The front page of your national newspaper features a galling attack on Christians in your own country, and you're still on about Muslims in countries twelve time zones away?

Don't pretend to care about Christians if you won't stand up to them when they come under attack in your own country (and in the comments section of your blog, I might add).

Intimidation and threats from Muslims is set to become mainstream. Good. Westerners who enjoy not praying to Allah need to realize that these backwards fanatics want us dead or subjugated under their cult.

what madman would try to spread the christian word IN THE GAZA STRIP? besides, christians spend most of their time converting other christians.

Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly........

Many in the West think that the lands in and/or around Israel belonged to Muslims. In fact, there used to be a large percentage of Christians. The Muslims are slowly but surely driving the Christians out.

An example is Bethlehem in Israel. Another example is the country of Lebanon.

The West appears to be very content with de facto Muslim aggression in these territories.

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2564
And Hotair.com also has a link to the story.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali bluntly states in an interview that we are at war with Islam, it needs to be confronted and destroyed.

Islam guts the essence of Christianity by denying the divinity of Christ and his death on the cross. It then says "let's make peace". There is no peace to make. Islam is a johnny-come-lately revisionist religion. If Christianity is true in its essential claims, Islam is false.

A religion should not be respected either because it is ancient or held by a wide swath of the world's population. It should be respected because it is a) true, and, b) beneficial in its effects when implemented according to its founder's precepts.

"Ayaan Hirsi Ali bluntly states in an interview that we are at war with Islam"

Andrew bluntly states that Ali is a bald feminist atheist who once planned to sneak into Canada with bogus papers to make a bogus refugee claim. Try again.

I agree with you 100% Richard.

So why is it that Christians don't come out and name Islam for the fraud it is? Why is it that when Muslims say they have Jesus too Christians don't say "whoa whoa whoa, that guy your book has running around in Kashmir saying he's not the son of god is a fake?"

Stupid liberals at work ....

In Toronto the Good .... Hallal food in cafeteria ....
U of T attempts to appease/accommodate the Muslim Student Association ... falls flat.... NOT GOOD ENOUGH for the precious dears who can't eat their hallal in peace with all that other evil stuff around!
Who is surprised? Leftards of the university faculty and staff....

It is stories like this one that assures me that George W Bush will go down in history as a great president. He was not shy about going out and killing these freaks of nature.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a great woman and a heroine. She too will find a place in the history books.

Andrew, you limp wristed jerk, get back under your bed.

"So why is it that Christians don't come out and name Islam for the fraud it is?"

Perhaps they are too busy fending off attacks from - heh - "New York intellectuals":

Slash-and-burn columnist Ann Coulter shocked a cable TV talk-show audience Monday when she declared that Jews need to be "perfected" by becoming Christians, and that America would be better off if everyone were Christian.

Coulter made the remarkable statements during an often heated appearance to promote her new book on advertising guru Donny Deutsch's CNBC show "The Big Idea."

In response to a question from Deutsch asking Coulter if "it would be better if we were all Christian," the controversial columnist responded: "Yes."

"We should all be Christian?" Deutsch repeated.

"Yes," Coulter responded, asking Deutsch, who is Jewish, if he would like to "come to church with me."

Deutsch, pressing Coulter further, asked, "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians?" She responded: "Yeah."

Coulter deflected Deutsch's assertion that her comments were anti-Semitic, matter-of-factly telling the show's obviously upset host, "That is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews."

Now, read the actual transcript:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301216,00.html

So Andrew .... just what do you consider to be OUR national newspaper?
Would that be the Globe & Mail???

Who would see the front page of this fishwrap .... and where?

Who would be surprised by anything they would print?

Apparently you would ... so do share your insights!

I've always wondered.... Shiite or Sunni??

Seems as though, everyone who believes in such mystical claims (christian, muslim, jew.. etc. etc.) will fight no matter what faith.

Last time I checked, protestants don't like catholics either. (vise versa)

I like to chant, 'fight' in the background. Only way to get rid of bogus beliefs is to let them kill each other for bogus reasons.

otherwise people get offended.. haha.

"The letter also spells out the similarities between passages of the Bible and the Koran."

And by that line of thinking, Hong Kong counterfeiters could demand that the likes of Louis Vuitton and Dolce & Gabbana engage in a "constructive dialogue" with them, given the similarities between their products.

The Karan is no better/worse than the bible.

Apples and Oranges.

They both suggest killing anyone who doesn't follow their beliefs. Great source for morality.

"The Karan (sic) is no better/worse than the bible"

Real swell bunch here at SDA. You should all be proud of yourselves for so courageously defending western civilization from idiots like the one above.

Mao killed 70 million - in peace time. Precisely how many more must die under atheism before we can agree that it is the greatest threat to humanity that has ever existed?

Who said I was athiest?

I merely have read the bible. Sorry.

Sorry, bzloki, but I don't recall my parish priest ever telling us to kill our non-RC neighbours in the name of God. If he had, he'd have been laughed at. I, for one, don't take the bible as the literal "Word of God" although the Ten Commandments are a good guide by which to live one's life. Don't screw your neighbour's wife, don't steal, don't dis your parents, don't overeat, etc. - makes for a peaceful society.

I think that you have framed this letter in a bit of a negative light - National Newswatch has a link to an article with less colour commentary. I think that this is a great opportunity for Muslim Leaders and Chrstians to point out to ordainary muslims that we are very much alike in our beliefs, preventing them from listening to the radical set. With the leaders in ecumenical agreement, it will be easier for the masses to see things the way they could be, preventing acts similar to the aformentioned abduction and torture.

bzloky. you could not have read the bible and say what you said.

@Andrew, 3:45 PM - "Coulter made the remarkable statements..."

What's your point? You disagree? Fine, your loss. You think it "bad" to hold that view? You want a law outlawing opinion?

She's not saying 'convert or die!'. She is expressing a preference.

Why people are so shocked is...shocking.

(Actually, it is revealing)

"@Andrew, 3:45 PM - "Coulter made the remarkable statements..."

Those aren't my words, tenny, I was merely quoting the article, which would have been obvious to you had you been of clearer mind. I recommend at least 15 minutes of chi'ha in the muu la'ak position daily for optimal brain thinking.

bzolki is totally correct...the Bible and the Koran are full of man made fairy tales, cave man rules and calls for violence against non-believers....written by men to control other men...and oh by the way ....unprovable. Christianity, although slightly more palitable to western values,can not and should not assume the moral high ground.

Exodus 22:20
He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed

It says things like this more than once. It also says good things, but lets not cherry pick anymore. K?

Chi'ha and muu la'ak. Yup, damn fine positions to be in. I'll remember that when I next find myself in a position that requires optimal brain thinking. Sounds to me like young Andrew could use a little ma'tu' ri'ty.

If you 'knew' The One Who said that bzloki you would be humbled, not critical.

Salvation Army Captain Brekke was killed in Pakistan last week. We will never know if it was terrorist related. No one is saying.

See? I told you people this would happen.

I've been calling the Islamophobes here at SDA retards and traitors of western civilization for a year know because I correctly calculated that the war on Islam would certainly morph into a war on Christianity. And that is precisely what has happened.

I, and I alone, totally called it.

I don't believe the letter from the Muslim scholars is as sinister as has been implied, nor can it be considered a threat. Rather, it is calling for reconciliation between the faiths. Implying that the survival of the world is at stake may not be so far-fetched, given the presence of nuclear weapons in Pakistan and possibly (soon) Iran.

As for the savage murder in Gaza, the terrorist group Hamas is in charge there, and can hardly be considered to represent mainstream Islam.

I don't think the priests and bishops of the interfaith crowd [eg the Archbishop of Canterbury] realize what Muslims mean when they things like:

"As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them - so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes"

It sounds reasonable, or at least it would sound reasonable if a Christian or Buddhist said it. But what a Muslim means by 'drive them out of their homes' is a very different thing. It can include having a growing non-Muslim population like in Nigeria, or it could mean buying land from a Muslim like in Israel.

Basically everything we do short of quietly decomposing can be considered offensive or aggressive by one Muslim sect or another.

There is no space for dialogue. I hope that no one caves in and meets with these Muslim 'Scholars'.

More people have died in the name of religion(any religion)than natural causes.Maybe we should just declare religion illegal?

good thought justthinkin.... but how would our masters keep us unwashed heathens in line?....we might even start thinking for ourselves!...that would never do!

Justthinkin,

You're not that bright and can't add. That was an absurd statement.

I'm no fan of religious nutters of any stripe but communism alone killed more than all religious persecution in the last 500 years if not in total.

As for natural causes, think of the billions of people who have come and gone.

Even as rhetorical excess it isn't very bright.

The pope has already asked for dialogue on this.

The only thing stop this from going further is the problem of Apostasy in Muslim countries.
The pope doesn't want further discussion until Muslims will accept Christians and Christian conversion in Muslim countries.

Christians often do Missionary work in places where they are not allowed. This is a Christian tradition stemming from St. Peter and Paul.

Christians understand the need for missionary work and are proud of the risks that missionaries take. Atheists and Agnostics will never understand it, because Muslim missionaries in Canada are not fearing for their life.

"Posted by: bluetech at October 11, 2007 4:44 PM"

- That's nice.

But the same could be said about Allah.

I would rather think about things critically, than accept things because they are the 'norm'.

No matter how humble I could feel afterwards.

Religion is the opium for the masses!

"I, and I alone, totally called it."

Seriously, Andrew, you sound like a bright man, but most of the time you seem on the edge of a complete breakdown.

Awesome, andrew, just awesome. You, and you alone, "totally called it'. Awesome.

And you haven't even mentioned Wikipedia yet.

I have just one problem, andrew - apart from your hubris. It's something called 'facts' and 'reason'.

You see, Andrew, I'm an atheist. Yes, yes. And I have a problem, just a slight problem, with your logic that makes a correlation into a causation.

Because Mao was an atheist, does not - factually or logically, - mean that atheism was the 'root cause' of communism's murdering millions.

I'm sure you know that people of every religious belief have, in their time, murdered thousands and thousands.

No- it is utterly and totally irrelevant to do a 'body count' of these murders, and then, list 'which religion killed the most/least people' and try to set up some ethical scale. Irrelevant.

The problem, andrew, is that correlation doesn't equal causality. And religion may have been a cultural belief justifying various murders, but, the root causes are, on that scale, always non-cultural and have to do with economic issues.

sceptic - your parish priest may not, now, be advocating war or murder, but, in other times, ie, several hundred years ago, I'd bet he was.

Christianity is quietly killing thousands of people daily.....the Vatigan's middle ages stand against the use of condoms is wiping out countless Africans, while the religous GW Bush hides behind his church refusing to help fund stem cell research...a truly moral and progressive lot they are (as they continue down their one way street back to the time when you were stoned to death for saying the world was not the center of the universe!)

I would rather think about things critically, than accept things because they are the 'norm'.

Oh the irony. You liberal idiots [redundancy] are too much; you haven’s had a critical thought in your short miserable life.

Lenin had it so right when he coined the term Useful Idiot and you, bzloki, wear the title proudly.

Obviously you have no idea why Marx coined the term, “religion is the opium of the masses.” Pay attention stupid and I’ll explain it to you………

………….As long as the people had a higher authority than man- -God- -they would not view the communist govt as the Supreme entity. The goal was then to destroy God and make the govt the highest authority; Marx wanted communist government to be the opium of the masses, religion stood in his way.

Millennia ago Muslims did not allow Jews to ride camels because it would put the Jews head above a Muslims and that’s not allowed by the “religion of peace” practitioners. The orthodox Jews of the time would be seen praying in a swaying/bouncing motion [like you would while riding a camel] which was a way of mocking the Muslims.

bzloki, I guess you never made it to the New Testament. (I guess you also never figured out that this oversight might weaken your paltry argument.)

You and valster are, I'm sorry to say, drive-by morons, who add nothing of significance to the debate. E.g., valster writes, "Christianity, although slightly more palitable [sic: that should be 'palatable'] to western values,can not [sic: that should be both a space and 'cannot'] and should [on valsters's authority? What's that?] not assume the moral high ground."

Gag. If valster had any sense of propriety, he'd be ashamed to spout such nonsense. However, being a bona fide member of the "ME-ME" generation, this person doesn't even know he's a fool. (The PC dispensation adjures us to tell the emperor he's beautifully and impeccably clothed. In his narrow-minded, delusional, parallel to real life universe, valster's obviously a sucker for this ruse.)

valster, the very FOUNDATION of the West IS Judeo-Christianity: there is no West without these two religions and the moral dispensation of the Ten Commandments. Societies that have practised this code have thrived. (No wonder Muslim societies, which have neither the compunction nor desire to follow the Ten Commandments, are such dismal failures.)

Now, even the West is turning its back on the Judeo-Christian moral code and, having spent nearly all of the moral capital of our Judeo-Christian birthright, just look where that's taking us. See Reginald Bibby's new study, and ask any teacher, priest, or police officer. Better yet, bzloki and valster, why not have a good (moral: no cheating!) look at yourselves in the mirror? (Going a few moves ahead in my mind, I realize that this suggestion is bound to fail: one needs self-knowledge and humility in order to assess one’s shortcomings. From the postings of these two, I see no evidence of either trait. Too bad.)

So, here we go again.

"Andrew bluntly states that Ali is a bald feminist atheist who once planned to sneak into Canada with bogus papers to make a bogus refugee claim. Try again."

Really? I say she's an amazingly courageous apostate, who's life is on the line for speaking the truth.

And your courageous deeds are?

-------------------------

Abrogation, from the Quran:

"Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers," (6:34).

"The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfillment in truth and in justice: None can change His words: for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all, (6:115).

None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?" (2:106).

---------------

Or, how about Islam claiming to be the 'original' religion, starting with Adam and including all the Jewish prophets?

"And I [Muhammad] am commanded to be the first of those who bow to Allah in Islam," (39:12).

--------------------

How about just plain stupidity. Not to mention confusion:

"Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood," (96:2).
"We created man from sounding clay, from mud moulded into shape, (15:26).

"The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was," (3:59).

"But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?" (19:67, Yusuf Ali). Also, 52:35).

"He has created man from a sperm-drop; and behold this same (man) becomes an open disputer! (16:4).

So, which is it? I guess all four.

----------------------

Now that we've established abrogation, how about the famous, "There's no compulsion in religion" crap:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things," (2:256).

"And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith," (9:3).

"But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful," (9:5).

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued," (9:29).

----------------

Oh, looky here. The Quran says the Bible is the truth and not corrupted:

"And dispute ye not with the People of the Book [Jews and Christians and the Bible], except in the best way, unless it be with those of them who do wrong but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you," (29:46)

--------------------

The master of lies says lying is okey dokey. Oh, and pre-meditated murder too:

"Muhammad bin Maslama got up saying, "O Allah's Apostle! Would you like that I kill him [Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf]?" The Prophet said, "Yes," Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say a (false) thing (i.e. to deceive Kab). "The Prophet said, "You may say it," (Hadith Vol. 5, Book 59, #369).

----------------------

As I and others have correctly pointed out before, Islam is based on foundational violence and all manor of deviance. It is commanded and rewarded by Allah in the Quran. It is commanded for Muslims to emulate Mo, the "Perfect Man."

So, therefore, sure there can be nice Muslims who don't follow the Quran and Mo's life to a T. But the cult is chronic. The virus can skip a generation and show up in the pups.

----------------

bzloki,

Whoever you are, you should stick to the shallow end always found on leftard blogs. You don't belong in grownup debates. Save yourself the embarrasment.

I'm no fan of religious nutters of any stripe but communism alone killed more than all religious persecution in the last 500 years if not in total.

Warwick, I think this is a case of friendly fire; I know I’ve been guilty of it. You’re both right, communism is the political ideology and the leaders of those regimes, in this case China, identified as atheists.

ET
You are using causality one way.

Atheists like Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot murdered many millions.
Stalin actually murdered more people the Hitler, with Pol Pot and Mao not far behind.

Most Muslim Christian wars had more to do with economics then religion. With the biggest wars between the Ottoman Turks and Christian Europe.
By the way the Byzantine Empire was very liberal in allowing Muslims to practice their faith. The Ottomans converted people by the sword.

Also Christian nations like France and England didn't do mass conversions of their subjects in Persia or in Asia, but the Muslim nations sure did.

In the end Jews suffered the most per capita tby both religious and Atheist protagonists and continue to do so.

lookout...it is you who looks in the mirror and sees a neanderthal me-me sucker/follower. If you weren't so belligerant people would pity your ignorance

Belisarius, another poster, some grey matter short of a brain, writes, "I don't believe the letter from the Muslim scholars is as sinister as has been implied, nor can it be considered a threat. Rather, it is calling for reconciliation between the faiths."

Just like the Wolf asking Little Red Riding Hood to meet him in the woods to "reconcile".

Some people don't have the eyes to see or the ears to hear. In this instance, these fifth columnist, useful idiots will be among the first ones to be steamrollered by "that nice group of Muslims who just wanted to be our friends".

(Where have these "friends" been in the last six years?)

valster - Bush isn't against stem cell research; he has funded it with millions; he's against aborting fetuses to use for stem cell research. A lot of stem cell research is being done using without destruction of an embryo.

Apollyon - I think the swaying of Jews when praying (and of other religions) as a continual act of mocking the Muslims is what is called an 'urban myth', ie, it's simply false. Jews were also forbidden to ride on horses, and you don't sway on a horse.

irwin daisy- I've disagreed with you before and will continue to do so; your quite violent hatred of anything Islamic has moved you out of any reasoned debate and discussion. I maintain that as a creation of man, it and any religion, can be reformed.

One group of Muslisms says one thing. A different group of (presumed) Muslims does something else.

Golly. In related news, some Christians exhort others to love their neighbours, while other Christians murder their neighbours.

"You can't accuse them of inconsistency." That's right. You can't. Not without committing an absurd fallacy.

irwin:

You can be all self-rightous... Go ahead, I won't lose sleep over it.

I don't pretend to be the smartest guy. I also don't feel any embarrasment about reading what people have to say; and commenting on it.

So what? I am young, and am more willing to learn than YOU.

I can tell right now, that my morals are better than yours, but thats my opinion.

I don't need a book to tell me how to live, if you do.. that's fine. If you want to fight over whose book is better, thats fine with me too.

lookout:

I never stopped before I hit the NT. There is a lot of garbage in there too, but I don't have 3 days to discuss these FOOLISH books.

I'm glad you are aware that the New Testament is a bit more humane, but again.. cherry pickin!

I merely wanted to point out how dam hypocritical it was to slander the Karan, yet follow the bible. Thank you for helping!!

ET.... I think you're wrong about the stem cell thing...from what I've read anyway. But prove me wrong. Stem cell research can be the breakthrough in saving millions of lives.

lookout - Where have these "friends" been in the last six years?

Are you aware that most of the soldiers and police doing the fighting and dying in the Afghan National Army/Police are Muslims? Or that the bulk of the casualties sustained in the war against al-Qaeda in Iraq have been sustained by Shiite and Sunni Muslims fighting for their new government?

In Pakistan, more than 4000 Muslim soldiers have now been killed fighting the Taliban/al-Qaeda. And lets not forget the casualties sustained by Muslim soldiers in Algeria fighting the Islamic insurgency there.

I won't be surprised if the Rome and the Church of England do indeed enter into such talks, even with successfully results. In fact, it would seem that Rome has agreed with their main premise already:

'The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."' - Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 841

However, no mater what diplomatic efforts ensue, there is still an unbridgeable gap between the 2 faiths. At its core, Islam is just another works-base religion; if your good deeds outweigh your bad you might make it to heaven. Christianity is unique of all religions in that it teaches that our good works can't get us to Heaven, only Jesus' work can; so we must put our faith in Christ alone to get us there.

Those who truly grasp this essential difference (though this isn't the only difference) will never be able to acknowledge any "common essentials" between Islam and Christianity.

valster, your F-grade slur is sophomor[on]ic. Yes, I did make a put down in your direction, but I also provided plenty of evidence for my assessment. How about making an effort to PROVE me wrong by actually addressing the points I made?

bzloki,

Originally, I wasn't going to post this, but since you recently commented that you are "willing to learn" I thought it couldn't hurt.

The text you quoted (Exodus 22:20) is accurate, but you are making a huge interpretive mistake if you are implying that this passage is to be taken as a command for believers today. This command was active for a specific people (the theocratic nation of Israel) at a specific time (the Old Covenant period). As we do not meet these conditions the command is not for us.

If you want more info, the follow article may be helpful (the topic is different, but the principle is the same): http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5624

It says, in part: "This doesn't justify throwing out the entire Old Testament. Rather, it informs our hermeneutic so that when we look at the Scripture we have to ask if our interpretation needs to take this disjunction [Old/New Covenant Period] into consideration."

I think these guys have something to say about Canadians and religion
http://handsacrossoceanministry.wordpress.com/2007/10/11/god-hates-canucks-and-with-good-reason/#comment-1468

ET,

"your quite violent hatred of anything Islamic has moved you out of any reasoned debate and discussion."

Really? That's quite a pompous statement to make don't you think?

If you aren't equipped to counter my argument, as you've proven over and over, then you're certainly not equipped to reposition my POV, or exclude me from debate.

Who, may I ask, appointed you moderator?

I've consistently pointed out that violence is foundational to Islam and that Muslims are the first victims. This is a fact, it is not hate (unless you're a muslim, where any criticism is construed as hate). However, I do hate the violence that Muslims perpetually do towards others as commanded and rewarded by allah in the Quran and taught by mo's life example.

Therefore, it cannot be reformed without editing out the calls for perpetual violence in the Quran and removing mohammad as the perfect example to follow, altogether.

Now, once again, prove me wrong. And saying "I've disagreed with you before and will continue to do so" is not an argument.

I stand... half corrected? haha.

To me, that's more confusing that it needs to be. I am aware that most christians do not follow the OT. Though, It still is considered the bible.

I'm not willing to die over it, thats forsure.

Irwin Daisy,

I've been reading some of Robert Spencer's stuff and have to say I've been pleasantly surprised. His position on the state of Islam and Jihadism isn't nearly so far from that of most Muslim reformers as I'd thought. From jihadwatch.org:

I encourage any Muslim individual or group who is willing to work publicly for the reform of the Islamic doctrines, theological tenets and laws that Islamic jihadists use to justify violence. But this must be done honestly and thoroughly, confronting the texts of the Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira that are used to justify violence against unbelievers, and decisively rejecting Qur'anic literalism.

Belisarius, I'm talking those who wrote the letter, not Muslims working with our allies in the ME. I think the context made this quite clear.

I'm in full support of our military helping the Muslims in the ME to help themselves overturn the Muslim thugs who threaten them.

"To me, that's more confusing that it needs to be. I am aware that most christians do not follow the OT. Though, It still is considered the bible."

Gee, it looks like we've found something you've failed to think "critically" about. Please consider a real and in-depth examination of Christianity instead of simply "accepting things because they are the 'norm'" (and yes, in our society parroting that Christianity is false is the norm - been there, done that).

As you have ably shown here, most of those who are opposed to Christianity are opposing something they know nothing about.

Right, irwin daisy - my point is that your conclusions have rendered any debate about Islam impossible.

Don't try to divert the issue - to asking me about 'who are you as moderator'. The issue is that your conclusion about Islam is that it is basically violent, that it is unreformable, that all Muslim immigration should be stopped. You've made these points before. Many times.

So, why are you yet again, posting them on a blog, a site which is by nature a domain of debate, when your conclusions are not open to debate?

You reject any concept that, as a man-made entity, Islam is by that nature, reformable. That would include re-interpretation of the calls for violence and so on. I've posted names of journals where such debate, by Muslims scholars, is going on. You aren't interested in their discussions. eg, American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, a very good journal. Their 2005 Vol 22 issue was on Debating Moderate Islam.

But - To you, it isn't reformable. End of debate!!

valster -Bush approved 100 million federal funding for embryonic stem cell research in 2001-06 and 250 million for research on adult and animal stem cells. Again, the restriction is only on a situation where you kill the human embryo to get the stem cells.
In 2006, Bush vetoed the HR 810 bill, that was seeking to overturn Clinton's act that made it illegal for federal funds to be used in stem cell research where you had to kill the embryo.

You can google http..and then, stemcells dot nih dot gov
You'll come up with the US National Institutes of Health for Stem Cell Research. Then check out Read the Eligibility Criteria (for funding). You'll find that you are completely and totally wrong.

bzloki writes, "I'm not willing to die over it [biblical injunctions], thats forsure."

Well willing or not, bzloki, you may well die over it. Not because Christians are out to get you but because Muslim fanatics disapprove--with some justification (our slack morals)--of the fact that the Western world is non-Muslim and they believe they have the duty to vanquish us.

So, even if you're not Christian, you're part of the dispensation the Muslim fanatics feel compelled to subdue. Too bad, eh? (But don't blame the Christians.)

"Christianity is quietly killing thousands of people daily.....the Vatigan's middle ages stand against the use of condoms is wiping out countless Africans,..." by valster

Right, and I guess it has nothing to do with these Africans having sex with multiple partners, which is okay, right? If the Vatigan is speaking to Christians within their fold, it should be unlikely these Christians are having multiple sexual partners, and I would think the non-Christians could give a rat's ass what the Vatican thinks. I know many Catholics, and they all have a mind of their own, and if they want to use condoms, they will, with or without the Vatican's blessing.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L01594991.htm

"The Vatican on Monday issued a strong defence of its controversial position against condoms, saying fidelity, chastity and abstinence were the best ways to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS in a "pan-sexualist society."

Lookout - actually, your context wasn't clear. When you referred to useful idiots will be among the first ones to be steamrollered by "that nice group of Muslims who just wanted to be our friends".. It's unlikely that a handful of scholars would steamroll anything, so it came across as a generic reference to all Muslims.

It's no more appropriate to fail to differentiate between these religious scholars and Hamas thugs than it is to fail to differentiate between Iraqi Muslim soldiers and al-Qaeda terrorists.

It's impossible think critically 100% of the time.

Although, we should all do our best to do so.

I suggested I would rather think critically than be humble, if you want to get specific.

If it makes you feel better, I am in the process of examining all religions, and will continue too untill I die.

You also suggest I oppose christianity. Which is wrong, I think anyone has the right to practice it if they choose. I think of religions as private clubs... that get a break from TAXES.

Sure, I opppose the belief in an omnipotent being that controls my destiney. That's against my religion!

I won't kill over it though, or even get mad if you disagree.

sorry for my speling arrrrors.

i suck.

Belisarius,

I agree with Robert Spencer. We might agree yet.

ET,

"Right, irwin daisy - my point is that your conclusions have rendered any debate about Islam impossible."

Well, then say uncle.

"Don't try to divert the issue - to asking me about 'who are you as moderator'."

As bright as you may be, you unfortunately display a pompous attitude at times. Further, your accusation is absurd.

"The issue is that your conclusion about Islam is that it is basically violent, that it is unreformable, that all Muslim immigration should be stopped. You've made these points before. Many times."

Actually, no. I have said that it is only reformable if the commands and rewards for perpetual violence are edited out of the Quran and Mohammad, as the one to emulate, is permanently excluded. Otherwise, the violence problem is chronic.

Until then, if ever, yes Muslim immigration must be stopped. It is without benefit to the host culture. On the contrary, it is suicidal.

"So, why are you yet again, posting them on a blog, a site which is by nature a domain of debate, when your conclusions are not open to debate?"

My conclusions are fact. Not speculation, or in your case, opinion. If a counter argument is made based on fact, then I suppose we have a debate.

"You reject any concept that, as a man-made entity, Islam is by that nature, reformable."

From what I understand, Muslims don't believe their religion is "man-made", so therefore your opinion is moot.

ET...seems rather obscene that a three-day-old human embryo (a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst- the brain of a fly has more than 100000 cells)needs to be saved at the cost of the potential of curing millions of people of any disease or injury.....Saving the thousands of animals sacrificed in the name of scientific research would be a more noble venture

ET...seems rather obscene that a three-day-old human embryo (a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst- the brain of a fly has more than 100000 cells)needs to be saved at the cost of the potential of curing millions of people of any disease or injury.....Saving the thousands of animals sacrificed in the name of scientific research would be a more noble venture

Posted by: valster

If you're trying to convince everyone you're an idiot you can stop now.

bzloki, you sound like a nice person. But you're very glib.

Of course, you won't get mad if people disagree with your religious position: you've invested nothing in it: easy come, easy go. Poor you.

Re the tax bit. Imagine society without churches (your imagination is probably hindered in this regard by lack of knowledge or experience): the abundance of community activities and services is HUGE, and often provided "for free" because of the free will offerings of the congregants of church COMMUNITIES.

People of all ages, backgrounds, and abilities, and from all walks of life join together: they give and receive all kinds of benefits, material, artistic, emotional, spiritual, etc. The state is unable to provide this kind of experience or support, and, ALL of society, either directly or as a spin off, benefits from the multitude of goods provided by faith communities (at a fraction of the cost of government-run programs). E.g., I know of one young man from a single parent family, who received a classical music education--for free--and male mentoring at his church. He's now a graduate of a major Ivy League university and making his living as a singer in Europe. This is just one of millions of examples of largesse and grace provided by churches.

You have a right to your opinions, bzloki, but they're often so embryonic that I think humility--a trait you've said you're averse to--might be a quality you should consider cultivating.

Not all religions are equal. Neither are opinions.

appollyon...At least I'm open minded....as opposed to you....but I'm enjoying the Christian love that you're sharing....want to date?

appollyon...At least I'm open minded....

You have such an open mind your brain has fallen out. You're a fool but the fool is always last to know.

You're so tolerant of free speech that you and your demented retrograde leftist ilk throw pies in the faces of Conservative speakers at college campuses. The tolerant little wannabe fascists.

valster,

What moral imperative gives you the ability to make that distinction?

Furthermore, Bush is a universalist, by his own admission.

appolyon...keep up the good work...you're converting us by the millions!...Christian you say ?.....sorry you would NOT be welcome in the Christian church I attend...but hey you have a good day eh?

Atheism is a death cult. Charles Darwin would take one look at the Musilm birth rate and a look at the atheist birth rate and conclude, correctly, that Muslims are superior to atheists, and that atheists and their societies perish and are QUANTIFIABLY AND MEASURABLY unsustainable because they are inferior.

Inferior. Get that? Inferior.

You atheists are always running your mouths off about science: HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT SCIENCE??????? HOW DO YOU LIKE BEING QUANTIFIABLY INFERIOR YOU LOW SPERM COUNT SHE-MALES??????????????

valster, I'm a Jew.

The only "church" that you attend is in your basement with your propeller beanie and diaper wearing friends taking shots of cough medicine trying to get a buzz.

Andrew,

Admit yourself while there's still time.

appolyon...I love you too

you're converting us by the millions!

Um, stupid, I'm not here to convert anyone, I'm here to voice my opinion like everyone else. It bothers you that Conservatives have a voice, doesn't it you little fascist?

I am all for peace with the muslims. But first,they have to go a year without blowing the shit out of innocent people of any religion before thier proposal should even be given a second thought.They cannot get along with different sects of muslims,does anyone really think that da joos or any other religion or absence of religion will be tolerated? there is a website called thereligionofpeace.com that gives a daily update on thier peace-loving ways. I suggest that any who would consider them to be just like the rest of the world to check it out.

appolyon sweetie: my opinion...You're in here because you can"t get a job... or a life

valster, unlike you who runs to the mail box hoping the welfare check arrived, I'm self-employed and have been since 2004. Ive had two businesses before the age of 30.

Sorry loser, and I'm not hiring.

"YOU LOW SPERM COUNT SHE-MALE!!"

Oh, andrew, how could you tell the world! Folks, this is nothing but sublimated anger aimed at me. The sordid truth is that andrew and i have being trying to have a child...so far, no luck, i've been keeping my cell phone in my pants pocket.

Apollyon,

A suggestion:

Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Astounding how the discussion degenerated into nothing but arguments in moral equivalence between the morning and the afternoon.

Islam as practiced and preached for the last 1400 years the little paranoid Mohamed's cult has pursued the destruction of civilization and the builders of civilization.

Nothing has changed for them ... the goal of destruction in the name of God is the only end of Islam ..... there is nothing to discuss.

Saving the thousands of animals sacrificed in the name of scientific research would be a more noble venture

valster - you need to return to the dark underside of your rock, human embryos trump research animals when assigned ethical considerations unless you can't figure out in the hierarchy where to place yourself above an amoeba. And, you stupid putz, trust me, no one is mourning the monkeys that died in the cause of curing polio worldwide. There is nothing noble is protecting animals above humans. It's sheer Darwin Award stupidity.

The front page of your national newspaper features a galling attack on Christians in your own country, and you're still on about Muslims in countries twelve time zones away?

Andrew - it's real obvious you've got mommy issues. Kate can't be held accountable, she's not omniscient, for tracking the MSM before she posts. Your whine and bogus strawman is kind of stupid, isn't it. Oh, and, potty mouthed responses subtract from IQ points. So, you aren't looking real bright, Andrew.

Don't argue with an idiot. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Very well put Irwin; I'm done with the ignoramus.

Apollyon: 10! valster: 0. Not a sustained thesis from this toddler anywhere on this thread.

As I said, not all opinions are equal.

valster, I'm still waiting for you to comment on my rebuttal of your moronic views about Christianity and moral high ground on this thread. (Psst . . . If you have nothing intelligent to say, I understand. 'Just let us know and then I'd actually PREFER to hear nothing from you.)

May your God be with you....you so obviously need Him/Her...keep spreading the love in your little blinkered dark little world...and oh yes...have a real good day....morons

valster, I'm still waiting for you to comment on my rebuttal of your moronic views about Christianity and moral high ground on this thread.

Lookout, don’t hold your breath for anything substantive to come from valsters scribblings. Lowlife ingrates like this have no credibility especially when they make such contradictory statements, [of course when you're lying about everything you say consistency is the least of you concerns]:

seems rather obscene that a three-day-old human embryo (a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst- the brain of a fly has more than 100000 cells)…….The Village Idiot

…in the Christian church I attend….The Village Idiot

That must be some church that preaches this babble.

Again, andrew - you aren't being factual or logical.

Darwin referred only to biological properties. A belief system is not a biological property. Therefore, you can't, factually or logically, compare atheism with any religion, and claim that that belief system had anything to do with its capacity to survive.

No, the religion of a society has nothing to do with its sustainability as a society. What counts, far more, is its economic and political capacity to sustain its population. And that sustainability also includes an acknowledgment of the constraints and resources, of its biome.

The reason I, as an atheist, promote science, is because its conclusions rest on facts and reason. Not personal opinions.

Also, birth rate doesn't translate into survival rate. I'm sure you know that a turtle lays thousands of eggs, but only a few survive to adulthood. Have you ever noticed the number of seeds, eg acorns, etc, from various trees? Do all of them become trees?

valster - try to be consistent. Your original complaint was that Bush wasn't funding stem cell research. You yourself stated that it could "be the breakthrough in saving millions of lives". Then, when I showed you that Bush WAS funding stem cell research, you are now arguing for a particular type that requires embryonic death, with the utterly stupid argument that an embryo is 'tiny'. The fact is, valster, that an embryo, unlike your false analogy of the fly, doesn't remain that way but right from the start, is programmed to develop. You don't seem to know that. I suggest a few beginner books on biology.

irwin daisy- I maintain that your claim that Muslims reject change is wrong. The journal I pointed out, has Islamic scholars openly claiming that the Koran requires interpretation and this act of interpretation opens the text up to change. You reject this - and you aren't a Muslim scholar. Your opinions are not facts but opinions. I don't think that you give any credence to those Muslims who are attempting to reform and change Islam - because, you, who are not a Muslim, declare that it is 'unreformable'. That has to be an opinion; not a fact.

Your view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. It cannot be a fact. I have a different opinion; equally, it cannot be a fact. Neither you nor I can, factually, make the claim that immigration of Muslims will harm/not harm us. You have not provided us with any facts that Muslim immigration to Canada is 'without benefit' and is 'suicidal' (to the host culture). These are your opinions; not facts.

I don't have time to thoroughly catch up, but I'd like to offer a few things.

1) I spent a little time in philosophy and agree that a lot of it is pretty useless. (the comedienne Joan Rivers said once, "I majored in philosophy, so I can go to the butcher and prove to him that the meat doesn't exist.)

Still, some useful things came out of it, and one of them would be that Muslims would necessarily have to define what they meant by "God", and Christians would have to define what they mean by "God" before any conversation could possibly take place.

I could dig out one of my theology textbooks and the word "God" would sound very different than most would imagine.

2) Both Christianity and Islam have a problem with who is the bona fide agent that can speak for the religion as a whole.

Dietrich Bonhoffer, the famous Protestant theologian who went to his death for conspiring against the Nazis, was a Protestant who was well thought of by Catholics.

Because he also raised the issue of "who speaks for Christianity." Obviously, the Pope speaks for a huge segment of Christianity, but the Pope does not speak for Protestantism.

Still, Catholics and Protestants on the theological level are not conspicuously different. (Remember, Martin Luther was himself a priest.) And so it would be possible to get a dozen or so people together who more or less speak for Christianity. The Pope, head of the Southern Baptist Convention, Archbishop of Canterbury, the patriarch of the Easter Orthodox communions, the head of the Presbyterians, Methodists, one or more spokesmen for evangelical Christians...

But who can speak for Islam? Every imam with a loud mouth can bloviate, and as a consequence, you can't really round up a small aggregate of people who can speak for the religion. Furthermore, all the imams could say something, and radical Islam may pay less attention to them than they do to the Pope.

3) Who speaks for ET? A lot of people in the West have no religious affiliation. Islam is not at war with Christianity. Islam is at war with a bunch of nations that are largely derivative of Judeo-Christian-Greco philosophical traditions.

So every Christian leader can say, "Sure, we'll talk with you." And Western governments might very well keep shooting at them, because Islam is at war with governments, not religious leaders.

This demonstrates how completely naive Islam is in respect to understanding the western world.

4) Islam is probably too psychologically immature to deal with the psychological maturity that Judeo-Christian-Greco thought has achieved. Islam has projected "the evil other" onto Western society and does not realize that psychologically they are seeing a quality that they possess and suppress in someone else. Kind of like someone with a phobia of spiders sees a terrifying spectre in a harmless creature.

All of their suppressed values regarding sin and eros are things that they see in us because they are completely unconscious on the level of their egos with their own capacity and desire for what they see in us.

They would have to somehow achieve some great feat of maturity and psychological awareness before the dialogue between us could start to make sense to them.

vester@713...that's very noble of you wanting to save 'millions'...but there is no proof that embryonic cells are necessary for the 'miracles' you would promote.Funny how people who don't want to believe in God would try to do god-like acts. There are stem cells available from other sources.

And ET is right about George Bush investing in stem cell research...so wow you agree with Bush . Does that make you feel better now?

Like some others here, I am curious as to which Christian denomination vester belongs to.

The level of venom and invictive is totally shocking ... and I'm a hard person to shock.

In God I trust ... the hateful vester I don't.

valster - try to be consistent. Your original complaint was that Bush wasn't funding stem cell research. You yourself stated that it could "be the breakthrough in saving millions of lives". Then, when I showed you that Bush WAS funding stem cell research, you are now arguing for a particular type that requires embryonic death, with the utterly stupid argument that an embryo is 'tiny'. The fact is, valster, that an embryo, unlike your false analogy of the fly, doesn't remain that way but right from the start, is programmed to develop. You don't seem to know that. I suggest a few beginner books on biology.

ET, to add to your points here……….

Valster The Idiot, almost without exception all strides and advancements in stem cell research has come from ADULT stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells have had negative effects and all funding has been steered towards ADULT stem cell research because that’s where the positive results are. You know why the liberal puppet masters peddle this trash? To financially strenghten the abortion Billion do

Secondly ignoramus, Bush did not ban funding for embryonic stem cell research, he banned TAX PAYER dollars from being used. If you and your welfare lefties want to fund this research you are free to do so. With that said, there has been money [tax payer $$] put towards embryonic research by the federal govt.

***To financially [strengthen] the abortion Billion do[llar industry].

Your view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. It cannot be a fact. I have a different opinion; equally, it cannot be a fact. Neither you nor I can, factually, make the claim that immigration of Muslims will harm/not harm us. You have not provided us with any facts that Muslim immigration to Canada is 'without benefit' and is 'suicidal' (to the host culture). These are your opinions; not facts.

ET, you merely have to look to the test case in France; the north African muslims are not assimilating, they’re rioting and demanding handouts. Hyper-multiculturalism has been an unmitigated disaster.

This demonstrates how completely naive Islam is in respect to understanding the western world………Greg

I would say it is naïve to say Islam is particularly interested in understanding the various denominations of Christianity. Walk into Saudi Arabia with a Bible and they’ll tell you what they think, of course if you’re a Jew you’re not allowed to enter.

Islam is not at war with Christianity…….Greg

Do you think the jihadists would be at war with the West if we were Islamic? Islam is trying to impose itself on the West and their cohorts in seditious anti-Christian organizations like the ACLU will see to it that they get their way.

Well said, Greg in Dallas.

The Muslims are connected through Arab cultural imperialism. The (now so-called) Arabs connect themselves through Mohammad. Mohammad connected himself through Ishmael.

Ishamel was a bastard. And born of an Egyptian. Not an Arab.

Muslims, in attempting to legitimize themselves through Islam are necessarily paranoid.

Therefore, supremacy is the result, rather than reconciliation.

---------------------

"irwin daisy- I maintain that your claim that Muslims reject change is wrong."

Some do embrace change. Although, they're usually called apostates.

"The journal I pointed out, has Islamic scholars openly claiming that the Koran requires interpretation and this act of interpretation opens the text up to change."

I admit. I have not read this journal. The problem that I have is that it seems every imam is called a scholar. I don't think they have the same definition of the word as we do. Especially given some of the stuff in their religious writing.

"You reject this - and you aren't a Muslim scholar."

Don't think you can be, unless you're a Muslim imam, in their opinion.

"Your opinions are not facts but opinions."

You're becoming boring. Prove me wrong, as I've challenged you ad infinitum.

"I don't think that you give any credence to those Muslims who are attempting to reform and change Islam - because, you, who are not a Muslim, declare that it is 'unreformable'. That has to be an opinion; not a fact."

Do I really need to state the facts again?

Your view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. It cannot be a fact.

This is true. It is my opinion, based on what I gleen from history.

Although, I might be wrong the double bastard bit:

'Now Sarai, Abram's wife, bore him no children. She had an Egyptian slave girl whose name was Hagar, and Sarai said to Abram, "You see that the Lord has prevented me from bearing children; go in to my slave girl; it may be that I shall obtain children by her." And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her slave girl, and gave her to her husband Abram as a wife. He went in to Hagar, and she conceived. . . .

And the angel of the Lord said to Hagar, "Now you have conceived and will bear a son; you shall call him Ishmael, for the Lord has given heed to your affliction. He will be a wild donkey of a man, with his hand against everyone, and everyone's hand against him; and he will live at odds with all his kin."

apollyon. I don't know what hyper-multiculturalism means.

I was referring to Canada and immigration to Canada.

As far as France and its Muslim immigrants, the problems there are far more complex than simply assuming that the religion is causal. Causality has to include the fact that the French society has isolated these immigrants economically and socially, rather than insisted on integration. As impoverished dead end enclaves - they've turned to a fascist Islam.

Irwin daisy- my view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. Just like yours is an opinion and not a fact. I cannot prove your opinion wrong or right - because it has not moved into facticity. That is, your claim that immigration is without benefit to the host culture and is suicidal - is an opinion. With regard to Canada - is your claim factually valid?

I suggest that you might want to consider that not all Arab scholars are imams - and that some of them are trying very hard to enable Islam to reform. Again - I suggest that you take a look at that journal. I think you are from Toronto; you can find it in the Reference Room of the Robarts Library; 4th floor; and you don't need a library card to access that Journals Room.

greg in dallas - very nice post. I've done a reasonable amount of philosophy; I'm a fan of Aristotle and Charles Peirce and find their work extremely useful in thinking about modern day realities.

I agree that Islam is psychologically immature but I'd rather say it is economically immature. Remember, Islam is heavily a sociopolitical and economic mode, defined as a religion. I won't go into my outline of its origins within a pastoral nomadic reaction to the expansion of agricultural Christianity (within the Roman empire) of the 5th, 6th, 7th c into the Arabian Peninsula.

Nor, the current Islamic fascism, which is a result of the political tribalism of the ME states.

And I agree - Islam is not at war with Christianity; that War of Cultures/Religions is a diversion; the real problem is within the ME states.

; Islamic fascism is an externalization of its internal problem - which is the dysfunctional tribalism that has frozen the Arab states into a medieval mode of governance. The ME states, as industrial, require a middle class, and tribalism rejects a middle class. The war against the West is an externalization of this internal war - and the US was absolutely right to move it back into the ME. That's where Islamism and tribalism have to be confronted and dealt with.

irwin daisy, I once had a long debate with ET about the importance of Christianity to the development of the West. No amount of facts on my part made a dint: ET would NOT admit that Christianity and its legacy should have any pride of place in the West. 'Very frustrating because this person is obviously very intelligent.

We also disagree on the "fact" that Islam "must" reform. I believe ET's argument fits one of the logical fallacies: circular argument, maybe. Her thesis is that Islam MUST reform in order to sustain an industrial infrastructure. But what if sustaining the ways of the West is not their goal?

My argument is that the infrastructure may well be destroyed: people who don't have it and are willing to destroy those who do--e.g., Islamic extremists with nuclear capacity against us--may well obliterate the West as we know it. It's happened before in the history of the world. ET seems to be wilfully blind to the possibility that the fall of a sophisticated, decadent civilization could happen again. Although she insists that such a possibility is impossible, I've not yet heard a convincing argument to disabuse me of my opinion that it isn't.

(That said, I appreciate most of ET's posts and find her knowledge and expertise on many topics very welcome, very informative, and very helpful.)

Some topics just keep hanging around like a bad smell. How soon a posting about some Muslim leaders expressing their concerns about a war they think they are losing and are thus trying to buy time to regroup ends up as some kind of moral equivalency debate or theist – atheist argument.

As a Christian I hold the Bible in highest esteem because of the Voice that speaks through it. From the beginning of Genesis to the Book of Revelation there is a common voice that speaks in words of the Spirit and not of the flesh. Parenthetically the same can not be said of the deuterocanonical books that are included in many Bibles. I am not a linguist and don’t pretend that I can read the Bible in its original languages but the translation(s) I read along with the Spirit that speaks through them is sufficient develop a deep abiding faith in a Loving, Faithful God who seeks and saves the lost.

However when I read the Qur’an, and again I state that I am not a linguist, I don’t hear that same voice. I read page after page of calls to violence intermixed with flowing poetry, twisted history and a theology that would suffice if the god being described was a rock in the middle of the Arabian Desert. From the Qur’an I can understand the reason for the shallow recited prayer. Lacking the Spirit there is no opportunity to interact with the Divine so the only possible prayer is mindless repetition or performing acts of self immolation.

I speak of the Spirit here and before any of the atheists get their dander up please realize there are things beyond your comprehension of which you have no idea. Talking to an atheist about God is kind of like discussing the colour of the sky with a man born blind. I can wax eloquent about the subtle hues as they blend and change as the sun sinks below the horizon but the blind man will never understand because he has no experience with sight or colour.

Unfortunately all too many atheists insist that their self imposed blindness is universal and never reach their full potential. The average atheist reminds of a young child standing in the middle of the street with eyes closed, ears plugged and yelling I can’t hear you at the top of his lungs as cars whiz by and I am urging them to move to the sidewalk.
I would also bet that Anthony Leeuwenhoek felt the same when he first discovered small creatures living in water. I have no doubt that some philosopher somewhere went to great lengths to explain the impossibility of there being creatures so small that they are invisible to the naked eye. Poor Tony if only he could get that smart person to look through the lens he too could see. If only the wise would do the experiment they too could see. Some tidbits of wisdom are found in the most foolish places and I am reminded of a line in a song “There is none so blind as he who will not see”.

ET,

I've suggested to you in the past that because of your clinical and strictly scientific view of reality, you don't consider the whole.

Human life cannot be observed in a petrie dish.

Regardless of whether you recognize faith and belief to be true or even important or not, beliefs are experienced and exist in the individual and the shared agreement of most people on this planet.

"Irwin daisy- my view about immigration is an opinion, not a fact. Just like yours is an opinion and not a fact. I cannot prove your opinion wrong or right - because it has not moved into facticity. That is, your claim that immigration is without benefit to the host culture and is suicidal - is an opinion. With regard to Canada - is your claim factually valid?"

I've already agreed with you on this point. But you have not admitted the fact that violence is foundational to Islam and that it cannot be reformed without removing the perpetual call to violence. Otherwise, the violent, inherent nature of Islam is chronic. ie: the homegrown Toronto 19.

Albeit, I have ventured that if the violent foundation of Islam was gutted, the Islamic faith would become redundant - that violence, not the misappropriated 'Oneness of God' defines Islam.

lookout:

Nobody can deny that western civilization was built on Judeo-Christian values.

The key word here being values.

One of the key values is knowing the difference between right and wrong, something we call morality.

It is possible to have a sense of morality without being devoutly religious, as long as a person understands the traditional values our society is based on.

One of the hallmarks of the secular progressives is their denial that right and wrong even exist.

At the same time, it is possible to be secular and believe in traditional values. Difficult, yet possible.

Wow, 100+ comments on a not very controversial post.

Ask yourselves, all you atheists: when was the last time a Muslim book store owner got himself killed/jailed/disappeared in a Western country for selling Muslim books? Or a Buddhist, Jew, Zoroastrian, Animist, Scientologist, Reformed Church of Elvis...

Now ask yourselves, when was the last time a Christian got killed/jailed/disappeared in an officially ATHEIST country for selling Christian books? Probably today, someplace like China! Or Burma, Cuba, Angola...

Are we seeing a pattern here?

Given this obvious pattern, I propose the following. This is (supposed to be) a free country. That means I am free to go to whatever church/synagogue/temple/etc. I want, when I want, if I want.Other people are certainly free to complain about my choices, but that's it.

Anybody wants to change any of the above substantially can K my A, because I'm not going to put up with it. My relatives didn't fight two world wars to see me take that crap lying down.

Reasonable?

And could we stop feeding the friggin' idiot trolls? They're boring.

ET
As rude as it seems , you know nothing of Islam. NOTHING. You argue with a western mindset about an ideology you know nothing about. "pastoral nomadic reaction to the expansion of agricultural Christianity (within the Roman empire) of the 5th, 6th, 7thc into the Arabian Peninsula"....????WTF??? What planets history are you talking about? Got any books , references or links to this brutal usurpation of gentle muslim nomads magic kingdoms by continent stealing Christian /Haliburton agro-giants?

Excuse me, I just could not let that slip unchallenged. You sound like you know something about something and maybe you do on some things but on Islam you know NOTHING.

Reform Islam? Islam is the pure voice of GOD to muslims! You suggest that gods words can be rearranged? Do that in some mosque in the ME and you will be torn to shreds, perhaps literally.

Perhaps you mean well by carrying water for Islam ET. You should study the cause you defend before you stumble so completely. There are Islamic sites that serve every purpose under heaven. Visit ummah.com and join so you can enter the complete forum and get to know Islam from its practitioners. Please. Again, sorry for losing my cool in the face of ignorance. (persistent/consistent)

Joe, I always enjoy your postings.

lookout,

I agree. The fallacy and deception of Islam, regardless of numbers of adherents, has been and will continue to be a problem unless the people are unchained. The ideological violence is defining, generational and foundational - it is chronic.

As far as ET is concerned, she cannot offer a solution, only commentary, when she refuses to acknowledge that a higher power is real in the hearts and souls of the majority on this planet. The question remains , who is God? For me, God is defined through Christ. Hence "(I am) the way..." Yes, it is grace. But God is also made clear through Christ's life example.

As Allah is made clear through Mo's life example.

Amen. And thanks, irwin daisy and joe. I always appreciate your posts.

While I don't always agree with her, I admire ETs use of reason when stating her position. Frankly, she has shredded the argument of every Christian fundamentalist who has responded. I am beginning to seriously doubt that the so-called Christians who regularly post here have the slightest interest in Islamic reform, reconciliation or even peace. For them, this is a war of religions and there can only be one winner.

lookout- No, the ME states have no choice but to move into industrialism. The reason is - their exponential population increase since the World Wars. You cannot sustain a population of that size without industrialism. And industrialism requires a middle class. Tribalism, which is a political mode found in agricultural economies, does not require a middle class.

And that is the problem in the ME states; their refusal to change their political mode to empower their population and permit them to form a middle class.

Irwin daisy - my point is that the 'call to violence' is an interpretation. And this interpretation can be re-interpreated.If you would read some of the journals I suggest, you'd find that the authors are proposing just that. So, your opinion that the violence is 'basic' to Islam is, in my view, a conclusion that is invalid. The interpretation of the texts can be changed - and that is what moderate Muslims are working on.

Blackbird - actually, I know a quite a bit about Islam. Including its text (Koran), its historical devt, the ecological nature of the envt in which it developed; the economic nature of the envt in which it devt; its later history - and the development of Islamic fascism.

And I am not defending Islam; I am analyzing it. I prefer to analyze it rather than simply condemn it. As Aristotle said - "All men by nature desire to know" (first line of his Metaphysics). I desire to know what and why - is Islam.

And I know a great deal about the devt and nature of societal organization - and that includes the nature of and the differences between pastoral nomadic and agricultural settled economies. You don't; these are not 'extra planetary terms' but basic ecological and anthropological terms.

Who said anything about 'gentle muslims..magic kingdoms'? Just because you don't understand these terms or know anything about the history of the area doesn't mean that you can get away with silly mockery.

I base my analysis on a knowledge of several areas. First, the ecological nature of the area; this enables you to understand what type of economy could develop there. Then, you have to know demographics and population bases and changes. And - the history of the area, including the Roman input that enabled markets - irrigation, roads, safety of commerce and marketing, increase of population, requirement for larger harvests, for settlements, expansion of settlements etc. ...and expansion into the Arabian Peninsula..

The rise of Christianity - an agricultural religion based around collaboration with neighbours [read the texts]. See also what was happening with Rome and the switch to Christianity.

The resultant emergence of Islam as a warrior agenda to maintain control over pastoral nomadic migratory lands. [read the texts; the society outlined in the Koran is very obviously pastoral nomadic.]

As for the modern era and the rise of Islamic fascism - again, you have to know the operational infrastructure of a tribal society, how it operates politically and legally; the size of population it can sustain - and the same with an industrial economy. Same thing - what type of political system does an industrial economy require? What type of family structure?

So- the fact that you don't know these things is 'just the way it is', and sorry, one book or article won't deal with all these issues - You need books and articles on: social organization of different economic modes (I used to take my students through ten basic modes); human geography; cultural ecology; population dynamics; the history of the area - from the time of Rome on; the texts of both religions; and..there are excellent books on the rise of Al Qaeda and Islamic fascism; ...as well as basic books on fascism.

As for those on this blog who are believers in a Metaphysical Agent - that's you. I am not going to denigrate or insult your belief, and I'd appreciate it if you would do me the same courtesy. I'm an atheist; there is no need to insult my belief.

Belisarius,

"Frankly, she has shredded the argument of every Christian fundamentalist who has responded."

Funny, if you follow her responses, she lost horribly again. Deflecting her defeat to immigration.

Is "fundamentalist" meant as a perjorative? Also, care to prove it?

As for the rest of your statement would you like to give evidence about "Christians who regularly post here have the slightest interest in Islamic reform, reconciliation or even peace." Or, do you mean appeasement?

I suppose that had it been the atheist 'Crusaders' versus the Muslims, it would have been different? What, you would have out manouvered them by force of intellect? Silly me, were they actually Christians? Or, Nazi Christians?

Your brain requires too many questions. I'm tired and going to bed.

There was hope.

Ladies and gentlemen, Elvis has left the building.

Et,

"Irwin daisy - my point is that the 'call to violence' is an interpretation. And this interpretation can be re-interpreated.If you would read some of the journals I suggest, you'd find that the authors are proposing just that. So, your opinion that the violence is 'basic' to Islam is, in my view, a conclusion that is invalid. The interpretation of the texts can be changed - and that is what moderate Muslims are working on."

Agreed, through editing out, or revising the tense clearly to a time and place. Mohammad's life example, on the other hand, as the "perfect man" to emulate, must be abolished.

Under the circumstances, 'Invalid' is a ridiculous statement to make. You sound foolish.

Since apparently Islam - the religion of 1.5 billion people on this planet - is fair game for mockery and slander by those posting here, I thought I'd post a different perspective:

Top 10 Signs You're A Christian Fundamentalist

10 - You vigorously deny the existence of thousands of gods claimed by other religions, but feel outraged when someone denies the existence of yours.

9 - You feel insulted and "dehumanized" when scientists say that people evolved from other life forms, but you have no problem with the Biblical claim that we were created from dirt.

8 - You laugh at polytheists, but you have no problem believing in a Triune God.

7 - Your face turns purple when you hear of the "atrocities" attributed to Allah, but you don't even flinch when hearing about how God/Jehovah slaughtered all the babies of Egypt in "Exodus" and ordered the elimination of entire ethnic groups in "Joshua" including women, children, and trees!

6 - You laugh at Hindu beliefs that deify humans, and Greek claims about gods sleeping with women, but you have no problem believing that the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary, who then gave birth to a man-god who got killed, came back to life and then ascended into the sky.

5 - You are willing to spend your life looking for little loopholes in the scientifically established age of Earth (few billion years), but you find nothing wrong with believing dates recorded by Bronze Age tribesmen sitting in their tents and guessing that Earth is a few generations old.

4 - You believe that the entire population of this planet with the exception of those who share your beliefs -- though excluding those in all rival sects - will spend Eternity in an infinite Hell of Suffering. And yet consider your religion the most "tolerant" and "loving."

3 - While modern science, history, geology, biology, and physics have failed to convince you otherwise, some idiot rolling around on the floor speaking in "tongues" may be all the evidence you need to "prove" Christianity.

2 - You define 0.01% as a "high success rate" when it comes to answered prayers. You consider that to be evidence that prayer works. And you think that the remaining 99.99% FAILURE was simply the will of God.

1 - You actually know a lot less than many atheists and agnostics do about the Bible, Christianity, and church history - but still call yourself a Christian.

Belisarius - your one through ten just confirm how ignorant a person can be of the contents within the Bible. As a Christian, I have never felt outraged that anyone denies the existence of God; you must have us mixed up with Muslims. I can only feel sad for you.

I desire to know what and why - is Islam. ET

I am reminded of a woman (I’ll call her Mary) I met while teaching an adult Sunday school class. She was a very intelligent woman well travelled, well read, conversant in several languages and a tenured professor at the local university.

Unannounced she showed up in the class explaining her presence in the class was the result of her desire to get to know Christianity. She explained that although she was an atheist, religion interested her and she had begun by travelling to various places around the world to fully understand the religion that she was exploring at that time. Her explorations were not just superficial examinations. She spent several years examining each faith. She had been to Israel to study Judaism, Tibet to study Buddhism and wanted to go to Saudi Arabia to study Islam.

In the mean time she wandered into my class. I don’t know why, I am not a recognized expert on anything but never the less she was in my class asking intelligent yet foolish questions. As weeks turned into months I did my best to answer her questions without losing my temper and believe me that was a challenge. One night after my time of prayer and meditation I was led to begin write a letter to Mary.

I can’t remember what I wrote that night because I didn’t keep a copy of it but the next Sunday I gave the letter to her. Before the class started we had a cup of coffee and a cookie and during this time Mary proudly showed the unopened letter to all her classmates. I began the class and while everyone else was discussing the love of Paul expressed in his letter to the Colossians Mary began reading her letter. Suddenly our scriptural reflection was shattered when Mary leapt to her feet screaming like she had been branded with a hot iron and began ripping the letter to shreds as raced out of the room never to return.

I often wonder what ever happened to Mary. The only thing I do know is that she had encountered the Living God whose Spirit spoke to her through the letter I had written. All the Buddhist prayer wheels of Tibet had little more than a romantic appeal to her. Likewise the devout Jews at the Wailing Wall had failed to connect with her and her academic study of religion.

However God chose to speak to her through some western Canadian doofus who, struggling to keep up with her mental acuity and in an attempt to answer some questions she had asked the previous week had resorted to writing her a letter.

I can only hope that ET (and the other atheists) dares to examine the depth of Christianity and although I wouldn’t want her to experience the discomfort Mary experienced I do hope and pray that one day she will realize the foolishness of the philosophers she loves to quote, the emptiness of her socioeconomic analysis she keeps expounding and realizes the inherit danger of a religion that incubates fanatics steeping in the teachings of its holy book, a holy book that calls for death to the unbelievers and justifies war to spread the religion, and come to a knowledge of Whom it is written “The fear of Yahweh is the beginning of Wisdom.”

Well said Belisarius!! I think we have room for one more effectively making it the Top 11 Signs You're A Christian Fundamentalist:

and the number 11 sign is:

"You spend most of your time on small dead animals posting ignorant hateful and mindless rants about muslims and Islam"

I suspect the sad man with the flowery name will be circling the wagons shortly with his band of blow holes after your last comment. I suspect, based on your last comment, and the frequency of their posts, you have given them a few more days of self importance; not to forget, provide them with something to do with their time which appears consummed by this site.

As I have said before, free speech makes for a great demoracy, but most times, at least on this site, it makes for lousy reading. It also make for disturbing reading and brings out all manner of wackjob. Thanks for bringing some balance and knowledge to this subject Belisarius! It is and has been entertaining and refreshing, albeit, I fear your efforts may not be fully comprehended by this lot. You are, attempting to reach, for the most part, an angry, small minded, racially motivated group of simpletons. Hate propaganda is a crime I sense a thin line is being walked on this site. I won't be back.

Belisarius

I’m a Christian fundamentalist and not ashamed to say so. However your clever(?) 10 points just don’t seem to fit in my case.
10 - There are millions of gods in this world. Each religion has their own god including atheists. Most people have many gods they just don’t know what a god really is. A god is that thing that determines what course of action a person will take at any given time. We appease the money god by going to work. Etc etc etc.

If someone doesn’t recognize Yahweh I don’t get upset or outraged. I can’t blame a blind person for tripping over an obstacle because they didn’t see it. It was my fault that I didn’t warn them about it.

9 - I don’t feel insulted or dehumanized when science points to evolution instead of the Biblical teaching of us being made from dirt. Actually evolutionary science says that our grandfather was a rock so I don’t see much difference.

8 - Did you graduate from kindergarten Sunday School or were kept back a few years and decided to drop out before they got around to discussing the Christian teaching on the Trinity. I can save you some time though I wrote an explanation of the Three in One on this website October 8 2007. Look it up if you want to.

7 - My face doesn’t turn purple over the atrocities committed by Muslims nor do I try to explain the thoughts of Yahweh when the firstborn of Egypt were killed. I do take some consolation in the fact that in the end we all die by God’s design so we can go on to something better. What I find most galling about the Muslim violence is the victims are predominately Muslim.

6 - I don’t laugh at Hindu belief in human deification. I believe that the purpose of Christianity is the deification of humans. Sons of God mean anything to you?

5 - Sorry I don’t look for loopholes in science and the dating of the earth. Science dating proves nothing more than the Bible states. “A thousand years is but a day” ring a bell?

4 - I don’t think everyone who does not believe exactly as I do is bound for hell. In fact Jesus said I have sheep of other pastures. Which to my tiny little human brain means that not everyone has to believe what I believe. The Bible also says I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. Its not up to me to judge.

3 - I used to speak in tongues but grew out of it. “When I became a man I put childish ways behind me” Actually I believe in God because of the Grace He has given me. If He should withhold that Grace I will stop believing in Him. As for all your gods , history, geology, biology, and physics none of them disprove the existence of Yahweh and I know and fellowship with a good number of historians, geologists biologists and physicist who all have the same Grace. They too believe in God. BTW does Albert Einstein ring a bell with you?

2 - As for answers to prayer I could begin to list them but you wouldn’t accept them anyway. BTW when is the last time you prayed?

1 - You actually think that knowing the Bible and Church history is important to being a Christian? You did drop out of kindergarten Sunday School didn’t you. How much education did Jesus have? How about the apostles? How much Bible do I need to know to know Yahweh? How much church history do I need to be led of the Spirit? Jesus said, “You study the scriptures thinking that by them you have life. They all testify about Me but you refuse to come to Me to have life.”

Now if you want to know what I know quiet your spirit, admit your fallibility and ask Yahweh to forgive you. You might be surprised at what you find. God Bless

Joe, that was a very thoughtful and well-thought out posting. I took the time to read all of it, and understand completely what you're saying. The "10 signs you're a Christian fundamentalist" I posted earlier were what I considered to be the equivalent of the anti-Muslim slander I read here so often. I know a number of Conservatives who used to read and comment regularly on Kate's blog, but got so sick of the nutjob fundamentalist Christian commentary that they have stopped doing so. Frankly, you and your friends need to tone down the rhetoric. I really try hard to respect your beliefs, but wish you would extend the same courtesy to others. Your last thoughtful post is a step in the right direction.

This thread started with discussion of a letter from Muslim theologians proposing dialogue with Christians, and even you referred to it as expressing their concerns about a war they think they are losing and are thus trying to buy time to regroup. Not a very Christian sentiment. I say lets give them the benefit of the doubt and have a conversation. We're not fighting a war with mainstream Islam, we're fighting it with Jihadists. Otherwise, what would all of those Iraqi and Afghan battalions be doing fighting and dying beside our soldiers?

Aleikum assalaam.

It's ALL crazy.............goofs!

I know I couldn't convince you otherwise, but please use your own mind and your own inherent intuitions (basic instincts) and realize what damage you do.

Your educated and intelligent why be insane!!!!!!!!!
His God….. My God….. the holy book say’s ---- I love you but I’ll kill you if you don’t believe in my unproven God. PATHETIC weakness of the human race. Yes you deserve to not exist (or possibly inherit it all) but please for the love of humanity and the greater good of what IS - leave the rest of us alone.

All right kids, settle down.

You're all wrong.

Never cared for these middle eastern blood religions myself. It's nothing but fight fight fight with you guys. Give it a rest.

Why don't you just let me sort the wheat from the chaff, OK? I'll smack some heads together.

Now go eat something. Get some sleep. You look terrible.

belisarius - thanks for all your excellent posts. I don't think that one can change the mind of some of these people - and that really isn't the agenda.

My only agenda is to introduce some facts to the rhetoric, to offset the fundamentalist (ie,non-factual and unprovable) beliefs of the few who post here - that Islam is an evil religion; that all Muslims are fanatics whose prime agenda is to kill others, that the only way to deal with Muslims is to prevent migration and seal them into the ME.

The issues about belief in god, results postulated of one's eternal damnation if you don't believe in god, evolution etc, are peripheral to this debate.

These people aren't interested in the historic facts of the emergence of any religion, the ontological nature of the religion, the historic causes of current Islamic fascism, and, the both possibility and probability of reform of the religion by Islamic scholars. And, the reform of their sociopolitical system that causes Islamic fascism.

Despite Perun's pre-emptive, very narrow minded, quite empty of specifics ad hominems, I have opinions I'd like to express. (Goody Two Shoes, who only like "nice" thoughts, might consider skipping the following.)

ET hasn't convinced me by her, IMO, wrong starting point. Sheer numbers of inhabitants do not necessarily change the economy from tribal to industrial. E.g., Just a few points: 1) Israel, a country also inhabited by a tribal people, in the same area of the world as millions of Muslims, but with a much lower population, has turned the desert into a thriving economy. Why the difference? IMO, it’s the result of a belief in a radically different God, one of justice and mercy, and so, a radically different belief system, one which is not based on fatwas, and one which rewards initiatve. 2) It's not too likely that investors are going to be flocking to build infrastructure in the Muslim part of the world, when the chances of their investments and workers being blown to smithereens is likely. Without massive investment in that part of the world, industrialization won’t happen. 3) Let's also consider Africa: its inhabitants have been living lives of tribal misery for centuries—not much improved by colonialism, which left some infrastructure for progress, now largely destroyed. Just because there are large numbers of people in a given area is no proof that industrialization WILL occur. 4) North America: with a small population compared to land mass, it rapidly moved from an agricultural to an industrial economy. How come?

Let’s look at first things: The crucial difference in all of these examples appears to me to be attributable to the underlying belief system and practices of the inhabitants. Those countries, based on the Judeo-Christian dispensation, respected cooperation, in accordance with their religious ideals of justice and mercy (exceptions included), as well as freedom to choose belief or not. Such DEMOCRATIC countries have tended to thrive and provide important freedoms to their inhabitants (such as Perun). (Unfortunately, these freedoms are now sometimes being exploited by immigrants with axes to grind.) Those countries with Muslim and animist deities, who control by fear, coercion, and violence have tended to be chaotic, miserable backwaters, ruled by despots. (Notice that $BILLIONS of Western aid has made little difference. Most of it ends up in some despot’s pocket.) And, as if things weren’t bad enough for their own people in Muslim and animist countries, the Muslim jihadists have now decided to export their violence and misery to the citizens of the democratic countries of the world.

So, a healthy scepticism re happy outcomes from initiatives by a group of moderate Muslims does not seem misplaced. E.g., Although these men—I’m betting they’re all men—may be sincere about moderating Islam, by what authority are they doing so?
There is no Muslim Magisterium: each imam is his own authority. So, even if the reformers arrive at a fine document, reinterpreting the excesses of the Qur’an, this document will have no authority or compulsion over those who wish to ignore it and continue to use intimidation and violence to carry out their agenda—to establish a modern day caliphate.

Yes, dialogue is a good thing. Trying to understand the motives and means of those who are a part of the community that wishes our destruction, may give us much needed insights. But a solution to this problem? I don’t think so. Think Neville Chamberlain