Convert Facing Death Sentence

[saintwannabe 777]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1793080' date='Feb 27 2009, 11:57 PM']how so?




Islam is not a religion of peace because they don't have Christ?

I can't speak to that. I don't think Islam is a religion of peace in the same sense of Christianity. But within the framework of the different viariats of Islam one can find peaceful versions. Of course you can find agressive, expansionist versions as well. I think the latter has more historical legitimacy but it can me tricky. imo[/quote]

Hassan, pardon me if I'm not correct here, but don't extremist muslims follow the original translation of Koran. And the other 98% of muslims (most of whom are good people) follow the watered down version of the Koran. If the original is deviated from that makes me question the validity of the religion's argument. I mean look at Christianity. Christianity. especially Rome Sweet Home (Catholicism) has followed the original bible for 2000 years. Yes, there are heretical groups, and yes there are weird translations of the bible. But at the same time, Christianity has always been a religion of radical peace, from its very beginnings. Does this mean that most muslims are bad? No, because God can still work through their religion. In fact I believe and the Church teaches that a loving muslim who follows the natural law on his heart has more of a chance of getting into heaven than a lax Catholic who has been taught the faith.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1793529' date='Feb 28 2009, 09:15 AM']"Maybe standing so long is making you cranky." Funny how you justify yourself insulting others who debate with Hassan, but it's okay for you to do it.[/quote]
I was joking with you, and my comment about trying to work outside of the Catholic argument was for everyone, myself included. Take a breather, you're turning on your own.

[quote name='Winchester' post='1792632' date='Feb 27 2009, 04:36 PM'][img]http://spf.fotolog.com/photo/47/0/90/peloura/Copia_de_malos_venger_1210355123318.jpg[/img]
Talk to the hand![/quote]
Really. How is that not hilarious?

Edited February 28, 2009 by Winchester

[Didacus]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1792783' date='Feb 27 2009, 09:21 PM']According to Fr. Mitch Pacwa, SJ, who specializes in the Middle East, the greatest number of converts to Christianity are coming from Muslims in predominately Muslim parts of the worlds. He said statistics show they are "in the thousands" by the year. And I bet they make excellent Christians, too.[/quote]

I have no doubt their devotion is far deeper than the average catholic on this side of the world. Both fortunately, and unfortunately.

[Hassan]

[quote name='saintwannabe 777' post='1793535' date='Feb 28 2009, 11:07 AM']Hassan, pardon me if I'm not correct here, but don't extremist muslims follow the original translation of Koran. And the other 98% of muslims (most of whom are good people) follow the watered down version of the Koran. If the original is deviated from that makes me question the validity of the religion's argument. I mean look at Christianity. Christianity. especially Rome Sweet Home (Catholicism) has followed the original bible for 2000 years. Yes, there are heretical groups, and yes there are weird translations of the bible. But at the same time, Christianity has always been a religion of radical peace, from its very beginnings. Does this mean that most muslims are bad? No, because God can still work through their religion. In fact I believe and the Church teaches that a loving muslim who follows the natural law on his heart has more of a chance of getting into heaven than a lax Catholic who has been taught the faith.[/quote]


The Arabic is the same for all the Qur'ans. As most Muslims don't speak Arabic they can use different translations which can have some differences amongst them, particularly in the included commentary. Kahn is the most common translation and the cheepest because the Saudi's subsidise is, Maulana Muhammad Ali's is used by a certian sect from Pakistan and reflects his more naturalized religion, Muhammad Asad's is more rationalistic etc. In thoses cases while there may be some small differences in translation the commentary is the biggest difference amongst them.

The movement of Muslim terrorist groups generally has nothing to do with what version of the Qur'an they follow. Unlike what some here would have you beleive the rise of Muslim terrorist groups, like most terrorist groups, is a complex phenomena and much more is involved than theological disagreements. The individuals socio economic class, nationalist, personal history etc all play an important role. More importantly there is no one homogenous group that is "the extremists". If you want to understand the extreamism of groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, at least traditionally, you would need to look at Sayyed Qutb's "Milestones". In that case his is a mixture of Islam and Leninism, if you want to understand Muslims extreamism in Chechnya you would need to look at the whole long bloody conflict and it's interaction with nationalism.

The reason I often put "the extremists" in quotes is not because I'm trying to deney that extremists exist, but because one groups of "the extremists" Muslims does not exist. Muslim terrorism is not homogenous nor are the all after the same goal.

Modern Extremists are not traditionalist Muslims, despite what some may claim. That is not to say Classical Islam was or was not a peaceful religion, but simply that groups like Al Quaida are not traditionalist Muslims.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Madame Vengier' post='1793529' date='Feb 28 2009, 10:15 AM']"Maybe standing so long is making you cranky." Funny how you justify yourself insulting others who debate with Hassan, but it's okay for you to do it.[/quote]

lol, that's not an insult. He simply asked me to not venture outside a certain set of parameters. I might find his request (at worst) unreasonable, but not insulting.

[Winchester]

This is a perfect example of why not to go outside the Catholic argument. Proving Islamofascists are or are not traditional is nigh impossible. There will always be an argument against it. Remain within the Catholic argument and you win, quick and easy and faithfully. Go outside it, and you start typing in caps and large fonts because it's frustrating.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1793616' date='Feb 28 2009, 02:31 PM']This is a perfect example of why not to go outside the Catholic argument. Proving Islamofascists are or are not traditional is nigh impossible. There will always be an argument against it. Remain within the Catholic argument and you win, quick and easy and faithfully. Go outside it, and you start typing in caps and large fonts because it's frustrating.[/quote]


You win if the Catholic argument is sound. I mean if you want to say without Christ there is not peace, Islam does not have Christ, therefore Islam does not have peace that's just fine with me (it's even deductively valid probably) so long as we admit that is not applicable outside of the Catholic context and only sound if Catholicism is true.

You can't prove that the "Islamofascists" (a term I would reject) are in the tradition of "true" Islam (whatever that means) but if you look at the body of Islamic fiqh and simply mean the common opinion of Islamic jurists through the years than we can make limited judgments.

[mortify]

All these threads about Islam are all mistaken and skewed... Islam is really a peaceful religion, really it is...

[Hassan]

[quote name='mortify' post='1793629' date='Feb 28 2009, 02:55 PM']All these threads about Islam are all mistaken and skewed... Islam is really a peaceful religion, really it is...[/quote]
your mom's a peaceful religion



oh

snap

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1793620' date='Feb 28 2009, 01:39 PM']You can't prove that the "Islamofascists" (a term I would reject) are in the tradition of "true" Islam (whatever that means)[/quote]

Can you please explain the basis for this statement?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1793620' date='Feb 28 2009, 01:39 PM']You can't prove that the "Islamofascists" (a term I would reject) are in the tradition of "true" Islam (whatever that means) but if you look at the body of Islamic fiqh and simply mean the common opinion of Islamic jurists through the years than we can make limited judgments.[/quote]
I [i]might [/i]be able to prove it, but I'm not interested enough. Theologically, I reject Mahomet and his unique teachings (those that match Catholicism are not his) so everything else is moot. If Islam resulted in glorious human freedom and respect, it would still be wrong. We don't judge by outcome; we are not pragmatists. Islam does not result in those things, though, and we know it. Really, no human endeavour (and religion is executed by humans--in both senses of the word) results in that. Seen in this light, one may reject Catholicism, whose members have often fallen short of the goal and will continue to so long as they are in this fallen world.

Arguing this stuff is academic. Those Islamists who are terrorists are a problem. [i]They [/i]must be destroyed and their religion must be pacified even if it means destroying it (and if it really offended Islam, they would be marginalized just like the stupid hicks burning crosses at their asinine southern frat parties). I am sick of it. If they bombed mecca, I wouldn't be outraged. This isn't [s]neccessarily [/s]moral, but I am sick and tired of this religion; it has been a problem since it began and I'm not an adherent so I don't [i]care [/i]if it suddenly disappears. I have a family and I don't want to see them suffer because of these whining durka durkas anymore. I don't care if they're offended--I want them to shut up, sell me oil and quit pretending they're not utterly selfish hypocrites who use their religion like the excuse every other religious adherent (yours truly included) does.

There. Honesty.

[Hassan]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1793662' date='Feb 28 2009, 03:37 PM']Can you please explain the basis for this statement?[/quote]


I just mean if Muslims want to point to some supra historical metaphysical thing that is "Islam" and hold as a matter of faith what "true" Islam is then no one can really say they are wrong. That doesn't mean there are any grounds for suposing they are right.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1793615' date='Feb 28 2009, 02:31 PM']lol, that's not an insult. He simply asked me to not venture outside a certain set of parameters. I might find his request (at worst) unreasonable, but not insulting.[/quote]

You might find this shocking to believe, but I was not referring to YOU, Hassan. My comments do not revolve around you. Again: failure. to. comprehend.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1793562' date='Feb 28 2009, 01:05 PM']I was joking with you, and my comment about trying to work outside of the Catholic argument was for everyone, myself included. Take a breather, you're turning on your own.[/quote]

Really, Win? Are you one of my own? Because you have never once--not once--given me than impression.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your unique sense of humor.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='Didacus' post='1793598' date='Feb 28 2009, 01:44 PM']I have no doubt their devotion is far deeper than the average catholic on this side of the world. Both fortunately, and unfortunately.[/quote]


Exactly. And for this reason, like many other non-western cultures, they are interiorly primed for Christianity. Not sure if this is solely because of their culture or partly Islamic influence. Probably some of both.