Islam
Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary
====An introduction to Islam.
==
Mohammad lived a near perfect Christ like life, serving the lowly, opposing evil and idolatry, and produced the beginnings of an inspired text, the Quran, at a time when the organized Christian church was highly corrupt and all of the various Arabian tribes had developed their own gods all fighting amongst one another.
He had a vision of ending the battle of the gods and all men following the GodOfGods rather than fighting over who's god was more powerful. God commanded him to follow Jesus and speak for the Spirit of Life and the Spirit of light and lead humanity toward God's world on earth, God's peace, Islam.
A Hindu view might be that Krishna came to earth to save Gods children in a time of need.
He brought law which spawned a new society that stood up against the evil in the established Church's and became a great civilization which applied preserved and developed philosophy, mathematics, architecture through the western worlds dark ages.
Islam means peace, the law of love is their greatest law.
It is a wonderful example of how God reveals himself to all of his people in magnificent ways.
There will be no peace on earth until there is a truce among the gods. The Jews and the Muslims share the old testament and The Christians and Muslims share the teachings of Jesus.
We all follow the God without name or image though he may be given a thousands names and a thousand faces. The Creation of the Atheist, All of Zen, Brahman of Hinduism, and the God of Israel are One, the GodOfGods.
It is said by many Anti-Muslim's and some Muslim fanatics that the Quran forbids friendship between Muslims, Jews and Christians. This is an abortion of the truth. The Quran in many places makes it clear that interaction and even marriage with Jews and Christians that do not cheat or persecute Muslims is good. Sure, in times of war, making alliances with the enemy is treason, which most translators agree is the context and meaning of the anti Jew and Christian sentiments. But indeed, if we persecute them, Muslims are bound to fight us.
And though we may disagree with each other, it is right that we unite under the GodOfGods, and through we stand by our beliefs, we do not let them separate us. Learning from each other will enrich us. Elitism and Prejudices will destroy us.
Each person is responsible ultimately only to God. There are good and bad people in all religions. We owe it to each other to treat each other as individuals rather than members of a certain church. Each of us has a personal relationship with Providence.
The word of God is not a static scripture, it is manifest in books that supersede one another over time and ones personal relationship with God. God is still talking if anyone is listening. Obey your beliefs but be not self righteous. The new law will come.
The infidels the Quran speaks of are those who worship idols and local gods that are evil or will destroy and repress those united by the GodOfGods. Those that respect and uphold all creation whether they call themselves Jews, Christians or Atheists, ultimately are not the idol worshiping, evil, Satanist, destroyers the Quran call infidels.
Woe to you, however, if you would oppose Islam, the peace that shall reign with the GodOfGods.
Fortunately, in America, there is freedom of religion, all religions are accepted, none are opposed or repressed. If America makes that clear in word and deed there shall be no Jihad against us.
See: GoodAndEvil, StopWar
* http://www.shirazi.org.uk/ * http://www.nfie.com/mirza.html * http://www.submission.info/perspectives/striving/terrorism.html
Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord; they have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve. Quran 2:62, 5:69
...we decreed for the Children of Israel that anyone who murders any person who had not committed murder or horrendous crimes, it shall be as if he murdered all the people. And anyone who spares a life, it shall be as if he spared the lives of all the people. ... Quran 5:32
"Regarding those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, God forbiddeth you not from dealing kindly and justly with them; for God loveth those who are just. It is only regarding those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, that God forbiddeth you from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances) that do wrong" (LX: 89).
====I'm tired of listening to uninformed bullshit.
==
Please go read the Koran, the Sunnah and "Islam Unveiled" before comparing Muhummad to Christ. If you don't have time for that, this web site ( http://answering-islam.org/Silas/ ) has some info. He was a murderer, rapist, torturer and tyrant who makes Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden look like nice people.When a sinning woman came to him to ask for forgiveness, he had her stoned. When his enemies wanted to repent, he killed them. When his men came to him to ask if they should use the practice of coitus interruptus when raping women in a village, he told them not to bother. Allah's soldiers would be born if it were his will.
What a great guy.
No wonder the middle East is so peaceful.
==== -JeffScarver
==
Hello Jeff. Muhammad's early life is described as being Christ like. God Himself was not very Christ like many times in the Bible. Muhummad fought to end oppression and war by unification under the GodOfGods. Certainly Christian's have not been very Christ like through the ages. I've known hundreds of Muslims, and most are in fact very peaceful people. Sure there are extremists in every religion, particularly when their religion and culture is not respected. -- JimScarver
This is so funny........ I wasn't trying to tell you you're friends were not peaceful. They are great people. I was just trying to explain what a virtueless piece of shit Muhummad was. Like many military leaders, Muhummad used religion to inspire his troops. Along the way, he became one of the wealthiest and most powerful military leaders in history. Not because he earned it, but because he kept killing, raping and pillaging until he owned EVERYTHING. Once he conquered the known world, people were compelled to become Muslim. Under Islamic law, known as the Shariah, when encountering infidels (those who dare to practice another religion) a good Muslim must "Strike them down until there is a great slaughter amongst you". Throughout history, there have been many people practicing terrorism and genocide, many in the name of god. All are now denounced by their religions now. A child interviewed by the BBC in Iran told reporters that he wanted to become a suicide bomber so that he could experience the pleasures of virgins for eternity, Allah's gift to martyrs of Jihad.
I mistakenly called Muhummad virtueless above. Below are some of his virtues.
Commitment:
to conquest
to genocide
to personal wealth
to the destruction of other religions and civilizations
to ruling the world with "Shariah"
Integrity:
He said that he would conquer the infidel......
He did.
Compassion:
He would never hurt a fly......
As long they were a good Muslim living EXACTLY the way he said.
If Muhummad were alive today, his goals would be the same as they were then......
to erase all other cultures and religions from the face of the earth; then we would truly have one god.
I don't condone the actions of Muhummad, in fact, I am downright against them. It took a lot to look at this from a neutral point of view :-/
Don't you think Muhummad had his reasons behind the killings and murdering? He was following the ideas and missions set by his forefathers who wrote the Koran to accomplish. So why did they feel it was necessary to do that? To have the belief that if your religion was not Muslim, you were wrong? (In todays time, It seems to have shifted from all religions that aren't Muslim to Americans and a couple other religions. Humm...)
The Muslims were not the first and aren't the worst people in history (Even though it IS bad)
- Hitler and the Nazis persecuted the Jews and others who weren't Aryan enough for them
- Correct me if I'm wrong, I 'think' that around the Renaissance time, the Roman Catholics killed any Christians just because of their religion. My history details are kind of dusty.
- Not a Religion but applies to the same concept, In the Revolutionary War, the British burned the Houses in the colonies. But they didn't stop at only the Rebels houses, they burnt the houses of the Neutrals who didn't want to do anything, and even some of the Loyalist houses.
- Babylonians and many other countries killed the Jews Just because of their religion
- Heck the list goes on and on to things people might not even know, before recorded events...
What I'm saying is that Muhummad might not have been a bad person. His actions were, but what does that say? He got a taste of power and it kept growing, to the point as you said he killed and pillaged to grow stronger. If you were Muhummad (The Way he was then, no bullshit about how you would think differently), if you were in his shoes, Isn't it in a great possibility you would do the same thing, if not worse? --KenSchry
To answer your question..... Would I do the same? No..... Shit no====
==
Most people wouldn't. That is because of the inherent nobility of human nature. It takes a very special person to eradicate other cultures with absolutely no regard for death or suffering. Muhummad, like Hitler was a very charismatic person, able to inspire people to follow...... regardless of the path. The difference being that people are not as quick to make excuses for Hitler's actions. It is very easy to make parallels between Muhummad and almost any other military leader in history. One of his tools was religion. It worked well for him.
You say the list goes on and on....... It sure does. The sooner you realize what group of people Muhummad fits into, the better. If you want to continue to defend people like Hitler, Muhummad, Nebuchadnezzar, Genghis khan, the sooner humanity can revert back to those times. I mean, some people just aren't cut out for the whole 9 to 5 American dream and all..... Let's take over the rest of the world an live off their spoils just like Muhummad. (and characteristically unlike Christ, Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, or Hindu leaders)
That is what you defend, and every religious leader EXCEPT Muhummad has rejected.
-JeffScarver
YOU are missing the point, Jeff.
Say in theory you were a frontline combatant in the army. You one day are in a battle skirmish with the opposing forces, and shoot one or more of them, and they shoot one or more of you. You took that persons blood in a war your country started, and you feel your doing the right thing, no? But what I'm saying is to look at it from the opposing armies point of view. You are attacking them. They do nothing but defend their country, which in their eyes is noble. Do you see? Both sides believe they are doing the right thing, by different actions. But both sides believes the other is wrong.
Muhummad did what he thought was right for his country (yes, in the sense of power he did what was right for him...). You shouldn't hate Muhummad because he did that. You should hate what he did. --KenSchry
I don't hate Muhummad. He's in the same class as every other despotic leader of his era. I just have to make corrections when uninformed people describe him as "Christlike". A few that might work: Hitlerlike, Atillalike, BinLadenesque. Sounds to me like a little reading of the Koran, the Sunnah, and "Islam Unveiled" are in order for Ken and dad. Please read SOMETHING before slinging your liberal rhetoric at everybody. I guarantee that Muhummad would have killed all of us a long time ago if he were around today. ESPECIALLY LIBERALS
JimScarver described Muhummad in the light of the a leader to his people, just like Christ was. Take away the fact of the things Muhummad did. He was the spiritual leader of his religious sect, like Christ was the Messiah. When you say that Muhummad is more "Hitlerlike, Atillalike, BinLadenesque" then Christlike, you are solely referring to his actions. That only brings us back to my point before. He did what HE believed what was right. WE don't believe that, exactly as I demonstrated in my armies example.
I believe that you 'are' biased against Muhummad, though you say you don't hate him. You don't hate him because he didn't directly affect you. Everything you dislike about him is secondary, things you've read. Take a few moments Jeff, and read this page over again. You'll find that many of the points you are stressing I have already covered and answered. --KenSchry
Well, it is our Actions that we take, or do not take, that define what kind of people we are. Anyone can say anything. Talk is cheap. But acting, or not acting, that tells us what that person is concerned with. The measure of a human being is not what he or she says, it is what she or he chooses to, and not to, do. ----StarPilot
Ken, I don't dislike Muhummad. I don't know Muhummad. I just know his actions. When someone follows a Hitler, a Muhummad or a Genghis Khan, someone whose goal in life is military conquest, it is no surprise if they turn out to be a terrorist. I don't say this because of the way I feel, Ken. I just happen to be unable to disregard the facts like you seem to be so fond of doing. Take away the atrocities he committed? You can't. You can't take away the the atrocities his followers commit every year. Why do you think you haven't been hearing about widespread terrorism from Buddhists, Taoists, Hindus, and other religions around the world? Probably because they are not following the doctrine of a vicious and ruthless military leader.
Starpilot, I don't think that anyone would disagree with your statement, but I don't see how it pertains to this subject. Actions? I'm not sure what actions one would take on www.whitescarver.com, but I guess we could turn the site into a big bragging pit for all our "actions" if you like. But I guess bragging about one's actions is just cheap talk anyway. The easiest way for you to avoid all of this cheap talk is to shut down your computer and go take a walk in the woods(highly recommended).
Cheers,
-JeffScarver
Jeff, my point is ........
This content has been moved to JudgementOfLeaders
.......blessings and guidance.
---StarPilot
Nobody is judging Muhummad. I just have to call bullshit as I see it. I have invited everyone to read on the subject or check out the website I listed above. As far as I can tell, nobody has. You are telling me how you feel, but this is the Islam page. If you do not have an opinion on Islam, do not post paragraphs of your philosophical objections to my "judgement" of Muhummad. What you say all sounds true, but it does not belong. It does not express an opinion on the subject being discussed. Your comments are of interest, but do not pertain to this page. Let's move this discussion elsewhere. JudgementOfLeaders
-JeffScarver
To quote the great philosopher, Tim Allen, "Er?"
I was stating that I believe you were judging him on his actions (and making an oblique case to others that they should perhaps read up on what he did when arguing with you on the matter, rather then just read up on the teachings of Islam). I do not know enough about the him to make such a call for myself.
So when are you going to refactor off all the talk of Muhammad was a village raping pig? This page seems to have two separate arguments in it. One being Islam is mostly teachings of peace and live and let live, and another about Muhammad did many mean things, and an subtly implied Islam is a Way of War. Is that what you are presenting? If this page is purely for the discussion of Islam, then all talk of Muhammad and his actions should be refactored to its own page, yes? And it does seem to me that there is a desire to separate the teachings from the teacher.
"Nobody is judging Muhummad"? Have you read this page? What what has been posted here? There certainly seems to be judgements cast (and at least two is frustrating you, Jeff). Of course, knowledge is knowledge, ideas are ideas, and they can be very good things regardless of who originated or proprogated them. I thought that was the main point trying to be made... that Islam as is taught and practiced by the majority of its followers is a peaceful religion, just as Christianity as is taught and practiced by the majority of its followers is a peaceful religion. Yes? Both have their extremists offshoots, of those fighting the Jihad/Crusade against the great evils. Whether its Americans and Isreali for the Islamists, or its Blacks and Jews and Abortionists for the United White Christians of American (or whatever it is calling itself this week).
I'm just a little confused about where you are drawing a line for what you think belongs here, and what you don't, as there doesn't seem to be a consistency at the moment. You seem to want to argue that Muhammad was a lieutenant of Satanish, while others are arguing that what he did is not a reflection on the teachings of Islam or its Way. Which is it? Is this page about Islam and its mainstream teachings, or about its Founder, or about how others should understand that he was a tool of Satanish? Because if it is the last, that should be refactored to a page on Muhammad, I think. To allow for a more focused discussion. Does that seem reasonable, or am I just way out of my orbit?
---StarPilot
Star, I believe this pages original intent by Jim was to point out the peacefulness of the Islamic religion, the religious teachings themselves. Jeff brought up the topic of Muhammad on his own opinion, which i felt was biased strongly against Muhammad blindly, so I countered him. I'm going to continue response on JudgementOfLeaders. --KenSchry
Starpilot-
I keep hearing people talk about the followers of Islam. I never maligned any followers of Islam. The Koran is not much more warlike than many sections of the old testament. Perhaps more significant in Islam today is the Sunnah, which consists of anywhere from 2000 to 30,000 pages of accounts of Muhammad's life. You will not find any sect of Islam who does not recognize the Sunnah. There is no way to separate Muhammad's actions from the religion he created any more than you can separate Jesus from Christianity. It is important to take a look at the facts, so I invite everyone once more: http://answering-islam.org/Silas/
Muhummad always tailored his religion to suit his needs. At the time his needs were mostly related to military conquest. For someone to call him "Christlike" and call Islam "peace" is absolutely preposterous.
Ken-
Anyone can read your responses and see nothing but how you feel. I keep inviting you to read and seek some knowledge on Islam, but obviously the offer has been rejected. Everyone gets their so-called knowledge around by there friends. I have Islamic friends, too. Even they recognize some of the warlike sentiments in the Koran and the Sunnah as well as the atrocities committed during Muhammad's lifetime. They just reject that portion of the religion. Your point of view is just saying whatever makes you feel good. If you want to describe someones comments "blind" the name you are looking for is Ken Schry.
Continued on JudgementOfLeaders
-JeffScarver
I consider that response to be insulting, Jeff. '"I keep inviting you to read and seek some knowledge on Islam, but obviously the offer has been rejected."' What the hell are you talking about? I read the page you sent me, and many others. I don't base my judgements on gossip and slanders. '"I have Islamic friends, too."' Well so do I... '"Your point of view is just saying whatever makes you feel good."' That's bullshit. My point of view is my opinion, my take on the topic. '"If you want to describe someonesomeonests "blind" the name you are looking for is Ken Schry."' That's just slander Jeff. No way to try to argue your point. '"For someone to call him "Christlike" and call Islam "peace" is absolutely preposterous."' Jeff, I've said it many times. Jim described Muhammed as ChriMuhammadn the fact that christ led his people. I don't know how your yelling at us if yor making wrong accusations yourself. The fundamentals of Islam are peaceful, the teachings, but some people twist them for their own use. --KenSchry
Wow. I don't know how old this conversation is but- everyone needs to take a deep breath. I don't even know how to begin so I'll start by saying that Muhammad was Christ'like in that he had two arms and two legs- etc. Their lives and teachings are in stark contrast with each other. Like Jeff, I have done quite a bit of reading on the subject. I became concerned that all my books' authors were biased, so I began to read the Koran itself. I believe that the Koran and the Bible are extremely dangerous whenever taken literally (or seriously). I think we can all agree that neither is the word of God. Rampant inconsistencies, atrocities and bizarre yet amusing curiosities comprise the bulk of these works. Composed by many men over many years, compiled into a a single volume hundreds of years after Messiah's death, the Holy books are Best Sellers loosely based on a true story.
Sure, Islam can mean Peace. But "Cleansing" can mean "genocide".
Religion does not make an evil man good It does not make a good man any less It gives us something to talk about It justifies the murders of millions and the actions of madmen It is a sanctuary for those who fear death It is another way that we can be "Us", and they can be "Them".
More later......
-JamesJr
Heh, the last reply to this before yours was in September. The point is that some of Mohammed's qualities interacted with some of the same as Christ. AS you repeatedly say, sure they are different in MANY ways. In fact, Muhammad is almost opposite. In the way that Jim is relating it, he is saying that 'Muhammad leads his people in that same way that Christ led his. Forget atrocities, events good or bad, the character: he was a symbol of leadership for that period and time.
If you get past the stubborn "Christ is nothing like MMuhammad stance, then this point can conclude. Yes, you're right, yes that Jim's right, everyone is right depended on how they look at it. --KenSchry
It is only in the stories of Mohammed's early life where he is compared to Christ. Indeed, they are very different prophets. Muhammad came to end the war among the gods in his own time whereas the time of the Messiah has not yet come. God's world on earth as taught by Jesus still awaits the peace among the God's Muhammad sought. Let he among you who is without sin condemn Muhammad. The simple truth is that Jihad ends with the end of persecution of Islam and WE are united under the one GodOfGods who's nature is mysterious to the pious. --JimScarver
"The simple truth" is that there is no conscious God and that we are all organisms granted life by chance. "The simple Truth" is that Jihad ends when we acknowledge that all religions are stories written by men to assuage fears and create order. There are many valuable teachings in the texts, that hardly makes them divine==== I see signs of the decline of the OldReligion. The many fanatics around the world are actually contributing to it's demise. All the good people of the world, those with goodwill towards their fellow men, will remain good when the OldReligion is fully extinct. Religion is like a brand. If you are a bigot and full of fear and hate, your religion is your brand of hate and your justification for demonizing those unlike you. If you strive for peace, truth and love in life, your religion is your brand. And like most brands of products, the differences are negligible. Are Post cereals really better than General Mills? Ford better than Chevy? Coke better than Pepsi?
==
I suppose that when the OldReligion has passed, religion will not leave us, but will take on a new form. So I'm not sure what my rush is to usher in that new era. It will likely mirror the old====
==
Oh Well- God Bless=========!!
=
Pepsi is much better then Coke.
In all things, is the Divine. Therefore, in all truthful stories about anything, is the Divine. Most of it, we find boring or of no interest to us, though.
Why do you think God is unconscious? We are all of God, and we are conscious. Therefore, God is conscious. And for the super entity... a being on that scale would be inconceivable to us. Is a star conscious? It might be, but we just do not have any way to tell. Scientifically, you cannot prove or disprove that the Earth is conscious. It has certain repeating energy patterns. Is that a consciousness? With no proof, and no un-proof, then it is up to our own personal view-points on Reality as to what we believe. So whether you believe or not in such a matter, that's purely an extension of you. Seems you prefer to think God is sleeping, or merely a collection of stars or whatever. Why?
People use their religion, whichever one it may be, just as they use everything else: an excuse/rationalization to do what the want to do. ---StarPilot
This is going toooo far and I must step in to set the record straight. Coke is MUCH better than Pepsi. Pepsi is too sweet. Sugar is killing us. Obesity and diabetes are rampant. The world would be a better place is we got rid of Pepsi lovers. Cokites unite==== Let the cola wars ensue. May the virtues of Coke be manifest.
==
"The simple truth" is that consciousness ss a collective property of communicating entities. The cells that compose you may deny the possibility of your consciousness but that does not make you less conscious. Such is the nature of evolution that if there were no top level consciousnes at the moment of the big bang, one most certainly would have emerged in an infortmation universe of increasing organization at higher levels of organization.
A candle or rock possesses "being" independently. It may also posess "spirit" in its position, function, history and perception in our participatory existence, where ideas have power and information is physical. There is no clear line between the abstract (human, cell) and the physical (collection of cells, molecules).
Believing you are the highest level of organization is unfounded self-righteousness. The one agreement of all religions is that there IS something higher than self, known to the self-righteous, and mysterious to the pious. How ever the highest organization might be conceived it is what WE call the GodOfGods. The Light Side of the Force, the Creative tendency of the Universe, Providence, the All, whatever, IS the GodOfGods. To claim is is conscious or not is simply human vanity. That is "the simple truth".
I don't share your belief that humans will act with goodwill automatically when deprived of their God. I believe they with see no difference between good and evil and be left with no social restraints on there action. I believe the communist philosophy of supplanting cultural religions with Atheistic Humanism is destructive to our diversity and survivability.
Instead let us join the pious of all religions who celebrate all the cultures of God's world and their celebration of the GodOfGods in a world that gives more than lip service to freedom of religions and each man's right to his own beliefs, which no man can choose, and each persons individual relationship with the eternal.
--JimScarver
JimScarver, what you say is likely to be accurate, however, the God of Christianity and the God of Islam have no relationship or similarity to the "Entity" that you describe. I never said that I believed that I was the highest level of consciousness; where did you read that? A cosmic collective consciousness may be called "God", but that doesn't mean that you're talking about the entity that a fundamentalist is when he refers to "God". If a star has a spirit, or a rock consciousness, that's fascinating and I wont dispute it without good information.
You say that "to claim that the GodOfGods is conscious is human vanity". I say you have just summed up all of organized religion==== You are right. Religions are a manifestation of human vanity. I couldn't have put it better.
==
I think that your GodOfGods is cool: it is like some benevolent, divine observer, it minds its own business, it is not concerned with trivialities, but it is kind of hard to "Love" or be loved by. -like loving a probability
Your GodOfGods is not "God" to me, and it is not "God" to the religious people of the world. They would call you a heretic. Your GodOfGods is the most realistic sounding divine entity I've ever encountered. I find it amazing, however, that you really believe that you are worshipping the same "God" that the Jews, Catholics, Muslim and Hindu are.
JimScarver, here is the last sentence from your entry:
"Instead let us join the pious of all religions who celebrate all the cultures of God's world and their celebration of the GodOfGods in a world that gives more than lip service to freedom of religions and each man's right to his own beliefs, which no man can choose, and each persons individual relationship with the eternal."
This is a very beautiful sentiment that you have expressed here. I just worry about who you'll be able to get on board. It is just NOT the christian, or the Isalmic, way. They wont go for it if they are serious about their religion. Don't you see how the scriptures are contrary to your above stated dream? I don't want to quote you to death again; it had absolutely no effect the first time. You were not interested in the facts.
Our argument has come full circle once again.
GodOfGods Bless You====
==
---
That's why the world needs another Muhummad....... Once he has killed all of the people of other religions (except the ones he'll keep around to tax or enslave), we will all be united under GodOfGods.
Cheers,
Jeff
Every person has a unique personal relationship with God. Religion is cultural but it is also personal. The only way another Muhummad could kill all other religions is to kill everyone but himself.
I am the God of Abraham, the God of Moses, the God of Jesus and the God of Muhummad. I am Brahman, The Creator without name of image. I am the All of Budhism. Although many gods sit at My table do not put any One God before me or behind me. --GodOfGods
Only those seeking division and war claim that Jahova, Allah and Brahman are not One. Clearly Jews, Christians and Moslems all follow the God of Abraham. Both Moslems and Christians believe Jesus was a prophet. More than 90% of those of all religions want peace and harmony dispite those proffessing division and war.
I cry that my own children breed hatred and cannot see and promote the vision of harmony that I, the pope, the and the humble followers of God of all religions in all times have sought. Yet it is the nature of this world that we are animals, all of us decendents of theives, murderers and rapists disposed to kill all the other sons of all the other theives, murderers and rapists. I must accept that the time for peace is not yet here and I am without power to see the peace that will surely come one day in my lifetime. All I can do is plant seeds that may one day blossom. Yet I cannot rest without knowing I have done all I can do.
--JimScarver
I do not understand how my comments or beliefs breed hatred. And I believe that I do indeed promote the vision of harmony that that you seek. In these matters we agree. It is only in our perception of religious institutions that we differ. I want the same future you do, but I believe that religion, as it is currently practiced by many, is a hinderance. The institution doesn't seem to promote peace, though it does often profess it.
Please explain how I am breeding hatred. I have always had peaceful relations with people of all backgrounds. All people are the same to me. I'm confident that people that know me would all describe me as a promoter of peace.
When you stated, "Only those seeking division and war claim that Jahova, Allah and Brahman are not One." You have again reinforced the point that I am trying to make. Your average christian, muslim or budhist DOES NOT BELIEVE that these Gods are one in the same THEREFORE, AS YOU STATED- they seek division and war. I, on the other hand, do believe that they all worship the same entity (the god of Abraham) THE PROBLEM IS- THEY DON'T SEE IT THAT WAY====. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. You, JimScarver, are correct in nearly everything you say, but you don't realize how few people see things your (our) way; how many people don't just use, but abuse the scriptures. You refuse to even acknowledge it.
==
I was at a Protestant church in Ewing, NJ today. If you ask a member of that church if they worship the same God that Muslim's do, you will get an emphatic, resounding "NO". That goes for Brahman too. Every church I have ever gone to has made a distiction between their christian God and ALL others. Every church I've ever attended has discredited every other faith. THAT is what I learned in church. That is what they taught me. But that is not what you taught me (thankfully).
Jimscarver, your interpretation of the scriptures correctly stresses their incusive characteristics. However, the majority of teachers and followers fixate on the elements that exclude and stratify. Does my stating this make me a breeder of hate? Would anyone even dispute that the preceeding statements are true or accurate?
I don't disagree with much of what you say, I'm just pointing out that most of the rest of the world does (disagree with you).
I feel like you miss my point each time I contribute, Jimscarevr. Do you also feel that way about me?
Let's look at this "reasonably"... how can they all be the same one? If they were all the same one, then there wouldn't be a need for the various distinctions, branches, and whatnot, would there?
That's what "reasonable" gets you. After all, the teachings of many of the OneGod faiths teaches that salvation/Nirvania is only possible through their particular way. Any other means a failed life, a doomed soul (for eternity or a few more unnecessary incarnations, etc).
For instances, if Jesus is the Way, and not accepting him dooms you to the pits of Hellfire forever and ever, then Islam cannot be correct. Nor can any other form of OneGod that does not have Jesus as the Way. This is the problem with most teachings/evangelizing of OneGod faiths... there is only one way. This is why the Romans were against the various OneGod faiths for so long... they are much too decisive (creating extra UsAndThem). But if there are many (even if it is many facets of OneGod), then all ways are correct, so long as you follow the tenets of your faith and allow others to follow the tenets of their faith.
For some, it isn't "reasonability" though. Sometimes, its just that they were raised in a certain way. And even though they spiritually feel that all ways are the same way to the OneGod, merely expressed differently for different people, their sensibility of how people should act is offended. And therefore, even though another people's spiritual beliefs may be valid, their social behavior isn't, and is something that all decent folk should actively stomp out. Whether it's they eat beef, or allow women their independance, or dance outside of religious ceremonies, or cut their hair, or don't cut their hair, or whatever.
Some people are willing to accept their neighbors on this wondrous blue marble, wherever they are at, as an equally valid voyager through time and space, regardless. Others are only willing to accept a sub-group... such as those that behave in a fashion acceptable to them. Or for billions of other odd reasons.
Some people start off knowing that there is more then one "correct" view point. Some people learn that. Some people are incapable of learning that. And others are in denial, for whatever reason. Does this mean people should stop striving for Peace on Earth and Good Will to all People|? Certainly not. Just that it isn't likely so long as there are more then 1 person left alive on Earth. Sometimes though, no matter what the odds are, you just have to try. Maybe its just that spark of the AntiSocial in you, motiviting you to try and change the current status quo. I've noticed a lot of such AntiSocial such sparks in JimScarver. I think that's why we get along so well, virtually speaking. ;-)
It seems to me that JimScarver simply is unwilling to accept that some people are unwilling or incapable of learning. And I hope he never does, on this issue. If everyone gives up or is only negative on this, then how will anyone else ever learn?
---StarPilot
Hate is learned whenever discrimination rears its ugly head. Whatever your religion, even if your religion is no religion, the lack of respect for the other religious cultures is wrong. We cannot change peoples beliefs and calling other cultures or religion bad or evil leads to discrimination, oppession and ultimately violent reprisals.
Would you say that every different christian church worships a different GodOfGods? Exactly how many different Gods did Abraham and Moses follow? Just three for chrisians, jews and muslems? or thousands for all the sects of of all three. Declaring them to be different is a blatent sign of predujuce. Sure predjudice is ramant in all cultures and it is up to those with understanding to stand against it rather than adding fuel to the fire.
Basic human respect demands that we respect all religions and all cultures. Taking them away is wrong. Cultures are by nature conservative and change is slow. Eliminating the archaic aspects must be accomplishest by building on the good, not throwing out the baby with the bath water.
Atheism is said by many to be compatable with jewdism and buddhism, the first being cultural, and the second being a path rather than a destination. One not need to recognize there is anything greater than self though I believe people are inriched by that understanding. Think not about what your predudice tells you others believe. If you accept there it that which is greater than self, trust that others are not so different from you and what they feel is much the same.
In the 60s it was fashionable to respect the beliefs of others no matter how far out they were. Do your own thing man, its groovey==== Now even my own kids want to tell others what they should believe or not believe in our society of political correctness. It makes me sick.
==
Our country was founded on the principle of freedom of thought and religion but even my children would tell others what they should believe or not believe. It makes me sad.
Belief in no religion, in my way of thinking is as much a religion as any. A man is only free of religion if he does not judge the beliefs of others.
Arguing about which god was bloodier or more war like is just anouther avenue to promote prejudice. When I read the Gita I was appalled at Chrishna desimating the enemies in battle. It took a long time for me to reconsile the sweet humble hindu people who literally will not hurt a fly with the brutality in the Gita. The waring god of the old testiment seems totally incompatable with christianity.
You may speak of Muslem brutality, but through the ages, it has been largely the christians who have stolen the land and mercylessly brutalized the arab peoples. The history is clear. Although there were muslem retaliations, sometimes brutal, I think we have deserved it. We are in denial. It is time to heal the wounds, not put salt on them.
--JimScarver
====Respect
==
"Basic human respect demands that we respect all religions and all cultures. Taking them away is wrong. Cultures are by nature conservative and change is slow. Eliminating the archaic aspects must be accomplishest by building on the good, not throwing out the baby with the bath water."
El Wrongo, my friend. If I want respect, in a civilized fashion, I should render unto you the respect I desire to be treated with. That means that I should render to your religious and cultural beliefs the respect I would give my own. And in both religious and cultural areas, that may not be enough respect. For instance, I might permit my wife and daughter to go out in public without being in an enclosing box. This is certainly unacceptable in several cultures, and a torturable offense in a few of those cultures. This is the problem with RELIGIOUS as well as CULTURAL beliefs.
Human to human, I don't think most people really have difficulty in treating one another with respect. However, some SocialUnit memes are extremely intolerant... most are, actually. The greater organism formed by the meme of the SocialUnit is better served by being intolerant, so long as it is a minority opinion. When you are the majority, you can be the ocean, letting your rising and falling tides, under time's direction, to wear away all other cultures and religions. But when you are the minority, you need to be aggressive to survive such a weathering of time... you need to keep your own individual bits in line (so they don't wash out to the opposing, dominant meme) while presuading others to join your community. Most memes that are not aggressive in resisting the dominant meme are not here. Those that are... are still battling it out.
Spirituality, regardless of the label/flavor (Christianity, Jeduaism, Islam, Taoism, Enocian, etc ) is a path. Organized religion is a government. Governments do not like to surrender their power. Their goal, as of any real meme or organization, is their survival and growth, regardless of the affects on the individual HumanAnimals. There is no difference between the US Federal Government, The Vatican and the Catholic Church, The State of Iran, or the Yakuza. They all exist to grow themselves.
====Violence
==
Claiming that because Christianity did it to others, it should be done to Christianity is wrong. Two wrongs do not make a right (yeah yeah, "but three lefts do". Very funny).
Mankind has existed longer then Christianity has been practiced (if you are not a literal creationist flavored Christian, and even if you have, then most of the world didn't have the Word for the majority of the Creation's ~6,000 years of existance). Now, more people have lived (and therefore, died) while Christianity has been the dominant practiced religion of the world, but more Christians have died at the hands of their fellow Christians then have "pagans" or other "non-believers". And over what? Very minor differences in their religion's dogma, for the majority of such wars.
Your Spirituality is completely unrelated to your Organized Religion that you might belong to. Your Spirituality is your own viewpoint and relationship between your own soul/consciousness and the rest of existance. Your Organized Religion is about what UsAndThem grouping that is battling in the MemeSpace of Belief you belong to... and whether you are a Soldier (destroying other competing memes), a grow space (Farmer) (educating new MemeSpaces via parenting/education/evangelizing), or a holding space (Dead Space) which is not active in the MemeSpace Belief Layer/War as a Soldier or Farmer.
====Policital Correctness
==
Political Correctness is about the total and complete destruction of all FreedomOfThought. It's a meme war for OneThought (or was it RightThought, in 1984?). It cloaks itself in being sensitive to our fellow man, but anything that is not sensitive to competiting viewpoints is not, in fact, sensitive or tolerant. It's just a new Religion... a new Organized structure competing for control of all the meme-space.
====RightThink
==
Religion tells people how they should think and act. Because of that, it does not respect how others think and act, because it knows what is Right. It is the Supreme Authority. When that is combined with the HumanAnimal's various needs (the need to be Right, the need to be part of the herd, the need to be valued, etc), this is a very dangerous combination, as it leads to Soldier mentality for the fight for people's Minds (their MemeSpace). And that is where we have a breakdown in the respect for each other. Which leads to so much more.
So long as the leaders of a religion do not preach tolerance, there can be no tolerance, no respect, for those that do not follow the practiced way of that religion. This is totally unrelated to what the Teachings of a religion may be... Remember, recent studies have shown that the need to stay with the herd is so strong, 1/3 (33%) of all people will go against what they know or is right just to stay within the herd, outright, and that's before you add in the matters of rewards or repercussions. 1/3 of everyone will just go along with the others, even if they know their decision will result in the harm of themselves or others. Staying with the herd is more important then the self. So even though much of the herd may know the Teachings is to love all other humans and do not harm to them, they will instead follow along with what everyone else is doing... because they want to stay with the herd. As long as the leaders of the religion can marginalize (through whatever means) the dissenters to just a minority viewpoint, everyone else will actively or passively do as told. If that is to kill all the male children of unclean believers, then they will actively strive to kill all the male children (or at least, not actively oppose the killing), and that religion will be a violent one. If the leaders are preaching tolerance, understanding, and respect, then the smallest minority will be those that do not follow the herd in actively or passively following their leaders.
====OneGod
==
Each person who believes in the OneGod, worships their own OneGod. Everyone has their own personal idea/view of what they believe, is. This is Spirituality. When you get together with 100 others and decide how others should believe and follow your god, that is Religion.
Arguing over the sciptures and teachings of a religion is pointless. Any religion that has a good tradition of stories and morals from their ancestors will have a range of teachings from tolerance to intolerance, from understanding to leaving no non-believers alive. What is important is what the leaders of the religion teach, and why they choose to teach those lessons of their Way that they Teach. There is nothing in the Muslim Teachings that say that Women are Inferior to Men in the eyes of their Creator, yet most Muslims do not allow Women to even take any prayer services. Half the souls of their belief do not need to pray every day? This is counter to their core beliefs. But their leaders do not allow women to pray or be educated in the proper Way of being "Human", of being a child of their Creator.
Remember, it is not the scriptures... it is what the leaders teach, and how they lead. That determines the Religion. But each set of leaders is their own version of their Religion. Ultimately it's all about the MemeSpace.
Jim, James is mad and wants to eradicate what he views as a dangerous meme. That goes against your own Meme. A minature Meme war in action... Tolerant-Thought (Everyone should be Tolerant of each other) versus All-Thought (All views are equal(ly mistaken ;-)). All Thought allows for all... Tolerant-Thought is more selective.
What is it you like to say, Jim? All systems organize from the simplest to the most complex? Well, All-Thought is the simplest, and therefore it is doomed in the long term. Maybe you should consider joining up with James and wiping out all those WrongThinking Muslims... and Hindus... and Mormans... and Wiccans... and Protestants... and ....
And Jim, you realize that a very great number of Hindus kill, torture, and rape, right? All you need to do is look at recent current events to find plenty of examples of that intolerant and hateful actions. Again, it's not the Teachings... it's the Leader.
---StarPilot
LOL, I know hundreds of Hindus from all over India who are all quite gentile, but they are HumanAnimals and have children who are bad sometimes, like the rest of us. Black Muslems I knew in the 60's were indeed quite violent. But they upheld the Quran, if you were not against Blacks, or Muslems, or God, you were family and they treated you royally. They were my friends, though I did mey best to challange their violent ways. If one of them were to hear the views of my sons on the evil ways of Muhhamud, I would problably have dead sons. This is not the least of why I am affirmitively for accepance of others and cannot rest while our children are breeding hate.
Islam is a peace where the we are not persecuted for our personal relationship with the GodOfGods whom is mysterious.
What anybody says people think is presumptuous. We hardly know what we ourselves think and don't really know anyone else. Every human being and creature on this earth is something special should we take the time to notice. And the LawOfLove is the common thread of most all religion. Don't worry about what other people think. Worry about what you think. The US is following a bad leader into becomming the Rambo nation. Who are we to judge others? In the last century we have given woman and minorities rights, we must accept that cultures are conservative and slow to change and change them with Love not bombs.
Who said if you are not liberal at 20 you have no heart and if you are not conservative at 40 you have no brain? We must be patient and relinquesh power to the self determination of any people and stop being the bully.
-- JimScarver
So, because the violent Black Muslims you know would kill your son, you teach your son to be tolerant? Something is very wrong in that transaction, Jim. If someone is that violent, then they are a general danger to Society, and that cannot be tolerated. That danger must eliminated from the WE, so that the individuals of the WE may proceed non-violently and have a chance at TheGoodLife, Jim. You cannot allow those that use violence to try and get their way to actually get their way, as they are awarded for their AntiSocial behavior and will just engage in that behavior more often from that point onward. Coersion through Violence is unacceptable for civilized behavior; it unnecessarily prevents/retards Human to Human interaction and exchange of ideas (which is how WE all live, learn, and grow). I'm surprised you would even associate with such people for a second more then absolutely necessary, Jim. Considered it missionary work to try and enlighten them? Trying to show them a better way to resolve disagreements?
Who said (re: 20/40) ? The Democrats and the Republicans. That's who. ;-)
We had our way of life changed forcefully, repeatily. That's our History. So we are just passing along our "wisdom" to others. They must change for their own survival. If they do not, then change will happen forcefully, whether by the ruled, or by the world community, but change is inevitable. Being inevitable, then they might as well do it now, instead of putting it off. This, by the way, is why Osama and the Teleban and all the other terrorist and militants and fundamentalists (regardless of their religion) are against Modern Western culture. Because even if everyone lets everyone else live in peace in our big wonderous World, the Modern Western way of allowing people to be self ruled, of treating everyone as equally as the nature of HumanAnimal allows, acts as an example of how people that aren't allowed to live in that manner, can live. It's not a threat, its an eventuality, so long as the Modern Western way of life exist. Freedom is corrosive. When others who don't have it understand that it does exist and it is achievable to them (by seeing/hearing of it via various day to day mediums), they will then strive for it, if only passively.
The Modern Western way of life has nothing against Islam. It has nothing against Muslims. It is, however, a running, world-wide rebellion to fundamentalism, militantism, and the institionalized practice of treating people differently under the Rule of Law. This is what their SocietalLeadDogs are striving against--- that which threatens their personal power.
When outsiders blame it on the meta-religion of Islam, non-Muslims just help reinforce the UsVersusThem mentality of the Muslims, which in turn makes them more receptive to the different leaderships messages. After all, those leaders are telling them that every hand of the Judao-Christian world is against them, and they are right on that. So maybe those leaders are right about the other things they say...
That's how I see it. Your mileage may vary, of course. ;-)
---StarPilot
We are some VERY tolerant sons.........
But we can still kick some ass when necessary.
But bullshit is still bullshit.
BULLSHIT:
"So, because the violent Black Muslims you know would kill your son, you teach your son to be tolerant? Something is very wrong in that transaction, Jim........"
".......When outsiders blame it on the meta-religion of Islam, non-Muslims just help reinforce the UsVersusThem mentality of the Muslims, which in turn makes them more receptive to the different leaderships messages."
Starpilot tells Jimscarver he doesn't agree with teaching his sons to be tolerant. Then he explains the dangers of intolerance.
BTW, I never blamed anything on Islam. I'm just the only person around here who will admit that Muhummad was no better than Atilla, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin etc. I cannot believe that you guys refuse to acknowledge the hazards of following a military leader in religion. A military who practiced genocide and revenge; not just allowed, but encouraged his men to torture and rape.
I hear you talk about religion being abused by fundamentalists to create war......
If Muhummad were alive today, he would execute all of the westernized Muslims as apostate. They are not doing what he said Allah has asked them to. His goal was to wage Jihad until everybody who he didn't kill was united under one god. People who we think are fanatics, like the Taliban, are just being good Muslims. If you read, you would know that. And remember, the Sunnah and the Koran are BOTH important.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1893554775/qid1078273472//refpdka2/102-3378675-7032960?vglance&sbooks&n=507846
"Strike them down until there is a great slaughter amongst you." -Muhummad
"One should not think, 'My religion alone is the right path and other religions are false.' God can be realized by means of all paths. It is enough to have sincere yearning for God. Infinite are the paths and infinite are the opinions." -Brahman
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." -Jesus
"Rouse yourself==== Sit up! Resolutely train yourself to attain peace. Do not let the king of death, seeing you are careless, lead you astray and dominate you.' - Buddha
==
Here is some good advice for you guys........
R-E-A-D'A'F-U-C-K-I-N'_B-O-O-K
.......before you make me repeat the same shit over and over.
Cheers,
JeffScarver
You have some very good points Jeff and great quotes. My black muslems friends also had excellent points. You are much like them. You are both right. And I am thankful to have such tolerant sons. I am thankful that civil rights have progressed in this country with minimal bloodshed.
I suppose Atilla, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin all had some redeaming qualities, but none is in the class of Muhhamud. I am not really worried about you being killed really, you are smarter then the average bear and could probably take many of them out before you are killed. It is the silent majority that does not mock or degrade the culture of others, that only want peace, it is these who will suffer and die the most.
In the end, anybody that would kill anybody will have killed anybody who would kill anybody and the meak will inheret the earth. In the mean time there will be war and both sides will have excellent points.
Islam is the fastest growing religion and represents mostly peacefull good people. All religions have a bloody history. I guess I will need to read more books, the more you degrade Muhhamud the more obligated I feel to emphasize the good things he taught, including tolerance of those who do not persecute you. Such things were not taught by Atilla, Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin. There is a BIG difference, and though you may be blind to it, you should not so readily insult 1/3 of the earths population. I know you are tolerant, but you are promoting intolerence.
--JimScarver
You seem to have misunderstood my point, JeffScarver. My point to Jim is that he should not be teaching his children to be tolerant so that they will survive around violently intolerant people, but that the violently intolerant people need to be removed from the WE. We kill untreatable threatening animals. We treat threatening traumatized animals so that they are no longer violent. AnimalRights For Humans, and all of that.
You seem to be highly biggoted on this matter. Mohammed also taught to his people that all Jews and Christians are their fellow believers of the same Holy God as they (his people) and that God will judge Muslims as harshly for mistreating them as He will for mistreating their fellow Muslims. They should only fight, and strike down, and kill their fellow brothers of belief just as they should only fight their fellow non-believing human brothers... only when it is a choice of their survival or their fellow man's. Or in other words... "do no harm to anyone that does not offer you harm first". You know, a basic tolerance belief of many, including your father, if I am not mistaken.
Again, it's all about which part you want to focus in on... what do you want to believe? I can go out of my home and find within a day a Christian church that teaches all non-Christians need to be put to death or enslaved (for their own good/protection), or one that teaches all non-white Christians are the spawn of Satan and/or Caine and are therefore forever accursed by God and it's all Christians Divine Duty to kill them and prevent their evil and accursedness existing, let alone being allowed to spread.
What is it you believe? We are Humans. We believe what we want to, not what is logicly consistant. Only if you don't care about something, will logic or evidence have any possible bearing on what you are willing to believe or find plausible. I do not believe that 2 billion people on this planet believe that the other 4 billion people on this planet are unworthy of being treated as they want to be treated/respected. Nor do I believe that Mohammed nor Islam preaches death to all non-believers. I can look at their written scriptures and see that. But books/scriptures do not preach... that's what the preacher/father/cleric does. When the herd is taught by their leaders that they are the only Blessed people of the world, and all others are but clay, crude imitations of man, the accursed, irrideemably fallen, or animals in a manly or godly form, you get great intolerance.
If Mohammed was alive today, I do not believe he would not call for the destruction of the modern Muslim. Mohammed is credited with being too practical for that. I'd expect he'd pressure them to better evangelize and spread the teachings, as well as call for better cooperation among Muslims. He was about the spreading of his message or personal power (depending on your view of him), and the soft sell/message of love, tolerance, acceptance, and having a better life through his community (via it's support and whatnot) will spread his message much better then radicalizing and waging war. Religions do not spread through war... they spread primarily grow through making new converts (the dissatisfied of other religions) and having children (making future believers that grow up indoctrinated).
As for reading a book... have you read the originals? If not, how many translations have you read? Each translator puts their own stamp of beliefs and evangelizing on translations, especially when its done by the Faithful. There are some version of the Christian Bible that are very radically different from the Teachings we know, even though they are taken from the same original sources or first/early translations. In some of those translations, you can find whatever it is you want to find. Would you like one with stories of Jesus striking down and torturing all of those that displease him? They exist. You won't find those stories in the modern King James version, for instance, but they do exist. Heck, the Catholic Church used to teach those stories between the 10th and 18th centuries. It was an accepted part of the Faith and Teachings back then, that Jesus went from acting as if he was the son of Satan to maturing into the Son of God.
Only those Scriptures of a religion engraved in stone remain the same. However, cultures change their beliefs, and change the Teachings and belief of what came before them. All cultures do this, regardless of how accurate the storage of their history or how much of their history is stored. That is how we get the entropy of information example of the common non-coastal mideaval european believing all the world is flat, because as far as they can see, its flat. Even though the Church and the Intelligensia of the time knew better, the common culture did not.
In 100 years, what is common belief for Christianity will change. We know this is a given, so long as Christianity itself is practiced. The same holds true of all other religions. Cultures have their own beliefs, and those beliefs change and evolve over time. In 400 years from now, the mainstream Koran and its Teachings may have all mention of war, soldiers, and violence of any form removed. This is a likely possibility. Certainly, changes and "re-interpretations" will happen between now and then.
Was Mohammed a "Hitler"? Or was he something else? It's been much too long since he has lived and taught for us to truly know. He could have been a power mad psycho-path out purely for his personal gain and power. Or he could have been much more benevolent person that had difficulty in even defending himself or his mother from harm. There is no way to truly know the man, his thoughts, nor his actual teachings. We can only know what the various cultures that have evolved since his time think they know about him, and what the current various flavors of that faith that have evolved since then, think. Just as we do not know of any other central figures of faith that dates back for more then a generation or three. So it comes down to your personal belief. What is it you desire to believe of him?
For your ponderance, remember this: you are merely a little more then a century down the road from when the Catholic Church decided that Jesus was always the man we know, and changed their Scripture, Doctrine, and Teachings accordingly. Were you to have been taught Christianity two centuries ago, you'd have been learned a different history of Jesus. One much less peaceful and perfect, one which has him being very rough and abusive to those around him until he gradually learned to be "better". Which do you believe is the truth?
Heck, in a thousand years, the mainstream culture of humanity may worship and believe in JimScarver as "the Great One through which all is made known, understand, or manifest", that JamesJr was the first arch-pope of all of space, and that StarPilot is the personification of entropy. There is just no telling what future cultures will believe.
---StarPilot
JamesJr isn't the one you're retorting to, Einstein.
-JeffScarver
Fine then, reply corrected. I notice you decided not to actually respond other then to make a sarcastic insult. Thinking, or just decided to take a break from spewing hatred?
I don't mind you comparing me to Einstein. Einstein couldn't dress himself. However, most people still think of him in pretty decent terms, despite that. If you had wanted to insult me, you should have picked someone who is known for being in touch with the common man, and the common world. That would at least imply that you think I should be able to do the same. Or compare me to Sherlock Holmes, implying that I should at least be able to deduce and remember all the familial details of the Whitescarvers and who uses which different set of signatures on this site. Of course, that presumes I should actually care about the details of Jim's relations, which amazingly enough I don't think is actually important in bettering my understanding of life or improving my enjoyment of living. But hey, most ignorant humans think that if they know something, all the rest of the world surely knows it, no matter how obscure, arcane, specialized, or limited that knowledge is.
You want to be properly creditted for your hatred and bigotry, Jeff, then sign your digital knick. Otherwise, when dealing with Jims and Jeffs and Juniors of Jims and Jeffs, its easy for people that don't know your exact details to think it was some other Whitescarver that posts here. Or be in the Wiki spirit and just fix the error yourself. But that would be being postive and helpful, which is not an attitude in keeping with your postings here.
Hatred always yeilds hatred in return. Anger calls forth anger from those you release it onto and around. Insults close minds to you. If you really want to turn the world onto the fact that Mohammed is bad and so therefore is Islam, you are not going to get anywhere with the attitude and speeches you've given here. If you are merely pissed off that people may be blasphemizing by comparing him to Christ, then you are going to pop an artery and die in a short time if you don't learn to let that sort of thing go. People constantly compare other people to Christ, no matter how inane or inappropriate the comparison.
So what is your purpose? To stamp out all knowledge and following of Mohammed? And/or Islam? Or stop people making inappropriate comparisons to Christ?
---StarPilot
Oh StarPilot........
The volumes you've written here prove what a dazzling intellectual you must be.
But I am so happy to say that I think you've actually written something that resembles a response====
==
"Or stop people making inappropriate comparisons to Christ?"
This quote is the first one that I've seen indicating that someone has understood my point.
I never wanted to engage in a debate about Islam........ I was just retorting to Jimscarver's highly flawed comparison.
"just fix the error yourself" ?
There was no error. No digital signature implied an assumption. If someone is confused, they can ask. There was only one Jeff replying on this page. Quoting myself should have made it even more obvious. Due to your complaint, however, I have changed the sig.
Cheers,
JeffScarver
To be accurate I should say that it is said that the young Muhhamud lived in the way of a good Christian but became a militant leader to defend all against the devil and idol worshipers who ransacked their communities and forced them to make sacrifices to and honor their idols and deny the GodOfGods.
Perhaps some less militant way may have overcome the persecution and achieved safety and security and freedom for the God loving good people who where being slaughtered and enslaved. Who is to say if our own revolutionary and civil wars were more necessary or nobel. Is it wrong that a persecuted people fight for their freedom? Similar to George Washington's refusal to be made king, Muhhamud would not be made a God or demand personal homange or even acceptance of himself as a phophet. He fought for all God loving people, including Christians and Jews. Today, in a more civilized world much can be accompleshed by passive resistance as Ghandi and King have taught us.
We may be forsed to protect ourselves from the violence of those who are persecured and repressed but it is far better that we eliminate the persecurion and repression than justify the actions by our intolerance.
We are animals but we are not killing eachother for food. Animals may accidently hurt humans, but animals attack humans for 3 reason, they are hungry and think we are food, they are inflicted with desease effecting there brain, or they have been mistreated. I every case of of a pet or trained animal attacking a human that has been investigated, it is said that healthy well fed animals only attack when they have been trained by negative reinforsement. If punishment of those who feel helpless and might hurt us is how we deal with the problem we are digging our own graves.
There will be a world war three most likely. There is little any of us can do to stop it. The best we can do is stand up against intolerance and persecution and fight the helplessness that drives people to such extreme action. Let us find WinWinWin solutions rather than promote UsAndThem divisions.
--JimScarver
Gee JeffScarver, as a matter of fact, I am an idiot. Does it make you feel good to insult and pick on an idiot? It doesn't bother me, as I figured out I was an idiot many, many years ago. But a man that picks a fight with someone he considers inferior then himself is not a human worth much, is he?
So, let's see what we know about you from your statements and attitude here: according to you, the world can go to hell, and you'll happily help them along their way there as long as it isn't too much a bother to you; and you like to be a bully whenever you are given the chance or become frustrated. You know, that's a great reflection on you, your faith, personal beliefs, family (wife, father, and all those who have helped shape and continue to shape who you are), and of this community in itself, isn't it? Hey, can you post some more, and reinforce these impressions of who you really are? I bet you can do it if you want to==== I believe in you!
==
Your dad understands that he is an asshole|. I mention this because I think you need to accept that you are one as well, just to be less stressed out when other people are being idiots and/or assholes around you. Insulting people just turns a debate into a pissing contests, and shows that you do not feel you can back up your claims or views in a discussion or debate. I've got no trouble passing along insults if that's really the game you want to play. Insults and hate are about the only things people really bother to teach other. I don't do hate, but I do remember a few insults I found to be funny. You'll probably just be bored, but that's okay, because you only like to insult and beat on people you think are inferior or weaker then you.
So, should we have the Social Services drop by and make sure you aren't beating those that are physically weaker or inferior to you on a daily basis? It really is a small step from projecting hate and violence in speech and thought to doing so in real, physical deed. Any study of abusers will show their progression, and how easily they did so. Your profile of yourself by your own words is that of such an abuser. I hope that's just a bad or false impression, and not a true representation of who you really are. Of course, I'm an idiot, so just imagine what someone who actually has a brain sees in your expressions here, especially when you are facing the merest, tiniest resistance to your views or ideas and you are not instantly recognized for the living god that is JeffScarver.
Idiocy is the natural state of everyone but you, JeffScarver. This is because noone else lives in the same reality as you. But trying to make other people think like you is not an easy thing. They have a different reality then you, and in their reality, you are the idiot. You will need to prove to them, over and over, every time, that it is they who is mistaken.
If you don't believe something, fine, you should just say so. But taking time out to insult a person whom is expressing a different view or idea from you only makes it appear to others that you are the one who is wrong, and that you know it. The reason is simple: if you actually knew better then they, you'd state your case and just blow them out of the water, leaving them the with only possible retorts such as "your feet smell almost as bad as your breath" or "you are an idiot" or something equally non-effective and non subject based. Something for you to keep in mind when you actually care about your conversations or you are trying to teach people that you think you have a better idea or a possible better way.
If you just want to flame people because they are idiots, you should just find a loyal fan board/forum, and tell them they are all stupid for liking whatever it is they like. (Whether it is a game, band, religion, movie, etc). They, being all idiots, will just line up for you to give them more abuse and insults. That should let you relieve your mental bladder of frustration, hate, and violence as much as you could possibly need. If you need a few such sites, just say so. I'd be more then happy to recommend a few to you, and provide and outlet that isn't WikiWorld, what with it being dedicated to trying to improve communication, understanding, and life for all if I actually understand your dad. Of course, I might have misunderstood that, what with being so slow and dense of mind and intellect.
If you want to engage in discussions, I'd advice you this: you need patience and tolerance to discuss anything with anyone else. Because everyone but you are an idiot, and they won't instantly recognize you are right, nor that they themselves are idiots (only a few of us really know we are). Insulting them will just shut down any possible debate, leaving your wisdom and brillance unreceived, and they unlearned idiots.
And thanks for fixing your sig==== It's easy for an idiot such as myself to get confused. That will help prevent other idiots from making the same mistake.
==
---StarPilot
Read====
==
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39116
Q.How can Islam be called the religion of peace when it was spread by the sword? ?
A.It is a common complaint among some non-Muslims that Islam would not have millions of adherents all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of force. The following points will make it clear, that far from being spread by the sword, it was the inherent force of truth, reason and logic that was responsible for the rapid spread of Islam.
1. Islam means peace. Islam comes from the root word salaam, which means peace. It also means submitting ones will to Allah (swt). Thus Islam is a religion of peace, which is acquired by submitting ones will to the will of the Supreme Creator, Allah (swt).
2. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace. Each and every human being in this world is not in favour of maintaining peace and harmony. There are many, who would disrupt it for their own vested interests. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace. It is precisely for this reason that we have the police who use force against criminals and anti-social elements to maintain peace in the country. Islam promotes peace. At the same time, Islam exhorts it followers to fight where there is oppression. The fight against oppression may, at times, require the use of force. In Islam force can only be used to promote peace and justice.
3. Opinion of historian De Lacy OLeary. The best reply to the misconception that Islam was spread by the sword is given by the noted historian De Lacy OLeary in the book "Islam at the cross road" (Page 8): "History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated."
4. Muslims ruled Spain for 800 years. Muslims ruled Spain for about 800 years. The Muslims in Spain never used the sword to force the people to convert. Later the Christian Crusaders came to Spain and wiped out the Muslims. There was not a single Muslim in Spain who could openly give the adhan, that is the call for prayers.
5. 14 million Arabs are Coptic Christians. Muslims were the lords of Arabia for 1400 years. For a few years the British ruled, and for a few years the French ruled. Overall, the Muslims ruled Arabia for 1400 years. Yet today, there are 14 million Arabs who are Coptic Christians i.e. Christians since generations. If the Muslims had used the sword there would not have been a single Arab who would have remained a Christian.
6. More than 80% non-Muslims in India. The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword.
7. Indonesia and Malaysia. Indonesia is a country that has the maximum number of Muslims in the world. The majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. May one ask, "Which Muslim army went to Indonesia and Malaysia?" 8. East Coast of Africa. Similarly, Islam has spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. One may again ask, if Islam was spread by the sword, "Which Muslim army went to the East Coast of Africa?"
9. Thomas Carlyle. The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book "Heroes and Hero worship", refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: "The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one. In one mans head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword==== On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can."
==
10. No compulsion in religion. With which sword was Islam spread? Even if Muslims had it they could not use it to spread Islam because the Quran says in the following verse: "Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from error" [Al-Quran2:256] 11. Sword of the Intellect. It is the sword of intellect. The sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Quran says in Surah Nahl, chapter 16 verse 125: "Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious." [Al-Quran16:125]
12. Increase in the world religions from 1934 to 1984. An article in Readers Digest Almanac, year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in The Plain Truth magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. May one ask, which war took place in this century which converted millions of people to Islam?
13. Islam is the fastest growing religion in America and Europe. Today the fastest growing religion in America is Islam. The fastest growing religion in Europe in Islam. Which sword is forcing people in the West to accept Islam in such large numbers?
14. Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson. Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson rightly says, "People who worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fail to realize that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already, it fell the day MUHAMMED (pbuh) was born".
For more information about Islam: http://www.geocities.com/abo_ahmed787/links.html
While the Muslem world may largely be trapped in a feudalism system, the western world has proven itself no more noble, modern or civilized. It is a great embarrisment to almost half of American that our vote as proclaimed another four years of the American sword. I accept the necessity that once existed to eliminate the pagans who would enslave the children of God against their God, and the benevalent role of Islam in defending all the children of God. But I must concede that rule by power pervades much of the Muslem world. It is for those under the thumb of power that all true Americans cry, and dispite our present knowlege to the contrary we pray that that will be our nations legacy. --JimScarver