do you think pastor's quran burning act is intolerance and foolish? or do you think this act is freedom of expression?. Do you think religious people are too sensitive towards their own faith while insensitive to other's feelings?
Intolerace and foolish would make sense. So far it seems 9 people have died as a result of this act of nonsense. One nonsense hating another nonsense, what a lot of nonsense that is. The deaths were not nonsense though.
ya...true but pastor seems to be indifferent to killings and still defends his doing...
Dental implants?? teeth replacement?? Why would you think it appropriate to be promoting yourself (against forum rules anyway) in such a sensitive arena as this? Do you not have any regard for the deaths of innocent people? Take it somewhere else, please.
If Muslims killed 9 people then Muslims are to blame.
Not all Muslims, just the ones who did it.
See how that works?
I think its both intolerance and foolish who should know better than fuel hatred in a difficult world. I don't think its freedom of expression in a supposedly civilized world. As to "Do you think religious people are too sensitive towards their own faith while insensitive to other's feelings?" unfortunately yes, but this doesn't mean that these great books like the Quran and/or the Bible preach insensitivity or parochialism.
I agree except for the last bit.
Patently the quoran and bible Do teach intolerance for each other's religion to the point of urging the murder of each others supporters.
Both books have passages that say just that.
do you think it is insecurity of religion which makes them write such stuffs?
I do. I also believe the reason for that insecurity and all the preaching is because they don't quite believe it themselves.
Decidedly one sided!
When a Koran is burned, Muslims retaliate with killings, riots and the like.
When a western flag is burned by them, it's tolerated. NO reprisals.
When the Bible is burned, Christians don't go on a rampage, killing and burning. Not in another country.
Muslims are FAR TOO EASILY OFFENDED!
Get a grip, people. Not everyone likes your violent ways!
. Do you think religious people are too sensitive towards their own faith while insensitive to other's feelings?
This meant all religions and includes Islam...when they come on streets when quran is burnt , why they dont condemn killing of governor who some extremist claim to have been against Islam...are they sensitive only for their feelings much like this pastor who doesnot feel that he is hurting others when quran is burnt...
for me bible or quran both are mere piece of paper but for some it may be divine work...at least we must learn to respect that...isn't it?
If (their) god can't deal with it, why do it FOR him?
If God wanted those people dead, He is capable of taking their life away.
WHY, should men kill for him?
What exactly did the UN workers that were killed do? Nothing. They were not burning anything.
STUPID. It's called murder!
and what are your views on stupidity of pastor?...thread is on that...please comments on that too...
I didn't read the story.
Yes, it's stupid too!!
Jesus does not teach His followers to burn any thing, or kill anyone.
This Pastor's mandate (from God) is to preach the Gospel, and tend to his flock.
I'd say he's after the media attention. That's all!
I responded to the killing, because that is the greater of the two evils.
i think this guy is nothing but a fool trying to get attention. he seems to love to cause problems though he claims to be a follower of god. strange way of showing it.
do you think pastor's quran burning act is intolerance and foolish? --- YES
or do you think this act is freedom of expression?.--- YES
Do you think religious people are too sensitive towards their own faith while insensitive to other's feelings --- YES
Yes it's intolerant. He has the right to be intolerant of a book that's against his own religion, if he owns that copy of that book. Last I heard, it's not a crime to be intolerant of certain things or certain people or peoples as long as one doesn't personally attack those people. (So far, the liberal agenda hasn't totally succeeded in making one's personal religious preferences a crime).
No I wouldn't say it's foolish at all. I'd say the reaction of certain people to his act, is not only foolish but a method of trying to bully Christians into cowing down to Islam, and is an act of terrorism against the U.S.A.
Yes his act is an act of freedom of expression. Some people in the U.S.A. still choose to take a stand against outside (and inside) invasion. And some others choose to defend the Pastor's actions only because they want to ride those coattails to keep furthering the elements of the liberal agenda that our current President has set in place.
Quran/Islam/Muhammad do not cow down any people; they just convince people with reasonable, rational and brilliant arguments.
I'm not even sure I would want to address this erratic post.
Just the fact that religion preaches intolerance for other religions, should prove how much of a farce it is, in and of, itself.
The path to peace is through tolerance, not intolerance.
What exactly is an act of terrorism against the USA?! What on earth are you talking about?!
May be she is locked in her thoughts; cannot see beyond that.
Intimidation, and beyond.
People in the U.S.A, especially Christians, are being put in fear of speaking out about other religions or even secular liberalism.
The fact that the Florida Pastor was admonished publicly by Obama, Eric Holder, and General Petraeus is evidence that they're allowing the radical Islamists to basically hold us hostage. What the heck is so hard for some of y'all to see? At different and specific times, both Obama and Holder, and others, have shown their support of Black Liberation theology as well as other tenets of Islam, and their neglect (and sometimes attack) of Christian values. If you really think the Administration is patriotic, or even fair and balanced, you've got another think coming one of these days.
Are you threatening eternal damnation of the heretics who dare to question the "truths" espoused by nut jobs like Jones?
I'm saying that I believe the wrong agenda of the Obama Administration will be exposed fully for what it is, someday. It's already very clear to a large portion of the population of the U.S as well as to many outsiders.
Are you battening down the hatches? I just saw on CNN that there's tornadoes hitting your area.
We had lots of rain today, not much storms; yes, there's some predicted for tonight. I keep a direct path cleared to my basement; very scared of tornadoes!
lol...at first I thought you said "tomatoes"! CNN would be throwing those at my neck of the woods! haha
Forgive me for not being au fait with American politics, but why do I get the impression that the whole of the American Church thinks Obama is some kind of communist, Islamaphile, anti-christ hell bent on destroying the American dream? Surely there must be some in the Christian community who think he's actually trying to do a good job in the face of right wing hysteria?
Sure, there are many who think he's trying to do a good job.
I'm in the group that knows he is not. In his own words, he has said he wants to fundamentally change America, and his actions also prove that; he openly advocates for everything EXCEPT Christianity and traditional America.
Nonsense. No Christians are in dead about speaking out about their beliefs except fear of public ridicule. If you were living in say Libya and wanted to speak out about the Geddafi regime then you might know what being in fear was all about.
Islamists are not hiding anyone hostage in the West. Your government publically admonished this pastor because his stupidity and bigotry puts lives at risk in Afghanistan.
Freedom of speech is earnt by exercising responsibility.
Freedom of speech entails that one is ethical and moral.
Freedom of speech here in the USA USED TO BE about ethics and morality, yes. But not anymore. Obama and the rest of the liberal agenda has seen to it that anyone can propose any outlandish immoral law and hide their whinings under the guise of "free speech" or "civil rights" and "tolerance" and get full support. Those of us who speak out for good morality and basic ethics are threatened with the rest of their "laws", as in the "hate speech" accusations that are instantly thrown at us.
Where's the Administration's "tolerance" for that Pastor? Nowhere, really.
Yet they sure are tolerating the killings of innocents by radicals in another country and blaming it on a conservative Christian U.S. citizen.
No one is preventing the church speaking out on any subject they care to comment on. Anti-abortionists are not persecuted or arrested. Nut jobs who parade about with signs saying 'God hates fagots' are still free to express their brand of right wing Neo conservatism, etc, etc. As far as I'm aware not since the Salem Witch trials has anyone been persecuted for their religion in America. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Let's get a sense of perspective, as long as freedom of speech is enshrined in your constitution, the church will not suffer persecution.
Correction, as long as that part of the Constitution continues to be interpreted correctly. Of late, the Administration here has attempted to twist it into something totally unrecognizable.
So yeah there's hope for us in the USA, if we can replace those fools with some actual common-sense, patriotic leaders.
If that doesn't happen, then we'll continue to be targets for any and all radicals who hate the USA.
If radicals hate the USA it's because of America's foreign policies. Such as supporting despotic regimes if it suits America's commercial interests; starting an illegal war in oil rich Iraq or using the CIA to destabilise democratically elected governments in Central America and Africa.
Recently a the pilot of a downed USA F-15 in Libya was being helped to safety by Libyan rebels of the Gedaffi regime. So what did American forces do? They fired on the rebels. They do what they always do, shoot first and ask questions later. America will not win hearts and minds as long as it trigger happy ignorant armed forces fire on civilians in the world's hotspots.
Tell that to General Petraeus. He's so busy blaming people here in the Homeland that he probably didn't think to command his troops correctly.
You forgot Iran. The US and Brittan deposed the democratically elected leader and reinstalled the Shaw that the people threw out because Iran wanted to nationalize it's oil. The people threw out the Shaw again but a radical Muslim took over and nationalized the oil anyway. Boy did that little mistake cost us big time. What's all this talk now about democratizing the world? Seems that's only good if they allow the US and Brittan to steel their oil.
Moral of the story? Piss in some one else's back yard and you are likely to get pissed on.
Brenda, Things sure have changed a lot. There is so many immoral laws in this world today.
Yes you're right.
Hey Woman! I've tried to contact you several times. What's UP with that anyway, I wonder? Maybe my e-mail account is messed-up...
I think you like conspiracy theories. Do you know the one about Bush planing 9/11? I think there may be something to that one.
I do think its foolish and intolerant and also pointless. However it is also within his rights to do burn the book if he purchased it, even if its a stupid pointless thing to do.
Plain stupidity on both sides. The pastor for not caring what the consequences of his actions are and refusing to take responsibility, and Muslims for caring what some retard in the US does with a bit of paper, and murdering people for it. This is how wars get started. Two stupid people doing stupid things and not taking responsibility for them.
Burning something is an action, not freedom of expression.
Pastor did an improper and immoral act; he should have refuted the arguments of the Quran if he disagreed with it; his burning a copy of it does no harm to Quran. Quran still exists.
Supposing you burn my Photograph ... stick needles in a rag doll, or hurl curses at me, from a distant Florida ...
Do your actions ... emerging from personal hatred, based in pure ignorance, or, the evil Intent of Politics ... hurts me ?
Until, "I believe" ... that your 'Actions' have the power, to hurt me ...
But this is what, and how, the deniers of God, Believe, infirmly.
Au Contraire, All True Believers, Believe Firmly, In, The Word of God ... Because True Belief grants the Believer, the intrinsic ability to Distinguish Truth, from Fallacy ...
Thus, True Believers are bound by Faith, to Respect ... all the Scriptures ... Though some, may stand altered, or might have been added to, by the Ignorant ... non-Believing Priests and Pastors ... In Ordination.!
For had their evil kind, Believed in The Truth, they would not be evil anymore ... Thus, they would not even think, of Tampering, with The Word of God.
Anyway, the burning of our Book, Koran, does not alter the Fact, that Scriptures, Exist, In, The Ordained State, of The Word ... what at times, is tampered with, by the evil kind ... among humans.
Quran, it should never be forgotten, Is, The Ordained Unalterable State of The Word of God ... The Eternal Truth, Scribed by the Pen, on Paper, in these times !
The living evil ... calling themselves, Priests and Pastors, will never learn ... that a fire, which can "burn" Truth, Hath not been Created ...
And so will the Floridan pastor learn, that, his condemnable act of burning The Book ... cannot even singe The Truth ... Stated.
Its just some Ink and Paper, he burns ...
For, Truth, Lives in the Believing Hearts, and Souls.
The Arabic word Quran ... means, "The ... Read ... Book... "
Meaning, The Book, Stating the Unalterable Truth, Stipulated by words, scribed by Ink, on Paper.
Remember pastor ... Truth Survives ... Evil Perishes.
Here you are 1400 years later, having killed 270 million people telling us that yours is a religion of peace.
Who is going to swallow that whale?
Where do you get all these "Negative Publicity's" Concocted Figures ...
From, stories, your elders told you, at bedtime, ingraining hatred for Islam in your innocent minds ...
Blaming ... all human suffering, on "others" particularly, Muslims ... as being Responsible for all human sufferings in the Past ?
But Islam entered the scene, 1400 years ago ... will you also Blame Islam and the Muslims, for what happened 2000 years ago ... or what happened during the past 8000 years ?
Next you will be holding God Responsible ... for your doings !
Don't you see ... the blatant lie of your 270 million figure claim ... But of course, you know, these stories are "Diversions" ... Created, to Divert the attention, of people, from what you have done in the Past, and are Doing today !
Tell me ... If your co-Religionists suffered at your hands in the past, and they settled the Score during the ensuing Centuries ... Where does Islam enter the Picture ... its one's doing in the other, of the same kind.
Tell me something extraordinary, that Muslims, or Islam did in the past, or is doing in the present, that is out of your Routine responses to Tyranny?
If you can read ... I suggest, you try Reading History, impartially, to learn what you did, to one another ... and go to the Media, if you want to see what you are still doing to one another, and human kind ?
Which particular group of "you" are you including me in?
I don't have any belief system or religion to flog.
Before Islam the other religions did the killing.
As for the stats, just Google, it's common knowledge.
You can stick you abusive "if you can read" insult where the sun don't shine, sunshine!
When I said Read ... I meant, read impartially ... get down to ground level ... talk about Ground Realities ...
And regarding Group Placements ... I do not place Atheists in any Relevant Group or Category ... they are the self-appointed Judges, sitting in Judgment, over humankind's Actions ... handing down Judgments, from atop the wall of Non-Belief ...
at least, I don't care ... what they say ... or worried about what they may make, others do.
Anyway ... if that "stick'' it ... is supposed to be a "Compliment" ... it winds up this debate ... beautifully !
Do as you like my friend ... its your outlook, and thats your business ... but such compliments do help the gracious ending of a fair discussion ...
Good Bye my friend.
No, I am not finished with the debate even if you are.
Please first learn the Truth, before you accuse ...
Thus I can only thank you for the <youtube.com/watch?v=jbPlgSNfuzE> clip. It took me about an hour to note down the 70 odd "allegations" leveled against Islam, and the Muslims.
But since 68, out of the 70 Allegations, refer to such matters as the West's, and the "newest" Pro-West's compiled Statistics and Philosophical considerations such, as relating Ethics, Morality and Warfare related Casualties ... I cannot address these Tentatively Theorized ideas, in the "reply" space provided here.
So I will write a Hub, whenever I have the Time, to Research these Concoctions, and reply with substantial facts, not conjectures.
The Title of the proposed reply Hub will be ... "TIP OF THE ICEBERG" ... thus, whenever, you see this Title on my pages ... read it.
In the meantime, you are free to add to the "Corpus Lamentari" ... any more allegations, needing my reply, in addition to the 70 presented here ...
Anyway ... since only "2" of the 70 Allegations ... appearing at, serial number 14, and 43, in the clip, are "Specific" ... I will address these presently, in correcting, the "out of Context ... meaning, the Dishonestly reported Texts as the Texts of the Koran and Sunnah ...
For the allegations are indeed False Propaganda Material, aimed at misleading, not only the Non-Muslims, but also the Casual Muslim's perceptions.
Regarding the Two Specific References produced:
The first, at #14, Alleges that [Mohammad bin Ismael] Bukhari, the Reporter of the Prophet's Said and Practiced, has Reported, the Prophet, as saying, that ... "97% Jihad is war, and only 3% is inner struggle ... ! "
I think, its about time I taught you the basic meanings of the word Jihad ... because, the Prophet, Peace and Blessings of Allah be Upon him; never said that warring is 97% Islamic Jihad !
You can either Trust my known, or quote me the exact Reference, if, you are interested in knowing, the Bukhari text in terms of the correct Text and meanings.
Jihad, in Arabic means, the "Earnest, Physical and/or Intellectual Effort, of the Muslim Individual" ... in Following The Ordained Way of Life.
Sword is the last Resort, in Defending ones Family, Hearth and Home.
Thus, Jihad in the Physical sense, "Primarily" means ones making Fair Effort for an Honest living ... by not living off such, as Effortless Interest on monies loaned, or living off the others Sweat and Blood earned livelihood.
In the intellectual sense, Allah Ordains ... Muslims, "must" Ponder upon His Creation. For the Universe Is Subservient in Creation, to the Human. Thus, Humans have to find out, how to Conquer the Universe ... Not waste time in Conquering fellow Humans ... because, all Human are Born free and Equal in Creation.
Thus, to Interpret Jihad, in its very limited Sense of war faring, is essentially talking out of the Reported' Context, so also the Islamic Concept of Jihad.
As regards the out of Context Quoting of the Koranic Text ... the author of the clip has omitted a part of one Verse [8:12] and attached the balance, to the other [8:55] These two verses, have many a Verse separating the two.
First, I Reproduce the English Translation of Verse 8:12... it States:
and I quote:-
"When thy Lord Revealed to the "Angels" : I am with thee, to make Firm, those who Believe ... I will Cast Cast Terror in the hearts of those, who disbelieve, so smite above the neck, and smite every fingertip off them."
The Verse, 8:12 Is The Lord, Addressing, the angels ... Not the Jihadists or the Mongols... an if anyone so interprets, the Verses, its their personal outlook.
Now I quote, Verse 8:55. Stating ...
"The Vile of Beastliness, in the eyes of Allah are those, who Disbelieve [that] they will not Believe"
I hope you can compare the Allegation related Translations, with the Stated Truth, and make up your mind, as to What hath been actually Said, and what in prejudice hath been Reported.
Then, by your own words, Jihad does allow one to pick up the sword and use it. That does not teach peace, it teaches and authorizes a Muslim to be violent.
It doesn't matter whether your lord is addressing the angels or addressing a bowling team, the fact remains that your lord is commanding to, "Cast Terror in the hearts of those, who disbelieve, so smite above the neck, and smite every fingertip off them."
Again, this is teaching violence against non-believers, not peace.
Striving ... in defense of one's hearth, home, and the family, with Sword, is mandatory upon all those, who are real men ... ones we like to know, respect, and remember, and Pay tributes due all Real men ... and women.
Real men, and women ... means, good humans: meaning, Providing fathers, and Loving mothers ... means, Faithful husbands, and Faithful wives, Caring brothers, and sisters, Obedient sons and Daughters, Good neighbors, Reliable friends and Relatives, etc., these are all good Muslims ... Good Humans.
Such fearless defenders, meaning, Good men, elsewhere, are following "Nature's" Creed ... in Following Virtuosity, and Honor, as Religion ... It is all the more important that they know the Real Truth ... Islam.
Islam ... means, the Peaceful Way for Human existence ... Live and let Live, Peacefully ... Islam, is The Lord's Ordained Way of Life, for all Good Humans to Follow.
"Smite above the Neck, and Smiting off the Fingertips" is proverbial Arabic Expression ... In, the Arabian Prophet, stating, The Word of God. Peace and Blessings of Allah be Upon Muhammad ...
The Expression meaning ... "Render their heads incapable of Thinking clearly, meaning, make them Confused, as if in stupor ... And smiting off the fingertips means, Render their Evil hands, Incapable of doing any Physical harm to the Believers ...
Now we are getting somewhere. So, your claim now is that only "real men" will take up the sword and be violent and they these real men deserve our respect and we should pay tribute to them.
Hence, your religion if one of violence and not only do you as a Muslim condone this violence, you actually believe it should be respected.
Violent Muslims, violent humans. No, you are not good humans or good neighbors if you condone and respect violence.
Yes, you have shown Islam to be a violent religion.
You are lying. You just said you respected Muslims who take up the sword in violence. That is NOT a peaceful way for Human existence. How can Muslims say to live and let live when you take up the sword in violence?
Is that some kind of joke? Peace and blessings on a violent god?
Absolutely disgusting religion that Muslims would remove the fingertips of humans and that your religion condones it.
Horribly violent religion.
When foolish people do foolish stuff, how can we discern a meaning from that act?
You're all right. It is both. The act was pointless and insensitive. But, not to sound as if I agree with the burning (I have no patience for acts of intolerance) I think the reaction shows the horror of Islam. They're reaction to everything is an 'off with their heads' mentality. You can't even reference Mohamed without causing a riot. Even when I was in awe of Jesus, I still appreciated humor making fun of my beliefs. If you had done little more than burn a Bible I would have simply laughed at the foolishness. I wouldn't have gone to the streets in protest.
I know a stack of moderate muslims and christians.
The fundies on both sides will fight to the death as they are doing as we speak. The last time I looked there were 31 religious wars going on in the world at the same time.
Yes, 31. This may explain why.
From the quoran.
Qur’an 3:56 “As for those disbelieving infidels, I will punish them with a terrible agony in this world and the next. They have no one to help or save them.”
From the bible.
Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)
The statements made in both tomes are equally sociopathic, but each ignores their own dirty laundry and justifies what is said with a puerile argument about it being out of "context"
What is amusing is that neither one will allow the other to use context as an argument for their position! Illogical of course, but logic and myths don't usually come in the same box.
I am not one, who dares Deny, the Truth, of The Bible, in State, of The Word of our Lord ... but I reject, the altered State of The Word of God ... Altered in human error, of Reportings, and Translations ...
The word, of Prophet Jesus' Aramaic Stated Word of God, into Coptic, then Greek, then into Latin, and later into English, and all the Languages of the World.
I am butting in ... For I will always, if I can, help Remove ... Mis-perceptions, created by the prejudiced minds ... If, and when, such fallacy, comes to my knowledge, for as long as The Lord Hath Ordained, that I live.
The correct Translation, in its "Proper Sequence, and The Context" Is ...
In, that, Verse 3:54; preceding Verse 3:55 ... makes up the Proper Context ... [what you are mis-quoting as verse 3:56 ... as the Present Discussion related Context, of The Revelation. Because, Verse 3:56, deals with the Rewards that Await True Believers, in the Hereafter... in the Context of True Belief].
And to make the Context abundantly clear, I will quote the two Verses In, The Ordained Relevance: The Stating, of The Truth, In a Chapter of Koran, Warning the Jews ... titled ... "The Sons of Imran ... "
Verse 3:54 States
"When Allah said, O "Jesus" I will cause thee to die, and Exalt thee in My Presence, and clear thee of those, who disbelieve, and make those who follow thee, above those who disbelieve till the Day of Resurrection ... To Me all of you are to return, when I shall decide between you, concerning that wherein, you differ ...
Thus, Verse 3:54 is in the Context of Verse 3:55 ...
and I quote Verse 3:55. what you have wrongly quoted as Verse 3:56.
"Then, those who disbelieve, I shall Chastise them with severe chastisement in this world ... and the hereafter, and they will have no helpers ... "
First of all we should understand that the Verses, are Primarily in addressing the progeny of Imran ... Sons of Israel ... disbelieving Jews, rejecting Christ ... one of their own ... as an Impostor etc.. And then, in the Context of Belief, Referring to all True Believers, in matters of Belief, In, The Truth ... be they Jews, Christians, or Muslims.
Secondly, there are Two Words, of greatest Import in these Verses; Verse 3:54, The Lord Creator, Addressing, Jesus, the son of Blessed Mary, and the Christ [Promised Messiah]. Peace be Upon him ... In, The Word,
"Mutawaffica" ... Meaning, Return thee in Elevation, into My Presence ... The Verse States, The Truth, of the Christ's human Mortality ... Life unto the Physical's death ... before the End of Times.
The Word Mutawaffica, has been variously Mis-interpreted by many including the Christian Exegetists, and Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of "Ahmadi" Religion ... by saying, that Christ was killed, or had died on the Cross, or had escaped death in a Delusion.
The Second Word is, "Kafaru" meaning here, the Deniers of God, and the Day of Judgment ... not referring specifically, to the Jews, Christians, or Muslims per se, but all the Non-Believing and Incorrectly believing Religionists; Have been Called, the Kafireen ...
So I ask you ... Who ... disbelieved, in the Miracle of a Talking Infant ... a son, born in the Manger ... to a virgin mother, at Bethlehem ?
So I ask you ... Is a Race, or Color, or a Name, enough by way of the Qualification, entitling a people, to be called the only true Believers ?
I wouldn't know about the numbers. I think sometimes we categorize things as religious when there are more important underlying factors. Take religion out of the equation and people will fight anyway. Men thrive on it.
yes but religion works as glue and with its claim of eternal life and such stuffs its too dangerous...religion is used as weapon is more lethal and dangerous than nuclear weapon because it poisons generations to come
Agreed. But man is violent by nature. Take physical violence out of the equation as acceptable and they turn to violence in video games. Men appear to have a love for it. Even atheists. So, my question is how do you turn human nature away from it? Religion is obviously not the answer, but I haven't seen any answer yet. Remove religion and war and intolerance will persist.
Self knowledge, knowledge of the shadow aspect of self. In other words education.
earnest is right...seeing whole human species as one and seeing our responsibility in taking things forward would be the key according to me...our ancestors struggled and fought with cruelty of nature , competed with other species and brought us to place we are in...present religions are too young ...journey has been to long...we need to direct out resource on whole human species and stop dividing them into tags like Muslims , Christians ...
The Meaning, of the Word, "Islam" Is ...
" The Lord's Ordained, Way of Peaceful Living ... "
A Muslim, therefore, is one, who follows The Ordained Way ... Not the Political Interpretation of a word ... or seeks meaningful Existence, by killing other Religionists ... whatever the held Religious Beliefs might be involved ...
These are ... Religious ways ... of the Fanatic ... Urban's Crusaders, The Spanish Conquestedors, the Hashisheen of Alamut, European Witch Hunters, the Illuminati, the Templars, Freemasons, or Halagu, and the converted Mongol hordes, the Moguls etc.. !
Thus, one group of Humans, killing the other group's votaries ... Humans killing Humans ... on the Pretext, of Religious Differences, within Religious Sanctions ... is the Religious way.
Wars, Religious and Political Killings, are essentially barbaric Actions, these have nothing to do with Islam ... or Humankind ... For Islam Is ... The Way, of Peaceful Co-Existence.
Because, Islam is the Peaceful Way of Life ... not a Religion.
It's both. A bigotted fool who's out for the maximum amount of publicity has had his actions whipped into a frenzy by another set of bigots in order to instill hatred in a population. It's utterly depressing and I feel dreafully sorry for all those innocents who have been killed as a result of these actions.
I share your sadness in seeing these haters.
Don't bother with the spammer I flagged his profile as well as his posts. No juice here!
Pastor's quran burning act : Intolerance or freedom of expression
It is an immature act of the Pastor; it is not going to effect Quran/Islam/Muhammad's teachings which remain as fresh as ever even after the pastors' doing the useless act of its burning.
Quran is available on line; one can print as many copies of Quran as one wants to have.
He could not refute the reasonable and rational arguments of Quran; so in frustration he burnt it; this could be one of the reasons he did what he did.
i disagree with reasonable and rational part...rest m ok...
And what do you think about the crowd of people who ultimately ended up killing those UN employees?
paar waiting for your answer...do you think reactions of many muslims after burning of quran is valid?
There is no teaching in Quran/Islam/Muhammad to kill the innocent UN emplyees; those who did it did it on their own and are responsible for their irresponsible behavior.
Well said, I find it heartening when muslims such as yourself are willing to condemn such actions.
Shame Kandahar isn't as tolerant as Surrey.
There are intolerant people in every religion and even in the atheists agnostics; it is a part of the human failings.
If this is true, then WHY did Muslims Kill innocent people in retaliation?
Why not let Allah deal with it himself.
After all, it's HIS book under attack?
They did it unautorized; so they will suffer for it.
Who will make them suffer for it?
What it means "unauthorised"?
Every one is responsible for the act one does and is accountable by the Creator-God.
"Unauthorized" by the Creator-God; not mentioned in the teachings of Quran/Islam/Muhammad.
You need to go to the Middle East, and teach THEM that it's unauthorised.
They think they are going to be rewarded for their efforts in serving Allah, and killing infidels wherever they are found.
I think our forum is accessable in the whole world including the Middle East.
Quran is available online to everybody; one could verify it if one likes.
He is intolerant, clouded by his emotions and fanaticism to his own belief perhaps.
I realize that it is not politically correct to generalize, but I have noticed a growing trend of Muslim "extreemists" getting more and more agressive, along with angry Christians. All it takes is a stupid cartoon or a book burning to set them off. I heard the body count is over twenty people now because of that idiot in Florida. People like the Americans who went on that killing rampage need to be held accountable for their actions too.
This is what happens when we ignore common sense; Crazy churches get away with protesting funerals and wedings, books get burnt, planes crash into buildings, and a mosque gets erected down town as a nice slap in the face. These groups don't care about human decency, they just want to push the law to the extreeme but that's going to hurt us in the long run because more stupid laws will get passed and our basic freedoms are out the window.
The Muslims are at that unsettling time when they realize most of the world is not Muslim and won't care to be. Muslims certainly can't exist in polar or sub-polar latitudes, and have trouble in Canada where their "pre-dawn prayers" in winter might be 2:30 a.m. or something! In the future they won't be able to maintain their rituals in space.
Before a religion becomes irrelevant, there is a phase where they are deeply fanatical. In the New Testament, Paul goes to Ephesus, and when they get wind that he is preaching a new religion, they shout, "Great is Artemis of Ephesus!" Who? Artemis, Greek goddess whose temple was the center point of the city. This is an example of a religion that was taken seriously, and in that city fanatically, but doesn't exist any more in that area. It will go the same for Islam.
I certainly hope you know what you're talking about. That sounds promising.
Interesting point, Pierre. In western Christianity, we see a period of fanaticism/ radicalism in the 17th to 19th centuries, as that religion was becoming less relevant in the face of modernism, secularism, science and democracy. Today, of course, Christianity is hardly relevant at all in the western developed countries.
it goes for all existing religions...all these religions would eventually die or evolve into new religion...nothing new in religions dying or evolving into new form...
Yes, for sure the atheism will die or change its name, like it always have been doing.
What changes has atheism undergone? It seems to me to be basically the same today as it was 200 years ago: non-belief in God. Not much to change there.
Atheism, unlike religion, has no complicated doctrines or scriptural interpretations to change in response to shifting cultures and values. The same could be said of theism, properly defined.
Do you think Atheism is only 200 years old? And it did not exist earlier.
The Atheist claim that they existed from the very start of human life; while as you said they are only a recent phenomenon; 200 or 500 is the same for our discussion. If earlier they had a different name that is another thing.
We have seen they have been changing their names to Atheists or Agnostics or Humanists or Secularists or Communists; so on and so forth; good name but hardly fitting on them.
I think that helps.
Unfortunately it looks like you don't really understand what all those terms actually mean. Yes, they are related on some level, but that does not mean they are identical. A dictionary might help you in future discussions.
Each has various meanings, but to keep it simple, let me offer some basic meanings. Dictionary.com has an entry for confused people just such as yourself:
"Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief.
An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings.
An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine.
Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity.
A skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds."
Thus one can be a skeptical theist or a skeptical atheist. An atheist says "there is no god" while an agnostic says "I don't know if there is a god." They are all infidels according to a strict interpretation of major religions.
Secularism" means: secular spirit or tendency, especially a system of political or social philosophy that rejects all forms of religious faith and worship.
So you can be an atheist without being a secularist. That is, you can believe there is no god, but still support religious faith and worship (for example, if you believe they have a positive effect in society.)
In the same way, you can be an agnostic, and not be a secularist. That is, you can say "I don't know if there is a god, but I still support religious faith because I believe it is a positive force."
Sadly, you suffer from the same misunderstanding vis-a-vis communism as many other religious believers. Here is the definition of communism:
Communism: (1) a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state. (2) (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
As you can see, communism is a political and economic ideology or system. It has nothing to do with metaphysical questions of God or creation. Thus, one can be an atheist communist, a theist communist, a Christian communist, a Muslim communist, etc.
20th century communism, inspired by Marx, tended to be atheist. But that does not mean that atheism is essential to communism, any more than theism is essential to capitalism. There are capitalist atheists and communist atheists.
Also, one can be a religious communist, and therefore not a "secularist," if one believes the totalitarian state should act according to a religious doctrine. One can be a religious communist or a secularist communist.
Humanism: (1) the denial of any power or moral value superior to that of humanity; the rejection of religion in favour of a belief in the advancement of humanity by its own efforts... (4) interest in the welfare of people
You can see that humanism can have an anti-religious or irreligious meaning, OR it can have be neutral toward religion, emphasizing only human wellbeing, depending on the usage. Thus it is possible to be a theist and a humanist at the same time, to believe in God and to have an interest in human welfare.
One can be a humanistic communist, an anti-humanistic communist, an atheist humanist, a secular humanist, a deistic humanist, a theistic humanist, a polytheistic humanist, etc. There is no necessary contradiction with any of these things.
Hope that clears things up a bit.
I know these are the names the atheists had been hiding behind in different times; naturally they have different meaning.
The atheist have a right to co-exist and enjoy their free will; I respect their rights.
Clearly you need to read my entire post again. I know English is not your first language, but you are being intentionally disingenuous here. I give you the dictionary definitions of these terms and you still stick to your original, incorrect, ignorant claim that they are all synonymous with "atheism." How unfortunate.
There have been Atheists from the beginning; religious beliefs are the mutation from about 30,000 years ago. The Piraha tribe of the Amazon has NEVER been religious; they even converted a pastor sent to learn their language and minister to them, to Atheism:
The man is a bigoted idiot. It's all very well him claiming that the riots in Afghanistan that has left a number of people dead are not his responsibility but he knew full well what flames of anger his actions would stir up. One only has to remember the riots that occurred a few years ago when rumour of an American solder flushing a Quran down the toilet reached Afghanistan. If your neighbour is prone to outbursts of rage, is it wise to deliberately wind them up knowing full well what possible carnage may ensue. Paul the apostle instructed believers to make every effort to live at peace with our fellow man.
Freedom of speech is one thing but to earn the right one must exercise responsibility.
We are not going to fall into the Muslim's trap of believing WE are the ones that have to behave. Burning a Qur'an can be an important political statement, and it does so while harming nobody. Rioting and killing does. It is up to primitives in primitive countries to change their behaviour, not advanced countries to limit freedoms.
It is primitive behaviour to burn someone else's religious texts and makes no useful political statement.
I agree. Book burning is a neurotic and childish response to any difference of opinion. Fundies are dangerous in any religion.
Sure it does. It sends the signal that religions are NOT sacrosanct and have NO primacy in our ives.
Maybe if an atheist had done it you could say that. Did you forget who burned the book? A guy who thinks his book has primacy in your life whether you like it or not. Perhaps we should all go out and burn a bible to make the point that he's a retard?
Be my guest, burn it all. People will some day forget that Jesus and Muhammad were anything but bit-players on the SOUTH PARK show...
I couldn't agree more. But by then they won't know what South Park was either.
Hahaha! SOUTH PARK will never die! Some day they'll have SOUTH PARK THE NEW GENERATION and a new generation after that! If you think it will fade away, well, I declare a jihad on you!
Wow..thanks. Most people here think I'm an idiot. That was nice of you.
No one thinks you are an idiot. You are usually the calming voice in the madhouse.
It is both intolerant and freedom of expression!
News flash, people: freedom of expression doesn't mean anything unless people have the freedom to express ugly or unpopular sentiments. And that includes offending people.
Muslims believe the Quran is the direct word of God (never mind the contradictions within it), while Christians believe the Bible is the inspired word of God. So technically the Quran is "holier" within Islam than the Bible is within Christianity. But still, Muslims need to learn that not everybody agrees with that. Most people just see the Quran as a book written by humans.
The fact that Muslims demand special treatment for their "holy" book indicates that they are... drumroll, please... religious. Being religious, they think they have the exclusive absolute truth and everyone else is going to hell. So it's not "just a belief" that the Quran is holy--it really is holy, really! As sure as the sky is blue.
Of course, the Florida pastor suffers from the same delusion--that he, in fact, has the absolute and exclusive truth, and part of that truth is that Muhammad is the spawn of Satan.
I'm sure if somebody burned the Bible in a similarly public manner, he or someone like him would be leading protests and boycotts for the sake of respecting the "truth" of the "Good Book" and "the one, true message of Christ Jesus."
Oh, imagine no religion...
But I would imagine that any Christian, as I do, realizes that the real worth of the Bible isn't the paper it's printed on or whether the cover is leather or vinyl or paper or whatever; those aren't Holy. It's the words contained in the Bible that are important and Holy.
So even if a Bible gets burned, it doesn't take away the message. That is passed down from generation to generation, even written upon the hearts of Believers.
Burning or destroying a book is never about ruining paper and ink. Rather, it's always a symbolic act. When the Nazis burned books nobody cared about the actual physical material, it was the ideas that the books contained and access to those ideas that was important.
So destroying a Bible is a symbolic gesture. Burning an American flag is a symbolic gesture. Of course we can manufacture 100,000 more American flags if we want, but it's the symbolism that offends people.
Sure. I agree.
But my point was in response to your saying that we'd be picketing and hollering if someone burned a Bible.
Indeed, we might! But I have no reason to think Christians would be KILLING someone because of it.
Obama has already symbolically shredded the Bible. That's cause to picket, yes. And I haven't figured out why more Americans aren't speaking up about that.
(And I haven't figured out why more Americans aren't speaking up about that)
Maybe because once again you are wrong?.
No, that's not it.
And I admit I've been wrong before. Several times, in fact, but not anything you'd know about, since you only know me from this site (I assume, anyway). So, your "once again" is sure a mis-spoken phrase from your end of it.
Of course, they certainly wouldn't be killing anyone in North America or Europe. But they very well might in places like Nigeria or Kenya. Indeed, Christians have killed many people for religious reasons in those places.
So the reason Christians in the western/ developed world are more peaceful is because they are more secular, overall, and benefit from several hundred years of secularization and cultural and political modernization. Perhaps in 100 years the same will be able to be said of predominantly Muslim lands.
But religion's potential for violence is seen wherever there is a culture to accommodate it.
Brenda, Lovely response relating to the real worth of the holy bible.
just where is that hell? let's find it and set it on fire.
You really can't blame the pastor. It has been hard to find anything in Florida worth burning since the witches moved to Salem - a written-word witch proxy is the best they can come up with.
Some of those witches, or their ancestors anyway, had the good sense to burn their OWN books. The Bible records that.
(Some of those witches, or their ancestors anyway, had the good sense to burn their OWN books. The Bible records that)
Does anyone have data on the opportunity costs of ignorance?
The probable inability to tie ones own shoes?
The French writer Honore De Balzac wrote a lot about burning witches, and saw the bone ignorance around him/her which caused it, knowing some of the people involved.
(I say him/her as I have never seen conclusive evidence of De Balzac's sex)
You probably shouldn't be watching other people have sex anyway. I take it he or she never made any videos? lol.... Definitely a he, by the way. The mustache and the little beard give it away, if not his name.
Witch burning was obviously done by the ignorant. And I dare say there many of those ignorant people still around wishing for the good old days.
De Balzac did seem to do a bit of that, and seemed to be up on all the court gossip as well. I saw the mustache and beard, but was told it was not real, nor the name. You may well be right though, I don't know much about that. I have 100 droll stories which I originally got from my mother when I was about 10 in paperback, I now have all of De Balzac thanks to birthday presents from my children.
From what I have read of his biography he did marry a woman, and the book kept calling him he. I didn't realize there was a debate about his gender. But then I didn't read the entire biography either. Oh well. Live and learn.
I can't say I have read a lot of his stuff. But I do know he influenced a lot of famous writers. Guess I"ll have to look him up.
It is a fact that Christians should respect the beliefs of others! Yes, we should discuss our views and see where each other is wrong, but to burn the holy book of another religion disrespectful, and intolerable!
It is a sick act of the pastor; not at all ethical, moral or spiritual.
Man, that is the second time I have agreed with Paar today!
Yes Parra seems able to be logical at times.
That logic seems to falter when he opens the quoran, then he reads the same way as the bible believers, with one eye shut!
It was neither Intolerance or freedom of Expression. It was an act of fear. Done by a sick mind- a man who thinks he is God, or that he can and is authorised to speak for God.
The act of a self-taught- mis-guided, mis educated and mis informed psychotic, and nothing more than that.
He needs serious help.
Although we might have the right to do certain things, there should be consideration for others. Some people might say this is being politically correct, but I would say that it is being respectful of others-just my opinion!
There is no teaching of any killings in Quran/Islam/Muhammad; those who did at any time after Muhammad did it on their own and are responsible for that;Quran/Islam/Muhammad has nothing to do with it. Quran/Islam/Muhammad are peaceful and their teachings promote peace and harmony in the society.
Islam spread most peacefully in the world.
100 million dead
One can see below killings by the atheists agnostics skeptics communists socialists; it is not from a very distant past; it must be still fresh in your minds. Just to refesh your memory:
1. Stalin and Mao are (by a long shot) the 2 greatest killers of all time. Hitler is a far distant 3rd. By any logical definition, Stalin and Mao are the 2 most evil men that have ever existed. In fact, since there is no devil, Stalin and Mao are the 2 most evil beings that have ever existed in the universe.
2. Some people let Lenin off the hook. Lenin was a mass murderer.
3. Some people let Trotsky off the hook. As leader of the Red Army in Lenin's war on the peasants, Trotsky was a mass murderer.
4. Some people think Marxism is "a good idea in theory", and the fact that every communist regime that ever existed has been murderously totalitarian is "a coincidence". This is crap. Totalitarianism is inherent in Marxism.
5. By any logical definition, socialism is the most evil idea in human history. Its record is more murderous than racism, tribalism, ethnic genocide and fascism, or the most bloodthirsty religion. Socialism has killed 100 million people. And it's still not finished.
What's interesting to note about the Islamic propagandist is their penchant for sticking to their holy books when it suits them, and their motives for using external sources when it suits them to lie.
Of course, when presented with quotes from their holy book or external sources showing their gods immorality and their religions past atrocities, they immediately ignore it or dismiss it out of hand.
If they need more to add in the 100 millions killed by the atheists, they could add a lot more from the google; it is just some clicks away.
Take a 5mt off to study some economics!!
And a little history will not do any harm!
When Muslims use the word "peace", it means something way different from what a free, democratic Westerner means It is "salaam" which comes from the Arabic root-word "islam" meaning SUBMISSION and SLAVERY. The "peace" is always skewed to mean peace under Islam. It never means the social peace found in Western freedom of religion, where the children of Muslim parents can be any religion they wish. The so-called "religion of peace" achieves the WORST results in the Global Peace Index of countries. Atheism fares the best:
I wont lie,i think the Quran is horrible,but i think its wrong to burn history,and Ancicent beliefs.
100 million dead
One can see below killings by the atheists agnostics skeptics communists socialists; it is not from a very distant past; it must be still fresh in your minds. Just to refesh your memory: 1. Stalin and Mao are (by a long shot) the 2 greatest killers of all time. Hitler is a far distant 3rd. By any logical definition, Stalin and Mao are the 2 most evil men that have ever existed. In fact, since there is no devil, Stalin and Mao are the 2 most evil beings that have ever existed in the universe. 2. Some people let Lenin off the hook. Lenin was a mass murderer. 3. Some people let Trotsky off the hook. As leader of the Red Army in Lenin's war on the peasants, Trotsky was a mass murderer. 4. Some people think Marxism is "a good idea in theory", and the fact that every communist regime that ever existed has been murderously totalitarian is "a coincidence". This is crap. Totalitarianism is inherent in Marxism. 5. By any logical definition, socialism is the most evil idea in human history. Its record is more murderous than racism, tribalism, ethnic genocide and fascism, or the most bloodthirsty religion. Socialism has killed 100 million people. And it's still not finished. http://www.markhumphrys.com/modern.left.html#museum
If they need more to add in the 100 millions killed by the atheists, they could add a lot more from the google; it is just some clicks away.
Read it and seen it all before.
Nice to see you do the same as all the other religions and interpret your hate filled tome with "context" and re-interpretations made under duress.
I commend those who would like to see how Islam and muslim beliefs try to wiggle out of their death toll to see this as well.
http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/2 … -hate.html
"Then, those who disbelieve, I shall Chastise them with severe chastisement in this world ... and the hereafter, and they will have no helpers ... "
That says it all. Psychotic nonsense and threats is all you got.
The quoran and bible are as I stated, and your nit picking can't make your god what it is not, and what it is not is as intelligent as mud.
Pastor's quran burning act is sheer intolerance not does not exhibit freedom of expression in a human way; he should have given arguments and reasons if he had one; that would have been the humane approach.
by peterstreep 14 months ago
Facebook is a publisher. Like a newspaper or magazine. Newspapers and magazines do and can not publish everything they want as they have to abide by the law. And so can be held accountable if they are promoting hatred towards groups of people, defamation of a person or spreading outright lies like...
by icv 4 years ago
Do you think freedom of expression is misusing under certain cases?Why people of both sides (arguments and defends) are claiming they each of them have their freedom of expression?
by pisean282311 8 years ago
Muslim leaders were in unison at the United Nations this week arguing that the West was hiding behind its defense of freedom of speech and ignoring cultural sensitivities in the aftermath of anti-Islam slurs that have raised fears of a widening East-West cultural divide. Turkish Foreign Minister...
by Ron Thinks 11 years ago
What I mean to ask is, at this day and age when technology is at the disposal of any person, is it okay for ANYONE to comment ANYTHING about EVERYTHING?
by Kenneth Dantzler 5 years ago
People are saying that their amendment right are taken away, especially the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in America is definitely safeguarded by the First Amendment to the United states of America Constitution and also various state constitutions and federal and state legislation. The...
by Mary Craig 8 years ago
Do you think its a good idea or bad idea to write about politics on HubPages?Politics, like religion, stirs up emotions in some people bringing out their, shall we say, darker qualities. Knowing this is it a good idea to rouse them with political hubs?
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|