways create an environment that can cause Muslims to commit Shirk.  We create mischief throughout the land and I’m just minding my own business.  The Muslim Code of Conduct is to fight that.

Contract, not with islam but between two human parties. Contract, as in live in peace. Peace time.

The other is during a war, if the other side shows aggression, yes, then things can get ugly. But, even then there are rules, written to protect the civillians, elderly, children and captured soldiers. If someone asks you, the modern rules of combat are based on the Quranic texts. You should check it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
1 hour ago, RavenHawk said:

Really!  Really!  Even though Christianity had become the state religion, depending on who the Emperor was, still had to endure persecution.  That had caused internal strife, but the faith grew despite that.

 

Do you really want to get into numbers? How many pagans thruout Europe have been killed during the christian expansion? How many jews have been killed in England, Germany, France, Italy, not to forget Spain. Facts buddy. Let's not get into numbers please, they will beat you to the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
14 minutes ago, odas said:

Contract, not with islam but between two human parties. Contract, as in live in peace. Peace time.

That’s not what it says.  It states that the polytheists that “YOU” (Mohammed and all Muslims) had made a covenant with are exempt.  Then it adds to fulfill their treaty until its term is over.  After that, it’s left up to one’s imagination.  The term “human” in a tribal society like Arabian carries a different meaning than what we consider today.  In the tribal sense “human” refers to people like you.  In Islam, “human” refers to the Ummah.  This is very similar to the way the Native American viewed the European settlers in the early days of America.  Only the Native American were Human Beings.  This concept is a major component to Islam.  It is very deceptive as the definition is left up to the individual and that hides the true meaning.

 

The other is during a war, if the other side shows aggression, yes, then things can get ugly. But, even then there are rules, written to protect the civillians, elderly, children and captured soldiers. If someone asks you, the modern rules of combat are based on the Quranic texts. You should check it out.

If I do not submit to the will Allah, then I make war against Islam.  I don’t have to physically take up arms.  If I am not part of the Ummah, then I am not innocent.  My existence alone is a threat to the Ummah and as such, I “create mischief throughout the land”.  This is a phrase found throughout the Quran when referring to the Polytheist.  In the Muslim universe, the world is divided between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb.  You are in one or the other.  The Ummah occupies the house of peace while everyone else occupies the house of war.  Those in al-Harb are worthy of death; there are no rules.  It says to kill the polytheist where ever you find them, there is no query as to who is a civilian, elderly, child, or soldier.  A civilian in Dar al-Harb is not the same as a civilian in Dar al-Islam (not human).  This is what non-believers must put up with.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
2 hours ago, odas said:

Do you really want to get into numbers? How many pagans thruout Europe have been killed during the christian expansion? How many jews have been killed in England, Germany, France, Italy, not to forget Spain. Facts buddy. Let's not get into numbers please, they will beat you to the ground.

I wasn’t talking about that period.  I was referring to the time between the Resurrection and the middle of the 7th Century.  Christianity spread without an army (especially throughout the Middle East).  It wasn’t until the time of Charlemagne that forced conversion became state policy.  If you would listen then you wouldn’t be trying to remove your foot from your mouth.  Yes, many died but Europe had been unified.  There are many pros and cons to weigh in determining if it was worth it?  Christianity would probably have continued to spread on its own, but Charlemagne, like his grandfather saw the menace from the south and realized that Europe must unify.  The regimentation of Christianity kept Islam at bay.  We are still living with the effects of that time today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hetrodoxly
9 hours ago, odas said:

Refering to specific battles, Roofgardener. One cannot take, in most cases, a verse out of context. The battle of Badr, for example. Verses in different chapters seemingly not conected, refere to the same battle. It repets itself as a reminder. 

There were 2 battles of Badr, Mohammed was involved in many more battles.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hetrodoxly
5 hours ago, odas said:

Do you really want to get into numbers? How many pagans thruout Europe have been killed during the christian expansion? How many jews have been killed in England, Germany, France, Italy, not to forget Spain. Facts buddy. Let's not get into numbers please, they will beat you to the ground.

Mohammed spread the religion with violence, Muslims were the aggressors, Jesus said 

Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

Mohammed cut the throats of every male with pubic hair of an whole Jewish tribe, these men had laid their arms down and Mohammed had taken their surrender, we're not talking about acts by random Muslims or Christians this is the behaviour of the founders of the religions.

if you want to talk about numbers i've got millions.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas

Are we talking about Jesus and Mohammed or about Islam and the Quran? Mohammed was a human, a warlord, a prophet. Not a God. The same or simmilar saying about enemies we have in the Quran. 

As for numbers, again, please don't push. Thousands of jews forcibly converted to christianity. 

Many more killed. Pagans, the number hard to immagine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk

It’s not about whataboutism.  It’s not about the numbers.  It’s about the doctrine.  Yes, there were atrocities committed in the name of GOD, but it was never established by the doctrine.  It is usually initiated by human hands.  This kind of behavior is institutionalized in Islam.  Where does Jesus say to kill all the unbelievers wherever you find them?  Doesn’t he say, he who is without sin, cast the first stone?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 hour ago, odas said:

Mohammed was a warlord,

That statement says a lot.

Helen and I had a conversation the other week. About the nasty things in Sarajevo in the 90s. Two groups trying to kill each other. Many who drank out of the same coffee glass, members of the same tribe, over something as mundane as religion.

Watching you Christians and Muslims fight is hilarious. Your both guilty of the same crimes. You both committed genocides. You both murdered children in the name of your prophets..........

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Piney said:

That statement says a lot.

Helen and I had a conversation the other week. About the nasty things in Sarajevo in the 90s. Two groups trying to kill each other. Many who drank out of the same coffee glass, members of the same tribe, over something as mundane as religion.

Watching you Christians and Muslims fight is hilarious. Your both guilty of the same crimes. You both committed genocides. You both murdered children in the name of your prophets..........

 

Actually three groups. Actually it did not start with christians vs muslims but catholics vs orthodox in which muslims were the biggest victims. Actually it was not about religion it was about nationality. Actually...don't worry.

But, you are right in the second part. Christianity as well as Islam, or more correctly, christians and muslims have done probably more athrocities towards each other and towards others then any other religion or ideology. If we get the numbers, each of the "fine" groups has commited more and worse crime then even the nazis themself. I am not hiding and never will hide horrific acts done by my group towards others in the name of my religion.

Edited by odas
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
2 minutes ago, odas said:

Actually three groups. Actually it did not start with christians vs muslims but catholics vs orthodox in which muslims were the biggest victims. Actually it was not about religion it was about nationality. Actually...don't worry.

 

Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks.  All brothers. 

I was a ARC medic in the siege. The Muslims were the biggest victims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
49 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

It’s not about whataboutism.  It’s not about the numbers.  It’s about the doctrine.  Yes, there were atrocities committed in the name of GOD, but it was never established by the doctrine.  It is usually initiated by human hands.  This kind of behavior is institutionalized in Islam.  Where does Jesus say to kill all the unbelievers wherever you find them?  Doesn’t he say, he who is without sin, cast the first stone?

I am not here to bring peace, i am here to bring the sword.

Rav, Jesus is my prophet too, no lesser or bigger then Mohammed. Jesus was the best human that walked the earth.

Jesus would have been the first to fight the christianity that was established 500 years after him.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
3 minutes ago, Piney said:

Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks.  All brothers. 

I was a ARC medic in the siege. The Muslims were the biggest victims.

Stepbrothers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 minute ago, odas said:

Jesus would have been the first to fight the christianity that was established 500 years after him.

:yes:

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.