What you guys miss about Islam

[dfens]

Here is the specific point that you Christians and agnostics miss about Islam. You see, Christianity long ago went through a process of what you might call separatization and privatization. It became something of a private religion, and in the Christian world (Europe and America), laws and civil society, the organization of society, largely went over to the government, or corporations, or other groups.

So basically that resulted in a situation in which you Christians and agnostics largely think in secular, "tolerant" terms, you learned to accept other religions, other people, etc. in a sort of mass multicultural society.

But here's the thing: Islam never went through any such process. It is a totalitarian system that demands complete obedience, and is also a system of law as well. It regulates every aspect of your life from birth to death. And all Muslims adhere to it, and think of themselves as first and foremost Muslims. They do not, and never will, reciprocate a sense of tolerance to you, or your nations.

So even while you may go to church and say "look, a mosque, and some muslims over there, and I welcome them into our town because of freedom of religion! etc". Even as you happily proclaim that, the Muslims offer you no such reciprocation. They think nothing of your church, and if they had the numbers they would gladly turn it into a mosque.

Same goes for you agnostics. It is amazing that, in your quest to separate yourself from Christians, you side with the Muslims - who are even more religious than Christians! You can't make this shit up anymore, guys. You leftist agnostics actually somehow think that taking the side of people who literally want to establish religious law all over the planet, will advance your cause of secularism, science, etc.

The bottom line: if you are Christian or agnostic, you cannot side with Muslims. Doing so is your demise. Look at the facts and the demographics for yourself.

 

[Pogo]

What you describe in your first two paragraphs is the effect of what we call "Liberalism". That's what threw off the power of the Church (and Aristocracy). Damn church didn't throw itself off that horse.

Reading after that it's pretty clear you've never met a Muslim in your life.

/thread

 

[JoelT1]

Here is the specific point that you Christians and agnostics miss about Islam. You see, Christianity long ago went through a process of what you might call separatization and privatization. It became something of a private religion, and in the Christian world (Europe and America), laws and civil society, the organization of society, largely went over to the government, or corporations, or other groups.

So basically that resulted in a situation in which you Christians and agnostics largely think in secular, "tolerant" terms, you learned to accept other religions, other people, etc. in a sort of mass multicultural society.

But here's the thing: Islam never went through any such process. It is a totalitarian system that demands complete obedience, and is also a system of law as well. It regulates every aspect of your life from birth to death. And all Muslims adhere to it, and think of themselves as first and foremost Muslims. They do not, and never will, reciprocate a sense of tolerance to you, or your nations.

So even while you may go to church and say "look, a mosque, and some muslims over there, and I welcome them into our town because of freedom of religion! etc". Even as you happily proclaim that, the Muslims offer you no such reciprocation. They think nothing of your church, and if they had the numbers they would gladly turn it into a mosque.

Same goes for you agnostics. It is amazing that, in your quest to separate yourself from Christians, you side with the Muslims - who are even more religious than Christians! You can't make this shit up anymore, guys. You leftist agnostics actually somehow think that taking the side of people who literally want to establish religious law all over the planet, will advance your cause of secularism, science, etc.

The bottom line: if you are Christian or agnostic, you cannot side with Muslims. Doing so is your demise. Look at the facts and the demographics for yourself.

Islam was merely Judaism & Christianity adapted for Arabs. Koran is just the Bible recycled for Arabs who didn’t have scripture. Very unoriginal

 

[daisiesRwild]

Here is the specific point that you Christians and agnostics miss about Islam. You see, Christianity long ago went through a process of what you might call separatization and privatization. It became something of a private religion, and in the Christian world (Europe and America), laws and civil society, the organization of society, largely went over to the government, or corporations, or other groups.

So basically that resulted in a situation in which you Christians and agnostics largely think in secular, "tolerant" terms, you learned to accept other religions, other people, etc. in a sort of mass multicultural society.

But here's the thing: Islam never went through any such process. It is a totalitarian system that demands complete obedience, and is also a system of law as well. It regulates every aspect of your life from birth to death. And all Muslims adhere to it, and think of themselves as first and foremost Muslims. They do not, and never will, reciprocate a sense of tolerance to you, or your nations.

So even while you may go to church and say "look, a mosque, and some muslims over there, and I welcome them into our town because of freedom of religion! etc". Even as you happily proclaim that, the Muslims offer you no such reciprocation. They think nothing of your church, and if they had the numbers they would gladly turn it into a mosque.

Same goes for you agnostics. It is amazing that, in your quest to separate yourself from Christians, you side with the Muslims - who are even more religious than Christians! You can't make this shit up anymore, guys. You leftist agnostics actually somehow think that taking the side of people who literally want to establish religious law all over the planet, will advance your cause of secularism, science, etc.

The bottom line: if you are Christian or agnostic, you cannot side with Muslims. Doing so is your demise. Look at the facts and the demographics for yourself.

do some research Islam was a made-up created religion by the jesuits and the vatican to do their dirty work

 

[Marion Morrison]

Crap OP is crap.

 

[Andylusion]

What you describe in your first two paragraphs is the effect of what we call "Liberalism". That's what threw off the power of the Church (and Aristocracy). Damn church didn't throw itself off that horse.

Reading after that it's pretty clear you've never met a Muslim in your life.

/thread

No, that isn't true. It was not an effect of Liberalism. And it was the Church that 'threw itself off that horse".

Now when I say the Church, I mean the church as in the group of Bible believing Christians, not the hierarchy of church groups like the Catholic church.

But it was the Church, meaning the believers in the Bible based Christianity, that jumped off the horse.

And they did this because they realized that what the authorities were saying, wasn't true. For example, the reformation was started by Martin Luther, who was sick of the Catholic Church selling indulgences. He realized that the Church didn't have this authority, and many other authorities it was using.

Same with many other things the Church was doing. Jesus never forced people to follow his teaching. Why were the Catholics? Jesus never imposed himself on people, and demanded they follow Church law. Why was the Catholic church?

Many of the reasons that christian based churches changed away from being authoritarian is because the "Church", the people of Christian faith, realized that the Bible itself didn't support these things.

And that is where Islam is in fact different. That is why any pure belief in Islam, usually required forced subjugation. Because that is what Mohammad did, and taught, and enforced. Mohammad was not like Jesus. Jesus spread faith by teaching, healing, and caring about people. He spread the faith by saying you are healed, go and sin no more. Repent of your evil ways, and live right from now on.

He didn't force people to repent. He asked them to. He helped people who did what is wrong, but then urged them to stop doing what is wrong.

Islam was spread by demanding people make the prayer of faith, or face being beheaded. Forgiveness was only an option if you accepted Islam. Infidels were only allowed, if they paid the tax on non-believers.

Authoritarian belief, is core to Islamic teaching.
Freedom to choose, is core to Christian teaching.

You might ask, then how did the Christian faith end up being authoritarian, if Jesus never taught that? The answer is Rome. Rome was an authoritarian system. Caesar was a dictator. When Caesar dictated that all of Rome would be Christian, they were not part of the Christian. And it wasn't the Christian Church that made those choices.

Rome was a brutal authoritarian system. Slapping the Christian label on the Roman dictatorship, didn't change what it was, nor how the government operated. Just like slapping "antifa" on a bunch of fascists, doesn't make them any less fascist.

The Romans that started being brutal authoritarian anti-christian pagans, became brutal authoritarian Christians. But it wasn't the Bible, nor the early Christian church that became brutal. It was the Romans.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

do some research Islam was a made-up created religion by the jesuits and the vatican to do their dirty work

Not, "the Jews"?

 

[daisiesRwild]

Here is the specific point that you Christians and agnostics miss about Islam. You see, Christianity long ago went through a process of what you might call separatization and privatization. It became something of a private religion, and in the Christian world (Europe and America), laws and civil society, the organization of society, largely went over to the government, or corporations, or other groups.

So basically that resulted in a situation in which you Christians and agnostics largely think in secular, "tolerant" terms, you learned to accept other religions, other people, etc. in a sort of mass multicultural society.

But here's the thing: Islam never went through any such process. It is a totalitarian system that demands complete obedience, and is also a system of law as well. It regulates every aspect of your life from birth to death. And all Muslims adhere to it, and think of themselves as first and foremost Muslims. They do not, and never will, reciprocate a sense of tolerance to you, or your nations.

So even while you may go to church and say "look, a mosque, and some muslims over there, and I welcome them into our town because of freedom of religion! etc". Even as you happily proclaim that, the Muslims offer you no such reciprocation. They think nothing of your church, and if they had the numbers they would gladly turn it into a mosque.

Same goes for you agnostics. It is amazing that, in your quest to separate yourself from Christians, you side with the Muslims - who are even more religious than Christians! You can't make this shit up anymore, guys. You leftist agnostics actually somehow think that taking the side of people who literally want to establish religious law all over the planet, will advance your cause of secularism, science, etc.

The bottom line: if you are Christian or agnostic, you cannot side with Muslims. Doing so is your demise. Look at the facts and the demographics for yourself.

what you miss about islam is the truth of how it cam e to be do some research it ws made up by the vatican and jesuits to do their dirty work

 

[Pogo]

What you describe in your first two paragraphs is the effect of what we call "Liberalism". That's what threw off the power of the Church (and Aristocracy). Damn church didn't throw itself off that horse.

Reading after that it's pretty clear you've never met a Muslim in your life.

/thread

No, that isn't true. It was not an effect of Liberalism. And it was the Church that 'threw itself off that horse".

Now when I say the Church, I mean the church as in the group of Bible believing Christians, not the hierarchy of church groups like the Catholic church.

But it was the Church, meaning the believers in the Bible based Christianity, that jumped off the horse.

And they did this because they realized that what the authorities were saying, wasn't true. For example, the reformation was started by Martin Luther, who was sick of the Catholic Church selling indulgences. He realized that the Church didn't have this authority, and many other authorities it was using.

Same with many other things the Church was doing. Jesus never forced people to follow his teaching. Why were the Catholics? Jesus never imposed himself on people, and demanded they follow Church law. Why was the Catholic church?

Many of the reasons that christian based churches changed away from being authoritarian is because the "Church", the people of Christian faith, realized that the Bible itself didn't support these things.

And that is where Islam is in fact different. That is why any pure belief in Islam, usually required forced subjugation. Because that is what Mohammad did, and taught, and enforced. Mohammad was not like Jesus. Jesus spread faith by teaching, healing, and caring about people. He spread the faith by saying you are healed, go and sin no more. Repent of your evil ways, and live right from now on.

He didn't force people to repent. He asked them to. He helped people who did what is wrong, but then urged them to stop doing what is wrong.

Islam was spread by demanding people make the prayer of faith, or face being beheaded. Forgiveness was only an option if you accepted Islam. Infidels were only allowed, if they paid the tax on non-believers.

Authoritarian belief, is core to Islamic teaching.
Freedom to choose, is core to Christian teaching.

You might ask, then how did the Christian faith end up being authoritarian, if Jesus never taught that? The answer is Rome. Rome was an authoritarian system. Caesar was a dictator. When Caesar dictated that all of Rome would be Christian, they were not part of the Christian. And it wasn't the Christian Church that made those choices.

Rome was a brutal authoritarian system. Slapping the Christian label on the Roman dictatorship, didn't change what it was, nor how the government operated. Just like slapping "antifa" on a bunch of fascists, doesn't make them any less fascist.

The Romans that started being brutal authoritarian anti-christian pagans, became brutal authoritarian Christians. But it wasn't the Bible, nor the early Christian church that became brutal. It was the Romans.

A lot of offtopic tangent here but basically to sum up:

Neither Christianism nor Islam nor any other religion I can think of is "authoritarian in nature". Religion is introspective. It's practiced in private. What you're conflating is organized religion -- in which case it's the organizers who push the authoritarianism, the force, the wars etc. Jesus may not have forced anybody to convert to anything --- and it's highly doubtful he was pushing religion at all --- but those who claimed to organize in his name sure did. And that's the yoke that Liberalism threw off when it rejected the established order of Church and Aristocracy, a duopoly that was in effect a racket. "Church" in that sense -- the First Estate --- meant the organization of the Church, those powerhungry militants within it. It doesn't mean "the bible" which is just a passive resource that anyone can go to and cherrypick any part they want to justify pacifism, aggressive violence, communism, capitalism or any number of ideas.

And they did this because they realized that what the authorities were saying, wasn't true. For example, the reformation was started by Martin Luther, who was sick of the Catholic Church selling indulgences. He realized that the Church didn't have this authority, and many other authorities it was using.​

Such "realization" didn't require centuries to go by. It could be recognized at any time, and was. And those who dared defy or question the company line were hunted down and exterminated. So one voiced one's realization at the risk of getting familiar with unspeakably sadistic mediaeval torture devices and/or being burned alive in public. That's what we call terrorism, and it propped up the aforementioned racketeering duopoly, by force and by public social intimidation backed by the same force, for centuries. That's what Liberalism threw off.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Religious zealotry is a mental disease. Christianity has become relatively tame thanks to liberal efforts over the centuries. Lots of Muslims in the west are living as moderates, but in the Middle East as long as the west keeps meddling the alt-right zealots there will cling to power.

 

[Andylusion]

What you describe in your first two paragraphs is the effect of what we call "Liberalism". That's what threw off the power of the Church (and Aristocracy). Damn church didn't throw itself off that horse.

Reading after that it's pretty clear you've never met a Muslim in your life.

/thread

No, that isn't true. It was not an effect of Liberalism. And it was the Church that 'threw itself off that horse".

Now when I say the Church, I mean the church as in the group of Bible believing Christians, not the hierarchy of church groups like the Catholic church.

But it was the Church, meaning the believers in the Bible based Christianity, that jumped off the horse.

And they did this because they realized that what the authorities were saying, wasn't true. For example, the reformation was started by Martin Luther, who was sick of the Catholic Church selling indulgences. He realized that the Church didn't have this authority, and many other authorities it was using.

Same with many other things the Church was doing. Jesus never forced people to follow his teaching. Why were the Catholics? Jesus never imposed himself on people, and demanded they follow Church law. Why was the Catholic church?

Many of the reasons that christian based churches changed away from being authoritarian is because the "Church", the people of Christian faith, realized that the Bible itself didn't support these things.

And that is where Islam is in fact different. That is why any pure belief in Islam, usually required forced subjugation. Because that is what Mohammad did, and taught, and enforced. Mohammad was not like Jesus. Jesus spread faith by teaching, healing, and caring about people. He spread the faith by saying you are healed, go and sin no more. Repent of your evil ways, and live right from now on.

He didn't force people to repent. He asked them to. He helped people who did what is wrong, but then urged them to stop doing what is wrong.

Islam was spread by demanding people make the prayer of faith, or face being beheaded. Forgiveness was only an option if you accepted Islam. Infidels were only allowed, if they paid the tax on non-believers.

Authoritarian belief, is core to Islamic teaching.
Freedom to choose, is core to Christian teaching.

You might ask, then how did the Christian faith end up being authoritarian, if Jesus never taught that? The answer is Rome. Rome was an authoritarian system. Caesar was a dictator. When Caesar dictated that all of Rome would be Christian, they were not part of the Christian. And it wasn't the Christian Church that made those choices.

Rome was a brutal authoritarian system. Slapping the Christian label on the Roman dictatorship, didn't change what it was, nor how the government operated. Just like slapping "antifa" on a bunch of fascists, doesn't make them any less fascist.

The Romans that started being brutal authoritarian anti-christian pagans, became brutal authoritarian Christians. But it wasn't the Bible, nor the early Christian church that became brutal. It was the Romans.

A lot of offtopic tangent here but basically to sum up:

Neither Christianism nor Islam nor any other religion I can think of is "authoritarian in nature". Religion is introspective. It's practiced in private. What you're conflating is organized religion -- in which case it's the organizers who push the authoritarianism, the force, the wars etc. Jesus may not have forced anybody to convert to anything --- and it's highly doubtful he was pushing religion at all --- but those who claimed to organize in his name sure did. And that's the yoke that Liberalism threw off when it rejected the established order of Church and Aristocracy, a duopoly that was in effect a racket. "Church" in that sense -- the First Estate --- meant the organization of the Church, those powerhungry militants within it. It doesn't mean "the bible" which is just a passive resource that anyone can go to and cherrypick any part they want to justify pacifism, aggressive violence, communism, capitalism or any number of ideas.

And they did this because they realized that what the authorities were saying, wasn't true. For example, the reformation was started by Martin Luther, who was sick of the Catholic Church selling indulgences. He realized that the Church didn't have this authority, and many other authorities it was using.​

Such "realization" didn't require centuries to go by. It could be recognized at any time, and was. And those who dared defy or question the company line were hunted down and exterminated. So one voiced one's realization at the risk of getting familiar with unspeakably sadistic mediaeval torture devices and/or being burned alive in public. That's what we call terrorism, and it propped up the aforementioned racketeering duopoly, by force and by public social intimidation backed by the same force, for centuries. That's what Liberalism threw off.

What is funny is that I just got done explaining in that post, exactly how Islam is, by it's very nature, and doctrine, authoritarian in nature.
From that, you immediately respond "to sum up, neither Christianity nor any other religion is authoritarian."

Islam is authoritarian.

Yes, absolutely any source of information, passive or otherwise, can be cherry picked, to justify any ideology you want.

But taking the Bible as a whole, considering all relevant scriptures into consideration, you can gain an understanding of what the intent is. The same is true of the Constitution, and the Federalist papers.

Such "realization" didn't require centuries to go by.

This is false. It most certainly did require centuries to go by. When Rome basically said to everyone in the empire "We're all Christian now", the vast majority throughout all the lands, had no idea what that meant, or what Christianity was. Their only understanding of Christianity was through the monks and priests sent out by the Roman church.

Why? Because most were illiterate. On top of this, not only were most illiterate, but the Church was still using Greek text. So even those who could read Latin, had no ability to read what the Bible said on their own. Without the ability to read the Bible themselves, people had no choice but to accept what the established authority of the Church, said was Christian orthodoxy.

And yet there is one last reason that it required such time for Christianity to revert to its original and proper place in society.

Simply put, when the Roman empire failed and imploded in on itself, many places under Roman rule, ended up in total chaos. In that vacuum, there were no public services, no one keeping the water running, no one cleaning the sewers, and no one enforcing the law. In many places, not all, and perhaps not even most, but in many areas, it was the Church that stepped up into that position. The church started paying to have the water supplies running, the sewers cleaned, and the law enforced.

As a result many people gave the church the same respect and position as government, because government had failed. You can see this even today. Faith is dramatically increasing in Venezuela, amid the crash of the left-wing socialist government. Faith has increased dramatically in the former left-wing atheist Russia.

 

[Andylusion]

Religious zealotry is a mental disease. Christianity has become relatively tame thanks to liberal efforts over the centuries. Lots of Muslims in the west are living as moderates, but in the Middle East as long as the west keeps meddling the alt-right zealots there will cling to power.

When I read of how many of these radical anti-west terror groups started, there is little to no evidence that reducing or eliminating "meddling" would stop them from clinging to power.

In fact, we have had people who defected from these groups, and say that it isn't our "meddling" that is causing it. It's simply a matter of ideology. They hate freedom. They are jealous of success.

I think the whole anti-US 'meddling' ideal is based more on a mythology that if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone. That doesn't hold true when compared to history.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Religious zealotry is a mental disease. Christianity has become relatively tame thanks to liberal efforts over the centuries. Lots of Muslims in the west are living as moderates, but in the Middle East as long as the west keeps meddling the alt-right zealots there will cling to power.

When I read of how many of these radical anti-west terror groups started, there is little to no evidence that reducing or eliminating "meddling" would stop them from clinging to power.

In fact, we have had people who defected from these groups, and say that it isn't our "meddling" that is causing it. It's simply a matter of ideology. They hate freedom. They are jealous of success.

I think the whole anti-US 'meddling' ideal is based more on a mythology that if we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone. That doesn't hold true when compared to history.

Compared to history? What history? How many Islamic terrorist attacks were committed in or against the U.S. before the mid-20th century?