Thursday, November 12, 2009

About Islam

The Jester cadged this from Shea.

...We want very much to believe that Violent Islam is a perversion of the Islamic tradition and Wise and Benevolent Islam is the Real Islamic tradition. But the reality is that Islam is an invented human religion that borrows from fragments of Judaism and Christianity, mixes in Mohammed's own delusional (or lying) claims of revelation, and completes it with a dash of conventional wisdom from seventh-century Arab culture. It is not a magisterial faith with some adjudicating body that defines what is and is not the orthodox reading of the Koran. It is whatever its various adherents say it is.

That means that if you are looking for a sanction for violence in the Koran, you can find it, because it's there. So is the wisdom, almsgiving, and peace stuff, if you want that. So Muslims who commit these heinous acts with such frequency are not "betraying Islam" when doing so out of self-described piety. They are, in fact, implementing one possible interpretation of the Muslim tradition (and often slaughtering a great many other Muslims in the process). Westerners who lie to themselves that these monsters are "not real Muslims" are simply self-deluded fools. They are as Muslim as Mohammed, as are their Muslim victims. There is no Islamic Magisterium to excommunicate them. They don't speak for all Muslims, but they most certainly do speak and act for the disturbingly large percentage of Muslims who either applaud them, remain silent, or complain about being victims of suspicion and distrust by the victims of terror instead of complaining about the thugs who commit the terror in the name of Islam.

That understanding is sorely lacking in the office of our President and (apparently) in the office of the Chief/Staff--Army and the FBI.

I have no confidence that our Attorney General has any understanding of anything at all.

28 comments:

JesusIsJustAlrightWithMe said...

Seriously? You can paint one religion as a human invention and believe that yours is true without a hint of irony? That, my friend, is the definition of insanity.

Your religion is based on the dilusions of a guy that fell of his horse like 60 years after Jesus allegedly lived. How is that so different than Mohammed's dillusions?

Amy said...

Your religion is based on the dilusions of a guy that fell of his horse like 60 years after Jesus allegedly lived.

Oh, please, theology major: tell us how you come to THAT conclusion!

JesusIsJustAlrightWithMe said...

It's common knowledge that some of the earliest Christian writings, and earliest in the new testament, were by Saul of Tarsus, who was converted by a delusion he suffered on the road to Damascus. Nobody is quite sure exactly when this took place, but it was at least a couple years after Jesus died and could be several decades later. The gospels were written even later than that. Nobody that wrote about Jesus ever met him. The earliest stuff doesn't even seem to suggest the writer thought he was a real dude.

Dad29 said...

I'll leave that comment, JJW, so others may view your total ignorance.

Dad29 said...

Actually, what is COMMON knowledge is that the Gospels were written by the authors named--although it's possible that Mark simply wrote what Peter told him.

Saul was a letter-writer, not a Gospel-writer.

You could spend about .5 seconds' Google to get that information.

Amy said...

Whatever. That must have been some hit on the head for Saul of Tarsus to go from persecuting Christians to defending them.

Believe whatever you want because you've already proven that you're too immature to handle an adult discussion on religion.

Dave said...

Long timeno see, Vizzini!

Anonymous said...

"Believe whatever you want because you've already proven that you're too immature to handle an adult discussion on religion."


Spoken like a true Christian Jihadist!

GOR said...

"...the dilusions of a guy that fell of his horse..."

Just for laughs JJW, can you point me to where in Scripture it says that St. Paul was "on a horse" on the road to Damascus? It doesn't...anywhere!

But that's the least of your problems in understanding the True Faith...

Dave said...

Anonymous Troll Coward:

Gee...suddenly I have this urge to issue a fatwa against you and Vizzini (aka JIJARWM) and have you hunted down and killed...maybe I can enlist one of those Opus Dei albino assasins...

(/sarcasm)

JesusIsJustAlrightWithMe said...

"Saul was a letter-writer, not a Gospel-writer."

Duh. I never implied otherwise:

"Nobody is quite sure exactly when this took place, but it was at least a couple years after Jesus died and could be several decades later. The gospels were written even later than that."

See, I obviously drew a distinction between Saul's letters and the gospels. Next time try reading before you knock what I say.

"Believe whatever you want because you've already proven that you're too immature to handle an adult discussion on religion."

Yes, I'm the immature one who presents facts while you call names, take your ball, and go home.

"Just for laughs JJW, can you point me to where in Scripture it says that St. Paul was "on a horse" on the road to Damascus? It doesn't...anywhere!"

I don't think it ever addresses the cause for his vision. Falling off a horse is just speculation. I guess it could have been drug induced. Or just a lie. Netiher you or I can be sure. Either way, he never met Jesus, but talked about him a lot. That strikes me as dilusional.

"Long timeno see, Vizzini!"

I thought we discussed this Dave. That characterization doesn't make sense. Vizzini was a know-it-all. Like Christians. I'm here to tell you that you DON'T know it all, and neither do I.

Anonymous said...

...says the man who's blogger profile I requested cannot be displayed. Many Blogger users have not yet elected to publicly share their Profile.


The scary part is...you are kidding yourself. You wouldn't blink an eye if that actually happened. A "true" Christian would never even think of such a henious crime.


"Just for laughs JJW, can you point me to where in Scripture it says that St. Paul was "on a horse" on the road to Damascus? It doesn't...anywhere!"

www.saintantoninus.org/church/c_stpaul.htm

thewoundedbird.blogspot.com/2008/01/riding-on-road-to-damascus.html

Dad29 said...

Your religion is based on the dilusions of a guy that fell of his horse like 60 years after Jesus allegedly lived

that's what you said.

The REALITY is that it is based on the Gospels. Paul's letters are nice, and all very good. But the GOSPELS are the foundation.

Back to World Religions 101 for you.

Dad29 said...

That was out of bounds.

Now it's just out.

Dave said...

Anonymous:

My profile is supposed to be shared, and it's not coming up as such. I assure you it's not intentional. So thank you for pointing that out. I'm going to try to fix that right now.

Dave said...

OK, anonymous - come and have a look at me.

JesusIsJustAlrightWithMe said...

Further proof that you guys can't make an argument. COnfronted with facts, and you ignore it at best, delete the comment at worst.

There was nothing in that comment that could possibly be construed as offensive by any reasonable person.

Dad29 said...

I don't have to be reasonable when dealing with ignorami.

And I'm not!

JesusIsJustAlrightWithMe said...

Yes, you believe in zombies and magic and I'm an ignoramus.

Also, only ignoramuses think the plural of ignoramus is ignorami.

St. Jimbob of the Apokalypse said...

Dad, back to a more serious thought: Could Islam be a proof-positive of the dangers of Sola Scriptura? Really, in Islam, there's no definitive Magesterium to guide interpretation of their documents. Is the comparison apt?

Dad29 said...

I think the better comparo would be to Congregationalism.

The problem is not only with their Koran. It's lack of a central, authoritative voice on interpreting that gobbledygook correctly.

Back a few steps, though, remember that Belloc classified Mohammedanism as one of the 7 great heresies; and the primary problem is their non-Trinitarian God.

No communitas, no love.

Billiam said...

Dad, Muslims don't use the Qur'an exclusively. They also use the Hadith, as well as other books. Yes, they can justify anything, because, it's in there.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Billiam, but the Hadiths can't overrule the Quran. Another thing to remember is the Muslim doctrine of "abrogation", where the earlier more peaceable Suras, written when Islam was small and weak, are replaced by those written later, when Mohammed was in a position to actually kill / enslave infidels.

Anonymous said...

"The problem is not only with their Koran. It's lack of a central, authoritative voice on interpreting that gobbledygook correctly."

Human beings, who are falliable, attempting to interpret a holy book, documented by human beings, who are falliable. That is the definition of gobblygook.

Get it through your thick skulls. Religion is a matter of faith. Anyone's insistence of a "true" religion is participating in a holy war, regardless whether it is the use of words or weapons to expunge or denigrate the "infidels".

How dare anyone downgrade one's personal relationship to their God, whether it be Jesus, Allah, or Yahweh. Hundreds of millions of people live righteous lives under their Good Book, yet it does not matter, for it appears that they are "eternally damned" in your eyes.

Dad29 said...

Ummmmnnnhhhh....

You are offended? Whine me a river.

First off, NOBODY "downgraded one's personal relationship with their God" on this thread.

Of course, you needed to be offended, so you re-interpret English to your ends.

Bozo.

Anonymous said...

Please...Now who's "re-interpreting English to your ends" with comments such as...


But that's the least of your problems in understanding the True Faith.

Believe whatever you want because you've already proven that you're too immature to handle an adult discussion on religion.


Or linking to the Jester, with his opening paragraph claims (We want very much to believe that Violent Islam...)


You certainly wouldn't even blink an eye if our country somehow banished Muslims, Jews, and certainly CINO's. And you certainly would be giddy if our government was overthrown and replaced by a theocracy based a literal interpretation of the Bible. Just the mere fact that there are several major religons, each with their own sects and core of beliefs, PROVES that human beings are divided over what is the TRUE faith. We won't know the TRUTH until we are judged by Him.

So who's kidding who?

Dad29 said...

My, my.

Do you read entrails or are you a phrenologist?

Anonymous said...

Ezek 22:25

There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst thereof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey; they have devoured souls; they have taken the treasure and precious things; they have made her many widows in the midst thereof.

Fits you to a T!