Tuesday, February 28

Persevering with the facts

From EO:

Boonton,

There's no jest at all. If millions of Muslims believe that terrorism against non-Muslims (and I presume those they consider hetrodox Muslims too) is good and is also ordered by God, then given how easy it is to pull off terrorism (see my story about propane tanks earlier) then there is a huge shortage of terrorism....

Allah orders the killing, not YHWH.

Chris addressed your "arguments" above very well. I will add a few of my thoughts.

I'm not sure what western military power has been intimidated by the protests over the cartoons Did Denmark have thousands of troops in Iran that were driven out by cartoon protestors that I didn't hear about?

More obfuscation.

Western "leaders" denounced the cartoons. Western editors have been fired and major media have refused to print or air the cartoons (out of "respect" for Islam).

A lot of it came from the simple fact that many of those countries have no freedom of speech. Pakistan, for example, does not generally permit protests against the gov't so the protests against the cartoon became anti-government protests & soon the cartoons were being used as a pretext for protesting the gov't.

Yes, all those oppressed European Muslims calling for death and terrorism over cartoons.

According to you Jihad (meaning violence) against non-believers is an obvious requirement of Islamic texts yet you'll also excuse the lack of violence as due to ignorance. Yet if it's so obvious how could serious Muslims be ignorant of it?

Corrections to your comment above:

1. According to Allah and his (false) prophet.
2. Due to a number of factors, not just ignorance of the Qur'an and Hadith.
3. Obvious when examining the texts, which is what I wrote.

Is your persistent misrepresentation of my comments intentional or unavoidable?

Ignorance of the Koran is a bit like attributing ignorance of Moses to Jews or ignorance of Christ to Christians.

No, it is comparable to Christian ignorance of the Bible, a comparison I've made before.

While Bin Laden has called for everyone to convert to Islam, I don't think he thought that would be the result of 9/11.

He "misunderestimated" our president and our people. I don't think he counted on America defending itself as vigorously as it has so far.

Rather I think he and many like him are waging a puritanical war within Islam that is just as likely to target other Muslims as Western targets.

That is true.

I didn't say Islam is peaceful, harmless etc. All religions are dangerous to one degree or another and only acceptance of the basic tenants of liberalism (not Liberalism as Sean Hannity would define it...but liberalism being acceptance of individual freedom, free speech, free religion etc.

Tu quoque. Christianity and Judaism are not inherently violent, since the Bible does not contain universal commands to fight against, subdue and humiliate, and kill "unbelievers." Islam does.

In fact it does mean whatever they want it to mean. When we discussed Sura 9, for example, I delved into the varous commentaries and at least one of the more prominant ones viewed it as orders in the context of an upcoming historical battle.

You "delved into" commentaries in forty-five minutes? That's impressive!

Maududi's commentary does note there was a historical battle upcoming. It was upcoming because Allah was declaring war against the non-Muslim world.

From what I've read about jihad it generally means 'struggle'. It can and sometimes does mean a military struggle but more often means a spirtual struggle. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad does a good job contrasting the term with crusade which is often used by Christians in a nonviolent peaceful context but often read only as a struggle by the sword by Muslim commentators.

Jihad has historically meant war. Ask Mohammed (see the texts I provided for you in my post above). It is commanded by Allah and his apostle throughout Qur'an and Hadith.

"Crusade" is not found in the Bible. When it was first used for actual warfare, it was in response to centuries of Jihad.

Anyway there seems to be a diverse array of opinions by Muslims as to when (if ever) the type of Jihad we are talking about is required

The only opinion on Islam that matters in the end is Allah's.

If this view was as obvious as you say it is it would be pretty stunning that Muslim scholars could publish in such complete ignorance of it.

Traditional Muslim scholars do not publish in ignorance of Jihad. They just don't advertise to Western infidels receiving "Religion of Peace" propaganda.

Neither is it recognized in Christianity or Judism. Until about one and three quarters thousand years after Christ the idea that Church and state could or should be separate would have struck many as bizaar, probably dangerous and probably downright evil.

That is false. Christ taught of Two Kingdoms, the civil authority on one hand, God's spiritual realm on the other. Christ commands His people to "give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and give to God what is God's." The New Testament also commands Christians to obey the God-ordained authorities (unless they require us to sin).

BTW....anyone else here notice the change in tone when the subject is Islam? It's like all in the sudden they pull out the ACLU membership cards and people like Chris start talking about "separation of Church and state". When the subject isn't Islam you'd just as likely find the phrase "separation of Church and state" joined with the word "myth" or "falsehood" on many political evangelical sites.

Whether or not some Christians are inconsistent (I've only seen Chris be consistent--you're attacking him unfairly, but that's typical of your "argumentation"), the "separation of Church and State" is completely appropriate when discussing both Islam and Christianity. The SoCaS was a phrase used by Jefferson assuring Christians that the Church would be protected from the State. If Islam were to rule, that protection would be gone just when Christians would need it the most.

You're making it rather easy. You're trying to tell me that most Muslims are just waiting for the right time to start blowing us all up.

That is another misrepresentation of Chris's position, but then accuracy (or is it integrity?) is not one of your strengths.