Exploring Islam

[Yonkers]

This is another thread about Islam. I hope the mods will keep a close eye on this thread to ensure that it says open. I hope we can just clean up the trolling and flamebait but keep the thread open.


Section 1. We are told by our Muslim friends that visited this site that the Koran does not tell its followers to kill in the name of Allah. We are also told that the violence is metaphoric. Well lets explore this line of reasoning.

A. The Quran, Verse (8:12 008.012) Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you:
give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers:
smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."
We are told that this only applies to this one instance where a 1000 men came down to kill Mohammad because they were persecuting Mohammad and his followers. Well this is not necessarily the case.

History tells us that Mohammad was in fact robbing caravans on the route from Mekkah to Madinah. While it is true that 1000 men were sent by the pagans to teach Mohammad a lesson, they did so after Mohammad was robbing and killing people for years.

Now I ask if Mohammad was non-violent, then why was he robbing caravans and why did he have to cut off the heads and finger tips? This to me is not metaphoric in any way. In the New Testament you will find nothing that says Jesus was ever violent. Jesus said I come with a sword and user other such terms to describe spiritual war-fare but never once did he commit violence. There fore we can conclude that Jesus' words were in fact metaphoric in nature. Mohammad by having killed people in a battle against 1000 men and by robbing caravans we can conclude that his words meant violence since Mohammad did commit violence.

B. You can also count 109 other war verses that requirer Muslims to commit violence, bloodshed in retaliation and even make war until God's religion reigns supreme over all the earth. (2:193 & 8:40) And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.

They are also allowed to drive non-Muslims from their homes as is stated in (4:89)
They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them.


How can you read this in any translation and get the idea that this could be metaphoric or that I just don't understand it. This only says one thing. To compare this to the bible and especially the New Testament you do not find this idea let alone such wording.

I know the common defense is that this is only towards transgressors and oppressors. Well now I am confused because we were first told in part A. that these words were just metaphoric. Now it seems it is allowed because they are transgressors and oppressors. Well which is it? Is it metaphoric or not?

Further more we have the problem that it seems that everyone thus far is a transgressor or oppressor. Now me being a Christian, I find it very hard to believe I am oppressed in American. Do Muslims in American find them selves being oppressed and if they do are we to conclude that these words are now not metaphoric? I really am concerned here.
Read this web page for more info on this topic in part B. http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=51761

The typical reply is "well the bible has violence in it" This is very true. But lets look at that. King David wanted to build the temple but God said no, you have bloodshed on your hands. You will not build the temple, Solomon build the temple because he is a man of peace. Here we see a dramatic change in the bible between the government and the religion. The government still waged war but the prophets and religious leaders did not. This is true from this point to the very last page in the New Testament. In fact Jesus said "he who live by the sword shall die by the sword"

[Yonkers]

What we have is a progression from violence towards Godliness. In Islam we have the exact opposite. We have Mohammad reverting to the old ways. This is a key reason why Islamic nations do not progress and are ruled by tyrants and theocracies.

There are other such examples we can go into such as non-Muslim taxation, plundering and ambushing non-Muslims but I want to move on.

Section 2. We are told by our Muslim friends that Mohammad was peaceful and never promoted Islam through violence. Well we know this to not be true from history and I gave one example of Mohammed's violent tendencies in part 1. of this thread. In this section I will talk about violence Mohamed personally sanctioned.

A. Mohamed had a Arab poetess and a Jewish man around 100 killed in Median, one because she wrote a poem condemning Mohammad and the other because he might write a poem condemning him. This information comes from Islamic sources that includes the Eadith.

Mohammad also had a man killed because he out debated Mohammad. Again Islamic sources. Mohammad was asked by the Pagans to prove he was a prophet of the Jewish God so he traveled to Jerusalem and ordered his men to face Jerusalem, bow and pray 3 times a day in order to impress the Jewish priests. The were not impress and rejected him as a prophet because he could not perform any miracles. Instead they made him a neutral arbitrary to Madinah to settle disputes in hopes that he would abandon his claims of being a prophet. As we know this did not work but only gave him more power, which he used in a very violent way.

In order to convert Madinah to Islam Mohammad had to eliminate 3 Jewish clans which he did one by one. The first two were just driven out of the land but the last was slaughter and enslaved. Mohammad had 500-900 Jewish men beheaded in one day. Again we see Mohammad using violence that is not in the metaphoric sense. Also this is Islamic sources that includes the hadith.

Section 3. This last section will deal with the Koran and its writing style.

A. While searching for info on Islam and the Koran I found this odd bit of information that recall has me scratching my head. Now as many of you know I am very poor at my spelling and grammar that is ok since I have not and do not claim to be a prophet of any sorts. Mohammad how ever did even though he could not read or write. Here is one example of how his translators dealt with Mohammed's ramblings.

8:18 in H.J. Dawood: "If you were seeking a judgment, now has a judgment come to you. If you desist, it will be best for you."

I did not know what was wrong with this at first until the author pointed out that there isn't any antecedent nouns. In other words because there isn't any noun we do not know whom Mohammad is talking about. We know he is talking about judgment and stopping if it is best for you but who is the subject of this verse. We don't know because of the lack of any antecedents.

B. It is said that the Islam and Judaism and Christianity are related because of the same stories told. Well not exactly. It is true that Mohammad does use biblical stories but he does not tell them accurately. Here is one example. Mohammad tells the story of the Exodus 27 times in his first 89 chapters and each time he leaves out the Passover. The Passover is the KEY part of the story of Exodus. The sacrifice is what it was all about. It it were not for that the Israelites would not have gotten out of Egypt. Further more Mohammad excludes the sacrifice of Jesus at the cross, thus concluding the important idea that there isn't any atonement for our sins except that being a follower of Allah but there was no atonement as we have with Jesus or in the Passover.

What we have clearly is plagiarism. Not similar religions. Mohammad only took what he knew to be from Jewish teachings and made it his own. This is one example of many where Mohammad did not know what he was talking about so he changed teachings or combined teachings.

Well that is it for now. I am sure this will make some mad and others just plain question any of the information here. If you do question it then GREAT! that is what I am aiming for. The more you know. The more you will find that Islam is to be taken very serious and watched very closely.

I will leave you with this last but very scary quote from the Koran. "Do not ask questions to things that you don't understand, because the answers will trouble you" That my friend is the key to why Islam is a regressive religion and not progressive.

Sources:

http://www.islam101.com/terror/verse8_12.htm
http://www3.alislam.org/showChapter.jsp?submitCh=Read%2Bfrom%2Bverse%3A&ch=2&verse=183
http://bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Commentary/q4-89.htm

[Yonkers]

Section 3 continued

C. I mention about how many times the story of the Exodus is told in the Koran, well this is true of many of the other stories in the bible. Now Muslims say the Koran was before the earth was, in fact they say the Koran ALWAYS was. If that is true then how many times does the Koran need to tell the story of father Abraham before they get it?

In fact you can delete a good chunck of the Koran and still get the same message and the exact same stories.

D. Now I did not read all of the Koran. To me that would be impossible because from what I did read, it MADE NO SENSE. It was gibberish. Some of the verses lead no where and in fact it jumped all around in its thought.

Muslims will tell you they have not read the whole Koran but they know what is in it. Well one of the reason why they have not read it is because IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. You can read the bible and you may not agree with it but at least it makes sense and is well written. You cannot say this about the Koran. Here are two exmples but there are many more and more confusing verses.
And His [God's] saying "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they)" means that they (the hypocrites) wish you misguidance so as to be like them in it; and this is due only to their great animosity and hatred towards you, that's why God said "so take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allâh (meaning left al-hijrah)" as said by Al-Awfy based on Ibn Abbas, and Al-Saddy said "they showed their kufr, then take them and kill them wherever you find them, "and take no friends or helpers from their ranks" means not to take any of them as allies or seek their support against the enemies of Allâh as long as they are like this; then Allâh excluded from them.
It is true this is taken out of context and we know that you need the whole story to get the message. But whe we do not need in any given quote is a explenation of a particular sentense. Notice how the author had to tell you who Mohammed is talking about and what. With out direction this quote is unintelligable.
"When the hypocrites come to thee, they say 'We bearth witness that thou art indeed the messenger of Allâh'. Yea, Allâh knoweth that thou art indeed his messenger, and Allâh bearth witness that the hypocrites are indeed liars."
Here we have another quote (taken out of context) that we just cannot understand what is being said. It seems that the hypocrites come to Mohammed and say they know he is the prophet but Allah already knows this and the hypocrits are indeed liars. WTF!? sorry for my confussion but this is just plain crazy talk. It is my firm opinion that Mohammed was insane because only a insane person could conjure up rhetoric like this.

The source for the last quote. http://bismikaallahuma.org/Quran/Commentary/q4-89.htm
Notice how the author explains this quote. Well it seems that not only is Mohammed insane but he is very paranoid. Every one is out to distroy him and the biggest culprits are the Jews and Christians.

[Riptide]

Fascinating.

Only thing I would note is w/reg to this verse:
And fight them until persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against wrong-doers.

Am I misunderstanding this? It seems to be implying that they are supposed cease hostilities once "them" desists.

[SH64]

You are wasting your time if you want to explore the Islamic religion .
the problem is that you cant take the Qu'ran as a judgment to this religion becuase if you read it from the first to last paper you will see several verses that order Muslims to kill anyone who dont belief in thier faith .. & in same time other verses that call for peace with the others .

whats happeneing now is that those "Mujahdeen" took the verses that order to kill all non-muslims as thier basic way to deal with the world , while the other part of the muslims only try to stick with the peacefull verses that shows mercy & a "good face" for the Isalmic religion .

[Riptide]

Sounds like a twisted confused mess to me.

[SH64]

Sounds like a twisted confused mess to me.

Exaclty .. thats why muslims are in loss now .. they have to call for peace now (as they are forced to do so in this new world) & at same time they have to explain how those hostile verses in thier Quran dosent mean harm for the non-muslims .

[Yonkers]

Fascinating.

Only thing I would note is w/reg to this verse:


Am I misunderstanding this? It seems to be implying that they are supposed cease hostilities once "them" desists.
You are correct Rip but then if they do not oppose you then you are supposed to impose high taxes against them. Most will either leave that land or convert.

So yes they do stop but the main point is that they say that the violence is metaphorics. The examples show that it is not metaphorics but actual action to be taken and notice that every one is "oppressing" Islam. Any one who does not believe if quote oppressing unquote Islam. This speaks of great paranoia with in Islam.

You are wasting your time if you want to explore the Islamic religion.
I disagree. We NEED to explore Islam so we can understand what it is that we face. We are at war with the ideas contained in the Koran.

Some people say we are at war with the fundamentalists in Islam. I dsagree. We are at war with the Koran its self, because it does say what it means and it says to wage war against non-Muslims. The problem is not Osama or the Taliban. The problem is the Koran.

Now how do we do this? Do we just kill em all as some extremists on our side suggest? I don't think so. I belive we should have compassion for them and help them to change their hearts and minds by helping them to question their own faith. Remember under their teachings they are not supposed to ask questions to the unknown because the anwswer will trouble them. This is a way to get them to accept the Koran on faith. We have NO such commandment in the bible. We are supposed to question the sriptures and see it they add up.

[vampireuk]

Yonkers you are quite clearly a evil bigot :D

[oldsk00l]

sounds like blueprints to a house reading "Build here" then later on saying "Don't build here"

[Yonkers]

I hope those who disagree with my take on Islam engage in this thread or at least go and find out for them selves the truth about islam.

[Ninjaman09]

I hope those who disagree with my take on Islam engage in this thread or at least go and find out for them selves the truth about islam.
I agree. I think most of us have expressed our views quite clearly, and I'd be interested to hear an educated rebuttal. So *ahem* certain forum members should probably stay out of this one.

[evilchris]

www.secularislam.org is a good site too Yonkers.

Islam is the religion of hate and death, anyone who argues that doesn't know anything about islam. F allah, and f mohammed.

[Yonkers]

I agree. I think most of us have expressed our views quite clearly, and I'd be interested to hear an educated rebuttal. So *ahem* certain forum members should probably stay out of this one.
Yes, this thread is not for the "amen chorus" This thread is for those who disagree about the problems with in Islam or I should say the problem that IS Islam. Unfortunately I am willing to bet they will not reply. If they do they will attack me or us and not the subject.

[Nemezer]

I hope those who disagree with my take on Islam engage in this thread or at least go and find out for them selves the truth about islam.

I will say openly that I disagree with you whole heartedly on your logic, not your facts. Note that I know nothing about Islam, nor do I know anything about Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism.

To me, the idea that the war on terror is actually a war against Islam can be equated to the war on drugs being a war against the drug cartels. As in, if the United States were to create a coalition to wage a war on drugs, no matter how many poppy fields in Columbia or in Afghanistan they burned down they could never win that way.

Meaning, although the drugs are produced overseas, the source of the drug problem is at home. The source is something that no army can ever defeat, it's the people themselves.

From my view, Islam is just a tool used by the terrorists justify their actions. To attack Islam will not provide any bebefit to your cause.

That is of cource my very own 0.02$. (Which in U.S. dollars is equal to 0.0159$ :p )

[oldsk00l]

I do agree, if someone has something to bring to the table that can rebutt this, I'm all ears!

[Ninjaman09]

Meaning, although the drugs are produced overseas, the source of the drug problem is at home. The source is something that no army can ever defeat, it's the people themselves.

From my view, Islam is just a tool used by the terrorists justify their actions. To attack Islam will not provide any bebefit to your cause.
I actually agree with you entirely. Very well said. I've never thought of the war on terror a "war on Islam". I do think that Islam lends itself to abuse rather blatantly, however, and the Qu'ran itself really doesn't seem too cohesive. I'd like to hear a muslim's perspective on this, as I know none personally and have only seen two posting here, in that one thread.

[Yonkers]

I will say openly that I disagree with you whole heartedly on your logic, not your facts. Note that I know nothing about Islam, nor do I know anything about Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism.
My logic is based on the facts. My whole point is the Koran is the source of the problem. You need to explore the Koran to further shape your opinion.

To me, the idea that the war on terror is actually a war against Islam can be equated to the war on drugs being a war against the drug cartels. As in, if the United States were to create a coalition to wage a war on drugs, no matter how many poppy fields in Columbia or in Afghanistan they burned down they could never win that way.
I think you are not understanding me. I am not saying we should kill all Muslims. I am saying we need to defeat the radicals on the battlefield and change the hearts and minds of the moderate Muslims about the Koran through compassion and love.

You can never totaly win a war like this. You can only control the level of the threat and best way to do this is to introduce critical thinking that comes with capitalist democracies to Muslims nations.

Meaning, although the drugs are produced overseas, the source of the drug problem is at home. The source is something that no army can ever defeat, it's the people themselves.

From my view, Islam is just a tool used by the terrorists justify their actions. To attack Islam will not provide any bebefit to your cause.
Again you are ignoring the facts about the Koran and this leads you to a false reality of Islam. You said your self "I don't dispute your facts but only your logic" Well you basically said I don't care about the facts, I just don't like what you are saying. Ok fine, you don't have to like it but it is the truth and until you can prove me to be in any type of error I will stick by what I have found out.

I really suggest you do research for your self. By all means don't just take what I say as gospel. Look into for your self. Look at the history of Muhammed and his followers and compare that with the apologists for Islam. The two do not add up.

While we are talking about apologists, there was a point in which Islam ruled all of the ME, North Africa and Spain. Well this gave the Muslims time to reflect on their religion and do critical thinking. So they started reading Jewish text from wich Mohammed said his word is from. The found that the Koran and the Jewish text did not match up. So they decided by councel that it was the Jews and Christians who were wrong and proclaimed that Mohammed was sent by Allah to correct the corrupted scriptures by the Jews and Christians. Well the problem is that NO WHERE in the Koran does Mohammed claim that the scriptures where changed or corrupted by the Christians and Jews. This was added well after Mohammed was dead.

This is just one example of Islamic aoplogists at work. We have many current Islamic apologists who say that Islam is not violent and the verses are metaphoric but we know that Mohammed did commit violence him self so the idea that these verses are metaphoric is wrong. Here is an example of a Islamic apologist.

I asked this question http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=524843&postcount=143
Let me ask you this and I mean no offense by it but it is a sincere question.

Do you agree or disagree with the methods Mohammed chose to spread Islam?
I got this reply. http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=524881&postcount=144
When spreading islam, Mohammad (PBUH) didn't burn villages, kill women and children or forecfully made them convert to islam. He used peaceful ways, which is why islam still exists today. Christians and Jews lived peacfully with muslims, they had to pay the "jizyah" (a small tax), but they were protected by muslims, and did many tradings with them.

Throughout history, muslims reached europe and even china while spreading islam, now you can't do that with killing everyone in your way or force them to convert. Muslims stayed in Spain for 800 (?) years, and they welcomed students from all over europe to study in their universities (No one can deny the contibutions that Arabs/Muslims made to the Europeans back in the day when it comes to Sciense, Algebra, Medicine, etc.).

So to answer your question, yes I do agree with the methods our prophet used to spread Islam, as they were peacful ones.
Do you see the denial of factual history. Either he is completely lying in order to protect what he believes or he has been taught this. Either way there is a separation from reality with most Muslims I know wrt to the Koran and history.

They will reply "well Mohammed and the early Muslims were oppressed". Again we have a Muslim apologist blaming every one else but their own faith. You see this today in the Islamic world when they blame all their troubles on the Jews or the US. Well at some point you have to grow up and take responsibility for you own actions just like they are doing in Iraq with the vote.

[Yonkers]

I actually agree with you entirely. Very well said. I've never thought of the war on terror a "war on Islam". I do think that Islam lends itself to abuse rather blatantly, however, and the Qu'ran itself really doesn't seem too cohesive. I'd like to hear a muslim's perspective on this, as I know none personally and have only seen two posting here, in that one thread.

I am not saying the war on terror IS a war on Islam because it isn't. I am saying we are missing the mark. The problem is not terrorism. It is the Koran. Terrorism is a by-product of the Koran. Remember Allahu Akbar means "Allah is greater" It does not mean Allah is great. The meaning is Allah is greater than all other Gods. It is a form of proclaimation and a defence of Allah. If God is who God says he is then he does not need any defences because he is perfect.
No what they really mean is we are defending Islam through violence because we cannot spread it through peace.

[Ninjaman09]

I am not saying the war on terror IS a war on Islam because it isn't. I am saying we are missing the mark. The problem is not terrorism. It is the Koran. Terrorism is a by-product of the Koran. Remember Allahu Akbar means "Allah is greater" It does not mean Allah is great. The meaning is Allah is greater than all other Gods. It is a form of proclaimation and a defence of Allah. If God is who God says he is then he does not need any defences because he is perfect.
No what they really mean is we are defending Islam through violence because we cannot spread it through peace.
Well, I disagree here. If the Qu'ran were the source of the problem then we'd be seeing a much higher percentage of the muslim community participating in terrorist activities. As it is now, the amount of terrorist muslims compared with the entire muslim community (of hundreds of millions) is extremely tiny. I think the Qu'ran lends itself to abuse more easily than some other books but the problem is the people, not the religion. The religion itself is just a political tool to justify their means. If there were no Islam, I'm quite certain we'd have the same problem with terrorism, from the same people, ceteris paribus.

[Riptide]

Unfortunately I think our two Muslim posters have left the building.

So it's back to talking amongst ourselves with very little outside addition. It really would be nice to get someone like Cat Stevens to come in here and attempt to debate. Ofcourse that isn't gonna happen though. :(

[Yonkers]

Well, I disagree here. If the Qu'ran were the source of the problem then we'd be seeing a much higher percentage of the muslim community participating in terrorist activities. As it is now, the amount of terrorist muslims compared with the entire muslim community (of hundreds of millions) is extremely tiny. I think the Qu'ran lends itself to abuse more easily than some other books but the problem is the people, not the religion. The religion itself is just a political tool to justify their means. If there were no Islam, I'm quite certain we'd have the same problem with terrorism, from the same people, ceteris paribus.
Well the highest number of terrorists in the world are Muslim. Look at Islamic countries and tell me how many are progressive in their thinking and how many are regressive. Please help me out here. If you can find a Islamic country that has freedom and equal rights for women then I am willing to listen. The truth is only Turkey has a form of democracy and some assemblence of rights for women. The rest DO NOT! Why? Because of Sharia law.

The point is not that the Koran makes all Muslims terrorist, it is that the Koran encourages terrorism and it hold populatins back from progressing towards freedom.

If the Koran lends it self for abuse by those who are extremists then why are the war verses in there? Why even bother putting such ideas in a "holy" book? After all Mohammed did what he said they should do. This is fact. So why are the terrorist any different than Mohammed? The fact is they are not different. They are one and the same in idea and deed.

You say if there was no Islam we would have with terrorism. Yes you are correct but only if the same ideas that are in the Koran were implemented. In fact there is a example of Koranic ideas that were implemented by a group of people who were not Muslims. That group of people were called Nazis. They used the same idea of hate, blame and elitism to justify their desire to take over the world and they had a group of people to blame for their problems. That group of people just so happens to be the same group the Muslims blame. The Jews.

The Nazis also had a book similar to the Koran. It was called Mein Kampf.

I don't know if you are getting my point or if I am just not clear. My point is that the ideas that would lead to terrrism with Islam are called evil.

[Ninjaman09]

Well the highest number of terrorists in the world are Muslim. Look at Islamic countries and tell me how many are progressive in their thinking and how many are regressive. Please help me out here. If you can find a Islamic country that has freedom and equal rights for women then I am willing to listen. The truth is only Turkey has a form of democracy and some assemblence of rights for women. The rest DO NOT! Why? Because of Sharia law.
Backwards? Yes, but that's none of our concern. What concerns us about the Middle East is their attacks on us, and those attacks are conducted by terrorists who use Islam as a tool to spread their beliefs, though their war on America is political in nature, not idealogical. Any religion would have done just as well.
The point is not that the Koran makes all Muslims terrorist, it is that the Koran encourages terrorism and it hold populatins back from progressing towards freedom.
You won't get an argument from me, but this isn't the issue with respect to the war.
If the Koran lends it self for abuse by those who are extremists then why are the war verses in there?
I guess you misunderstood me. I was referring to the war verses when I mentioned "lending itself to abuse". On the same token I could argue that Christianity condones the slaughter of gays because it says very clearly in the OT that gays are an "abomination and should be put to death". Yet you don't see a lot of Christians going around with an active anti-gay agenda (with the exception of the Ku Klux Klan, Christianty's own breed of terrorism).
Yes you are correct but only if the same ideas that are in the Koran were implemented.
The Qu'ran has nothing to do with terrorists' hatred of America, at least not the leaders. The big name terrorists' beefs with us are political, not idealogical. The people they have doing their dirty work for them are the brainwashed suicide bombers, etc that are fed the violent verses of the Qu'ran. Again an example of my statement about "lending itself to abuse".
The Nazis also had a book similar to the Koran. It was called Mein Kampf.
Let's not do this. ;)
I don't know if you are getting my point or if I am just not clear. My point is that the ideas that would lead to terrrism with Islam are called evil.
You're clear, and I get your point, I just think your thinking in the matter is too biased to be considered critical. There is certainly a possibility for any religion to be the scapegoat of evil deeds but ultimately it is the lunatics that carry them out that are to blame. You're blaming the book, I'm blaming the people.

[Yonkers]

I guess you misunderstood me. I was referring to the war verses when I mentioned "lending itself to abuse". On the same token I could argue that Christianity condones the slaughter of gays because it says very clearly in the OT that gays are an "abomination and should be put to death". Yet you don't see a lot of Christians going around with an active anti-gay agenda (with the exception of the Ku Klux Klan, Christianty's own breed of terrorism).
Very good point but what does the bible later say about those types of sins? It says that they result in death not that the sinner should be put to death by law. That is the key difference. Unlike Muslims we Christians do not claim that the OT uses these laws as metaphore. No, they were as they said, put to death. What we do say is that the law was fullfill and now it is not man who puts sinners to death but because of the atonment death is a result of not asking for forgiveness. So that in its self is a major difference and we can clearly point out that those Chrstians who do kill homosexuals in the name of God becuase of OT teach that they are in fact, wrong and evil. Islam will not do this because they will rebuff thier own scriptures.

Never the less good point. You are engaging in a usefull dialogue.

The Qu'ran has nothing to do with terrorists' hatred of America, at least not the leaders. The big name terrorists' beefs with us are political, not idealogical. The people they have doing their dirty work for them are the brainwashed suicide bombers, etc that are fed the violent verses of the Qu'ran. Again an example of my statement about "lending itself to abuse".
This is not true. Osama him self said we need to convert adopt Sharia law and the attacks would stop. He is in fact fullfilling what the Koran says.

Let's not do this
If it is uncomfortable for you then you don't have to do this. I how ever will do this because it is a prime example that rebuffs your argument that terrorism would regardless if Islam was not around. Well sorry but Hitler's book was for many years a best seller in Islamic countries. Muslims sided with Hitler and even Yasser him self had Nazi ties. The truth is uncomcortable and painfull at times but I wont ignore it for fears of not being PC.

You're clear, and I get your point, I just think your thinking in the matter is too biased to be considered critical. There is certainly a possibility for any religion to be the scapegoat of evil deeds but ultimately it is the lunatics that carry them out that are to blame. You're blaming the book, I'm blaming the people.
Of course I am bias. That is clear. My bias came as a result of research. That is a good thing.

You are correct that any religion can do this and in fact all religions have. The difference is that most have progressed. Islam has not. As I pointed out when Islam was first started their first act was one of regression back to violence. But to say that any religion can do this ignores the facts. It is Islam right now that IS doing it and it is Islam that will not take care of their own extemists. Silence is complisant with the act.

[Nemezer]

My logic is based on the facts. My whole point is the Koran is the source of the problem. You need to explore the Koran to further shape your opinion.
Of course, reading the Koran would give me some great insight on the muslim populace. But again, for my current opinion, the Koran is irevelant, as it is based on basic human nature that hold true for any country in this world.

Here is what I do know. There are 1.2 billion muslims in this world. I'll give your argument the best chance and say that there is a total of 1 000 000 terrorists in the world that are muslims. That, you know as well as I do, is a great exaggeration. Given this, the ratio of muslims that are terrorist is 0.00083%

If the Koran is the source of terrorism which is your claim, then I would say, with all due respect, it sucks at it.
I think you are not understanding me. I am not saying we should kill all Muslims. I am saying we need to defeat the radicals on the battlefield and change the hearts and minds of the moderate Muslims about the Koran through compassion and love.
I will continue to say that attacking the Koran, and by definition Islam itself, and thus Muslims themselves, will not advance your cause a single inch. Indeed, it will most probably create even more animosity, which is not the greatest thing to do.
You can never totaly win a war like this. You can only control the level of the threat and best way to do this is to introduce critical thinking that comes with capitalist democracies to Muslims nations.
That's a blunt way to put it, but ok.
Again you are ignoring the facts about the Koran and this leads you to a false reality of Islam. You said your self "I don't dispute your facts but only your logic" Well you basically said I don't care about the facts, I just don't like what you are saying. Ok fine, you don't have to like it but it is the truth and until you can prove me to be in any type of error I will stick by what I have found out.
Agreed, my position remains unchanged by what you have showed me is written in the Koran. Again, my fact is that there are millions of muslims living in the U.S. and Canada today. I have yet to see a trend that will convince me that the Koran they read has made them more violent towards non-muslim.
I really suggest you do research for your self. By all means don't just take what I say as gospel. Look into for your self. Look at the history of Muhammed and his followers and compare that with the apologists for Islam. The two do not add up.
I appreciate your suggestion, but I have yet to fear my few friends that are Muslims simply because of what I now know what is written in the Koran. I need not read on Jesus and his followers either to know my Christians friends and family are good people.