homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Islam and violence (Page 20)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  17  18  19  20  21 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Islam and violence
Eliab
Shipmate
# 9153

 - Posted      Profile for Eliab   Email Eliab   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
[HOSTING]

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Sorry, Eliab, leo has rather forced my hand with this....

quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Christianity didn't burn people; a distortion called 'Christendom' came along centuries later and did that. 'Christendom' thought this was OK because, in contradiction of the NT , 'Christendom' set up a 'Christian state'. The rationale used by 'Christendom' and by 'the jihadists' are therefore not 'rather like' one another - they are identical. Except, as I've been saying, 'Christendom' was doing something deeply contradictory of the original teaching of Christianity;

No one has forced your hand. You've been asked twice, first very gently, and then more clearly and precisely, not to hijack a thread on Islam to make these arguments about Christianity.

We get that this is an important issue to you. That's fine. It's even one you're allowed to discuss on the Ship. What you can't do is argue it on every thread into which it can conceivably be shoehorned.

You can start a new thread quoting comments from this one if you want to develop a tangent. You can start a new thread with your own OP inspired by views expressed here. What you have been asked not to do is continue to divert this thread. Your cooperation is expected.

If you want to respond to this post, do so in the Styx, not here, please.

Eliab
[/HOSTING]

[ 10. March 2015, 23:08: Message edited by: Eliab ]

--------------------
"Perhaps there is poetic beauty in the abstract ideas of justice or fairness, but I doubt if many lawyers are moved by it"

Richard Dawkins

Posts: 4619 | From: Hampton, Middlesex, UK | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Alex Cockell

Ship’s penguin
# 7487

 - Posted      Profile for Alex Cockell     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by Eutychus;
quote:
It suits your argument, but you haven't provided any third-party evidence at all.
My comment here was in the context of leo's statements on Muslim ideas about the gospels.

My overall position remains as was; Islam contains a deep inconsistency between the aspiration of peace and the indisputable setting up by Muhammad of an Islamic 'kingdom of this world' state, which necessarily conflicts with the peaceable aspiration. Oh, and see my quote in that long post from a Muslim I'm having conversations with....

Thanks for your warning; but I wasn't going to let quetzalcoatl get away with
quote:
I like the use of 'time-locked' to refer to the use of violence by Christians; well, they managed to burn people for about 1000 years. Some time-lock!

It sounds rather like the rationale used by the jihadists!

and I somehow don't think anyone else was going to challenge him. If his comment was justified on the thread, I believe my riposte was also.

It's striking that you seem to be agreeing with the militants' view of Islam. They would also say that they preach (and practise) authentic Islam, and the peaceful Muslims are apostates.

If the West starts to hold that view, we are in big trouble- it'll be war and war redoubled.

Sorry to be rather crass.. but sadly it might be, with apologies to Hilare belloc...

"Whatever happens we have got
Instant Sunshine and B52s, and they have not".

Posts: 2146 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250

 - Posted      Profile for irish_lord99     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
B52's that is.

--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, carpet bomb the tribal areas in Iraq and Syria, and watch IS membership go through the roof. I think you would have a 100 Charlie Hebdos. Still, think of the thrill of it; the armchair warriors would be having orgasms. Bomb for Jesus!

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Presumably, also, if the West broadly accepts the idea that Islam is inherently violent, not only do they have to find a way to deal with Islamist militancy, but with Islamic countries as well. I guess we could invade another one, as a kind of warning - that usually works well.

Then there's the problem of European and US Muslims, but maybe internment could be used; after all, it worked in N. Ireland.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
LeRoc

Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216

 - Posted      Profile for LeRoc     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
quetzalcoatl: Presumably, also, if the West broadly accepts the idea that Islam is inherently violent, not only do they have to find a way to deal with Islamist militancy, but with Islamic countries as well. I guess we could invade another one, as a kind of warning - that usually works well.
And it would be a good way to show that they are the ones who are violent.

--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)

Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I fear some of these suggestions may be taken seriously by some posters...

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I fear some of these suggestions may be taken seriously by some posters...

Worse still, they may be taken seriously by some governments.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
quetzalcoatl: Presumably, also, if the West broadly accepts the idea that Islam is inherently violent, not only do they have to find a way to deal with Islamist militancy, but with Islamic countries as well. I guess we could invade another one, as a kind of warning - that usually works well.
And it would be a good way to show that they are the ones who are violent.
Why not go all out and invade Iraq again? We've learned from our mistakes; all we have to do is bribe a few tribal leaders, give the various militias some box sets of Top Gear, and everything should calm down.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
One fundamental difference between Islam and Christianity can be seen in their final standing orders...It would appear that while there are periods of warfare in JudeoChristian history - a lot of these were timelocked, and presented as history. Not a standing order.

It would appear, however, that a literal reading of Surah 9:5 does NOT allow that interpretation - thai it is a standing order for religio-military action.

That is quoting Sura 9 completely out of context. It is not 'a standing order' at all but refers to self-defence in a specific situation, much as do many similar Old testament passages about enemies.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Of course I'm looking at Islam 'from my own perspective' – and equally, being aware of that, trying very hard to step outside that perspective if I can. But saying that is not an objective argument – on the contrary, it runs the risk of relegating everything to just subjective opinion. Where's your objective refutation of what I'm saying?? Or your objective comment on the Islamic perspective???and the specific example of their prophet.

Their arguments are, therefore, 'objective' from their point of view.

Why should your view be more valid than theirs?

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alex Cockell

Ship’s penguin
# 7487

 - Posted      Profile for Alex Cockell     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
One fundamental difference between Islam and Christianity can be seen in their final standing orders...It would appear that while there are periods of warfare in JudeoChristian history - a lot of these were timelocked, and presented as history. Not a standing order.

It would appear, however, that a literal reading of Surah 9:5 does NOT allow that interpretation - thai it is a standing order for religio-military action.

That is quoting Sura 9 completely out of context. It is not 'a standing order' at all but refers to self-defence in a specific situation, much as do many similar Old testament passages about enemies.
The problem is it plays out in reality - especially when you look at Islamist propaganda - like the way Hitler blamed the Jews - and therefore rationalised Auschwitz through ramping up FUD and moral panic.

Here is a Disney wartime folm that covered this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvp3zAPraF4

Posts: 2146 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
'pbuh' is 'peace be upon him' isn't it? Black irony

Not at all - Muhammad, pbuh, brought peace to all the warring tribes in Arabia.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
The problem is it plays out in reality - especially when you look at Islamist propaganda - like the way Hitler blamed the Jews - and therefore rationalised Auschwitz through ramping up FUD and moral panic.

Hitler's religion was a perversion of Christianity.

So is 'Islamism' a perversion of Islam.

So violence is not inherent in either religion.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alex Cockell

Ship’s penguin
# 7487

 - Posted      Profile for Alex Cockell     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Maybe not, but it's endemic to ISLAMISM, and ISIS is Ismaist, is it not?
Posts: 2146 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I thought that there are non-violent Islamist parties, e.g. in Turkey.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
Maybe not, but it's endemic to ISLAMISM, and ISIS is Ismaist, is it not?

ISIS may well be Islamist, which is the extension of Islam into the social and political fields, but it appears to go further or use methods which other Islamist groups do not use.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Of course I'm looking at Islam 'from my own perspective' with the original teaching of their religion and the specific example of their prophet.

And why should your own perspective be any more normative than anyone else's?

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Alex Cockell

Ship’s penguin
# 7487

 - Posted      Profile for Alex Cockell     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Of course I'm looking at Islam 'from my own perspective' with the original teaching of their religion and the specific example of their prophet.

And why should your own perspective be any more normative than anyone else's?
Look, Leo. ISIS have gone on record as EXPLICITLY wanting to create a new caliphate- thereby becoming a clear and present danger to the states around them.

Personally, I'd take them seriously.

Posts: 2146 | From: Reading, Berkshire UK | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Moo

Ship's tough old bird
# 107

 - Posted      Profile for Moo   Email Moo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Hitler's religion was a perversion of Christianity.

No.

Hitler was raised Catholic but there is no evidence he practiced any religion as an adult. There certainly is no record of his justifying Nazi policies on the basis of Christianity.

He certainly persecuted the Christian churches because he wanted to do away with independent groups.

Moo

Moo

--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.

Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091

 - Posted      Profile for Jack o' the Green   Email Jack o' the Green   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My understanding was that he tried to promote an Aryan Christianity which more in line with his hatred of the Jews. He certainly persecuted the confessing church, but used the antisemitic views of Christians like Luther as a political tool to unite people behind him.
Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601

 - Posted      Profile for Steve Langton   Email Steve Langton   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
by leo
quote:
Muhammad, pbuh, brought peace to all the warring tribes in Arabia.
Tacitus, I think, had something to say about that kind of peace in its Roman version - something on the lines of 'making a desert and calling it peace'.

by leo
quote:

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Of course I'm looking at Islam 'from my own perspective' with the original teaching of their religion and the specific example of their prophet.

And why should your own perspective be any more normative than anyone else's?

1) Please quote me accurately - I never posted that particular combination and it doesn't make sense. The two more detailed comments which you have confabulated did make sense in their context.
2) My perspective is not more normative than anyone else's. Facts are normative, any hope we might start discussing them?

by leo;
quote:
Hitler's religion was a perversion of Christianity.

So is 'Islamism' a perversion of Islam.

So violence is not inherent in either religion.

So much is wrong with that, I daren't comment....


Surah 9

Surah 9 is related to the historical events of the battle of Tabouk - or more accurately the expedition to Tabouk which didn't result in an actual battle because Muhammad had been misinformed about Byzantine intentions and there wasn't an enemy there to fight.

But this is rather indisputably, both according to Wikipedia and according to the edition of the Quran I'm using, a case of Muhammad mounting a real kingdom of this world military expedition involving real flesh and blood people with very real weapons, and an expedition not against pagans, but against Byzantines - Christians, people of the Book.

Self-defence - arguably; but equally given the warlike posture of the Islamic 'Ummah' at that point, I think the Byzantines, had they been there, would have regarded their expedition as self-defence also.

Other aspects of the Surah include complaints about those who refused to join the very real non-abstract expedition, and provisions about non-Muslims (including Christians) being aggressively required to pay the 'Jizhya' tax to have peace with Islam. It is not easy to argue from that to a supposedly non-violent Islam.

Yes, Islam is inherently violent.

Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
Moo

Ship's tough old bird
# 107

 - Posted      Profile for Moo   Email Moo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hitler did everything he could to suppress independent action by the Christian churches. He did this, not for reasons of doctrine, but because he had no intention of tolerating anything that was independent of the government. The Aryan church, which was a government institution, was supposed to replace the independent churches.

As far as using Luther's anti-Semitic statements is concerned, they did it but the statements were four hundred years old at the time. They were not statements issued by the contemporary independent Christian churches.

Moo

--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.

Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
And why should your own perspective be any more normative than anyone else's?

Look, Leo. ISIS have gone on record as EXPLICITLY wanting to create a new caliphate- thereby becoming a clear and present danger to the states around them.

Personally, I'd take them seriously.

But Steve is not arguing that that reading must be normative for ISIS, he seems to be arguing that it *must* be normative for *all* Muslims - in that context leo's objection is valid.

And seriously, what answers have you propounded so far? Carpet Bomb them? Collective punishment on a mass scale because successive invasions and meddlings have broken civil society to the point where a bunch of warlords can cow the majority of the population?

[ 11. March 2015, 23:14: Message edited by: chris stiles ]

Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think people are taking IS seriously. But proposing mass military attacks in the Middle East is insanity; it would probably radicalize thousands, if not millions of Muslims. Europe would be dealing with Charlie Hebdo attacks daily. Fortunately, I think politicians, military and intelligence leaders have the nous to realize this.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601

 - Posted      Profile for Steve Langton   Email Steve Langton   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
by chris stiles;
quote:
But Steve is not arguing that that reading must be normative for ISIS, he seems to be arguing that it *must* be normative for *all* Muslims - in that context leo's objection is valid.
What I'm actually arguing is that there isn't a single normative reading for all Muslims. In effect there are two contradictory readings built in to the faith from the beginning. One of those readings is the aspiration to peace, which I fully recognise. The other is the aspiration to an Islamic state, the 'Ummah', which clearly can be both established by warfare and sustained by warfare, as Muhammad's example and practice, supported by Quranic teachings, clearly shows.

In theory this is nominally 'non-violent' - but, as they say, 'theory is that stuff that doesn't work in practice'. Practice is that states use violence, as Eutychus basically pointed out earlier in the thread; violence is also used by those trying to set up a state of their particular persuasion. Islam is not specially violent compared to other religious states; but the temptation is built in and almost impossible to limit.

Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250

 - Posted      Profile for irish_lord99     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I thought that there are non-violent Islamist parties, e.g. in Turkey.

I guess we need to define Islamist then.

The 'Hızmet' movement under Fettulah Gülen is sort of like Evangelicalism for Muslims: they're very politicial, they proselytize, publish books, have their own schools, etc. They have peace, love, and service to others as the pillars upon which their movement is built.

They used to have a very healthy relationship with the current President of Turkey before he went all 'Putin' on them and tried (pretty sucessfully) to set himself up as 'President for Life'.

Ironically, he (the President) used to push through religious freedom legislation for the Orthodox and other Christian groups and was slowly giving them back some of their confiscated properties. The rational was that he couldn't continue to campaign for greater rights for Muslims in the Eurozone unless he was willing to roll back (in a very token-esq manner) the horrendous human-rights violations committed against the Orthodox in Turkey.

Sadly, that seems to have ceased now. There's even talk of him wanting to use the Hagia Sophia as a mosque again.

--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged
itsarumdo
Shipmate
# 18174

 - Posted      Profile for itsarumdo     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It seems that if one reads the Bible, it's necessary to focus on the spirit of the NT/later works, and if one reads the Koran it's necessary to focus on the spirit of the earlier revelations. Without that focus, Love doesn't have a lot of room to be heard.

--------------------
"Iti sapis potanda tinone" Lycophron

Posts: 994 | From: Planet Zog | Registered: Jul 2014  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
by chris stiles;
quote:
But Steve is not arguing that that reading must be normative for ISIS, he seems to be arguing that it *must* be normative for *all* Muslims - in that context leo's objection is valid.
What I'm actually arguing is that there isn't a single normative reading for all Muslims. In effect there are two contradictory readings built in to the faith from the beginning.

Yes, but the logic of your argument is that the violent one will always prevail:

quote:

Islam is not specially violent compared to other religious states; but the temptation is built in and almost impossible to limit.

It seems like essentially you are arguing that any violence committed in the name of Christianity is causes by circumstances, whereas violence committed in the name of Islam is due to some deep internal motivation.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601

 - Posted      Profile for Steve Langton   Email Steve Langton   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
by chris stiles;
quote:
Yes, but the logic of your argument is that the violent one will always prevail:
Not quite, fortunately (or rather, providentially); but the trouble is there's basically nothing in Islam to make it go away either, so it won't be going away and unfavorable circumstances will always be liable to bring it back.

by chris stiles;
quote:
It seems like essentially you are arguing that any violence committed in the name of Christianity is causes by circumstances, whereas violence committed in the name of Islam is due to some deep internal motivation.
Neither. I'm arguing that the vast bulk of violence in the name of Christianity has resulted from the contra-NT teaching of having or trying to have a Christian 'kingdom of this world' state, so-called 'Constantinianism' or 'Christendom', which is no part of original Christian teaching. In Islam, the idea of the Islamic state remains a built-in ideal of the religion, originating in Muhammad's very real-world acts and the Quranic justification of those acts, and will be liable therefore to lead astray, to put it mildly, even basically well-meaning Muslims.

(Hosts; I know I'm a bit on the edge there - and I am preparing a Styx submission about this - but I honestly don't see how I could have responded otherwise to what chris stiles asked)

Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Yes, Islam is inherently violent.

Is Judaism 'inherently violent' given the amount of scripture wherein God commands genocide and also where God anoints kings as sacral rulers over a theocracy?

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Steve Langton, I'm going to let you off your last post because of the Styx reference. But do not repeat your oft-heard refrain yet again until there is a resolution of your Styx query. If you do, you will get referred to Admin for ignoring a Hostly ruling.

Barnabas62
Purgatory Host

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Shipmates

While the Styx thread is ongoing, I'm going to leave the thread open. It might be as well if you try to avoid dialogue with Steve Langton which might provoke further repetition. This is strictly temporary guidance. I feel sure you will understand the reason for it.

Barnabas62
Purgatory Host

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601

 - Posted      Profile for Steve Langton   Email Steve Langton   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
OK, Barnabas, I'm leaving the thread till the Styx issues are sorted.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Admin have ruled.

This thread can continue in the light of the ruling. If you want to discuss any historical or theological aspects of the views exemplified by this quote from Steve Langton's recent post, please start a different thread.

quote:
I'm arguing that the vast bulk of violence in the name of Christianity has resulted from the contra-NT teaching of having or trying to have a Christian 'kingdom of this world' state, so-called 'Constantinianism' or 'Christendom', which is no part of original Christian teaching.
But no more follow ups here.

Barnabas62
Purgatory Host

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Hitler's religion was a perversion of Christianity.

No.

Hitler was raised Catholic but there is no evidence he practiced any religion as an adult. There certainly is no record of his justifying Nazi policies on the basis of Christianity.

He certainly persecuted the Christian churches because he wanted to do away with independent groups.

Moo

Moo

Yes, he certainly persecuted The Salvation Army. The Nazis closed our churches, took over our youth work and took over our social work.

We have hardly recovered from this, even now.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Langton:
Yes, Islam is inherently violent.

Is Judaism 'inherently violent' given the amount of scripture wherein God commands genocide and also where God anoints kings as sacral rulers over a theocracy?
It isn't what is written though, surely; it is by their fruits you shall know them.

Look at Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Atheism, Jedi-ism... Not ONE of these belief systems has the amopunt of jihadi activity going on!

Judaism does not have a load of Jewish teenagers rushing from British high schools to go and fight against the palestinians.

Christianity doesn't have loads of Baptists and Pentecostals rushing from the Spring Harvest Bible/worship week to go and fight to free the oppressed Chrustians.

I haven't seen Hindu suicide bombers with backpacks on the London underground.

I haven't read of Buddhist terrorists with explosives in their shoes wanting to blow up an aeroplane.

I don't see the disciples of Richard Dawkins shooting the cartoonists of any satirical newspaper that runs an article about him.

So, please tell me - regardless of what various Suras actually mean for moderate Muslims today (and I've heard a British Muslim man say how insulted he is when that term is used by the western media) - exactly why so many Muslims take verses like that as if they really do mean that Islam must be spread by violent means?

And if IS really does want a caliphate, why do so many people support that?

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Look at Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Atheism, Jedi-ism... Not ONE of these belief systems has the amopunt of jihadi activity going on!

Many wars have been fought in the name of Christianity. In fact of your list Jedi-ism seems to do most favourably probably with Buddhism a close second. By the same logic with which you judge Islam we should abandon Christianity for these other more peaceful religions?

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The idealistic can get conned, Mudfrog.

The problem facing Muslim parents today is more akin to that of parents whose children have been drawn into an activist cult. Cults can be violent, espouse violence to support "the Cause".

I think this thread has often mixed up two questions.

1. What traditional beliefs within Islam can be used to justify the use of violent means to further the faith?

2. To what extent are such beliefs characteristic of what Muslims believe today?

Those who entrap will often use the language and historical beliefs of religion in a persuasive, but skewed, way in order to produce a self-enclosing ideology. Once individuals have been sucked into such world views, it is not easy for them to escape.

Personally, I'm more interested in two other questions.

What motivates the proselytisers?

Why is their message persuasive?

I've already argued in this thread that it might help if there was some teaching to help young people understand the dangers of entrapment and their own potential vulnerability to these kinds of mind games. That argument applies both within school systems and teaching within religions themselves.

[ 18. March 2015, 07:48: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Look at Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Atheism, Jedi-ism... Not ONE of these belief systems has the amopunt of jihadi activity going on!

Many wars have been fought in the name of Christianity.
Many? Name them.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You want to maintain that there aren't many wars fought in the name of Christianity? You must have some explanation for why all the wars on the history books don't really count as Christian in motivation. Perhaps the explanation has some merit to it, but it doesn't seem to equally be on offer to Islam.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
You want to maintain that there aren't many wars fought in the name of Christianity? You must have some explanation for why all the wars on the history books don't really count as Christian in motivation. Perhaps the explanation has some merit to it, but it doesn't seem to equally be on offer to Islam.

Erm... "Christian in motivation"?

Now, if you mean "started by Kings, presidents or governments who purported to be Christians," or "perpetrated by Kings, presidents or governments of countries where Christianity is the dominant religion," you might have a point.

But for a war to be "Christian" in its motivation?
What is the motivation of Christianity?

To make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the father, the Son and the Holy Spirit..."

Now, apart from the shameful use of Catholicism by the conquisators in South America, I am not aware of any wars where the motivation is the conversion and baptism of the people.

And so, to say that "All the wars on the history books" are "Christian in motivation." is a very suspect allegation.

I have never heard of American, British, or allied soldiers shouting "Jesus is Lord!" or "God loves you!" or "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved!" as they marched into villages to rape, burn and behead the inhabitants.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of course you believe Christianity not to be inherently violent; so do I. But you have to have your eyes tight shut not to notice any wars in history conducted either implicitly or explicitly in the name of a (Christian) God.

Any belief system with an eschatalogical, millenialist facet contains an inherent danger of violence; this is just as true of Christianity as it is of Islam.

You will doubtless object that this is a wrong understanding or distorsion of Christianity, and discard the counter-examples as marginal or "not proper Christians", but you refuse to view Islam through the same lens, preferring rather to take the most violent, extreme examples as normative. Why is this?

(Oh, and returning to a previous debate, I've discovered that the very first person in the Bible said to have encountered the "Angel of the LORD" [YHWH], in Genesis 16:7, is... Hagar, the mother of Ishmael).

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Of course you believe Christianity not to be inherently violent; so do I. But you have to have your eyes tight shut not to notice any wars in history conducted either implicitly or explicitly in the name of a (Christian) God.

Any belief system with an eschatalogical, millenialist facet contains an inherent danger of violence; this is just as true of Christianity as it is of Islam.

You will doubtless object that this is a wrong understanding or distorsion of Christianity, and discard the counter-examples as marginal or "not proper Christians", but you refuse to view Islam through the same lens, preferring rather to take the most violent, extreme examples as normative. Why is this?

(Oh, and returning to a previous debate, I've discovered that the very first person in the Bible said to have encountered the "Angel of the LORD" [YHWH], in Genesis 16:7, is... Hagar, the mother of Ishmael).

There are no wars in history that were waged for the sole purpose of converting nations to the knowledge of the love of God and salvation through Jesus Christ.

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
There are no wars in history that were waged for the sole purpose of converting nations to the knowledge of the love of God and salvation through Jesus Christ.

All that needs to mean is that the protagonists of wars with a "Christian" element were cunning (or duplicitous) enough to base their acts of war on other grounds.

Are you saying that none of those who engaged in violence with a claimed Christian element were "not proper Christians", or what? (and don't think protestants have been immune from this...).

[Edited to add a sample list to be getting on with]

Besides, I'm more interested in your answer to this question:

quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
You will doubtless object that this is a wrong understanding or distorsion of Christianity, and discard the counter-examples as marginal or "not proper Christians", but you refuse to view Islam through the same lens, preferring rather to take the most violent, extreme examples as normative. Why is this?



[ 18. March 2015, 09:35: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
There are no wars in history that were waged for the sole purpose of converting nations to the knowledge of the love of God and salvation through Jesus Christ.

There are plenty of wars in history that were waged on the basis of wiping out heresies.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The odd thing is, that Mudfrog's argument is parallel to the jihadists, who also argue that Islam inevitably leads to violent jihad. If they are both right, it's difficult to see how it can be combatted, since even moderate Muslims may well in the end see the correctness of this. What can we do - intern them all?

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Callan
Shipmate
# 525

 - Posted      Profile for Callan     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
Of course you believe Christianity not to be inherently violent; so do I. But you have to have your eyes tight shut not to notice any wars in history conducted either implicitly or explicitly in the name of a (Christian) God.

Any belief system with an eschatalogical, millenialist facet contains an inherent danger of violence; this is just as true of Christianity as it is of Islam.

You will doubtless object that this is a wrong understanding or distorsion of Christianity, and discard the counter-examples as marginal or "not proper Christians", but you refuse to view Islam through the same lens, preferring rather to take the most violent, extreme examples as normative. Why is this?

(Oh, and returning to a previous debate, I've discovered that the very first person in the Bible said to have encountered the "Angel of the LORD" [YHWH], in Genesis 16:7, is... Hagar, the mother of Ishmael).

There are no wars in history that were waged for the sole purpose of converting nations to the knowledge of the love of God and salvation through Jesus Christ.
This is entirely correct. It is also entirely correct that there were no wars that were waged for the sole purpose of converting the Infidel to the belief that there is one God and that Mohammed is his Prophet.

--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, Mudfrog's argument seems to assume that IS are simply a religious group. In the context of the Middle East, and Arab politics, this is absurd; politics and religion are often joined at the hip in that region.

Hence, it struck me that 9/11 was not particularly aimed at Christianity, but at American power, and the symbols thereof. They didn't strike a big cathedral, but buildings that represent commerce and the military.

But these arguments go back a long way; after all, Iraq and Syria were created by colonialism - I notice that IS take particular pleasure in pulverizing the Sykes/Picot border.

You could even argue that the long travail of post-colonialism is still going on today; Nasser thought that he had found a (secular) solution, but that was just the antipasto. Of course, it didn't help that Bush/Blair had the distinct air of neo-colonialists. Shock and awe - what a fucking joke, but a dangerous one.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520

 - Posted      Profile for mdijon     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Callan:
This is entirely correct. It is also entirely correct that there were no wars that were waged for the sole purpose of converting the Infidel to the belief that there is one God and that Mohammed is his Prophet.

Exactly. Typical of the non-equivalent treatment of our religion's histories.

Look at violent Islam fighting war after war over Shia vs Sunni sect membership. On the other hand Northern Ireland is about cultural differences with a convenient religious label, which actually has nothing to do with the true religion of Christ.

Of course the same argument can be made in the Middle-East but it doesn't seem to have been considered.

--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon

Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  17  18  19  20  21 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools