julianw

Convert to Islam or Buddhism so you can learn to fast.

Smooooooth. :cool:

Wow. This bot is sure persistent.

You two need to get a room.

Have you checked his record sales though? People do like him. (for the same reason they like porn or crack, but that's just my personal opinion.)

Watched Serenity too many times?

In Holland, too? I thought it was just US who's buying every crap from China.

It's a good film, very emotional. The bit where the Israeli operative and the PLO guy fight over the radio stations is pretty funny.

Happy Birthday!

Virtual Blank - Don't I deserve some pts for successfully turning the freedom of speech thread into a religion thread?

It depends on the audience. To humans, yes. To elves, no.

Maybe killing a few thousand would have helped with that... " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well. Christ isn't Muhammad and Muhammad isn't Christ. They each had different roles in life.

@Mothman - We discussed some of those issues long time ago and I am too tired to repeat them all since obviously you didn't pay too much attention to them the first time. *sigh* I guess I will just offer one final advice: do not be so quick to point the finger. Didn't Christ say let the sinless ones cast the first stone? Your sources are obviously biased as are mine. Why do you trust their accusations so much? You did not witness Muhammad cursing anyone, did you? Was someone in the tent witnessing Muhammad's wedding night with the nine-year-old, who was also 14 (a common age for marriage) according to others? We don't even know what the prophet looks like today. Why do you let these irrelevant 'facts' cloud your judgements? Yes. Muhammad killed a few thousand people, but do you not see how much he accomplished in life? He raised an entire nation. Christ couldn't even convince the Jews that he is the true prophet. If you couldn't possibly find any appreciation for Muhammad the person even if you deny him the prophethood, I have to say that I am sorry to find your position on Muhammad quite disrespectful.

My point is that the line was intended for people at the time. People who were getting killed by the Pagans. Not religious students in the Middle East getting three meals every day. My point is that to fight the Holy Spirit is a worse sin than murder. If others are bent are the destruction of Christianity, would you choose to let your friend, family and everyone you love be murdered or fight for their lives? Don't know him, so I did a quick search. You have sympathy for this idiot? Once Abu Lahab asked the Prophet: "If I were to accept your religion, what would I get?" The Prophet replied: "You would get what the other believers would get." Abu Lahab responded: "Is there no preference or distinction for me?" In which the Prophet replied, "What else do you want?" Abu Lahab replied back: "May this religion perish in which I and all other people should be equal and alike!" I sense serious prejudice from you about Muhammad. Let's pretend for a minute that his mission is true or that it's false but he believes it to be true. You would blame him for causing his persecutors mischief? You claim that Christ suffered so much more than Muhammad, but is death and physical pain truly worse than pain in the spirit? Once Muhammad sought lodging in a village and the pagan children (innocent and sinless in Muhammad's eyes) threw stones at him and chased him out of the village. It was said that Muhammad, the warrior who would unite the Arabia Peninsula, broke down and wept for hours. Do you think he wished for all the persecution and suffering brought upon him? Could it be that he knew he must prevail because his message was true and it was his responsibility to elevate an entire nation of people to an advanced civilization, which he accomplished? For centuries, the Islamic empire stood at the peak of human civilization. Was Muhammad not worthy of praise at all from even Christians?

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword." (Matthew 10:34) It's all about the interpretation...

@Mothman Though it's really not my place to defend Islam... Islam is a religion that advocates peace is indicated by its name itself. S-L-M from which Islam and Muslim are derived means 'peace' and 'submission'. As for references to Jihad or 'holy war', one must understand Islam was born in a harsh environment where fighting was common and essential to survival. You are also taking those misinterpretated lines out of the context. "Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever you catch them...If they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward for those who reject faith....And fight them on until there is no more persecution..." "They ask thee concerning fighting in the Prohibited Month. Say: Fighting therein is a grave offense; but graver is it in the sight of God... to deny Him" and "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them." (As a Christian, you really can't argue against this since "whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or the age to come".) In the early days of Islam, Muslims were being persecuted and slaugthered for their love of God. Even then, Muhammad chose exile at first. He decided to fight not because his life was threatened but that of those he love were threatened. He permitted killings not to save one's own lives but the lives of others. As Volourn pointed out, versed could be twisted to suit one's own cause; hence, Muhammad's own life stands as better instructions than words out of the mouths of 'scholoars'. He taught his followers to pray before, during and after every battle, not to harm any who surrender but send them to return to their homes instead, and eventually forgave the entire city of Mecca, his worst enemies.

Though I'd like to point out that many Islamic clerics have also stood up and condemned those acts of violence as being far worse than caricaturing the prophets. They have openly admitted that the existence of militant extremists is also to blame for the west's misinterpretation of the religion and many of them who tried to calm down the protesters have gotten stoned at as well... As for whether Islam has a tolerance for violence, I certainly don't believe that it advocates any form of aggression. However, I feel perhaps that Muhammad's great military career may have actually become a weakness of Islam as a religion. Maybe many Muslims, out of admiration for the prophet, have found defending the faith with force to be the favorable course when it was clearly the last resort for Muhammad.

Yeah. You are probably moderating under the influence... j/k. Though I will say that the Chinese are kind of dry in the humor department and easily gets offended. At least in my experience. :ph34r:

So is it a chick flick or could a guy actually stay awake through the whole film and not just when pretty women are on the scene? Btw, I hear that Zhang Ziyi was nominated for best actress for some award show. So how is her preformance anyway?

You are correct. These lines were written thousands of years ago. Words could be mistranslated, miscopied or misinterpreted. That's why the corruption of the church is stronger evidence that Christ would never leave his religion in the hands of the church and let the blind guide the blind. Even though Peter was a pious man and a fitting messenger of the faith, Christ would never let such a corrupt institution rule over his people for the years to come.

Great song.

You shouldn't take that line out of the context. Christ first asked Peter: "Who do you believe Me to be?" And Peter answered: "Thou art the Son of the Living God." Then Christ said: "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church." When asked the same question, others had answered to Christ that He was Elias, John the Baptist or one of the Prophets. Personally, I would like to think that when Christ said "upon this rock I will build my Church", he was confirming Peter's words that the belief that Christ is the Son of the God will be the foundation of His religion. Though you are certainly welcome to disagree. Secondly, let's compare the lives of some of the Popes to Christ's teachings. They have killed innocent people and shed so much blood to merely retain power or for mere differences of opinion. There is little resemblance between the instructions of Christ and the manner of government of Popes. Thousands of men of science and learning, Protestants and other sinless souls died by the hands of the Papal government. Could Christ have ever sanctioned such a corrupt institution?

The way I see it, all of the above that you mentioned are still only progression of church and the human society and not the religion itself. Once the prophet is dead, the guidance of a religion is left in earthly hands and no divine revelation could come of it any more. Christ didn't sanction for any church. Neither did Muhammad authorize today's Islamic clergy to be the true interpreters of his religion.

The last thread was closed due to off-topicness. I guess I will risk it one more time and take full blame on this one. Aren't all religions primative and unprogessive? When the religion's prophet dies, the religion dies with it. All that are left are books and ideas written down already. It's the people who will either choose to embrace new ideas over the foundations built by their religions or choose to fight them at all cost.

Well. It's certainly far from a perfect religion since it does not confirm the equality of rights between man and woman but neither did Christ mention it. Perhaps the reason behind these shortcomings are that the people and society have not yet progressed enough to be ready for such ideas at those times, but that's off the topic.