Posted on 07/08/2013 4:24:51 AM PDT by Kaslin
How about in our government?
Exactly - by force of arms. If the author lived in 1930's Germany, would he be spouting similar nonsense about the "moderate" factions of the Nazi Party?
Having lived in the Muslim world, I know that there are many Muslims that are peaceful. The problem is that, with Islam, the most radical factions predominate, and no one dares oppose them. After all, they are the "most dedicated and faithful" practitioners of the religion.
Also, even "moderate" Muslims can be easily radicalized by what one observed called "the incandescent fury of Islam..." - as in the early flashbulbs that smoldered before igniting. Many Muslims are taught to hate the "infidel" and that violent Jihad against those who oppose their religion is their sacred duty. Thus underneath the "thin veneer" of moderation run dark currents that are unimaginable to the Western mind.
I disagree with Pipes. The entire framework of the Islamic faith is based on the idea that people are slaves to Islam and the absurd idea that a person can be “converted” by force.
Contrast this to the free, but conditional, gift of salvation that God offers humanity through Jesus Christ. This gift can only be accepted in a framework of informed consent, which by its very nature must be voluntary. Nowhere in the Bible is the idea that people can be “converted” by force.
I think what Pipes is reacting to in Islam is that some people just cannot accept what the literal reading of the Koran implies. But on the other hand we see so many major Protestant sects such as Methodists who cannot bring themselves to accept the plain statements in the Bible regarding what God considers righteous and what He considers Sin. A good example of this is the issue of sexual immorality, which Jesus says in Revelation 22:15 disqualifies a person from having eternal life.
You have to look at the total context of that verse to see its real meaning. Jesus was referring to the upheaval and decention that would come to Jewish families when members of the family follow Jesus in the new covenant rather than current Hebrew teaching.
There is a similar passage in Luke 12:49-53 that clarifies this ....... "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo [His death and resurrection], and how distressed I am until it is completed! Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law."
How about in our government?
A violent world-domination movement cleverly disguised as a religion.
And who, exactly, was Mohammed? Islam was founded by a desert bandit who made his living robbing caravans and sacking towns. Mohammed was the kind of guy who would order a woman's murder because she made satirical poems about him.
The "exemplar for Muslims" was a psychopathic killer, rapist, and pedophile.
There is a principle in Islam whereby the latter verses of the Koran, when they conflict with earlier verses, are the ones that prevail. (And generally the latter parts of the Koran are the more militant ones.) Jacoby ignores that, quotes an early verse, and leaves it at that.
His logic is similarly riddled throughout. Surveys show majorities in most of the Muslim world believe that sharia law should be enforced as the law of the land, even though a majority of Muslims aren’t personally geared toward becoming violent themselves. And, part of Islam’s stated strategy is to move peacefully into a new area until the conditions can be created to prevail by force.
Jacoby is the Globe’s token ‘conservative’ writer, and we know how that tends to work out over time.
*has been*
“Mosques should be shut down.
No, they should not be arrested, but including them in our military is lunacy.”
No mosques and no military would have gone a long way toward reducing the domestic threat. Too bad you weren’t advising George Bush.
The religion is demonic.
Because Islam is demonic.
What is Islam?
A gutter religion.
The question that Jacoby does not ask himself is: why are many Muslims violent in this day and age when most other religions gave up violence centuries ago? Sure, some Muslims, like Indonesians, are relatively non-violent and do not seek to conquer the earth. But why are so many Muslims from the Mid-east violent and seek to conquer the world with their twisted ideology? Why does Islam condemn to death those who seek to leave it? Why is Islam the only religion that is doing those things? Jacoby should be honest with himself and try to answer those questions.
I’m willing to say - in my rational moments - that it IS a religion.
The fallacy is that it’s not a religion in the same sense that WE think of a religion.
Maybe a bit like saying “Being a hitman for the mafia is a job”. Well yes, maybe it is a job. But it’s not a job the way most people think of a job like an accountant or a truck driver.
What is islam - death, to the body and the soul
Right Here:
Book - http://babylonscovertwar.com/index.html
I dealt with personally on a military/diplomatic level like no one who has written about it has before...Pamela Geller can’t touch this book, Robert Spencer, Morey, or any of the others...the only reason they get press time is because they have inside press contacts...but for a veteran who served 4 tours and was instrumental in going against the largest insurgent faction < Mahdi Militia > I get sidelined for stating what no one else will state...I know and fully understand Islam...
Pipes is wrong; the Mohammedan “religion” is based entirely on violence. The koran is filled with lying, cheating, killing and outright terrorism. To equate it to other religions by stating: “Like every great faith, Islam is what its adherents make of it.” is a lie.
Anyone can quote Scripture to prove or disprove a point. That is what is done here. The koran must be taken in its entirety, just as Scripture must be taken. If one does that, we get two different pictures - one a message of terror, the other a true religion of peace.
And to the NSA trolls, FU.
How did Mohammed practice islam?
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.