Posted on 05/22/2015 8:18:12 PM PDT by TexasTransplant
I am looking for a Youtube from a Dr that was hawking his books about ISLAM and he had a few Youtube vids that spelled out exactly what ISLAM is and the Koran is described as 3 separate Korans (only one I remember is the Medina Koran)
I meant to save it and search as I may I can't find it
It’s primarily a violent pre-civilization culture with a strong ideological content that references a deity which can’t possibly exist.
Sorry, can’t agree with your definition.
It assumes there is one God. While I personally agree, there are and have been many religions with a different POV.
There are and have been religions with many gods, and religions with no gods.
I personally consider them false religions, but they’re false religions, not non-religions.
I also do not want my, or anybody else’s beliefs about religions, incorporated into our legal or constitutional system. Let all the religions, true and false, duke it out in the public square.
Example: Without Islamic law it wouldn't be a religion at all.
no other belief requires theocratic law to keep them afloat.
I don’t know how to express this more clearly.
You obviously assume it is axiomatic that religions are non-political. That is a valid belief system, but that’s all it is.
Islam is only one of many “religions” that incorporate aspects of what we would today consider politics. Another example is the Caesaropapism of the Byzantine Empire, under which the Emperor was head of both the Church and State. In medieval western Europe, church and state were separate in some ways, but intimately entangled in others. Similarly, under the Roman Republic and Empire the state religion was a department of the state.
That religion and politics are or should be separate is not a fact, it’s an opinion. One I agree with, BTW. But that doesn’t change the FACT that it’s an opinion and preference only.
Dhimmitude is quite remarkably similar to the conditions imposed on Ireland via the penal laws intended to encourage Irish Catholics to become Protestants. Didn’t work as well in Ireland as in Islam.
No i don't.
All I'm saying is once the religion becomes a theocracy it becomes more political then it is a religion. That is why our founders set up the separation of church and state to avoid creating a political system based on a religion.
Why would I want to see a peaceful eradication of Islam? They are criminals, plain and simple.
That’s because only one God has provided us a true religion.
Respecting any other religion disrespects His legitimate authority.
The American political doctrine of ‘freedom of religion’ was premised upon Christianity, with different religions being different denominations within Christianity, all originally premised upon Judaism, all directed back towards God on His Word.
In understanding religion, study how it is used in Scripture. The Old Testament rituals in the Tabernacle were religious and true and provided by God. On the contrary, the Puritans premised their religion upon Scriptural worship of God through faith in Christ, void of all Roman Ritual.
Islam lacks verity as it was synthesized some 6 centuries after the Resurrection and Ascension, without adequately addressing Jesus Christ.
then you don't know what Dhimmitude means. To this day a kafir can be killed by a Muslim on the street. It's extremely unlikely anything will happen to the Muslim other then paying financial compensation to the family for their loss in 'property.'
All they have to do is claim blasphemy by the Kafir and they don't have to prove it.
This creates a kind of legal vigilantism which is the root of Jihad.
So, in 1750 a Protestant in Ireland couldn’t for the most part murder a Catholic on the street without repercussions? Not sure that’s true.
BTW, under sharia financial compensation is usually an option for any murder.
1. most muslims are duped into the belief. They been lied to exactly how the left believes they are the religion of peace.
2. Many Muslims would like to leave but are forced to stay by threat of the theocracy.
3. it's the humane thing to do. We ARE better.
Kafir’s had to bow as a Muslim passed by on the road in Islamic Sicily or be flogged.
bump
Killing a kafir isn't murder. If the people involved are of equal class it's a murder. If the crime was murder then the accused will be executed under sharia. There was no compensation for murder. There is compensation as one would lose property for killing a kafir.
From an Islamic site:
In the above narrations, we clearly see that Allah Almighty used to punish to death those who commit intentional murders among the People of Israel. This law is still effective in Islam, and killing the murderer is still a valid law in Islam, but there is however another alternative for punishment, and that is accepting by choice the blood money.
If the relatives of the slain person wish to have an open and forgiving heart, then they can forgive the murderer under the condition that he compensate them with money for their slain son or relative. The demand should be reasonable.
If the relatives do not wish to forgive the murderer, then he is to get executed by the Islamic ruling authority.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/laws_of_murder.htm
Which is exactly what I said.
In most slave states prior to our Civil War, killing of a slave without just cause was murder, with the death penalty. It even actually happened. Same was true under Jim Crow. There was, by law, no difference between a white man killing a black man and a black man killing a white man.
However, in practice the consequences were usually, though not always, dramatically different.
You are conflating the fact that in Muslim lands it is unlikely a Muslim will be prosecuted for killing a Christian with the assumption that it is legal for him to do so. AFAIK that is not the case anywhere.
Two different things.
Islam is Not a Religion”
February 19, 2011
By admin
Religion”
New book by Rebecca Bynum
Reviewed by Louis Palme
Then let them greet their meritoriuos deeds and leader from the point of my 556 cal., pork encrusted, ammo .
Their god is the moon, muhammed is their profit , 680 years after the existance of my God.
Let them go the way of the "thuggies".
and may all their 72 virgins respond to the name : "Sue-eeee !"
I would not recommend messing with the Constitution in an effort to address Islam and the obvious contrary ideology from that expressed in our founding documents. Simple recognition of their law being opposite to our own should suffice. I personally refuse to accept them as a religion. Our founding elements were familiar with Christianity and what it was capable of in the hands of fallible man despite principles or commandments to the contrary. To consider any other comparison to prove a religion over criminal enterprise, or false ideology, would not be true to our founding IMHO.
That said, they would probably want to take it to the Suprmee Court. That might be interesting.
There is no shortage of Muslims willing to die and sacrifice, for a belief that it is what God wants them to do.
I would say it is a religion, albeit not what we would like it to be, since us Infidels are the ones who will be killed by Islam. -Tom
The written form of the Quran has never been in Chronological order, here is why. The composer of the Quran, Othman, is said to have gathered all known verses and scripts that were ever written in all forms. This included bones and what not. The Quran before it was compiled in written form was always recited orally. There was no reason other than Othman’s as to why the Quran was compiled like it was. Even the Quran in Istanbul’s museum isn’t even in chronological order and this is one of the oldest Quran’s on record.
Islam does not have a scholar at every mosque nor will it ever have one. They have what are known as the Hadiths and what are authoritative interpreters. These interpreters interpret the quran and have written “their thoughts” on the matter. The Mullahs and clerics (which are not authoritarians on the words of their god as set forth in the quran, they are the messengers to the followers. Now some will be but they are usually found in major places like Universities or Mosques, but never at your everyday neighborhood mosque.)then refer to these interpretations by the authorized interpreter when an issue comes up. Most muslims do not own the Quran and the only way the Quran is recited is in arabic. Their prophet is said to have not be able to read or write and was told to recite the quran by the angel of light. If you ever debate a muslim who speaks arabic they will always tell you that the translation from arabic to english wrong 100% of the time. So it is a bit different than the early Catholic Church trying to control their empire with Latin because the followers didn’t understand Latin whereas the followers of the Quran understand arabic. The followers receive their instruction in the language they speak not a language that they did not. They are controlled by the fact that their ultimate authority is their god on all matters. And in those cases, it is left up to the authorized interpreters to determine what their god meant when he said such and such.
Again here is a comparison of Christian faith versus Islamic faith that actually falls flat. You can’t compare the two. When you do and you do so out of ignorance (because you do not know the actual facts) then it is bad for those of us who actually try to fight Islam.
My point here is that we would not come to an argument without the correct facts. And when one side does come to an argument with incorrect facts the other side laughs at them because of the ignorance that is shown and their arguments going forward usually have no credibility.
Look at the religion of global warming, how many times have Freepers dispelled incorrect facts that appear by scientists who have defended global warming. If you are going to come to an argument/debate come with correct facts or your words mean nothing. Thus you lose your credibility in the debate.
I despise Islam because I have spoken with apostates and I have spoken with those who have been subjugated by its hand. I have debated muslims with correct facts. The fact is Islam cannot stand on its own two feet. It will always bring Christianity and Judaism into the equation then misdirect the argument to the ills that have been caused by those religions.Then you are not arguing Islam anymore you are defending Christianity and Judaism. It is a common diversion tactic. However by knowing the facts and not something you heard but something you researched for yourself to be true, then we can go toe to toe with Islam.
Think of it this way, muslims in the Middle East are shown soap operas every day and also inundated by religious shows that indoctrinate them to have them believing that Israeli Jews kill babies so they can the blood of the infant. Your reaction to this statement is exactly their reaction to when you come at them with false information regarding Islam. Everything I ever say about Islam has come from their books not one iota of it comes from heresy. Show Islam for what it really is by using Islam to destroy itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.