• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Isis

Status
Not open for further replies.
OK, keep the post civil and on topic. or it'll be closed. I have to train shortly and can't keep watching?

You can disagree without being distasteful FFS...
 
ok so back to it, my point is i dont think islam is a religon of peace, when it was founded in violence
 
you guys can cry moan and troll all you want,,threaten moderators on me that ive known for 9 years,,go your hardest,,doesnt change the fact i dont think islam is a religon of peace when it was founded on war
 
Most ideologies were founded in violence, or have long histories of violence associated with them.
 
Same could be said for Christianity and Judaism and many others.
Nonetheless there are peaceful Jews, peaceful Christians, etc.

Are peaceful Muslim sects the right ones? Or are violent ones? Harder to say which is "true" to the Koran but for the rest of us, it's fair to say that only the peaceful ones are acceptable
 
joeblowforshow said:
Same could be said for Christianity and Judaism and many others.
Nonetheless there are peaceful Jews, peaceful Christians, etc.

Are peaceful Muslim sects the right ones? Or are violent ones? Harder to say which is "true" to the Koran but for the rest of us, it's fair to say that only the peaceful ones are acceptable
Click to expand...

Question:Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?



Summary Answer:The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.
The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God, however this can work both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
 
kramer1 said:
Question:Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?


Summary Answer:The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subjective as anything else in the Quran.
The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God, however this can work both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.
Click to expand...


Once again, resorting to quotes from islamaphobic propaganda websites like this makes your argument appear even more ridiculous.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Bible-Quran-Violence.htm
 
kramer1 said:
instead of just saying the argument is ridiculous point out the falsities, make points, produce discussion, im getting the feeling you havn't got a clue
Click to expand...

Quoting what I've been saying to you back at me isn't going to get you anywhere.
 
Bazza20 said:
Not saying I agree or disagree but just saying it is a islamaphobic website isn't proof that what was said is wrong.
I'm interested in some actual facts.
Click to expand...

A critical part of any academic argument is making sure your information is objective and unbiased. Quoting an alarmist website like the one he has been quoting which clearly has an agenda and expecting people to take it seriously is plain ridiculous.
 
Repacked said:
A critical part of any academic argument is making sure your information is objective and unbiased. Quoting an alarmist website like the one he has been quoting which clearly has an agenda and expecting people to take it seriously is plain ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Again, that doesn't prove it is wrong. As you would know in any argument you need to provide fact and reason why their argument is wrong. Just saying it is alarmist isn't doing that.
 
Repacked said:
A critical part of any academic argument is making sure your information is objective and unbiased. Quoting an alarmist website like the one he has been quoting which clearly has an agenda and expecting people to take it seriously is plain ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Point out the ridiculous sections of the article, stop making pointless posts, i'll tell you why you cant, because you havnt got a clue
 
Bazza20 said:
Again, that doesn't prove it is wrong. As you would know in any argument you need to provide fact and reason why their argument is wrong. Just saying it is alarmist isn't doing that.
Click to expand...
He cant prove any of it wrong because he has no clue about what he is arguing for
 
kramer1 said:
Point out the ridiculous sections of the article, stop making pointless posts, i'll tell you why you cant, because you havnt got a clue
Click to expand...

I haven't pointed out any 'ridiculous sections of the article'. I haven't spoken to the content of the article at all. All I've commented on is you're inability to make a convincing argument. Everything you write proves that you're an A grade moron. An amusing moron but a moron nonetheless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top