|
Fitna, the controversial dutch movie (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by -=Kotten=-
The old testament is gods covenant with Abraham and the people of Israel. The new testament is gods covenant with believers through christ.
The early Christians decided that while Judaism was the true revelation of God and the foundation of Christianity, Christianity represented a new era of God's dealings with the world so the extensive body of Jewish law was no longer binding. Religious principles and ideas (such as the notion of a sovereign God who is active in human history) are appropriated; religious practices (such as dietary laws and sacrificial routines) are not.
Thus the Old Testament is useful and edifying in that it tells of the true God's actions in Israel, but it does not carry the same level of authority or relevance as the New Testament. |
I'm sorry but you really don't have an argument. The very fact that the Old Testament is part of the Christian Bible PROVES it is relevant to Christian beliefs
You can't give me any reasonable explanation to its inclusion, otherwise you would do
However, I do acknowledge that you are saying Judaism is as "bad" as Islam for its inherent violence and extremism... |
|
|
| Alex |
Well I am studying Theology so while I'm no expert I happen to have quite an interest in both Christian and Muslim Theology.
Saying "there is no God" doesn't help your argument. In fact it makes you sound kind of stupid for making baseless claims without any evidence :p |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
Saying "there is no God" doesn't help your argument. In fact it makes you sound kind of stupid for making baseless claims without any evidence :p |
Ah, a classic case of the pot calling the porcelain kettle black. |
|
|
| Alex |
I've had the argument with Renegade and others in other threads, I've defended my position quite a few times and have offered plenty of evidence. I'm not going to get into it again as this thread isn't about that, but for the sake of keeping this discussion somewhat intelligent I'm going to call anyone out when they make claims without any evidence whatsoever.
My posts in this thread so far have been based on evidence, so give me a break :p |
|
|
| -=Kotten=- |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
There is no God. Therefore, it was ALWAYS the people that decided to kill the people they did.
|
Wow. What a revelation. Now you just have to convince 1,5 billion people that the Koran is not the words of god and then we will all live happily ever after. :tongue3
Heres a study of the estimated death directly caused by the islam idiology:
Africa
Thomas Sowell [Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994, p. 188] estimates that 11 million slaves were shipped across the Atlantic and 14 million were sent to the Islamic nations of North Africa and the Middle East. For every slave captured many others died. Estimates of this collateral damage vary. The renowned missionary David Livingstone estimated that for every slave who reached a plantation, five others were killed in the initial raid or died of illness and privation on the forced march.[Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, p. 62, 1888] Those who were left behind were the very young, the weak, the sick and the old. These soon died since the main providers had been killed or enslaved. So, for 25 million slaves delivered to the market, we have an estimated death of about 120 million people. Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.
120 million Africans
Christians
The number of Christians martyred by Islam is 9 million [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-10] . A rough estimate by Raphael Moore in History of Asia Minor is that another 50 million died in wars by jihad. So counting the million African Christians killed in the 20th century we have:
60 million Christians
Hindus
Koenard Elst in Negationism in India gives an estimate of 80 million Hindus killed in the total jihad against India. [Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi, 2002, pg. 34.] The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad. The mountains near India are called the Hindu Kush, meaning the “funeral pyre of the Hindus.”
80 million Hindus
Buddhists
Buddhists do not keep up with the history of war. Keep in mind that in jihad only Christians and Jews were allowed to survive as dhimmis (servants to Islam); everyone else had to convert or die. Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million. [David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2200, William Carey Library, 2001, p. 230, table 4-1.]
10 million Buddhists
Jews
Oddly enough there were not enough Jews killed in jihad to significantly affect the totals of the Great Annihilation. The jihad in Arabia was 100 percent effective, but the numbers were in the thousands, not millions. After that, the Jews submitted and became the dhimmis (servants and second class citizens) of Islam and did not have geographic political power.
This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alex
Well I am studying Theology so while I'm no expert I happen to have quite an interest in both Christian and Muslim Theology. |
Well I assume everyone posting in any thread has an interest in the topic, but that doesn't mean they actually know what they're talking about!
| quote: | | Saying "there is no God" doesn't help your argument. In fact it makes you sound kind of stupid for making baseless claims without any evidence :p |
Actually, saying "there is no God" helps my argument quite a bit!
However, the history of religions, their origins and how and why they originated is something that fascinates me. But I look at it as a historian would, not as a theologian does.
As a Christian, you obviously have a vested interest in defending your faith against the kind of "accusations" I've thrown at it, but I hope that putting you and your faith on the defensive at least helps you think about how normal Muslims would feel about a "documentary" like Fitna... |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | | Originally posted by -=Kotten=- |
You've got to be getting all of this from some e-mail chain letter. |
|
|
| Alex |
I imagine they'd feel the need to refute some of it's claims and what not, and I imagine some of them would want to declare a jihad against the Dutch Parliament.
If such a documentary were to be made against Christianity, just how many death threats would the Dutch MP receive? Then again, sadly, I imagine he might just get a number of letters telling him he's going to hell which while ridiculous and extremist would not result in his bodyguards being extra careful :p |
|
|
| Nostalgic |
U.S. Muslim TV network founder charged with beheading wife
Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:18pm EST Email | Print | Share| Reprints | Single Page[-] Text [+]
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The founder of a U.S. Muslim television network has been arrested and charged with murdering his wife by beheading her, the network's Web site and local media reported.
Muzzammil Hassan, founder and CEO of Buffalo, N.Y.-based Bridges TV which launched in 2004 with a mission to show Muslims in a more positive light, was charged after reporting the death of his wife, Aasiya Hassan, 37, on Thursday night.
After Hassan, 44, told police his wife was at the Bridges TV offices, in the village of Orchard Park, they found her body there, beheaded, The Buffalo News reported.
Authorities said Aasiya Hassan, with whom Hassan had two children, had recently filed for divorce and had an order of protection mandating that he leave their home as of February 6.
He was being held in a county detention center charged with second-degree murder.
"Our deepest condolences and prayers go out to the families of the victim," a statement on the network's Web site said on Monday. "We request that their right to privacy be respected."
"There had been problems before and there had been prior incidents of physical abuse," Corey Hogan, whose law firm Hogan Willig represented Aasiya Hassan in the divorce proceeding, told the newspaper.
(Editing by Alan Elsner)
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE51F4ZX20090216
Muslims stay losing. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by Nostalgic
Muslims stay losing. |
Not by numbers, they don't. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
Some people here have forgot what the issue is really about. Its not about the racism or war on religion. Surely some people like Wilders have gone a bit too far, but some people just forgot that ANY criticism of Islam that is made via the public sources (media, publications) can result in fatwa issued. Surely there's a big difference between talk of womens rights and comparisons to Nazis, but both are still punishable by death equally, it seems.
It is the anniversary of another famous fatwa issued in 1989 to Rushdie ... Time to refresh your memory:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7889889.stm
| quote: |
Anniversary of Rushdie book fatwa
It is 20 years since Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against the author Salman Rushdie after the publication of The Satanic Verses.
The novel's release led to widespread protest by Muslims who regarded it as blasphemous, including public burning of the book.
Rushdie had to live in hiding and under special protection for several years.
And while he is now able to live a more public life, he says the affair remains "an albatross around his neck".
Last year, he told BBC's Newsnight that he was considering writing a book about the experience.
Nine days after The Satanic Verses was published in Britain in September 1988, it was banned in India.
Attacks
Muslims who wanted the book withdrawn in Britain burned a copy at a demonstration in Bradford's main square.
Protests gathered pace in various countries, and on 14 February 1989, the Iranian revolutionary leader issued the fatwa.
There were attacks on people involved in translating or publishing the book.
Although Iran said this week that the fatwa remains valid, the official line laid down in 1998 was that the death sentence should no longer be pursued.
BBC arts correspondent Lawrence Pollard said the controversy over the book could be seen as a defining moment for British society, both for race relations and freedom of speech.
"[It was] the catalyst for the emergence of a stronger sense of Muslim identity in Britain," he said. "Protestors had an issue around which to rally."
"Until that time there had been assumed support for the broad principle of free speech, the Rushdie affair introduced the question of how far free expression should be limited to avoid offending religious feelings in a multicultural society," he added. |
|
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| Perhaps the UN should also come up with an equally enforceable edict stating that religion is in turn not allowed to antagonize anyone whatsoever. |
|
|
|
|
