Hi Rhosty,

Thank you for responding. I was intrigued by your comment about "the truly passive nature of traditional Islam".

Again, please correct me if I'm wrong but Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia - indeed Palestine too - were Christian long,long before Muhammed was born. The Muslims bust out of Arabia and conquered Mesopotamia and Syria by the sword in the late seventh century, then Egypt by the sword around 700 AD, then swept across North Africa, entering Spain in about 711 and conquering it by the sword, at least up to the Cantabrian Mountains. For the next four or five hundred years, they ravaged all the lands across the northern Mediterranean, even up into Switzerland, if the great historian Marc Bloch is to be believed.

And when was the Ottoman (Muslim) seige of Vienna ? 1699 or so ?

But I guess we all can go against our 'truly passive nature' from time to time. Even for a thousand years :)

And after all, to get back to the Middle East: where did the disciples go after Jesus was strung up ? I think it might have been Egypt, Syria, Turkey and Greece: they set up churches across the entire Roman Empire, when it is all said and done.

When did the Chaldean and Assyrian Christian churches get set up in what is now Iraq ? Around 330 AD or so, if not earlier. There were Christians in Arabia, even down in the Yemen, long before Muhammed.

So please don't try this 'hard-done-by' trick: Muslims invaded peaceful Christian territory - admit that and we can move on :)

As an atheist, I don't have a particular dog in this fight, but I'm certainly concerned that the truth and fairness can prevail.

Cheers,

Joe

It was Christian slaves which powered alot of Muslim boats, if you
go back a few hundred years. So this notion that religion was
all about peace, is a furphy.

Guys, don't get caught up in scientific and materialistic debates, it's a diversion, Islam makes people uncomfortable, it's a gut feeling and for most people the more exposure they have to Muslims the quicker that gut feeling becomes a strong conviction. People like the author just push that feeling down because they see opinions based on "feelings" as bad and dirty, their opinions are formed by nice clean sheets of paper covered in graphs and statistical tables and the crisp, new book smell of approval from other academics.

Well Rhrosty, it's almost as though we're talking about two different religions/belief-systems. Your passive meditational order seems somewhat at odds with what has been happening in Pakistan (and elsewhere) - and with a Pakistani Minister's offer of a large reward for the killing of the maker of the referenced video/movie.

Did Muhammad perform any miracles? Or, was he just a great general who conquered many nations and was responsible for killing or enslaving a great many people? Given the latter, a strong example has been set for a belligerent and militant view of Islam (which appears to have a great many followers). By the way, what is the origin of the term Islam? (Can it be part of the name for God - Allah 'Islam'?)

Muhammad is supposed to have received a copy of the Holy Qur'an, but how is it that this text has a great many similarities to the Bible? And, what accounts for the apparent contradiction of Muhammad as a man of peace and yet also a conquering general? The difference in the eye of the beholder perhaps? (Or of ulterior motive and vested interest perhaps?)

It has been a fair while since any Christian movement promoted the idea of a holy war or proposed the killing of opponents or detractors, but in parts of the world passive missionaries may be sentenced to imprisonment or death for endeavouring to convey a Christian message. There accordingly appears to be a clear contrast between current Christian teachings and those expounded by a significant portion of the Muslim world.

Jesus a man of peace; Muhammad a man of war? I fear there is a segment of the Islamic world which would relish the idea of a holy war as payback for the misdeeds of the West, and possibly with visions of a new Islamic Golden Age. (Another Dark Age before a new Age of Wisdom?)

I doubt Allah would be well pleased with the way a great many followers are currently behaving - but this is only my opinion of course. (And now, off with my head?)

Well, Christianity was hijacked by atheist Emperor Constantine, around 350AD?
There was serious disagreement between the "Appointed" Roman Pope and the Byzantium one not all that long after, which effectively split the church into two camps, Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy?
Given Islam, was formed around a thousand or so years ago, it's hard to lay blame for much of the earlier conflict on them or it?
The Ottoman empire was hardly Muslim but largely secular? Many of the Mosques were former Christian Cathedrals! Who knows beyond doubt, exactly when they changed hands or or religions?
Moreover, just as esoteric Christianity was hijacked for political ends, it might be also argued that Islam suffered a similar fate, with the "so-called descendants" of the Prophet, issuing edits that had very little in common with Islam's core or founding principles? Children often have views that are in extreme variance with their parents or forbears beliefs?
Why, even the Sofies were attacked and reviled, almost as if they were hated Christians, and for no better reason, than they counselled against violence and or violent reprisals.
From their perspective, the Prophet, by his living example, believed in peaceful coexistence; and was a person of very modest means?
Sure Islam was involved in various conflicts, some reactive some proactive?
So also was everybody else!
Much of what are now international borders were won with the blood of millions, and hardly any religion is entirely blameless or outside?
And yes, the spread of massively revised or extreme versions of Islam, has been often extremely coercive.
Particularly, those patriarchal misogynist offshoots of offshoots, that morphed into blame-shifting blood-thirsty cults, born of an acquired victim mentality and a lunatic blood-lust?
At some point, we all need to understand that everything that happened was for a reason; and, we really do need to stop with the blame shifting; [enough already,] and take personal responsibility for everything that happen(s)(ed) to us, and or, the positive or negative decisions that cause(d)(s)/precede(d)(s) almost every event or outcome? Not for nothing is it written, we are co-creators of our own universe?
Rhrosty.

Wow, Rhosty ! So many 'inaccuracies' !

The Eastern and Western Roman Empires were differentiated around 330 AD. Muhammed was strutting his stuff across western Arabia in about 622-632 AD. Catholicism and Orthodoxy split around 1000 AD. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong with any dates.

That's a straw man about Muhammed causing a division in the Roman Empire - but that differentiation predated the Little Baby Muhammed by some 250 years.

The Ottomans were Muslims. The last Caliph was, I think, an Ottoman. Yes, indeed, it was an Albanian Muslim, Kemal Ataturk, who abolished the Caliphate (not the West, and certainly not the nasty US). A Muslim abolished the Caliphate in order to set up secular dominance in Turkey, the state separate from, and over, the mosque.

Yes, a common tactic of Muslim invaders was to either destroy churches or temples - remember Ayodhya ? - or to take them over as Muslim centres, to obliterate the previous owners one way or the other.

I don't know to what extent fundamentalist Muslims exterminated Sufis and other sects - you may know far more than most of us on that score. Most of us out here would take your word for any extermination by peaceful Muslims of other peaceful Muslims.

You may also know certainly more than me when you write, " .... those patriarchal misogynist offshoots of offshoots, that morphed into blame-shifting blood-thirsty cults, born of an acquired victim mentality and a lunatic blood-lust ..." I'll take your word for that too.

And yes, we must "take personal responsibility for everything that happen(s)(ed) to us ...."

But when Muslims proclaim that they wish to beat their swords into ploughshares, unequivocally, I will take it more seriously as a civilized ideology, my friend :)

Cheers,

Joe