the Christian "re-formation" had that as its stated aim
The Islamic reformation has already happened -- the Wahabbi re-formation.
Posted on 12/05/2016 5:10:46 PM PST by RoosterRedux
*** “would also carry the unfortunate side effect of turning ourselves into the hateful animals which we so readily decry, not to mention carrying with it the annihilation of any reasonable notion of the teachings of Jesus Christ, who, I might remind us all, is the Son of God and Prince of Peace”***
I have given much thought to and about wiping muslims off the face of the Earth and how it might make me “just like them” ... then I thought a little longer and they killed more of us and played the guilt trip against us, then again.
Your guilt trip is their prophesy and a weakness that should not be administered while unarmed, I am not like them in any way and I am not like you either.
*** “A friend of mine (a Liberal) was saying “Interesting how for years we have been trying to preach Jesus to muslims, but couldn’t get into their countries. And now they are coming here.”
While I think the illegals need to be stopped, and everyone needs to be vetted - it is an opportunity” ***
YOU are a Dangerous Idiot!
the Christian "re-formation" had that as its stated aim
The Islamic reformation has already happened -- the Wahabbi re-formation.
if you talk about "Softening the Koran" -- that is not "re-formation" but creating a new religion, like Bahaiism
*** “ and imparted to it the opposite of what I wrote” ***
Negative ... you invite the snake into OUR house by accepting it.
You think there are Factions and that it can be delt with in other ways than eradication.
You are going to Shame them to death with your superior insult skills? (and take 150 years to do it) undermine their confidence with bravado and a puffed up chest?
They are not hard to figure out ... They tell you straight up what they are going to do, to your face, they put it in writing and deed and try every day to prove to you that they are serious.
you forget about the killings of Christians (the genocide of the Assyrian church) by Timur-e-Lang, the destruction of the Church of the sepulchre by Caliph Muawiyah that led to the first crusade, the persecution of CHristians in Spain, in Syria, in the arabian peninsula -- all of this occured long before Al-Wahabb
It's leader says he was a prophet, succeeding Mohammad -- and that is anathema to Moslems who consider Mo as the last prophet (which is also why they hate Ahmaddiyas)
>> “corpus of [Islamic] texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the centuries”
Islam is a war plan. It’s nothing more.
Salvavida -- you are 100% correct. Jesus preached love, acceptance. Mohammad preached war. Any reformation to return to these fundamentals will result in differing religions
Just a question, your writing style is familiar.
Please assume the following in the manner it was intended.
“Do you always write in Tweed or did a Grad student write it for you?”
It is a question begging 2 answers if addressed to the right person, only one if not.
I wasn't referring to the individual you named. I was referring to his ideological predecessor, Ibn Taymiyyah, born 1263, died 1328, and who "is considered to have had considerable influence in contemporary Wahhabism".
The person you named lived a few centuries later.
So, to summarize, the ideological underpinnings of Wahhabism began with Taymiyyah, and became more widely propagated with the person you named.
Hence my chronological references make somewhat more sense in that context, and I maintain my assertion that several centuries passed after the death of the Prophet before the the seeds of Wahhabism were first sown in the 13th century, and more centuries still passed before this most virulent flavor of Islam became more generally spread and adopted in the 18th century.
Take up your accusations of a guilt trip with Christ, not me.
What I'm clearly stating is my belief that Christ would not adopt such an indiscriminate, un-Christian solution— a solution which would destroy both His humanity and divinity— therefore I categorically reject it as an untenable, hopelessly simplistic, counterproductive option.
I really don't know what do to with that question, so I guess it was addressed to the wrong person...
Thank you, my question and my curiosity satisfied
Negative....see, this is where your reading comprehension is lacking. I was arguing the opposite. You are a hothead and maybe last night you were drunk, but intellectual arguments escape you.
I am saying forget reform, it won't work. Attack the muslim world by being willing to tell them the truth about their religion, its formation, the lunacy of its beliefs, its basic inhumanity. Make islamic beliefs anathema to the civilized world. Turn the people of islamic countries against it. Ataturk was a model of this, but it was only done in one country and the west lost its resolve, so Turkey is backsliding. Cordon off the islamic world and give them benchmarks for progress in de-islamizing, becoming civilized. Stop subsidizing them with oil refineries and technology. Do it for a century or two until islam goes the way of other ancient pagan beliefs. That is what must be done, because reform will not last.
But you got a 400 on your SAT verbal and didn't get that.
Bahai is hardly “the peaceful version of islam”. In islam there can be no new messenger of God. Bahaism claims there is.
who cares. Bahaiis don’t maraud the world murdering, beheading, raping, and amputating people.
If you’ll check your religious texts, Christians had to stretch to allow for “just” wars. The koran sprciically calls or conquest.
Thank you for that explanation — I had not heard of Ibm Taymiyyah.
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.