by ILoveTTATT2 80 Replies latest jw friends
The Fundamental difference between Islam and Christianity
Islam's holy book doesn't command stoning. (Even though it has a lot of other bad things in it.)
Edit: Hmmm... I didn't actually read the first post before typing when I saw the title... apparently I was right.
good post I loveTTATT2 , the western democratic nations are going to rue the day they let in so many muslims.
What I don't understand Smiddy is that we in Britain ( I know you're a Brit)and France have had fairly large Muslim communities for at least 60 years - in some places they are in the majority. We haven't had any *problems, so why all the trouble now?
I have my own theories, but even so.
*Edited to say no problems specific to their being Muslim immigrants . Certainly didn't hear anything about the "S"(sharia) word.
Diogenesister
you will indeed not hear muslims talking about wanting sharia to be implemented
you might look up Taqiya. This is an islamic term that allows muslims to lie when it benefits Islam. They can say they do not want to have sharia but this does not mean that this is what they really think. Their thinking is controlled by Islam.
IMO, two big differences between Islam and Christianity:
1. Christianity has no political or legal system as such. Christ said his kingdom is no part of this world and that his followers must obey the laws of the land. In contrast, Islam has Sharia - a legal system straight from the Dark Ages that has inhuman punishments, e.g. amputation of hands for theft. This law is very popular among Muslims.
2. There are big differences between behaviour and sayings attributed to their respective founders, Muhammad and Jesus.
Jesus said "love your enemies"; Muhammad regularly waged jihad and personally beheaded prisoners.
Jesus said not only should a husband be faithful to his wife - he shouldn't even carry on looking lustfully at other women. Muhammad had multiple wives and concubines; worse still he married and had sex with Aisha, a 9 year old girl. One of the reasons why child brides stubbornly continue to exist in some countries is because the local people are copying Muhammad.
ILoveTTATT2,
I don't know of any Christian religion that wishes to follow the following Bible texts literally:
There is a religious philosophy known as Theonomy (Reconstructionism) that advocates taking over society and imposing pure Old Testament civil law. There's only a few hundred thousand of them along with millions of Theonomists lite but they are well connected politically. Michele Bachmann's university professor John Eidsmoe - which she fondly recalls as her mentor - is a Theonomist.
These people have a multi-generational time schedule for taking over society. They already are well represented in the lower political echelons of Southern and Midwestern states.
An example is Vice-President Mike Pence, not quite a Theonomist but definitely a Christian Nationalist, who believes in the supremacy of his brand of Christianity.
Yesu, you make a fair point.
While Qur'anists continue to identify as Muslim, other Muslims consider them heretics and they are heavily persecuted in Muslim countries (a Quranist blogger got imprisoned in Cairo not so long ago).
I guess I see the Qur'anist vs. Orthodox debate as similar to the Catholic vs. Protestant debate. When Luther challanged the traditions of the Catholic Church I am sure many no longer considered him Christian and if his revolt had failed there would be no such thing as a Christianity divorced from Catholicism. But Luther succeeded. Thousands of common people listened to him and intellectuals like John Calvin used their learning to build upon his dissent. Now we have millions of people who utterly reject the Pope and many of the traditions of the Catholic church; and yet these people consider themselves to be Christians. Is the pope going to tell them they're not?
If Qur'anism is able to take the Muslim world by storm the way Protestantism took the Christian world, I think we could have hundreds of thousands of Qur'anists who yet consider themselves Muslim and are recognized as such by the non-muslims as well. Whether or not this ever happens is an open question, but if liberal Muslims want to justify their unwillingness to live under sharia law, this is the only option I see for them.
Diogenesister13 hours ago
Rainbow _Troll Can you tell us anymore about these " satanic verses"? About these daughters of Allah please?
Records of pre-Islamic religion are sketchy at best and some Muslims will even deny the Satanic verses incident ever happened; but here is what I know:
Allah, the Muslim God is actually a contraction of Al-Ilah or "the god". Al-Ilah was the creator deity of the pre-Islamic polytheists of Mecca and he had daughter goddesses who were also worshiped there. Most Muslims will vehemently deny what I have just said, for obvious reasons, but so what? Anyways, in comes Muhammad with his gospel of one God. "Al-Ilah", he says, "is the only true God and I am his prophet!". The priests and merchants of Mecca are indignant and for good reason: Mecca was a popular holy site and they made a lot of money from the chumps who would make pilgrimage there to worship the gods of the Kabba. Threats are made on Muhammad's life (though they can't be carried out due to tribal politics). He and his followers are persecuted without mercy. The stress gets to the prophet so he tries to compromise with his opponents. All this time he had been uttering revelations which would eventually become the Qur'an and now he utters a new revelation that you won't find in any version of the Qur'an extent. He says:
"Have ye thought upon Al-Lat and Al-‘Uzzá and Manāt, the third, the other? These are the exalted gharāniq, whose intercession is hoped for."
Muhammad's enemies are appeased by this rather equivocal sentence but Muhammad is racked with guilt. He's no charlatan. He really believes that he is receiving revelations from Allah and this wasn't one of them. He soon retracts his new 'revelation' and the persecution of Muslims resumes. End of story.
I read about the difference between the Hadith and the Quran. My point still stands. Although the Quran itself does not have a "stone adulterers" text, the Hadith does, and now, comparing again to Christianity:
The Quran is like the New Testament. A lot more "chill" than the Old Testament, but still has horrible things in it.
The Hadith is like the Old Testament. Very horrible things in it.
The problem is that Christianity's holy texts go from VIOLENT to PEACEFUL(ISH). Islamic holy texts go from PEACEFUL(ISH) to VIOLENT.
So it's worse.
Now, I don't support a total ban of Muslims, but I do support heavy vetting. The vetting was already pretty heavy during the Obama administration.
I don't support welcoming hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, without at least making sure that they will respect the laws and the customs of the lands where they go. But, given the fundamental nature of the religion, this is highly unlikely. At some point, they will want to implement their own rules.
ILoveTTATT2,
Thanks for the PEW states and this thread. This is interesting.
Yesu... thanks for the details about the Hadith vs the Quran. I've never even heard of the Hadith or remember reading anything from the Quran. However, I'd take that video with a grain of salt, as it is using propaganda techniques and looking up CBN on wikipedia reveals:
The Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) is an American Christian-oriented religious television network and production company. Founded by televangelist Pat Robertson
Diogenesister i`m an Aussie born and bred and I have to agree with Yesu Cristo Bwana Wangu
"you will indeed not hear Muslims talking about wanting Sharia implemented." Taqyia is a term used that allows Muslims to lie when it benefits them "
I have seen videos inside Mosques here in Australia where the Imam asks the packed congregants if they disagree with Sharia law and their was not one person who disagreed with it.
And these were portrayed as moderate Muslims.
