Irfun as usual your piece is timely and thought provoking. As usual it will trigger the usual string of ant-Muslim comments which frustrate balanced debate.

Note that since you wrote the piece JI's spiritual head, Abu Bakar Bashir, has issued a defacto Press Release from his prison cell. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16813119-23109,00.html

He said "I really disapprove of bombings in non-conflict areas for whatever reason, including in Bali, because it can be almost certain that innocent and unknowing victims would fall," however he said he was particularly saddened if such attacks claimed the lives of "people whose religion is Islam".

Bashir also advised the Indonesian Government to "approach closer to Allah" by practising God's law as best as it can.

Irfun. This backs up your Islamic infighting thesis.

Perhaps JI and Co's message to the Indonesian Government is 'don't suppress radical Islam (as a religion and political movement) in Indonesia or we'll make it much much worse'

On calls to ban JI. JI, unfortunately, is not just a terrorist organisation. It is at the sharp end of a radical Muslim religious and political movement in Indonesia.

For many, as yet moderate young Indonesians, it must seem like a type of "Robin Hood" to the "infidel" West's "Sheriff".

The Indonesian Government fears that if it banned JI it would just be glorifying it - thus giving JI and radical Islam generally a wider following. If the calls come from the West to ban JI it would also antaganise natioanlist sentiment ("Australia and US don't tell us what to do") in addition to the religeous backlash.

Reluctance to ban JI is not appeasement. Indonesia is always keeping back the forces of religious, ethnic and geographical fragmentation.

Also sending the JI organisation underground would remove the current ability of Indonesian security agencies to keep tabs on many "legal" JI members. Being able to keep an eye on the "devils you know" while swatting the illegal terrorists (who occasionally come up to meet them) is a seemingly contradictory but effective art.

good post plantagenet and thanks for the insight Irfan.

Three posts in plantagenet and your prediction about anti muslim diatribe has yet to be proven corret - and I am amazed; I have always enjoyed Irfans commentaries for their style as well as their content. This piece is no exception.

Have to make it four posts without anti-muslim sentiment. V/interesting angle about sufis, Irfan, really appreciate your insight on this latest horror.

Did anyone watch Insight on SBS last night? V/impressed by Indonesian speakers - the sincerity, the passion, the desire for friendship w/Australia. All this before the latest bombings.

My condolences to all who have suffered.

Would love to hear some stories about individual Balanese and how they are coping.

Cheers

Irfan, I've not read the other posts, just your article.
I'm writing from Singapore, and on 2 things in your piece I totally agree.
1/ It is an attack on "Indonesian" Islam (in the popular cultural sense)
and
2/ The Yemeni traders were "Sufi's"

Those to facts are very indicative of 'which' source the attacks are coming from.
They are clearly Islamic, but which 'brand'.... one can only presume that it is Wahabi or Salafi, of which there are a-plenty in Indonesia.

I've been travelling on the MRT here in Sg, and I tell you, I almost packed death when I saw a 'dubious' looking character with a back pack and playing with his mobile. Then, even more so when 2 very determined looking Indonesians were walking along in the MRT with a Back Pack and the other using a mobile.... sends shudders up on'es spine.

I don't suppose they showed the severed heads of the bombers on the front page of the Age or Herald, but they sure did here.

The point I'd like to make in this post is that as I've been saying all along, its the 'agenda drivers' who we are at war with. Not the Irfans or Fellow Humans. So, don't take it personally when we attack what we perceive to be the scriptural justifications for those who wish to harm us. (and many other 'collateral's' along the way)

If it were an attack on Indonesian sufist-style Islam, why didn't they just blow up an NU office and blame it on the Christians? That should have served their purpose well enough. I still think Westerners were a target as were the non-Muslim majority of Bali.

“Different reasons are given for the Bali terrorist attacks.”
The only reason for Islamic terrorist attacks is simple – hatred: hatred of anything non-Islamic. Potted histories of Muslims relocating to Indonesia are all very interesting, but there is still only one reason for terrorism – hatred.
I agree with Irfun Yusuf that those who care about Islam should be at the forefront of fighting terror. But they are not, even though they have had plenty of time and opportunity to do so. It is up to the West to deal with the situation. The ‘moderate’ Muslims in Australia are too busy preying on single mothers and others low in the pecking order – converting them to Islam – to care too much about what is going on far away from the safety they enjoy here. And if some of you characters looking for ‘debate’ about Muslims don’t watch out, you will all find yourselves facing the East with your backsides in the air.
And, anyone who accepts that Abu Bakir Bashir doesn’t believe in bombing is pretty naïve or just plain stupid. He has, in the last couple of days, advocated the use of nuclear weapons

Irf

Thank you for your article.

You end it by saying something along the lines of - those at the forefront of Islam should fight the terrorists.

Where are these people Irf? I heard Kaiser Trad (not sure about spelling) on the John Laws Morning Show. I thought he was supposed to be a leader. He was most unconvincing. His voice did not reveal any compassion for any of the victims of the latest Bali bombings. Indeed, getting any commitment out of him was like drawing teeth.

G'day BOAZ_David! You don't sound very happy on your holiday? I guess you must be getting some first hand knowledge about the aftermath of terrorism. Take care mate.

Cheers
Kay

Kay... thnx for the sympathy:) its not holiday, right now its 10.00pm and I just arrived at the airport, but 30 minutes ago I was on the Bedok Reservior in a boat that they are trying to power by electric motor, using my speed controls. Everyone from the Managing director to the coolie of the company were there giving their tuppence worth. I'm as sweaty as a stuck pig :) do NOT hug me now... be warned :)

Leigh is getting passionate there.. rightly so to a degree, there is such a thing as Good muslim/bad Muslim, Irf is a goody it seems, but let that not lull us into a false sense of security and lack of vigilance.

Well, lets all examine such issues as this one in the broader perspective, and also in terms of the fundamentals of their faith.

The Indigineous Balinese are Hindu and have been overpowered by an aggressive Islam.It all sounds a bit ominous for the rest of the free thinking open minded scientific and religious world.

Leigh

I don't think anyone is taken in by Bashir's "Press Release". The fact the he laments the deaths of one group over another group is bizarre but typical of religeous fanatics. The fact that he's permitted to issue a defacto Press Release is disgusting.

I think basically the bombings are part of a campaign to create tension within Indonesia, scaring moderate Indonesians towards the (misplaced) "comfort zone" of radical Islam.

If JI (and other radical organisations are banned) this can only be enforced by government repression - an excellent breeding ground for young dissident groups who can then take up Islamic radicalism.

So I think an Indonesian government crackdown on JI (and others) would probably make things worse.

In any case I don't think Downer (despite his proposed visit to Indonesia) seriously expects such a crackdown will be launched. What does matter to the Indonesias is what the US wants. If the US wanted a change in policy it would pressure Indonesia towards this privately rather than publicly.

Note that Indonesia's President (former General) Yudhoyono appears to have closer ties to the US than Australia. For example: he's lived several years in the US - starting with the Airborne School and US Army Rangers education in 1976 to US Army's Infantry Officer Advanced Course in 1982 and 1984 to US Command and General Staff College, in 1991. He also gained an MA in business management from Webster University, Missouri, in 1991. All this must have made an impression. http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Susilo_Bambang_Yudhoyono

He's more their man. If they talk he'll listen.

No, Irfan, the target was men, women and children, preferably infidels - but any other victims are fine, too.

I see you are still in denial abouyt your religion. As I said before, radical Muslims kill, while moderates, like Irfan, make excuses.

Check out http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=2&subID=46
to see what your fellow Muslim Abu Bakar Bashir, leader of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), thinks of us non-Muslims: He says peace is impossible and "If they want to have peace, they have to accept to be governed by Islam."

It will be a cold day in hell before I follow a torturer like your 'dear' prophet. Irf, remember that I gave you references and links to passages from your own hadiths telling of the despicable torture practiced by Mohammud and asking you to condemn the man. Nada. Silence. You would not condemn him; you ignored me.

See, folks, that says a lot about Irfan Yusuf, the "moderate", "compassionate" Muslim that likes to write about how Islam is misunderstood. If you really care about Islam, why don't you call your friends in the mosque together and say: You know, folks, we consider the prophet to be the most noble person and great example, yet he was a torturer, murderer, wife-beater, slaver, etc... What about this? How can this be? Are these accounts lies or are we blind?

Now that would be honest dialogue.

Sufism may be a "soft' version of Islam, but what we see around the world is the 'pure' hard Islam of the days of Mohammed making a comeback, backed by modern conditions, immigration, technology and petro-dollars. Make no mistake, the terror will continue because it is in the heart and soul of the 'pure' Islam. And as long as there is terror, there will be people like Irf saying "oh, no, that is not the real Islam" even while standing on the broken bodies of its victims.

Kactuz

kaktuz,that's exactly what they used to say about Jews and Gypsies and disabled people in the 1920's and 30's in Europe.

Good article Irfan,

Two comments though:

1. Islam in essence is moderate: Sufism is more spiritual pracice though.
2. Terrorists target is not tourists or non-muslims: 99% of their victims /targets were muslims long before sep 11 and Al Qaeda. ‘they hate our freedom’ slogan reflects a wrong understanding of the ideology and the target. They want their way (kill science, modernisation go back to the Islamic caliphate states) and that’s it. They were blowing other muslims for decades before 2001. The US just happened to get in the way but their crosshair is pre-dominantly other muslims.

Islamism is just another bloody 'ISM' that we will have to eventually deal with as we have had to deal with nazism/communism....
All the isms are an excuse to sieze power. To have dominion over the rest of the world. To be Mr Almighty and have others bow to you.
Right now the world is teetering on the edge of a conflict between Islamism and Capitalism.
The Islamic leaders want to drag the world back five hundred years and Capitalism wants to drag as much wealth out of the world as they can.
God must weep.

Hello Irfun Yusuf, and thank you for your article - both interesting and informative.

Please allow me to apologize for some of the remarks made by our countrymen, I can at least say that such prejudicial attitudes do not exist amongst all of us.

I don’t know a lot about Islam, I do know that there is an emphasis on kindness and benevolance in Islam, exemplified by the requirement that all Muslims must donate a portion of income to charity. I don’t think that exists in Christianity.

To all my fellow countrymen who are happy to write all Muslims and their religion off in a single stroke:
The terrorist's motivation, as has been discussed, is hatred. Perhaps they have lost a relative in a bombing by a US aircraft (in Afghanistan or elsewhere), perhaps they have just grown up in a poverty stricken environment and seen Western expats living it up in their mist. In any case, something painful has happened to them, and when something really painful happens, like losing a family member to someone else's bullet, all reason (obviously) goes out the window. The pain of uncertainty, knowing that such a thing could happen has to be suppressed, and the best way is to find a scapegoat, someone to blame. You blame the West, or the USA, and then you have somewhere to channel the pain, and a way to 'make it right'. Acknowledging our shared humanity, and that Westerners, like Muslims, are all just trying to live their lives as best they can to make themselves happy is just too difficult and too painful, having someone to blame is so much more satisfying Then you have a way to resolve that painful uncertainty.

This is exactly what we are doing by blaming 'Islam' as the cause of the world's problems.

I think we can do better than to think just like the terrorists.

That's my opinion.

Kactuz

You have hit the nail on the head! You are spot on in saying that moderate Muslims make excuses. Note the Irf did not reply to my post - see above.

Cheers
Kay

funkster,
Since you state you know nothing about Islam; how can you state Islam is not the current cause of the problem of terror? Please explain what is driving followers of Islam to bomb innocent people in Bali?

You state: Quote, "I don’t know a lot about Islam, I do know that there is an emphasis on kindness and benevolance in Islam, exemplified by the requirement that all Muslims must donate a portion of income to charity. I don’t think that exists in Christianity....This is exactly what we are doing by blaming 'Islam' as the cause of the world's problems.

It is also obvious you know very little about who provides the largest contribution of charity in the world. How much was given by Australia to the tsumani compared to Saudi Arabia? In fact Israel gave and offered more than Saudi Arabia. Muslim charity is restricted to Islamisation, they do not give unconditionally.

Channel 9. Thursday 6 October 2005. Reporter: Sarah Ferguson Producer: Nick Rushworth

Muslim Sheik Khalid Yasin said Muslims couldn't have non-Muslim friends.

He's setting up radio and television network here to spread his extremist message. Launched last weekend, the Islamic Broadcasting Corporation aims to attract a quarter million subscribers. This US preacher is aiming at young Australian Muslims with a radical mix of pleas for understanding terrorism and anti-Western conspiracy theories.

For Yasin, terrorists bombing Bali is justified by hundreds of years of Western oppression of Muslims.

Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda did not carry out the September 11 attacks on the United States - they were a "rogue operation" by Western governments. Instead, he says, "we now know the way those buildings fell, they fell from internal explosive charges the same way it's done on a building site."

He said, "The Koran gives a clear position regarding homosexuality lesbianism and bestiality," says Yasin. "They are aberrations punishable by death...We can't walk around society slandering them because there is legislation against doing that."

According to Yasin is was missionaries from the World Health Organization and Christian groups who went into Africa and inoculated people for diphtheria, malaria, yellow fever and they put in the medicine the AIDS virus.

For all his claims of having been mistreated by the Australian media, reporter Sarah Ferguson discovers that Yasin has been given an easy ride. He's also in Australia raising money for his broadcast company based in England. And local Muslims eager for their own voice have given big money. But SUNDAY has looked into the company and found Yasin's claims about it are bogus. And while he presents himself as a "moral-minded" teacher of Islam, someone who corrects "distortions and misconceptions" about his religion, his academic qualifications are also a fiction.

2GB Ray Hadley will interview Sarah Ferguson from Sunday program re the Yasin interview (Friday 7/10/05)...
between 10am - 1pm you can hear it and download to hard drive via www.2gb.co

funkster has no right to apologise on be half of all Australians.You can do on your own behalf but not on mine or many others.

Irfan,where are these protest marches against terrorism that will show us your good faith and alliegence to country.The sniggering silence some groups are displaying are making us a tad distrustful.

We should not back away from these issues for the sake of offending Muslim sensitivities.The prodminately Hindu Balinese are protesting since their Govt are sitting on their hands and not confronting terrorism.Abu Bakar Bashir will soon be released and he condones the use of nuclear weapons on the West.For him to be an untouchable,a sizable proportion of the Indonesian pop must sympathise with him.

What does that say about our Australian Muslims?Muslims cannot go on nodding and paying lip service to their good faith and fidelity by hiding behind a veil of being vilified or disriminated against.We want to see actions and not just words.

Funkster,

Thanks for your kind note. Luckily most Australians are like yourselves and Reason but you do not need to apologise.

Interesting postings from the usual 'I hate muslims' squad:

1. Note the selective honesty when they pick on 1 sheikh comments but for example, they ignore all other good positive preachers like the Turk/Yugoslavian imams in Penshurst and their open day mosque teachings. They have been running religious harmony for the last 5 years. Yet Philo runs with the usual copy & paste from the daily telegraph. Why aren't these efforts in the media?

2. Arjay does not like you to be apologetic for the way a minority of Australians think. Yet he would like to play the blame game on all Muslims because of terrorism. Read my above postings about terrorism and its original target. The main target of terrorism is Muslims.

Peace,

F.H.

We should evaluate a faith by its scriptures/foundations, not the 'nice actions' of a few.

On one point "Muslims should not take Christians or pagans as friends"

Yasin says this but your Yugoslav Imams have 'open days' etc......

Well, the 2nd does not cancel the first, as it is more likely an 'evangelistic/Dakwa' exercise, than a 'make friends with the non muslims' exercise.

FUNKSTER. If we stick to facts and issues, we don't have anything to apologise for. You also may need to brush up on the history of Islam and it's expansion before writing off the comments which write off a religion as u say. The core issue of such bombings is 'hate', correct. But
1/ by whom ? and
2/for what reasons ?
3/Towards who ?

Ok, lets clarify. Its hate 'by' Extremist Muslims, against "Western decadence/Perceived Western oppression of Muslims/Islamic wishywashyness and moderation"

The most common apologetic by extremists and moderates alike is "We condemn all attacks against INNOCENT' non combatants"

But, are those who support Western values or those who hold a 'weak' view of Islam 'innocent' ? (in the eyes of the extremists) That is why they can slaughter even children without mercy.

Even the hadith of Islam contains the following

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html
Chapter 9: PERMISSIBILITY OF KILLING WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THE NIGHT RAIDS, PROVIDED IT IS NOT DELIBERATE

Book 019, Number 4321:
It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them">>

Now, this clearly justifies the killing of women and children as long as it was 'not deliberate'. Are you getting the message yet ? about the 'flexibility' of Islam.

Do you also note here how 'night raids' are permissable, yet F.H. will tell you over and over that 'only defensive' actions are justified and then 'not to transgress the limits'... hmmmm
Does a 'night raid' sound 'defensive' to you ?

Are my comments 'anti-Islamic' or..."Islamic" :)

Ok, interesting thoughts by all.

First of all, Philo, I said I don’t know much about Islam, I am a student at UWS where there are alot of Muslims so I interact with them. Also, I have studied Islam at uni, so I do know a little.

Now, I originally wanted to say that I actually disagree with Irfun's idea: I actually think the attack was against Westerners and Balinese, if you were attacking Indonesian Islam, Bali is clearly the wrong target! It makes no sense.

However, I was shocked and distracted by all this prejudice, and ran out of words.

Philo, I never said Islam wasn’t the problem, but I do believe that extremists/ Osama Bin Laden / Abu Bakir Bashir do not represent all Muslims any more than the KKK or Pauline Hanson (I don’t think they are the same by the way!) represent all Christians or all Australians!

Regarding Yasin - nut bags occur anywhere, but it doesn’t mean they in any way represent the majority.

Arjay, true, many Muslims wont condemn extremist actions, and clearly they should. But this is for a reason, because they see someone fighting against the injustice that often occurs. Not to excuse condoning terrorism - everyone should condemn it. I don’t want to wash over the whole thing like "all Muslims are wonderful and victims", BUT all I am saying is there are plenty of decent peace loving Muslims out there. Of course there are nasty ones too. Never write off a whole group, no one is that homogenous.

BOAZ_David, now we can refer to the Quaran if you like, about the flexibility of Islam.
But, allow me to point out, how many women and children have been accidentally killed in US bombing raids? LOTS

Not only that, but the Old Testament of the Bible comes straight out and says :

"Though shalt not kill!" But that doesn’t stop all us Christian nations from killing when we want to!

BD,

What’s with the ‘lalala, am not listening, am not listening” is there few of you using the same PC?

Quoran is the only divine source for all Muslims. Hadith mostly was written two centuries after the prophet’s death. What conflicts with the Quoran cannot be credible.

The only ‘fight’ allowed in Islam is in self defence format, not pre-emption, and not civilians. The only two people who are confused are the likes of Al Qaeda and yourself.

Now, Mr devout Missionary :-) , all the new neo-con pro war and killing of civilians as we speak call themselves ‘devout Christians’ .. What’s your views on Bush’s mission from God to invade Iraq and Afghanistan?

There is 85,000 civilians dead in Iraq alone to date. How does the banning of baby milk formulas to Iraq killing 600,000 new born during the sanctions?
All the ‘legal’ killing of civilians (in millions) is happening in the name of your religion today, here and now! Any words of wisdom to your version of Taliban?

Kaktuz,

There are different types of references on the character of Mohamed (PBUH):

- Muslims historians.
- Arab Christian historians. (ie Dr Milad Hanna)
- Arab Christian churches historians./ church.
- Non religious credible historians/ scholars (William Muir, George Sale, other German and French scholars).
- Anything else you fancy: missionaries, etc..

The first four sources agree on the character of Mohamed (PBUH) as an honest, always truthful and charitable man. All he left at his death was his mule! Conflicting features that you claim cannot co-exist within the above definition.

Enjoy your ‘truth’ but have a think every now and then.

Kalweb,

Muslim communities are doing many things on youth education amongst other things to combat terrorism in all mosques including the city ones. This is more important than the ‘marching in the street’ suggested by Arjay. The media is just selective good news never sells. Boaz, Kaktuz and Philo might boycott the daily telegraph.

Yep

Thought the debate would degenerate to "look at the relegious foundations" argument.

How about leaving this old road and returning to Indonesia, where Islam is only one of several inflences on Indonesian's lives.

New possibilities may be:

Could the Bali bombings - Indonesians mainly killing Indonesians - be a symptom of a political struggle in Indonesia?

Could secular, renegade, Indonesian army elements have provided their expertise to the bombers as part of an anti democratic destabilisation campaign? Its not out of character.

Or, if Westerners were the targets, is this more a nationalist (rather than religeous) reaction against the West.

Boazy - welcome back - I think some of your observations are good - but the moment you get on to religious foundations as your main argument, and start your quotations, it becomes a textual tit for tat.

So, I think, the narrowing of the debate to old books and "all Muslims are fundamentally the same" puts a dampener on intelligent discussion.

As you can realise Fellow_Human and Ifran being pacifists represent a branch of Islam that is not political, and not totalitarian. They are Mr nice guys. The problems that the world faces today are not from nice Muslims; it is from those who will enforce a totalitarian state. From an active political arm of orthodox Islam that believes the entire world must fall under the laws of Allah and infidels must be destroyed.

Fellow_human and Ifran do not represent or have any power to influence this radical orthodox arm of Islam. Unfortunately they defend their brand if Islam against any associated criticism. They attempt to defend an inane religious branch of Islam against the radical elements of Islamic orthodoxy that might taint their view of the religion.

What we must be aware of is the power brokers of radical Islam and their agenda to enforce the laws of Allah upon all nations. The power brokers of this brand of Islam believe the Qur'an exactly as BD and myself present as the basis of their agenda. As well as the example set by Mahomet in his ruthless warlike life. Unfortunately Ifran and Fellow_human are irrelevant in standing with us in outlawing the radical basis of their orthodox belief in the Qur'an.

By a continual defence that: "This not what the Qur'an teaches" is unfortunately not believed by the radical Islamists, and it is what these Islamist believe that must be challenged and outlawed.

By the continual defence that Islam is a peacful religion is not the nature of peace we believe in. Peace to them is only achieved when all the opposition is subjected or destroyed. A diverse democracy is not acceptable to them and is considered by them as an abomination to Allah. They cannot coexist with persons of different faith, that is why even Fellow_human and Ifran in their view are not orthodox.

But just between us most Muslims do not mind if the whole world is subjected to Allah's laws as the Qur'an outlines. Death of infidels is not a sad day to orthodox Islamists. They continue to degrade the coalition of England Australia and USA's attempt to protect the right of all people in Iraq to live together in a democratic secular system. They prefer the continual bombing and overun of extremists in Iraq than a secular society.

Irf and others

Newcastle is my home town. My family is grieving for a long term friend.

I have not heard any "moderates" speaking out for the Newcastle victims - let alone any others!

Plantaganet is quite correct.

The holy rollers should realise that when they turn otherwise productive discussions into theological mumbo-jumbo, most of us tend to move on to another discussion.

I thank Irfan for at least trying to present another perspective to the spin and propaganda upon which the noisiest of this forum's correspondents rely.

I was born in Newcastle, and I have many relatives there.

Philio:

"They continue to degrade the coalition of England Australia and USA's attempt to protect the right of all people in Iraq to live together in a democratic secular system. They prefer the continual bombing and overun of extremists in Iraq than a secular society."

Mate, you have got to be kidding! I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist or anything, and I am sure that there are many fighting who belive this, but its the power brokers who make decisions and control power. And they are NOT there to protect the right of Iraqis to democracy.

To belive George W only invaded for that reason is completely and totally niave, and I have to say, I thought the same thing for a while. But on balance, all the evidence suggests these types of international policy issues are never made out of altruistic concern for the people of other nations. Maybe, at times they may make up about maybe, 30%, but the nation state is there to look after itself and its own people.

If protecting democracy was a concern, then there would be loads of US troops in Zimbabwe outsting Mudgabe!! but no one is doing squat. O! I forgot - they are black!

Duck

G'day mate. Hope your family and friends are ok in Newcastle. We started out in Taree, then Nabiac, Salt Ash, Medowie - goes on - Dad was a Raffie, fought for our freedom.

It would be good if so-called "moderate" Muslims had the guts - ugh - I mean honesty - to verbally fight for our freedom.

My father died for you bloody ungrateful people, vis a vis: moderate Muslim people who do not speak out about Islamic terrorists.

Philo / Kalweb,

Back to the subject and topic by Irfan, Muslims know that terrorism attacks are predominantly targeting moderate Muslims to form totalitarian / theological states.

I lived in the Middle East/ Egypt for 29 years of my life. Since 1980 until 1996, the so called Islamists were blowing up other Muslims in order to push them to a totalitarian state.

Islam is currently the fastest growing religion of the Abraham faith despite the propaganda machine. The war on terrorism is an ideology war and cannot be won except by moderate Muslims with the support of the west. This cannot happen by continuously alienating the Muslim majority.

Philo,

When Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) died he asked his followers to chose/ elect the leaders amongst themselves provided that he is the fittest to run the nation. The first four governors were selected by a council. That is an early form of democracy to me and majority of Muslims.

Peace,

Hey FELLOW,

Is islam the fastest growing religion or just the fastest breeders? What I mean is, how many people are converting to islam because it is such a 'great' and "peaceful" religion?

Multiplying quickly by having 7 children to 7 wives for different nights of the week is a sure way to become a majority. Better not alienate the breeding machines, shall we.

Funkster, inserting some political correctness there with your Mugabe statement. Is'nt he trying to rid the country of whites? That should be ample reason for the 'west' to get involved

Fellow_human,
Ifran's post is about radical Islam and its outworking in Bali, you seem to give tasset support to the anti-Western propaganda from radical Islam and challenge Australia's role in fighting its stronghold in Afghanistan and Iraq against the introduction of free democratic governments. You pose as a secret agent [an enemy] one opposed to Australia's role. Either you are fighting for freedom for all or undermining Australia's involvement in this cause?

Your'e not released from the radical agenda that wishes to dominate all societies, you constantly defend Islam. You would have us believe your view of Islam is not the problem. Fine! But the problem the world faces today is not the peace and tolerance you uphold, it is the entrenched belief of some Muslims who believe Islam must rule the World.

I believe in life for all including atheists. I lobbied Governments and foreign affairs Ministers when Kurds were being blown apart. I lobbied again when Muslims in Bosnia were being ethnically annihilated. You see what a person believes is irrelevant as long as that believe in the right for others to live. Instead of defending Islam as though it is the best way and comparing it to atrocities committed by so called Christians; come up with the principle that life is more important than 'my' belief. Life is God's business as he created it, and this principle outweighs any totalitarian religious doctrine.

Democracy is that every man of good will has the right to live. That is the guiding principle that forms western liberal democracy. The principle is the value of the life of all persons is equal before God and all deserve to live - even the sinful atheist. When America had to make a choice on where to drop the Atom bomb on Japan in WII they chose cities with large Christian populations. Why? Because the USA wanted the proud Japanese to see the value of all life is equal, USA deliberately chose not to bomb Shinto warmongers.

Philio, thats interesting about the Abomb, but is that really true?

I thought that the bomb site were actually backups - the weather was bad over primary target so they had to move onto secondary target, not anything to do with Christiandom....?

davo, regarding Mudgabe. Yeah, sure he got rid of some white farmers, but at the moment, he is demolishing whole suburbs where (a, opposition supporters live) (b, poor people live). On most occasions it tends to be both, as the downtrodden poor tend to support the opposition.

I would have thought if the international order was really so concerned about 'justice', 'freedom' and 'democracy' then we would be bombing the crap out of mudgabe and supporters.......

Davo,

Mix of backgrounds in the followers of Islam speaks for itself. Arabs are now less that 15% of the total Muslims world. In the last few years, there are less than a million new converts into the US and around 80,000 in Italy. You can dig out an article in the SMH few months ago under "the Lure of Allah” about the number of Australians choosing Islam.

Most Muslims of my generation and the previous have one wife and 2-3 kids at most but don’t let the truth come in the way of a good story (the 7 x 7 one!)

Philo,

I noticed your attacks always come when you run out of logic amigo!

Maybe I should tag along with your theory and cheer to see Australians in the full front of war in every country in the world? Is this your version of ‘if you are not with us you are against us?'

My message to people like yourself is:

a. There are proud Australian Muslims like myself and equally proud of both. We see our religion as peaceful and loving religion. You seem to be struggling with that.
b. I am explaining my opinion on best ways to fight fanaticism is to promote / support moderate Islam. Seems your view on peace with Islam is to fight them until they convert.
c. The fact you need to admit to yourself is that you are a radical Christian (not like Reason for example) and can never accept Islam as a religion. Just be honest to yourself and move on.

Thats it for this thread.

Peace to you all,

Those considered to be moderates like Sheik Hilaly and Keyser Trad are also involved in double speak.Publically they condemn the radicals but privately within the inner circle of true believers the attitude changes.Philip Clarke from 2GB banned Keyser Trad from expressing any views on his programme last year.

Keyser Trad implied that Australian women should dress more modestly or expect to be sexually assualted.

I just see Muslims just viewing themselves as always the victims and always pushing the boundaries of their rights and beliefs into our sphere of influence.Our cultures and belief systems are not harmony and I don't see a peaceful resolution.

(modified from my post on "The Pretend Peacemakers" but equally relevant)

I'm always surprised how hyper-sensitive many OLO posters have been about the tightening of anti-terror laws (which I support) - they strongly oppose the government line.

However concerning the coalition killing many thousands of Iraqi civilians they support the government line. The numbers of Iraqis killing Iraqis are even worse. Yes Saddam was far better than Mao (who the West began to back in the 1970's). However is the escalating civil war in Iraq worse than Saddam? - no studies are permitted.

As many intelligence insiders have said about Iraq "it was about oil not WMD or terror."

Now that many Muslims have been killed in Iraq (a country devoid of an international terror record) the West has created the terror industry in Iraq, in Madrid and in London - perhaps in Bali. And next?

We'll hear more about 4 Aussies murdered by terrorists in Bali than 18,000 Pakistanis dead from the earthquake. Should the media airtime be based on nationality and nature of political murders alone or should we look at the foundations of these murders more fundamentally than "Muslims by religion are different and bad".

Every death is sad - and acutely felt - whereever it is.

Politicians justify death (by tough talk) in someone else's country.

planet

My friend member was killed in the latest Bali Bombing. Was yours?

I'm very sorry to hear that Kay.

I've had two friends recently killed by Muslim terrorists in the Philippines.

It was a shock as well.

Fellow_human,
Who is alienating the majority Muslim community? You state, "The war on terrorism is an ideology war and cannot be won except by moderate Muslims with the support of the west. This cannot happen by continuously alienating the Muslim majority."

Where are the majority moderate Muslims fighting the war on terror? Moderate Muslims do not have a voice on terrorist forums. You believe the West should support Moderate Muslims, how about the moderate Muslims support the many religious voices of the West! Your agenda is revealed by the dominant thinking that the West must support a single religion. Your reading of Muslim media releases denouncing the West as terrorists seeking Muslim oil and territory is what is alienating the Muslim community. You either support the freedom and diversity of the West against religious extremists, no matter what the opposition is saying, or you come out and reveal your tassid support of a pure Muslim State in Iraq etc.

You see the Muslim media see the infidel West as diverse and evil especially USA, and unfortunately it is, that is because its people have the freedom and openness to live as they choose. This is not liked by religious fundamentalists. I do not like it either. But that is democracy. It is just that States like the former Afganistan under Muslim law oppressed the people and was the reason for the mass exodus of people who did not want to live in a religious State. Muslim law is opressive to the free choice of people, and many convert because they look for strong leadership. This is what happened in Germany under Hitler, he was an impressive leader. You see democracy has many voices, and not all are good, but it gives the individual right of conviction to follow their conscience.

So you either support the evil West including the decadent USA; or ignore the extremist Muslim bombings and accept they are doing Allah's work in self defence of their proud religion.

First of all Irfan,

You are drawing the longest bow I have ever seen, to put it down to Wahabi Vs. Sufi. These terrorists clearly mention constantly that they want us dead for helping East Timor gain independence, they want us dead for drinking alcohol and not wearing veils in their country(Bali isn't even mostly muslim but they don't care, this is why they don't care about blowing up Balinese, because they are not muslim).
Sure a lot of them are students of the dark, evil madrassas in Indonesia that are funded by mostly Suadi/Wahabi money, but it was never direct war against sufism. Their first enemy is Western people, because somehow, due to the sickenning brainwashing from their local sheiks, they believe that we are morally decadent. I keep asking myself how they think this. It is their culture that in the top three most corrupt nations, it is their culture that treats women as sex objects by covering them from the view of other men and making them stay at home to be the household slave, it is their culture that has no problem calling on thousands on volunteers to round up illegal migrants so they can be officially whipped and kicked out. Funny that.
Also, FELLOW HUMAN, you think that Islam is peaceful. You must never have read your own koran.
Does everyone know who the American negro sheik Yasin is? Well on the Sunday program he compared himself to other peace activists, who he named as Jesus, Ganhdi, John Pilger(I disagree here, Pilger is a criminal who's books give these Islamic loonies verbal excuses to do what they do). Firstly, I thought it was disgustingly rude to compare himself, a xenophobic, homophobic, bigotted pig, to Jesus Christ; secondly, I noticed that he didn't/couldn't metion his very own prophet, Mohammed. This is because his violent/evil deeds far outweigh his good deeds, if indeed there are any.

Philo,

Since you addressed me I am back on the thread.
My view is winning a war on terror ideology would consist of three folds:
- Military/ Police (against violent already brain washed groups).
- Preventive Intelligence: understanding what and who else is in the pipeline.
- Eliminating the cause: ie ensure that proper programs (religious education, schools, democratic reforms, employment, etc.) are in place to dry out the ‘resources’ where these people can brainwash others youth.

Moderate Muslims are active in the last area as they should; maybe the question is more of can they do more. Take youth education and preaching in mosques and on websites for example: the methods improved over the last few years, there are more room for American and Western type of Imams preaching on Modern Islam and the co-existence agenda which, 10 years ago, I never heard of it. This is happening not only across Australia but across the US and Europe and even in two countries I visited in the Middle East last month. Can they do more? Of course they can but it is all fragmented efforts from individuals and organisations. There is a room for governing body, methodologies and resources but the question is who will lead? Who is to take ownership, create, support and monitor progress?

I have no answer to the question but I least I thought of which question to ask.

Your statement ‘support the US or ignore terrorism’ is an emotional rephrase of the ‘with us or against us’ theory. The definition of “terror is the enemy of the west” is disastrous because it means the West decided to fight alone. We can get much better results if we live this definition: “Terrorism is the enemy of all cultures & religions, especially Islam”.

Matthew S,

Might be a good idea to catch up so may I refer you to my earlier posting and responses to Boaz David?
Yes I know the Quran and I studied the Abraham faith books in native languages.
And Yes, I see my faith as beautiful, peaceful and loving.

Peace,

I have family members who were murdered by Hindus and Sikhs in 1947. They had nothing to do with the partition of India, apart from wanting to settle in a new land.

I have friends who were exiled and banished by a Jewish government.

I have friends whose female relatives were gang-raped by Orthodox Christian soldiers in Bosnia.

And if I use that as an excuse to hate Hindus, Sikhs, Jews and Orthodox Christians, I seriously need to get my head checked.

Thanks Fellow_human for your last post I can recognise your concern about terrorism, and your strategy to reduce religious fanaticism.

My concern is to recognise we live in a diverse society, and we will not all agree on some Government decisions; but when the Government is at war to protect the nature of that diverse society we must side with those of our countrymen whom we might normally disagree with to defeat an enemy who will destroy that diverse free State. That is the basis of democracy. I must protect your personal right to adhere to your religion, unless your religion threatens the freedom of others to their personal beliefs.

If we support a democracy then an individual opinion or any one idiology or religion cannot be adopted by the Government. Our Australian constitution dissallows that. The Australian Constitution, under Section 116 says, "The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, & no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth."

Our society is secular, based upon the principle that every life is equal before the State and the Law. This is a shared core value of a diverse democratic society comprising many religions and idiologies. That very core value becomes the basis of democracy, as a democratic Government does not assist in the establishment of a single world view. The Australian Government will not assist moderate Muslims unless the assistance is commonly shared by all. The code of a democratic federal state is that moderate Muslims like everyone else should be assisting the Federal Government to defeat any common enemy of that State.

Acts committed by criminals are different and are dealt with under local criminal law.

Irfan ,I just have a problem with the religious psyche of humans.The Jews believe they are the chosen people and thus after 2000yrs came back to take a portion of Palistine,which I believe in the modern era was totally wrong.

As juvenile catholics we were taught that our faith was the only way and everyone else would burn in hell if they didn't follow.Now the Muslims have a similar philosophy.I just think it is just a load of BS and we have to grow up, move beyond the fairy stories and evolve a more mature philosophy based on scientific facts and logic.

Religion is not about the concept of god but about the those at the apex of the triangle having power over the ignorant believers.

We never see the mature leaders being suicide bombers,just the young ignorant,testosterone enraged youth used as sacrifical lambs.

There is a better way.

Philo,

Thanks for your posting, I guess all we can all do is to stick together and unify our efforts for a safer nation and a better world.
On supporting the US, I think we can become a much safer nation if we reduce our military commitment, but increase our trade, economical, business and cultural relations with SEA and Muslims countries.

Arjay,

Two minor corrections if I may:

1. Israelites always lived in the middle east (Palestine included) as traders, merchants and businessmen. They did't come back because they were always there living among us for the last few thousands years and are a part of our history. When Nazism drove European Jews out of Europe, large numbers crossed the sea and settled in Palestine which then was under the British flag. Theodor Hertzel intentions for Israel was to be a secular state. The "promise land" theory was used around WW2 to drive immigration into Israel and to gain support from the Jewish communities overseas and get military support since that was the preferred choice for the founders of the new state at the time.

2. In Islam all good believers who do good deeds will go to heaven, Muslims, Christians, Jews or Sabeans (Others). Quoran did not give exclusivity to Muslims and heaven.

Peace,

Don't you Muslims read your own histories? Or if you read them, why don't you believe them? Allow me to enlighten you about Muhammed:

The first biographers of Muhammad were Ibn Ishaq and al-Tabari; they provide the only authoritative history of his life. Later, Bukhari put together a collection of Hadiths/traditions which are regarded almost as valid as the Qur’an. These three historians provide the original information we have about Muhammad and early Islam. In 830 AD Ibn Hisham wrote a censured version: "I am omitting things which Ishaq recorded in this book. I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss and matters which would distress certain people." Ishaq:691. All modern day biographies are even more "cleaned-up’.

Here are some texts about Islam’s great prophet:

1. "When the Prophet was informed by a shouter for help, he sent some men in their pursuit, and before the sun rose high, they were brought, and he had their hands and feet cut off. Then he ordered for nails which were heated and passed over their eyes... They asked for water, and nobody provided them with water till they died..." http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html. Read verse 261 Yes, they were thieves, but.... (Mo, the torturer)

2. Allah's Apostle ... passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you... The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." Bukhari Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301 http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/006.sbt.html#001.006.301 (Mo's attitude toward women!)

3. "The military expeditions (raids) in which the Messenger personally participated were twenty-six. Some say there were twenty-seven." Tabari IX:118 "The armies and raiding parties sent by the Messenger of Allah between the time he came to Medina and his death was forty-eight." Tabari IX:115 (Mo, the plunderer)

4. Mohammed says... "Why is it, O 'A'isha (his 9 year old wife!) that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me... He said: Was it the darkness that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain....... ," Muslim 4:2127. http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/004.smt.html#004.2127 (Mo the wife beater)

5. "All married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hand possess (your slaves). It is a decree of Allah for you. Muslim 4:24. (Mo the rapist/slaver/adulterer)

6. Pagans indeed are those who say that God is a third of a trinity (ie, Christians) except the one god. Unless they refrain from saying this, those who disbelieve among them will incur a painful retribution. The Koran, Sura al-Ma'ida 5:73 (Mo, on Interfaith relations)

and so on, I think you get the idea. I could write about the pregnant woman sliced open, or the Old Man Mo killed for critizing him, or Asma Marwan, the old lady he had killed for criticing the murder of that same old man, and so on for about 10 pages...

Out of space. Tomorrow I will write why these things are important, and how they relate to modern Islam, the s-called 'moderate' Muslims (like FH and Irfan) and even the Bali bombings...

Kactuz

Philio:

Just wanted to write a response to your last post. I agree that in a democracy we must 'agree to disagree' on many issues, but when we are all under threat we have a duty to stick together and defeat that threat.
However, I do not think this obliges me to support the war in Iraq. Why?
1) I do not think that the fight there is related to threats to our own country, and if so, then it is likely increasing the threat to Australia rather than eliminatng it.
2) Even if Iraq is related to our own security, I do not think we are going about it the right way. The only way we can truly elimintate terrorism is to eliminate the root cause - hatred. Thus, the way to garuntee our own security is to ensure the well being of those societies that breed terrorism - really 'win the hearts and minds'.

kaktuz:

I dont know if what you say is true, probably it is.
But what is the point in creating more negaitivity towards Islam? How many Muslims are there in the world 1, 2 billion?
Regardless what you think of them they are going to always be there, we have to live with them, so we might as well try and accept them and promote as freindly relations as possible. Unless of course you want to kill all the Muslims in the world, which would no doubt end up in the death of every human and animal on the planet.
Much more benificial to try and promote harmony.

Kaktuz,

All your 46 postings are about Islam, I noticed someone’ response to you:
“Kaktuz, All I have ever noticed is your incessant vilification of Islam on this forum. I doubt you would be able to hear an honest opinion in the storm of your hatred for Islam” posted by Trinity (Atheist).

Let me help you understand how we view our faith:

- Interfaith: Quoran separates theology from human interaction. How Muslims treat and should treat people of the book (Christians, Jews) is clear in different parts of the Quoran. Verse 2: 60-62 stipulates that good believers will go to heaven whether they are Christians, Jews or Sabeans (a form of worship by Noah). 3:84 tells muslims not to differentiate between prophets of God or their followers. Treating Christians and Jews have always been best by Muslims and hence they lived and prospered in Muslims countries. Salahudin, when attacked by the crusades assigned a garrison to protect Arab Christians and risked his own life to rescue his friend and later prime minister who was an Arab Christian. When it comes to faith however, God is One in the Quoran, pure and simple. Neither polytheism nor idolatry allowed and no buts no ifs. When I visit my Jewish friend in Randwick, he shows me the direction to Mecca when it is prayer time. He is not expected to believe in my religion. Do you understand the difference?

- Your references: the copts site you refer to have very little truth in it. The fanaticism and discrimination in Egypt however is based on “Theo-Nepotism” of some sort (ie some companies prefer to hire Muslims only while some Christians prefer to hire and interact with Christians only).

- As mentioned in my previous posting, we believe in the Quoran as the final word of God, Hadith was written few hundred years later on ‘hear say’ sources so how we view it simply like this: what follows the spiritual teachings of the Quoran are credible.

As for debates, visit www.themodernreligion.com
I hope you know now whether it is fear or hate you feel,

Peace,

Fellow Human,
All these things are good and true. Most Muslims are good people and much of what is written in the al-Qu'ran is good. But we are facing something really nasty now. All around the world Muslims are being taught black propaganda and much of it is lies. They are being taught that the US and the West are oppressing Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya etc. If educated Muslims in countries like Britain believe this, imagine how it must be for otherwise good Muslims in places like Saudi Arabia where there is no access to free media and no freedom of religion. It is not their fault if they believe this propaganda that the US is out to get Muslims. They almost all believe it. What do they know about the complexity of the conflicts in places like Chechnya and Kashmir? How do they allege the US is responsible in places like that? Do they really think most Iraqis Muslims are well-served by the insurrection there? Do they know that the US is also pushing for a Palestinian state or that the US and NATO bombed the Serbs to help Muslim Kosovars and Bosnians? Or indeed that not all oppressed peoples are Muslim and not all oppressors are non-Muslim? This is the challenge - seemingly unwinnable - to convince the Muslim masses that jihad is not the way. The insurgents in Iraq will win simply because there is an unstoppable supply of suicide bomber terrorists willing to blow their brains out based on the lie that in killing so many Iraqis along the way, they are doing something religiously righteous. Who, among the Muslims, will let them know it is wrong?

The Q'ran, Bible, Torah , books written in another time, another place with no relevance today yet still used as an excuse to commit war on others.
When will we ever learn?

MIckjo

could you please have a read of the New Testament, and the teaching of Christ, and then show me how it can legitimately be used as justification for war ?

Then, when you find you cannot do that, please feel free to state that it is 'PEOPLE' who for their own dark reasons, will seek any pretext in order to carry out their own dark purposes.

The difference though, between Fellow Humans 'friendly' Islam and the real version :) is found in such verses as Quran 33

<<25 And Allah turned back the disbelievers [meccans] in their rage—they gained no advantage. And Allah sufficed the believers in fighting. And Allah is ever Strong, Mighty. 26 And He drove down those of the People of the Book [Qurayzah] who backed them from their fortresses, and He cast awe into their hearts; some you killed and you took captive some. 25 And He made you heirs to their land and their dwelling and their properties . . . . Allah is ever Possessor of power over all things.>>

This example (straight from the Quran by the way) is fleshed out in a number of other traditions, including the hadith and histories.
The actual numbers involved '600-900 men' constitutes pure culpable genocide.
That day, would make the sum total of all the 'beheading video's' on Ogrish.com look like chicken feed.

for further reading, I suggest you do a search on "Banu Qurayza". You will find a number of results, ranging from Muslim apologetics to simple hate/propoganda anti Islamic sites. You will need to weigh up the information yourself.

But the most OBVIOUS problem Fellow Human has, is that he continually refers to 'non aggressive' war, yet Mohamed surrounded and beseiged the Qurayza for 25 nights. Defence?

The Islamic Council of Vic's goal:

To promote Islam AS PRACTICED BY MOHAMED....

woops.. hang on.. it DID say that until about a month ago... now I see its all changed.. wonder why ? Clearly, they are embarassed about how Mohamed practiced Islam.

'could you please have a read of the New Testament, and the teaching of Christ, and then show me how it can legitimately be used as justification for war ?'

Some people find a way, Davey boy, they find a way. Of course they can't do it *legitimately*, same as those who follow Islam can not *legitimately* justify. But they do it just the same. Some people kill in the name of rock bands. My point: killers are killers, regardless of religion.

God does his fare share of smoting and smiting in the bible. Actually, he smotes and smites all over the place - it's a pretty violent read.

There's plenty of people throughout history who have used the bible as an excuse to smote thy enemies. Come to think of it, there's people doing that right now. Look for an article tipped to come out towards the end of the month, where Bush in a private conversation apparently said that God told him to invade Iraq.

Ok, so no ones surprised, fair enough.

..oh by the way, this will be my last post for a while as I'll be away from a computer for a bit - so I'll end with a quote from my old fav, Bill Hicks (this was said just after Bush No. 1 left power):

"I'm very relieved, because let me tell you, we have had fundamentalist christians in the White House, fundamentalist christians who believe that the Bible is the EXACT word of God, INCLUDING that whole wacky fire and brimstone revelations ending...who have had their finger on the f-n button for the past eight years. 'Tell me when Lord...tell me when....let me be your servant lord...'"

Peace everyone, see you all in a few weeks...

BD,

What should I call you, the Aussie Taliban! (Won’t call you a Christian so not to hurt my Christian friends…see la difference?)

I am now sure there are many little missionaries using this account because you keep referring to the same story.

First, you can’t compare the bible to the Quran, the earlier has been edited and censored by the church to shape Jesus character and the Christian faith as it is today. Banned from the bible is everything related to Jesus from the age of 12 till 29 (a mystery that no one dares to pose the question though).

Enjoy this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russel
http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

Second, the incident you keep referring to is treason during the time of war and the judgement was passed by Saad, one of their own tribes. You won’t find any kinder than this!

Imagine if in WWII the UK would have turned against the US and massacred US soldiers and their families. Then Roosevelt will ask the UK government to sentence their own traitors, we will be saying: ‘he was fair and kind’. Right?

Its Ramadan BD, haven’t received the ‘happy Ramadan’ card you sent yet! :-)

Au revoir et paix (peace).

Fellow Posters,
You will recognise the well know saying, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

We might all like a society that believes and behaves exactly as we do. However when one ideology holds power then dissidents are oppressed or made outcast. We have the examples of this well written into human history.

Roman Christianity was oppressive to unbelievers, Socialist atheism was oppressive to theistic believers, Where Islam is in power they are oppressive to other ideologies / religions. The only nations that allow personal democratic freedom are those nations that have secular Governments. If moderate Islam had control for example in Australia the power brokers of Islam would soon subjugate others to their oppressive laws. As in all ideologies the Radical Power brokers of that ideology rise to the top to influence the society to adopt the strict and pure understanding of the ideology.

The only acceptable society is one in which each person respects the different personal convictions of others. This does not mean we do not attempt to propagate of defend our position. As on this Forum communicative defence allows us learn how others think

Continuing my thoughts from the post above. We all must understand that there are no Moderate Muslims, there are those that will kill you and those that will make excuses for those that kill you.

There is no way else to judge the actions and explanations of people who deny the most obvious facts - even from their own writings, no less. As you know I have been on a quest to find Muslims that can read simple statements that tell of despicable acts by their great prophet and then tell me those actions were wrong, and then say the man that did them was evil. No luck.

Reason tells us that a man that sees evil and then says it is not bad at all, or simply says he saw nothing, is morally corrupt and cannot be trusted. Those are hard words, but true and logical.

So we come to the issue of modernday terror. Islamic terrorists are simply following the precepts of their prophet. They are practicing their understanding of Islam. The fact that the Koran gives ample support to this interpretation is yet another case of denial. Words like "So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam" (Koran8:39) and "Muhammad is the apostle of Allah. Those who follow him are merciful to one another, but ruthless to unbelievers" (Koran 48:29) leave little room for doubt

This pattern of violence, inconsistency and denial is a bloody river that runs through the life of Mohammed, across the pages of the Koran and into the lives of Muslims.

The bombings in Bali are an attack on Non-Muslims, not on “moderate” Muslims as Irf would like you to believe. A majority of the Balis are Hindu, another group that Muslims dislike (pagans). This is just another phase of the world-wide Jihad against the infidel. It is Muslims doing what Muslims are told to do by their dear prophet. May I quote: "Indeed in the Messenger of Allaah (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes for (a meeting with) Allah" (al-Ahzaab33:21)

There are two ways to stop terror:
1. Kill them, jail them, exile them, send all Muslims back to Dar al_Islam. I will not be a part of this.
2. Stop pretending that Islam deserves respect. Denounce Islam for what it is and says. Ridicule it. Tell Muslims the truth. Be honest with them – including the seemingly mild Irf and good-natured Fellow Human. They are as much a part of jihad as the bombers and beheaders. This distortion of reality in Islam is known as Al-taquiya (deception). You will notice that they never condemn Mohammed, in spite of my efforts to show them what kind of man it is they consider to be the most noble of men. Mo would be proud of them, as he would be of the September 11, July 7 and Bali-bomber Muslims.

FH, think about what you say. May have noticed that the "vilification" you mention is directly related to my references and quotes from the Quoran and Hadiths. It is not me that is insulting Islam, but rather Islam insulting Islam. Don't blame me, I only point out the obvious (or rather the oblivious in the case of Muslims) as recording in Islamic writings.

Have I misquoted? Are these not 'truths' written by the prophet and his followers? Did I invent the links? Do you think I should be nice to slavers or torturers? Have you ever stopped to consider the moral implications of these shameful events, or better, the moral implications of your refusal to even consider the moral implications of these very ignominious events recorded by Muslims about Muslims? Please answer! Think, FH, Think!

I know you may find this hard to believe but at times I have been threatened by followers of the so-called religion of Peace. They don't answer my questions, but they have no trouble expressing themselves when the issue is promissing extreme pain. I wonder where they learned this?

Funkster. Apologize? Are you depraved or just stupid? It will be a cold day in hell when I am nice to torturers and slavers.

Kactuz

rogindon:

Just wanted to say that that is a very well written and thought provoking peice. I think there is alot of truth in what you say, thats the hard truth that we have to face and think about....

Kaktuz,

Last week Egypt celebrated its 4th Nobel Prize and the Muslim world celebrates its 3rd Nobel peace prize.

You are brainwashing yourself with hate.

President Sadat, Egypt. 1978 Nobel Peace Prize Winner:

“Peace be upon you. This is the traditional way in which, everyday, we greet one another. It reflects our deepest feelings and hopes. We always say it and we mean it”.
“On this most solemn and moving occasion, I would like to pledge that we in Egypt - with the future rather than the past in mind - are determined to pursue in good faith, as we have always done, the road to peace, and to leave no avenue unexplored to reach this cherished goal, and to reconcile the sons of Ismail and the sons of Isaac.
"Any life lost in war is the life of a human being, irrespective of whether it is an Arab or an Israeli.”

Maguib Mahfouz, Egypt. 1988 Nobel Literature Prize Winner:

“I will introduce Islamic civilization in a situation summarizing one of its most conspicuous traits: In one victorious battle against Byzantium it has given back its prisoners of war in return for books of the ancient Greek heritage in philosophy, medicine and mathematics. This is a testimony of value for the human spirit in its demand for knowledge, even though the demander was a believer in God and the demanded a fruit of a pagan civilization”.

Mrs. Shirin Elbadi, Iran. 2003 Nobel Peace Prize winner:

“I am a Muslim. In the Koran the Prophet of Islam has been cited as saying: "Thou shalt believe in thine faith and I in my religion". That same divine book sees the mission of all prophets as that of inviting all human beings to uphold justice. Since the advent of Islam, too, Iran's civilization and culture has become imbued and infused with humanitarianism, respect for the life, belief and faith of others, propagation of tolerance and compromise and avoidance of violence, bloodshed and war."The sons of Adam are limbs of one another Having been created of one essence".

Peace,

I did set out to read the Bible once but never got past all the begetting, got bored and never tried again.
Maybe that will make me sound superficial , that's Ok . But I still can see no relevance in old books written by the long dead of an age long gone.
The Ten commandments are not a bad hook to hang a modern hat on, they are a good system of how to treat others.
Undoubtably someone could find some interpretation on 'how to commit war in ten easy lessons' in the bible, would't know, never looked.
Maybe it is time a new book was written that would apply to ALL cultures, ALL races demanding that we behave politely and civilly towards each other and live in peace.
Trouble is there is no profit in peace.

Thanks Fellow,

That is interesting indeed, and heartening to see.

However, I do have one question regarding Iran.

I was under the impression that Islam in Iran is intolerant and extreme. I have heard stories of rapings as punishment for adultery being condoned by family, and women being extremely repressed.

As you hopefully know, I have been one of the ones trying to stop people blaming Islam, but I just had to bring that up. I really thought Iran was one country that cannot be held up as an example of model Islamic society.

Perhaps I am just revealing my ignorance? I would be glad to be corrected on this one...

Rogindon,

Sorry for responding late, as mentioned in earlier posting Muslims are doing lots of activities in fighting fanaticism. Few things worth mentioning:

- The misuse of the term Jihad is maybe affecting 100-200K people (that is my personal view). Most main stream Muslim education (even the Orthodox one) explains it within its proper context: struggle for better self, charity, sponsoring the orphan and the widow. I lived in the Middle East/ Egypt till the age of 29 and the real size of the problem cannot be more than that. Even though a 200,000 in 1.4 Billion is less than 0.01%, they can do a lot of damage with the ‘1 way trip’ ideology if not corrected and dealt with quickly.

- The Propaganda machine is as bad in the East or west, bad news sells: “The other hates you and is coming to kill you”. Although the media in the Middle East improved over the last couple of years, media on both sides need to be more socially responsible and collaborate.

- There is also a cumulative lack of trust especially on the issue of Palestine that you mentioned. Middle Eastern usually has long memories and they only believe actions. The Gaza pullout for instance was received very well on the street level when I was travelling through Egypt and Emirates. Action wins a lot of hearts easily in this part of the world.

- Even though most community based efforts are small’ish’ and fragmented, each is doing a bit. Even you can actually help by pointing any Muslim you know or bump into to these sites and forums.

Kactuz,

We are not in denial we do criticize what we do wrong. Let me point you to few articles written by an Orthodox Muslim (what you and I may call extreme):

http://www.themodernreligion.com/ugly.html
read “obligation of a Muslim towards a disbeliever”
http://www.themodernreligion.com/misc/an/arrogance-mistreat.html
http://www.themodernreligion.com/ugly/muslim-racist.html

Funkster,

Thanks for your posting, when you read the full article By Mrs ElBadi on Nobel.org it will give you an understanding on traditional tribal habits that is hiding under Islam as perceived by Iranians

F.H.
me.. taliban ? :) I must be scoring a few truth points, you are resorting to character assasination. Never mind, we can discuss our differences no matter what.

Now.. an important point here.

I made reference to the mass execution of the Banu Qurayza by Mohammed.
You then made some statements as follows:

1/ It was treachery during a time of war.

You also qualified the background from other sources... may I know which 'sources' these are ? I can only presume they are the same sources I am using to flesh out and give background to the same events. After all, I'm using the recognized Hadith, which as you know is 2nd only to the Quran in Islamic thinking. I can think of no better source.
Then, I'm using others, including Sirat Rasul by Ibn Ishaq, but I know the credibility of his work is questioned by some, though I have my own reservations on the credibility of the criticism.

Given your point about Treachery, let's scrutinize that more closely.
In fact, it was a 'treaty relationship' mainly being a 'peace treaty' for the protection of the signatories (if they did sign anything)...
So, alliances change, this is not wrong, it is convenient, alliances changed all the time in European history, and for good reason. SURVIVAL.

So, it seems you are saying that if anyone changes their alliances in their own survival interests, those they were formerly in treaty with, can now liquidate all the men (genocide) and enslave all the women and children ! ....er in that case, you have just 'justified' the massacre of muslims at Srebrenica which was the same thing. Muslims declared independance from Yugoslavia, i.e. broke a treaty.
And.. surprise surprise..it was a "time of war"...

As for "Sa'd" He was a cruel bloodthirsty monster of a man, read up on him. Jew ? He was chief of the Arab Aws tribe, former allies of the Qurayza.

MICKIJO

I can identify with your struggle with the 'begats'... At first I had a similar struggle, and found them cumbersome and apparently of no value.

Then, I came to understand how important they were. There are many little pearls among them. An anthropologist would be absolutely revelling in them for the information they provide about tribes, kinship and gender roles.

But the most important place to begin, for the 'genealogy challenged' like myself and you, would be one of the Gospels. Mark is the shortest, and if you see this link, it will take you straight to a contemporary english version.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=1&version=31

Mark does not have very much on the ethical teaching of Jesus, its more about Kingdom of God parables etc. Matthew and Luke contain much more of Jesus 'public teaching'. Sermon on the mount etc.

When one has an understanding of Christ, the Old testament can become more meaningful.

Jesus said in Luke 24:44 "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."

45Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.

So, Micki, it is through an encounter with the living Christ which will open our minds to the Old Testament.

I urge you to read Mark, and consider your position before God, and take that step of putting your faith in Christ, and enter in to the 'presense of the future' experiencing the Kingship of God in your own daily life.

BD,

Gee man what is it with you? Always on the attack and little sense of humour.
First, my intent was humour and not to offend you. Apologies if you were.

Second, the whole issue you are referring to in any reference you chose is a man made ‘hear say’ whether its Ibn Ishaq, Tabari, Razi or any of these people have lived during the time of prophet Mohamed (PBUH). Most of these stories conflict with the Quoran. Aisha, when asked about P. Mohamed manners, she said “his manners were the Quran”. Ie he lived by its teachings.

Anyway, not sure what are you trying to achieve but as I see it Islam or religion is simple: “one God, creation, people, human messengers. Do good, purify your heart, help one another, be good to all creatures, don’t judge, be saved” . That’s what Islam is since Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohamed (PBUT all) are about. The Quoran mentioned Mohamed 4 times only while Jesus was mentioned 33 times. Have a think for a second.

You are still in the comparison phase to convince yourself of your faith but I don’t need to because mine makes sense to me ‘as is’. You sound like you are not easy about the 3 Gods or heads of God (I am guessing, no offence intended).

I wish you will find your inner peace my friend and contribute with a posting on the subject.

Peace,

Fellow-Human,
Quite insightful really. One who continually points to errors in others reveals a lack of certainty regarding oneself. I know we will get bluster regarding this but it is a legitimate observation.

I am not Muslim. I don’t think I ever will be (I do like a wine now and then!) but I greatly appreciate your beliefs and respect your right to them.

All the history picking is pointless and meaningless in the face of what modern Muslims believe their faith is about, regardless of the extremists – which exist in all faiths. Perhaps they are a divine reminder not to judge another (as extremists do) for that is the divine’s role, not ours.

May I ask, are you in Brisbane?

Salam…

F.H. .. I think I need to send you to the optomotrist :) <--- you did not see my SMILEY face.... I didn't realise you were attempting humor, (because I sensed you were just coming back at Kactuz attacks) but at least I addressed you in a friendly way.. and 'offence' ? me ? hardly.

I'm not here for 'me' except in that it does give me a sense of fulfillment to bring the truth of the Gospel to others eyes.

In your case, what I was 'on-about' was this. I observe John Kactuz making a continual attack on Islam, (most of which I can regard as factual, based on the sources) and you giving the 'good cop' version.

So, when it comes to factualness, and sources, I stepped in to underline a couple of crucial points. The most important one was as I pointed out, in that Mohammed carried out "aggressive" raids, (yet you continually remind us this is 'un-Islamic') and then the ICV (until it recently changed them due to anti terror legislation) had as its primary objective "To promote Islam AS PRACTICED by Mohammed"

REASON. If you have a molecule of 'reason' inside of you, u must be able to see the worrisome connection between the MODERN muslims representative agencies stated goals and the FOUNDERS behavior and its implications for us ? If u cannot see the obvious connection then I rather think you are being considerably biased and selective.

I am making a very reasonable connection between 'example' and 'followers' so I fail to see why you take issue with this. The history my friend.. DOES matter when a contemporary body uses it as its guiding example. Your sweeping generalization about 'how modern muslims think' about their faith was rather shallow, as u well know there are many varieties.

F.H. as for Ramadan... you are doing as u see fit, so let me just say that I hope it leads you closer to God :)

Hi Reason,

Agree, sometimes I say why bother: I spent time defending my faith against the Jihadist hijackers, contributing to forums and websites, talking to youth and when I am not, I am defending myself from those who chose to hate us (hate and love are personal choice in my opinion). I will persist though on both because it is a good cause.

I grew up in a place where religion was never a base of identity at school, at home or at work. I have seen churches, minarets and synagogues side by side since, I have seen Coptic priests crying in my father s funeral. Parts of my family in the south of Egypt and Morocco are still on their Christian faith since Islam came to North Africa.

I live in Sydney but travel to Brisbane, Melbourne and Adelaide for business; I work in the IT, ICT services industry.

Yep and I do remember the wine and beer since the drinking days, I am on de-alcoholised red and Coopers Birell (all the taste and 100% compliant)

BD/ Kaktuz,

People chose to hate or love first then they pick up what justifies it.
In your cases, you choose to understand Islam (as the enemy) therefore you educate yourselves in this format: you use missionaries literal translations (the CTF way!) , websites, etc..In a nutshell you refuse to see Islam as Muslims see it.

When I wanted to learn and understand Christianity, I went to the Bible society of Egypt and picked up few copies and material as seen by loving Christians proud of their faith. I did the same when learning about Judaism for instance.

Have you read “What is right with Islam” by Imam Faisal Rauf ? (forward by Karen Armstrong)
Your comment re Ramadan confirms your attitude. I honestly don’t care if you hate us or not, but you can’t claim a better spirituality until you offload it. When Jesus 's friends saw a decomposed body of an animal, he (PBUH) pointed them to "See how white are his teeth".

All the best,

Salam to you all,

Fellow_Human sees intellectual difference as hate. In his terms all must agree that Islam offers the world peace and love.

However the experiences of those not Islamic under Islamic governments surrender their personal freedoms to appease the State. Those insisting the whole world be Islamic terrorise innocent civillians. Why? Because they hate difference.

Perhaps Fellow_Human is using his own definition of hate and transferring it on to those that differ with him. In his world there is no democratic right to hold a different opinion, otherwise you are hating Islam. In his world both cannot coexist. I have many Coptic Christians aquaintances [my wife was one previously]and their view of Islam in Egypt leaves much to be desired in human rights

FH,
First regarding the Muslim Nobel winners... How are they doing? How many were killed and by whom?

Regarding your references, I couldn't have chosen better...

1. http://www.themodernreligion.com/ugly.html
It says exactly what I have been saying about Muslims and Islam: hate, rape, murder, conflict, oppression, discrimination, abuse, anger, war, etc... Of course, the reference is very selective about the issues it raises and what texts it cites. Nowhere does it mention that there are texts in the Koran that justify every single issue on the page. It says exactly what I have been saying about Muslims except it takes the rather stupid position that Islam is perfect but Muslims are not.

2. http://www.themodernreligion.com/misc/an/arrogance-mistreat.html
Same problem here. I notice it quotes a bunch of Hadiths that are favorable to Islam. Why does it not mention any of the equally numerous hadiths that tell of beatings, murders, torture, adultery, slavery, etc... I think I have used the word "denial" before. Can any Muslim say "Hey, there is a lot of nice sayings in the Koran and hadiths AND there is some really disgusting and unacceptable stuff." I won't hold my breath. (PS: Do you think Mohammed is going to get some of his own medicine? I refer to the line “the Messenger of Allah said, "Allah will torture those who torture people in this worldy life" Do you think Old Allah will use the old ‘hot iron in the eyes’ method like Mohammed?) (PSS: There sure were a lot of references to slaves in that link. Do you know what year the Saudis officially ended slavery?)

3. http://www.themodernreligion.com/ugly/muslim-racist.html
I have had correspondence with Ms. Alibhai-Brown about 3-4 years ago. I think it was something about Islam and I may have been critical.

Two points here:
1. Once again she says that I have been saying all along. Muslims are hypocrites and do not respect human rights. She talks about the rape, murder and oppression of Christian minorities in Muslim countries. She writes: “Our lives here as Muslims are manifestly better than the lives of many minorities living in our home countries….

2. A more important question is: Has anything changed since she wrote the article? No! If anything, the situation is worse. The few brave Muslims in Islamic countries that have spoken out against the evil that is done to women, religious minorities, jews, gays in Muslim dominated countries are dead, in prison, in exile or living in fear. There are a few Muslims in Non-Muslim countries that raise these issues, but in a way that can only be described as half-hearted and timid (wink).

There you have it, FH. As I said almost three months ago, Islam is oppressive and intolerant where it dominates. Even Muslims themselves suffer under Islam. Blame whoever you will, but the problem is not the Jews, Bush, the Gringos, Capitalism, the Crusaders, or even Donald Duck. The problem is that Islam is a religion of hate, anger and denial. It is not that you don't know these things, or even that you don't think they are true. You just don't want to think of them. Can you indicate a Muslim site that explains the 'problematic' verses in the Koran and hadiths that I have spoken of? (such as torture, murder (Asma) and sex with slaves).

You say “we do criticize what we do wrong”. Well, that is nice but your criticism is ineffective, because you are only treating the symptoms, not the disease. Criticism is worthless without change. Can Islam change? Can it treat people decently? It can’t, because it would require honesty and then Islam would not be Islam.

Yes, I “refuse to see Islam as Muslims see it.” Why should I? Should I apply that phrase to Nazis or the KKK also? About translations, one day I should write a page about how Muslims translate, untranslate, destranslate, quote and misquote the Koran, or how they conveniently ‘forget’ about some verses. It is almost amusing. I don’t need Christian missionaries to help me put down Islam, I get all the help I need directly from the Mohammud, the Koran and Muslims themselves. With help like that, I can’t go wrong. What is CTF?

Kactuz

F.H. Philo is correct... you see 'intellectual difference' as 'hate'
and indeed you are projecting it on us. May I say that it is from my own Church tradition, that a lady has been serving medically among Muslim Bedoins in Jordan for over 40 yrs with the sympathetic attention of the Queen, and in spite of the murder of her colleague by fanatical Muslims. She does not accept Islam, she would argue just as passionately as myself, yet she has given her life for Muslims.

I'm getting the impression that you are unable to handle truth yourself and the only way you can deal with it is to resort to the 'you hate us' ploy.

My concern is that truth must be spoken in love, and love sometimes hurts, but is in the end, not harmful.

You constant resort to this 'you hate us' tactic tells us more about Islam than anything and it may be telling us a bit about you. Because it is a 'personal attack'.

It is a mistake to suggest that the only way we can love you is to agree with you...

I don't see personal attacks in even John Kactuz posts, I see attacks on Islam.

I do not regard the Islamic 'insult' to God the Son calling him 'merely a prophet' as 'hate' towards me, it is a view which I must counter with truth from Scripture.

But I don't have any joy 'attacking Islam' I'm more concerned that the founder is accurately portrayed, not sugar coated as you tend to do here.

I welcome ANY AND ALL attacks on Jesus or Paul or Peter, based on the respect for the recognized sources that you expect us to give to your own. Islam recognizes Quran + Hadith = Sunnah. We recognize the Old and New Testaments.

But let me finish on a positive note, Jesus said. "I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.'

No matter how poorly we may express ourselves, God through Christ is still calling you and all who read this.

I just wanted to remind everyone that this article was about how Indonesian Islam is being hijacked by political extremism.

Just a brief reminder in case anyone forgot.

Good point, Irfan - and thanks for the insightful article.

Unfortunately, the discussion here has been hijacked by the same old Muslim bashers that the vast majority of us tend to ignore, so they're basically preaching to the converted. I think they're pretty harmless in themselves, but their theological rants probably provide some kind of perverse moral justification to the out-and-out racists around the place.

This is of course why some of us argue with them occasionally, but mostly I couldn't be bothered, quite frankly. I'd rather read intelligent articles like yours.

Irf (and Mahatma) the Bali bombings, and attacks on Indonesian Islam are what we are actually discussing, believe it or not.

The bombings came from 'fundamentalist Muslims'
The Fundamentalist Muslims came from "Islam"
Islam came from Mohamed.

A discussion of the historical, behavioral and theological aspects of all these things is quite in order.

This will inevitably lead to a degree of interaction between contributors on issues raised in their posts.

Yes, we do get a bit carried away, 'guilty' as charged.

Mahatma your intellectual superiority complex is yet again noted :)

Irfan,

My postings above reconfirm your views.

Philo,

I reread my posting above; I expressed my views on extremism and a workable staregy to deal with it froma Muslim point of view. I even expressed some of the efforts that myself and other moderates like Irfan do to combat this ideology.

Let me examine the ‘intellectual’ approach to resolving the issue:

BD: convert them all.
Kaktuz: Ship them all to Dar Al Islam: so anyone converts to Islam lose their citizenship: I guess you are asking for Australia to be the mirror side of Saudi!.

I have seen nothing intellectual in the format of suggestions or ideas, all I have seen is character assassination, tall puppy syndrom.

BD,

On the German government archives website, Hitler claims to be executing God/Jesus will with the blood sacrifice of Jews because “there isn’t enough baptism water to clean their sins”

Sorry, time to hit earth at full speed. Islam at work: http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/, oo yeh so peaceful more dead bodies to count . Communism Fascism combined ! Pure amateurs.

Just when you thought it was a religious text, sorry you are wrong:
http://answering-islam.org/Books/Tisdall/Sources/index.htm

And not to embarrass any sitting on the fence or just bathing in ideological bliss (ignorance), Dr Derabi can explain a few things to enlighten you. You will not be pleased.

And for those up and budding atheists and Communists etc, here is a Historical deconstruction of religion, Full Book. Well I will spare you, just read Chapter Nine, and then get your local Islamic leader to explain it to you, Psssst, a hint, check the dates: In Academe it is Plagiarism.
http://www.revilo-oliver.com/rpo/RPO_NewChrist/chap9.htm

And one more thing, start reading and quick, time is running out, the pixies will not save you, nor will Irf.

F.H.... close, but not quite

"offer salvation to them"

as Christ said "All authority in heaven and earth is given to me, go therefore make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you and lo, I am with you even till the end of the age." Matthew 28.18-20

The only force which can stop this great enterprise is.... the human heart. It can say yes, or no.

If all authority is in God, in Christ, that does not leave any authority to anyone else.

We are servants of that Authority.

Hitler ? hmm I don't think I would look to his hermeneutics as a guide to understanding the Bible. He is just one of many throughout time, who has had ideas of megalomania and sought to justify them with distorted views of Biblical teaching.

F.H. The Bali Bombing was rooted in Islam, but on your view, it is a distorted Islam. So, that's fair enough, I see no honour or conscience, only hate in those acts. But too many people tell us 'but'... the west this, the USA that, the Brits such and such and thats where all the hate is coming from, and I can see why and agree to a point. So, you have an enjoyable Ramadan, and a blessed Hari Raya
oops.. that's malay :) in English it means 'big day'. I still pray you will come to Christ -your Lord and Savior.

As much as I would desire all to acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord; this must be by personal conviction, not by cohersion or threat. I am a convinced follower of the teachings of the sinless son of Mary, who is the word from God [the expression of God]. I admire his character and actions and conclude he was of all men the Lord.

If all orthodox Muslims believed and followed Jesus life and words, there could be greater understanding between us of the true God. The Qur'an gives mention of Jesus, but Islamic extremists prefer to follow a person who himself said he confessed his sins 40 times a day. Why? because his was a serious offender of God's laws.

BD and fellow passionate posters,

You posting confirms my point: any religion can be used to promote love or violence, it is how you preach it.

Philo ‘special correction’:

There are no differences between Muslims and Christians over the teachings of Jesus. In fact, an average Muslim will know a lot more about Jesus teachings than an average Christian.

The difference is we kept our commandments. Jesus was clear on the commandments: you Lord is one and also clear that he was not God nor equal (specially when asked about the day of judgement: he admitted “only the father knows”). The bible confirms what is in the Quoran.

Irfan,

Congratulations on a good and timely piece like always.
Your threads are the most discussed so I am signing off.

Peace and all the best

F H, a small point,I think you meant that the Quran mentions what was in the bible.
Thank's

-All,

Nope, the Bible as I studied it consists manily of the edited Torah (aahd adeem) + Jesus biographies.
The Quran addresses the same messengers as the Torah does, except some Israelites kings (like David and Solomon) are actually prophet-king according to the Koran (Solomon for example was given the miracle of understanding animals).

The other key differences are:

- Definition of God is light of the earth and creator of all beings and laws. This definition is in line with the Torah as well but the bible have a physical form of God (ie Jesus).

- The Quran refer to other prophets and messengers (Salih, Shueyb) etc… meaning there was messenger outside the Israelites. The Bible only talked about the Sons of Jacob prophets (ie Israelites).

- The Quran story of Jesus kept the teachings but have a different philosophy about his fate, wisdom and ending. There is no original sin in the Quran or the Torah.

- It also focuses on intent, heart purification and a social/ legislative frame (the bible is a mix of Mosaic law and Jesus spiritual teachings.

- The Quoran talks a lot more about the nature of creation, miracles of stars movements, human body, astrology, which have no mention in the Bible.

All the best,

I have Just completed my Anthropological study on Zoroastrianism: Zarathustra, and about to embark on the Book of Enoch Second edit.
Dr Mary Boyce has a number of publications as she is considered to be the authority on this subject, Professor Revilo Oliver has some points also, thus in Chapter 9 above,” Slovak Enoch” and confirms some dates of the inception of Monotheism. With limited resources to link Egyptian Pharos Akhenaton to attempted monotheism and why. Dates are helpful.
Thus Ethiopic script of Ge’ez, are in Hieroglyphs. (Bit out of my league) just the English version. Will help understand what happened.
Cambridge Ancient Histories of the Middle East are exellent sources of infomation also. Publications are hard to come by.
All of this just to figuer out what happened.

The problem with the Qur'an is its historical authority. It was writen 600AD whereas records concerning David were recorded contemporary to his time. When you have stories being told 1600 years after the event not taken from original records the stories take on contemporary influences.

This is the position with the Qur'an, as it adopts the tribal warrior attitudes of its contemporaries. Being 550 years after Jesus answer to being servants rather than lords over people is the answer to human conflict. The religious Jews were in his day in conflict with Rome, and desired its overthrow with swords. Jesus teaching is the only amswer to human relationships.

For Mahomet servanthood showed weakness, while being a warrior showed strength. The only answer to conflict is resolved in servanthood. Our role in Pakistan is an act of goodwill and charity; a service to the distressed. Most Muslim websites see Western charity as an attempt to win religious converts. This identifies how they think, they cannot give charity unless it wins converts to Islam. We should do it because we love our neighbours as Jesus taught.

I spent an hour today trying to find out how many of the victims of the Bali blast were Muslims. I could'nt find any good statistics. It does appear, however, that most if not all the Indonesian nationals murdered by the Islamists were Hindu. This conclusion is from the fact that Bali is 90-95% Hindu, the papers mention that the victims were cremated and the services had to be completed before the Hindu Galungan holiday.

So much for the theory that the bombing was an attack against Islam. That is a rather strange idea, Irf. Muslims kill infidels to hurt Islam.

Like I said, radical Muslims kill, moderates make excuses. There will be more jihad killings and our Muslim friends here will continue to make excuses. Have you no shame?

Of course, it was the victims own fault because they were immoral.See
http://theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16865508%5E2702,00.html
So
bikinis = immoral and bad
killing + suffering + mutilation = the good work of Allah.

How disgusting these people are. Is there no end to this? Notice in the article how everybody has to respect Islam: "Afif said Muslims and Christians would only live side by side when Christians learned to respect Muslim culture."

Of course, Islam respects nothing. It is a licentious, corrupt religion that feeds on lies, illusions, hate and murder. Well, it does respect the torturer and murderer they call Mohammed.

Answers to questions: a. 50% of Egyptian Nobel prize winners (see above) murdered by Islamists - a record unmatched anywhere. b. The Saudis formally ended slavery in 1964 - well within my life time. Did anybody see the 'honor killing' done on the streets of Denmark by the 'Religion of Peace' in broad daylight last month?

An attack on Islam? Yeah, right! So then if Muslims killing infidels hurts Islam, would you argue that Muslims killing Muslims would promote Islam?

Philo,
A book you would enjoy would be, Ayn Rand, "The New Intellectual",
This is an excellent read and well presented, what you say above is true, in the context Rand writes, The Obvious answer is in abundance and well descriptive to a point you can put faces to the writings, and understand easily. There lay the missing link.
Islam is the Antitheses, along with modern religions of Marxism spurned on by Universal pantheistic Ideology, or to reinvent God in all forms as Philosophers had done.
Unlike all other religions, Islam was the only Cult to recruit by Murder and death, and was not the evolutionary progression as the pathological minds would convince us, it like Modern Socialism or Communism is a primitive Ideology of Psychopathic thinking, not much has changed in 1400 years. And that is courtesy of an Iranian Professor, and Islamic Scholar. On the run of course. He taught Komaine. And there was another with grand thoughts and the modern prophet of Islam, or so he said. Hmmmm, get the picture.
Read on about Mazdak religion, Islam and communism derives from that. Commonalities are awfully familiar.
Communism has dissidents, Islam has unbelievers or Infidels. Some of the Psychiatric patients are writing the medical Journals,and History me think.

Kaktuz,

You got a disturbing way of thinking yet you confirmed Irf and my opinion.

“Muslim peace prize winner was assassinated by extremists”.
Who was the so called Islamic Jihad blowing up in Egypt since 1970s till 1990s? Only other Muslims. Who was behind the assassination plots of presidents / rulers of Muslim countries to replace them with Taliban like governments?

Why is it then that most North African countries (namely Muslim countries) by early 90s had outlawed or had death warrants on the Bin Laden/ Al Qaeda when your US/European countries were protecting Ayman Zawahri (leaving happily in the UK and Switzerland) and Omar abdel Rahman (was happily living in the US until Oklahoma bombings).

The simple truth is: They just want extremists regimes in the Muslim countries, they could not care less about West or East, I lived in these countries for the first 29 years of my life and saw these groups preaching at uni and streets. Overwhelming majority of Muslims rejects them. Sorry but my conclusions are based on practical living experience and not google surf or a couple of websites.

Wish you find your inner peace (piece by piece :-))

Philo,

It is our belief that the Quran is God’s word revealed to Mohamed (PBUH).
We do not see it as a historical document since the prophet lived most of his life as a merchant not a historian (since he was illiterate) or ‘suddenly a swordsman at 53’ like some anti-muslim want people to believe.

As for charity I agree that Christians do a lot of charitable activities. I don’t agree with the “muslims aid only those who convert” statement because Muslims don’t have an equivalent to the millions of missionaries in your religion. A lot of missionary work in Africa by the way is “converts only charity”.

-All,

The ‘Islamic finance’ and compulsory charity is closest to ‘socially responsible capitalism’ (share the risk and reward, beyond the interest based economy).
Equity mate by commbank is a practical example of how it works.

All the best,

G'day All

Just found this site and it's my second post.

Mr Boaz, interesting what you say about the ICV removing that comment about Mohammed from their site, considering that........

'Faith or belief in the Oneness of God and the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad;'

Is one of the five pillars of islam.

He's also mentioned in the adan or call to prayer.

He is mentioned in some the articles on the ICV's site but there is no link to an article dealing explicitly with him.

Watched Compass on Sunday. It was about Waleed Aly and his wife Susan. Strange. Mohammed or the prophet wasn't mentioned once either even though their daughter shares his favourite wife's (Aisha, his child bride) name.

Perhaps they're distancing themselves from this rather unsavoury individual's character, at least for the time being.

Wouldn't be at all surprised

Fellow_Human,
Think about the capacity of such a person as you here described of Mahomet to write with authority and give correct details and interpretations of history. Sounds like Joseph Smith who wrote the Mormon book has equal authority to give historical details; and we know his fantacy on American history. They both claim to have received revelation from the same angel.

"It is our belief that the Quran is God’s word revealed to Mohamed (PBUH). We do not see it as a historical document since the prophet lived most of his life as a merchant not a historian (since he was illiterate) or ‘suddenly a swordsman at 53’ like some anti-muslim want people to believe."

The fact that Mahomet would turn to violence against those that dissagreed with him gives evidence to the depth of his disturbed character. A difference in belief about love and peace as given in earlier revelation by Jesus indicates the capacity of the man to explain divine revelation. Jesus faced the same violent opposition and what happened to him - he submitted to death. It did not end his appeal to influence believers. His death gave his message meaning and power.

Of course in the Muslim mind they cannt have Jesus die because it would show weakness in his character, so they deny this well documented fact of his death. Have a read of the official letters to Caesar by Pilate where he describes Jesus miracles greater than can be performed by any Roman god that he allowed to be crucified to settle a religious Jewish uprising. Ask why Pilate committed suicide when he heard Ceasar was sending a posse to have him brought to Rome to answer for the murder of an innocent man. The fact is it happened, and cannot be denied by a hunch of an illiterate man.

CARNIFLEX....."my people are everywhere" :)

kidding.

Yes... not surprising they (ICV) are distancing themselves now, I find it hard to escape the conclusion there is a slight 'awareness' of just how serious the issue of close identity with Mohamed is in a democratic non muslim society. Perhaps our feedback and 'nutbags' emails (to quote Waleed Ali) are having some positive effect.

F.H. I'm beginning to think that "IT" is just your hobby and that Dakwah is your full time work :)

Let it be known to all, a person cannot be a Muslim unless he confesses "Mohammed is 'the' Prophet of Allah" so, a close scrutiny of his life is quite in order. We have pointed out repeatedly the behaviour which you know of, yet you cling to him. This surprises me greatly.

Could it be that your on going rejection of criticism of his acts (described in Hadith, accepted by all schools of Islamic Jurisprudence) demonstrate that you in fact approve of them ? and if you approve of them, that you would not worry to see them repeated today because they are 'Allahs Law' ?

I draw our attention to Jesus, the Christ, Lord and Savior.
Suffering servant "He was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities"
In Him, we have acceptance with God, peace, and forgiveness.
But also, he is triumphant returning Savior and King,

6He said to me: "It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life. 7He who overcomes will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son.

Revelation 21

Are you thirsty F.H

Philo,

You have seen Jesus teachings in the Quran, we share the very same. What we reject is the man made stuff that came later: Son of God, original sin, churches, etc..
It comes down to how do we approach faith: in your case is blind faith and miracles while we are asked in the Quran to think and reflect (we have no miracles in the biblical sense). Here is a sample:

pre revelation:

An honest merchant who never told a lie or worshipped an idol. Suddenly at the age of 40 became politically ambitious (even though he had wealth and status). So he decided to create a religion! (the death warrant in pagan Arabia!).

Lost everything, persecuted, his followers tortured and killed every day, yet persisted to preach his message (!) and declined wealth and kingdom when offered to him “if they place the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, I won’t stop preaching”. The torture, persecution went on for 13 years (enough time to give it up you may wonder) until he had a 1000 followers when pagan arabia waged wars on him and his followers. The ‘great’ warrior who had to raise a sword at 53, have always been attacked by a force 9 to 11 time his number for no reason except to stop his faith. Under attack and outnumbered, all what the man can think of is “God if we are to be killed today, you will not be worshipped on this earth”.

post revelation:

The Quran have enough puzzling statements that proves its divine source. It talks about an ‘egg shaped Earth’, planets movements, other creations, the sun motion, the sun as a source of light and the moon as its reflection, identifies star location and not stars (astrological facts we are finding this century) I can go on forever but you got the picture..

I guess this answers yours and BD question on why we believe.

BD,

Whats a Dakwah? I fasted longer hours in Africa but thanks for asking,

G'day All

I've worked with or had direct experience of muslims for almost 20 years now in 4 different countries.

Different places, same behaviour, it's a huge problem.

If you wish I can go go into minute detail about what I've experienced and some may label me a racist but I've seen die hard lefties (as I once was) become ranting rednecks after having to deal with with your average aussie mozzie for 2 or 3 months.

Relatively speaking, they really have little to worry about your average Anglo Aussie or concerned Christian they have nothing on how the other cultures of this land feel about you.

In my line of work I've talked to Chinese, Vietnamese, Serbs, Croats, Arabs, Moaris, Indians and Koreans among others.

They really hate them and nothing will change that.

Waleed Aly says that Multi Culturalism works, I don't think so but maybe in some ways it will.

CARNIFEX

I will be very interrested in heaaring of your experiences.

Thank you
Kay

Fellow_Human,
I wonder why Jesus didn't think of the line Mahomet used. Quote, "God if we are to be killed today, you will not be worshipped on this earth".

The scripture says of Jesus 'even his followers dispersed and fled' and went back to fishing after his death. What changed their indifference - his resurrection and their receiving of the spirit from God. They were willing to die for his revelation of God. Most of them suffered severe religious persecution including Paul - stoned and left for dead on several occasions. He was finally put to death in Rome many years after his conversion. Why did they submit to persecution and torture? It was the message the Lord had taught them, "Love your enemy, do good to those who persecute you!".

Read 1 Peter and see what he had to say about persecution and torture. Peter before his conversion was a dagger bearing zealot sympathiser who constantly believed Jesus would attract followers and overthrow the polytheistic pagan Roman occupation [Acts 1: 6]. Didn't Mahomet follow the Jewish Zealot line, which Jesus identified as satanas [opposed to God] when he was asked to join them in their overthrow of the pagan Roman occupiers, "Get thee behind me satan" Matthew 4: 1- 11.

F_H you have rightly stated: "The Quran have enough puzzling statements..."
Divine revelation in your opinion is verified by natural science. Things which man can discover himself. For me divine revelations are things that natural man does not conclude, like "Love your enemy". Or For God so loved mankind that he demonstrated this in the giving of his chosen Christ [his son - in the terms of the Messiah] to death that whoever believes him will know his forgiveness and be eternally saved.

Quote, "that proves its divine source... an ‘egg shaped Earth’, planets movements, ... the sun motion, the sun as a source of light and the moon as its reflection, identifies star location and not stars (astrological facts we are finding this century)."

The terrorists' directive commands them to kill Christians and Jews, to kill all Americans and make no distinctions among military and civilians, including women and children.
Little in Islam's history, dating back to 610 AD, when Muhammad began preaching, and 622AD, from which Islam dates its calendar, has not demonstrated an inclination towards peace and, for decades now, its imams have preached hatred against Israel and the United States. Despite suppressing militant Moslem movements in their own nations, most of the Middle East leadership also contributed to their upkeep and permitted their media to validate their fanaticism.
While Westerners are accustomed to expressing ourselves plainly and openly, one of the difficulties to be faced in the days ahead is that the opposite is true of Arab culture. In addition, Arabs live with too many bogeyman fantasies about Jews. It clouds their ability to see things as they are.
There is, however, a very big difference between Islam and Christianity. Writing in "Jihad in the West: Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 2lst Centuries", "'The sword is the key to heaven and hell,' Muhammad told his followers. Six hundred years earlier, Christ had said, 'He who lives by the sword shall perish by the sword.' It can be said that Moslems who kill are following the commands of Muhammad. To ignore these differences-and they exist between Islam and all other religions-is to ignore a terrible truth, one that has been articulated by the leaders of Islam since its beginning. The late Ayatollah Khomeini whose Islamic revolution overthrew the Shah of Iran is a saint to millions of Moslems around the world. This is what he said of Jihad: "It means the conquest of non-Muslim territory. The domination of Quranic Law from one end of the earth to the other is the final goal of this war of conquest."

F.H. Dakwah... I should have written Da'wah .. maybe u know it now ?
its the 'missionary call' to Islam. Dakway is the malay/Indonesianization of the Arabic.

I read your post quite closely. I note that you made all kinds of points about the personal life of Mohamed, and I'm wondering about your sources ? I can only assume they are the same ones that the 4 major schools of Islamic Jurisprudence use, Quran + Hadith.
Which also include the information about Mohamed which John Kaktuz has been presenting here.

Without Mohamed....there is no 'Islam' because it came from him.
So, scrutiny of his life becomes paramount in assessing the validity of his claims

I note specifically, your reference to his 'difficult years' after which he had the strength to 'fight' and indeed he did it. Which suggests, that if he had the strength of numbers from day one, he would have been fighting then also. It also raises an important issue:

Why ? is it neccessary to 'FIGHT' for Allah ? I present to you the young Christian church, feeble in all ways, persecuted not for 13 yrs but more like 300 ! but in all that time- NO FIGHTING, yet it grew .. and grew...and grew...... the spoken WORD about the living WORD is what caused it to grow.

The Church Persecuted and Scattered (Acts 6)
On that day a great persecution broke out against the church at Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout Judea and Samaria. 2Godly men buried Stephen and mourned deeply for him. 3But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison.

Philip in Samaria
4Those who had been scattered preached the word wherever they went.

Note from the above.

1/ Saul (later Paul) was dragging men and women off... persecution.
2/ Response, the disciples are scattered, and they proclaimed. (repentance and salvation)

No fighting.

Posters

Greg Carey's 4bc Brisbane 1116 issued a radio alert for Indonesia at around 12 mid-day today. Intelligence said - 40 known suicide bombers, Australians warned not to go to Indonesia (unless urgent), Aussies living in Indonesia to come home, the possibility of a third Bali bombing. This information was gained by Greg through an interview with an Australiian expert.

Cheers
Kay

There! That's another century of comments for me!!

Irfan,

You are establishing a new precedent: “Islam sells”.

Philo,

I was barely answering your questions, I spent years in my search trip and science is only one aspect of it. If you are into Muslims / Christians debate, please follow this link:
www.themodernreligion.com/comparative.html

Also, please refer to the following books banned from the bible:
The Life of Adam and Eve
The infancy Gospel of Thomas
The Book of Jubilees
The Gospel of Barnabos

BD,

“Without Mohamed..No Islam” is a missionary myth that is probably the reason why even though with millions Missionaries and billions of dollars you are not moving forward.

Mohamed (PBUH) never claimed any divinity or status to himself; he inspired people through actions and showed them the miracle within. He was working until his last days, playing with his children, milking his goat, etc.. He left no wealth behind but a mule and a shield. He fed the poors and respected his treaties and taught his religion.
When Christians came to his house, he would give them part of his prayer area to worship. He is the one who said: ‘if anyone carries out an aggression against people of the book, I am his enemy on the judgement day’.

Islam as I see it is and compared it is a logical and tolerant religion.

My references are Arabic History, Arab Christian historians, and western historians (William Muir, George Sale). The missionaries writing and translations are quiet misleading since I compare Arabic scriptures to English versions.

-All,

Just a minor correction, the “Arabs-Jews” hating each other myth is a 20th century stuff. Jews and Arabs are cousins and Jews always lived in Arab / Muslim countries. My father and great grand father before him in Egypt had Jewish friends amongst others. Since the state of Israel appeared hate seemed to serve both sides for a while: driving Jews out of Arab states to live in Israel and mislead arabs to put all Jews in the “bad” basket to assist dictators creating the Israelophobia”

Do not confuse “post Israel” politics with religion.

Fellow_Human,
The books you mention above I have in my personal library, already read and critiqued; plus copies of ancient fragments including Dead Sea scrolls, contemporary historians and official letters and ante Nicene Church fathers etc. One of the men I currently work with who attends the same church as myself was previously the Theological Books Store Manager for Moore Theological College' he shares with me reading of the latest releases.

The gospel of Philip is gnostic, and reveals a lot about the thought and character of the man, seems to fit with his confused view of God. Jesus confronted such just before his death [John 14: 1 - 12].

FH,

I really don't know about you guys. I have spent a lot of time reading Islamic history, hadiths, the Koran and going to Islamic blogs, forums and Q&A sites. It is a good, necessary work, and kind of amusing in a strange way. How ungrateful you are! Ha!

One thing is for sure, I will never understand how you Muslims think. It is quite unbelievable. When discussing Islam with Muslims, all logic seems to evaporate into thin air.

About your references to the life of your prophet. You say: "My references are Arabic History, Arab Christian historians, and western historians...

How can you argue from these and ignore the early works of Muslim historians and even followers of Mohammed? (such as Ibn Ishaq, al-Tabari and Bukhari). Muslims have no problem citing from them when it serves their purposes. By using the early works they give credibility to them as sources, so if A (the good parts) is true, then B (the 'bad' parts) must also be true. Also, in any writing of history, an early or contemporary account always has precedence over later comentaries. The later works you mention are just opinions based upon selective sources, and very biased. The problem (for you) is that these works paint a very unflattering portrait of many aspects (the B stuff) of Mohammud's life.

This is part of the many problems I have with your religion. This selective blindness causes me to believe that Muslims are not being honest, and therefore cannot be trusted (simple logic, Mr Spock!).

I have said this as nicely as I can. I am shaking my head as I write this, a little disgusted with you Muslims for not seeing the obvious, and a little disgusted with my poor ability to explain things that I see as crystal clear.

Nao e' facil. Nao sei nao. Talevez um dia vou conseguir me expressar melhor. Ciao.

John Kactuz (still shaking his old bald head...

Kaktuz,

What made you think that I am ignoring Hadith or other historical references?
I am just distinguishing what makes sense and what doesn’t.

From my perspective, it is simple: I spent a long-time in the agnostic world and there was little sense starting from the character of the prophets before establishing the logic of God, messages, etc. So I started from scriptures (Quran, Bible and Torah) comparing likes and unlike and trying to ‘storyboard’ it if you like the term. I gave the Quran a special attention because of the lack of physical miracles so I compared Arabic writing and text style to text of the same period and prior (Ibn Shaddad period, as I am fluent in old Arabic).

I spent six years on this journey and when I came to a conclusion that made sense (to me), it just became apparent which parts of history makes sense and which doesn’t it.

Kaktuz, The issue however is not universalism but for one to understand and accept that what makes sense to me is not likely to make sense to everyone else no matter how passionate I am about it (Subtle hint for Boaz David and Philo!). I accept that there are others who can’t have life without alcohol or gambling for example. I personally don’t understand it but I am not going to walk into a pub and preach. So as you said: you dislike us, don’t understand us, etc..Just let us be because we are human beings, we have families, we enjoy life with sports and family and friends gathering drinking Bavaria 0.0% alcohol.

As for extremists I am still convinced with my real life theory: these individuals or groups are mainly targeting Muslims. In 1984, they used to organise open day sessions at Unis in Cairo to explain their beliefs and theories. They use youth frustration with oppression, corruption and mismanaged economy with the “Islam is the Answer” clichet. More jobs and democratic middle east will exterminate terrorism.

Your head position might have moved from ‘shaken’ to ‘scratched’ but anyway,

All the best,

F.H. :) it is as I thought, but I won't go into that.

As for your sources, all the histories and such like must come 3rd in order of 1/ Quran 2/ Hadith 3/ those sources.

Enough said on that.

It seems your search was sincere and determined. Your 'storyboard' approach is to be commended.

Your conclusion is interesting "What made sense to me"

The noteworthy point about the 'gospel' as preserved for us, and the teachings of Christ is this, sometimes they DON'T make sense. Not to the hearers, not to us. The classic example is as follows:

Mark 8:27 and following. Just as they had realized Jesus IS.. the Christ/Messiah, he 'began' (this is MOST crucial) to teach them:

1/ That the Son of man must suffer. ( This was totally against popular view of 'Messiah')
2/ Die (what ?.. how can this be ?)
3/ Rise

What kind of Messiah is this ? A very weak one it seems.

The 8 concluding chapters of Mark are the continuing of that one theme. "Suffering, dying,rising Messiah"

The disciples were so thick headed, they still just did not 'get' it.

Approaching Jerusalem James and John the sons of Zebedee approached him. "Master, let us sit at your right and left hand in your glory"

This is like we humans.. we like to have a satisfying, understanable, reasonable, and rewarding Messiah. Happily, the Holy Spirit preserved the true teaching of Jesus, that of "the last will be first, and the first last", "He would be leader of all must be servant of all"

Yet, in that servanthood and lastness, there is found "That peace which passes understanding"

I can understand why you were not attracted to the Christian faith, perhaps you were looking for something too human ? I can only guess, and I'm not trying to be cynical or 'smart' here.

I don't think there is much more to explore on this topic now.
So, I'll probably bow out.
Grace

FH...

That is the easy way out... When it comes to holy writings I would think any true believer should not "pick and choose." If your God (or gods) are really God, He will insure that the message is honest and uncorrupted. If Mohammed is the messanger of God, then God would not allow those slanderous things and the inconsistencies to be recorded. But they are there, and there are lots of them. So, what gives?

There is also the fundamental issue of words and their meaning. Unless we all agree that bread is bread, and not cement, then we are in trouble. So, to me torture is torture, and a very bad thing. Murder is murder. You cannot live life and socialize on this planet as a fellow human unless you share basic concepts (mental and verbal) expressed in language with others.

Your "makes sense to me" argument doesn't make sense. Furthermore, you have chosen to associate yourself (through your religion) with others who evidently have different standards of "what makes sense" and some of the things that "make sense" to them are not very nice. Have you asked why these things make sense to them? Is it because of the same words you read and reject, but they accept as divine commands. If so, who are you (or Irf) to criticize them for acting upon what makes sense to them? And what kind of diety would be so ambiguous as to propagate a 'pick and choose', 'love and hate', 'kill and be kind' do-whatever-you-want religion? It still doesn't make any sense.

Unless there are absolutes, unless there is conceptual consistency, and unless there are standards that apply to all people all of the time, all is lost and society cannot exist.

G'day Kalweb

Sure, would love to but where do I start and how do we get in contact should I do it on this forum?

How about I start with welfare abuse?

Here's a comparative

I used to work for the NPWS in Sydney, It was my job to sell and check for tickets for vehicle entry. I sold thousands, pensioners, after producing ID, received free entry.

This is my personal experience my workmates, even the lefties admitted the same.

In the 7 years I worked there we had a broad ethnic mix visiting the parks.

Chinese visitors: Five pensioners in seven years.

Aussie mossies: On busy days five in 3 minutes.

During ramadan the parks would be relatively free of moslems, they can't eat so no picnic. In a 4 hour shift all ethnic groups would arrive, I'd issue 10 - 15 pensioner passes out of about 200 tickets sold. From October onwards when they came in quantity every weekend I could issue at least 40, one day I did about 90.

Who they where.

Lots of moslem single mothers with anything from 2 - 7 kids. They weren't really single, hubby was often there in the tarago too. I'd ask them 'does your husband have a card too?' 'No' she'd say, 'Is that him?' 'Yes' Easy to catch out I would ask to see both drivers licenses, they'd live at the same adress.

I've seen guys with 4 wives, all with pension cards.

Many 'disabled' pensioners, often driving late model vehicles towing $40000 jetskis. Such cripples were often early 20s, male and superbly fit. Checking their licenses, it was all 'legal'.

I saw on the immigration web page that 70% of lebanese are on welfare.

I'd believe it.

More fun stories with fires on fire ban days, racist taunts, threats of violence, blocking access gates so emergency crews can't do their job.

It's really depressing

The Bali bommers don't see their actions as evil or sinful [against God] they believe the're doing Allah's work, and will be heros in the afterlife. That's the point of it. They don't believe they need forgivness for their actions, the're performing a divine act of judgment upon a decadent society. To apologise with remorse means the've abandoned their belief in the virtue of their action this leaves them vunerable sinners condemned by God. They carry the burden of this sin before God.

In Islam the individual carries his own sin to the grave and must make personal atonement. The first blood shed in Jihad atones for all past sin.

It appears Islam neither practise forgiveness or knows present forgiveness, as they constantly plead for mercy upon past sins in the hope they will make favour in the end with God. That's part of the reason when defending Islam they bring up the distant past i.e. the Crusades; they have not learned or practise forgiveness on their enemies. Much of Hitler's theology was based upon the same belief- Jews murdered Jesus. Jesus could forgive his accusers and murderers - Catholics could not forgive till this last Pope.

Compare: in 1940's we were at war with Japan, today we are good neighbours in spite of the terrible atrocities they performed upon captured soldiers. Though some individuals have not forgiven the Japanese, we have. I've had Japanese exchange studens live with our family for 9 months - wonderful children.

In Jesus teachings God's forgiveness for sins happens now as we turn away from our evil behaviour and is permanent. This is also how it is to be worked out in human relationships. Jesus said forgive 70 X 7 everyday others who offend us, for as we forgive others so we also are forgiven by God for our offences against Him. However one who constantly offends on the same issue has not repented, nor knows forgiveness. If it's a constant violation of socially accepted standards then other action needs to be taken to bring about correction for the offenders sake.

Kaktuz,

That’s interesting, so lack of conceptual consistency is a proof that the religion is bad.
Well, you can either choose to judge a religion by those who follow its teachings or by whatever they claim themselves to be.

Let me give you (and Boaz David) my comparative view:

- Islam: generally, all Muslims would/should follow the Quran. If an Australian Muslim and an American Muslim study the religion properly (ie the Quran, reason or circumstances of revelations, contextual understanding) they will come to the same exact understanding and practice and that is among 99% of Muslims. It is easy for a Muslim to single out the inconsistency (ie wahabism/ Sayed Kotb writing, etc.) which were in essence political movements disguised as Islam).
- Christianity: it varies vastly on how it is preached. It can be preached as tolerant, or Nazism (all through the church). On a sunny day in 1991 when serving during the 1st gulf war on the African East coast when I saw American soldiers after a church service, painting crosses and virgin Mary on Tank shells and air to surface missiles. Orthodox Christians in the Mediterranean and East Europe interprets ‘turn the other cheek’ in an interesting way: “slapped on your right cheek means you were hit from behind! (people are right handed by default)” so what Jesus meant was to turn around and fight back!”.

The word Islam means Peaceful submission to the will of God. It has no other meaning (unless in a restaurant “is lamb”).

Muslim apologetics who labeled terrorists as extremists or fundamentalists made a mistake it confused Muslims and non-Muslims. Islamists terror lost their faith because to call yourself a Muslim means you can’t step on an ant let alone kill an innocent soul. They should be fought and stopped predominantly by Muslims. To me, an extremist Muslim should be the one who sells his watch to feed the poor.

BD,

Again why did you assume I don’t like Christianity?
Let me gave you my religious formula:

I see Islam = Christianity - Trinity.

Peace

New Testament Christian: The trinity isn't Biblical teaching it's Roman Catholic construct to place the conception of Jesus humanity fathered by God - God's-his-human-father. They conclude he's God on this basis but seperate from God. Jesus talked about another spirit from God which they construct as three spatial beings. [Qur'an-supports-their-view-trinity]

This isn't what is taught in the NT doctrine, even the apostle John doesn't mention it. He is establishing that Jesus was truly the chosen Messiah /son of God [John 1: 32 - 34;in spiritual terms the anointed Christ = the son of God].

John defines what being born of God means in John 3: 1-15, and it's not on the basis of natural birth [john 1: 12 - 18]. This major aspect of his teaching is concerning how one becomes a son of God. The examination of Christ's spirit in his words, attitudes and actions demonstrates this spirit was born of God [from God]. He said that the words, works and character he displayed was not of his human self it's God in him doing the works, revealing the truth. Jesus never encouraged worship of himself but always directed worship to God, "Thou shall worship the Lord thy God and him only shall you serve". God was the God of Jesus, and Jesus was chosen to be the Christ, revealing the spirit of God. Proper understanding of God being called Father is essential to understanding Jesus relationship to his calling and to God. We don't worship the human Jesus, we worship the revelation of the character of God he expressed, and the wisdom of the words he spoke that revealed more than natural reasoning, and the acts he performed on the sick, injured and social outcasts that demonstrated a compassion we believe reveals the compassion of God.

Examine these essential characteristics in Christ's life they reveal God. I read and understand the behaviour of Mahomet, leaves me doubting his spirit was born of God or expressed the heart of God. Similar to Joshua, but a greater than Joshua or Mahomet has been among us. Learn of and follow him!

Philo,

God reveals himself in the fact that we are living breathing thinking feeling beings (practically we are few gallons of water, grams of calcite and salt, iron and a pin head of phosphorous). He reveals himself through nature animal, trees, weather, and life cycle.

The following article will explain to you how Muslims see Jesus:

http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/contents.html

Peace,

F.H. .. I was not saying you 'dislike' Christianity mate, just that you misunderstand it :)

You made your choice, and if your difficulty with the Christian faith is the 'Trinity' then I recommend you try to wipe the concept out of your mind totally, and stick with the scriptures. I said this also to Philo, who has sought to 'define' Jesus.

When we try to 'define' him in terms which are totally satisfying to the rational mind, we will end up wither rejecting/modifying his Divinity or His Humanity.

Where the scriptures say "I and the Father are one" then we can accept this, and where it says "I do as my Father has shown me" or words to that effect, we can see His 'Sonship' when he speaks of the Holy Spirit, (another, allos.. 'same as') another comforter, we can accept that also as His indwelling reality in our lives.

As I mentioned previously, the "Trinity" as a doctrine is an attempt by men to define God in systematic terms,based on the revealed Word,
It is also a defence against falsehood which arose in many forms in the early days. Usually by people placing too much emphasis on Christs 'humanity' or his 'Divinity'.

We cannot judge a faith by those who claim to follow it, but we can (as Jesus taught) Judge followers by their actions.

"I give you a new commandment, that you love one another, by this, all men shall know that you are my disciples, that you have love, one for another"

I've just been on a mens retreat, around 40 of us went away, and it was a true demonstration and experience of that very love which Jesus spoke of.

If Christians or those claiming to be such show a poor uncaring or unloving attitude, you may describe them as 'lousy Christians' but one can never speak of a 'Lousy Christ' :)

Take care.

Islam denies the one atonement offered for all sins for all time to any vile person that truly repents. This sacrifice of one moral person [Jesus Christ]one time to end all blood atonement sacrifice as was practised by Judaism. The Jews practiced blood sacrifices of substitute animals for atonement for their sins.

In Christianity a vile criminal outcast can find total forgiveness and cleansing in life now without his death. This is grace, they deserve death, but are offered freedom from guilt. They can be totally freed from guilt by acceptance of God's grace repentance for his past, and know a perfect new life from his former sins and he does not have to be punished for his past sins. This was the case of the murdering Pharisee who became the apostle Paul.

In Islam the past sins are weighed against the total life and the mercy of God before one enters total forgiveness; unless you are a martyr. Islam upholds blood sacrifice of humans for atonement.

Islam support the idea that those with a previous criminal record the vilest in society like the Bali bommers can atone for their own sins as a martyr for Allah. In Islam this is a sure cleansing for all past sin as they kill the enemies of Allah. Sinners dieing for their own sins, yet finding the paradice of God. This means in the spiritual realm they have not died at all, in fact they have found new life for their past crimes by their own blood. Where are the scales of justice?

This view eminates from the teaching of ancient Zoroastrian, not from the great teacher, Jesus Christ.

Hi Irfan,
I don't know if you have read this, but I think you should:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20051014&articleId=1085

This is a transcript of O'Shea's SBS documentary, featuring an interview with Gus Dur. The article suggests that corruption and incompedent Aust. foreign policy is driving terrorism in Indonesia.
I think militant Islamism has something to do with it as well. It is too easy to over simplify.

I support your views on Islam and encourage you to pursue your vision. Looking forward to further dialogue.

Regards, Paul.

Philo,

Let me correct your understanding of atonement in Islam.

In Islam there are two different atonements and not connected:
Atonement to God and atonement to other fellow humans/society/ animals etc..

For example, a murder is atoned to by earthly judgement (victim’s family to judge the penalty) but atonement to God is different (repent, purify your intention, ie don’t repeat the crime, do good, etc.) If a serial killer or rapist was sentenced to death this have no relation to whether God atoned you from your sin or not.

Divine and human authorities are separate entities in Islam and no human have the authority to judge on God'e behalf or predict God's judgement.

The following are narrated hadith that will help you understand how we see our faith:

- When Mohamed (PBUH) asked his followers “What is a bankrupt?” they said “he who have no money”.
He replied: “the bankrupt is a Muslim who prayed, fasted, paid the alms (good deeds to God). But he comes on judgement day and he insulted this person, robbed that one, spelt the blood of a third. All his victims take from his good deeds until he is left with nothing, then he is sent to Hell”. The metaphor of the story is clear (to me at least).

- In another he said: “Is not a believer he who eats his fill and his brother next door is sleeping hungry”

In the Quran God forgives all sins “to him” but you still have to reconcile towards others (humans and animals).

All the best,

F.H. .... :)

Now I thought you told me that the Hadith are "just stories" ... and here you re using them with reverence to support a view.

Watch out for John K, he might have a field day with that last post :)

We say this, "A miss is as good as a mile"

If a person is to be justified by the Law, obedience, observance, it must be 100%, not 99.999999%

No one can do that, hence God provided a perfect Savior to take our sins upon Himself.

"For God so loved the world....that he gave, his Son, that those who believe in Him shall not perish, but will have everlasting life."

This verse of course, is emphasising the Sonship of God in Christ.
To a Muslim it must sound quite challenging, and not even reasonable.
God giving....Himself.... but this is the mystery of God. Separate, but one.

I can hear you calling the Taliban religious police to get me :)

The charge "Those who join others with Allah are ..."

cheers

Boaz,

Is there a chance ever, this life time, that you get us, Muslims, out of your head?

First I always said Islam is following the Quran, hadith have to be taken carefully on the following basis:
- What conflicts with the Quran is not credible.
- Single source hadith that conflicts with older narrated is usually left out. Mainly because hadith was collected 200 years later after the prophet's death.

This is the opposite of your teachings since:

- Paul's teachings, if in conflict with Jesus, Paul wins.
- Even though all bibles (written by mere mortals) were collected a century after Jesus (PBUH) departed the earth, it is unquestionable God's word in your view. You should see it as we see Hadith actually.

PS:
Did you notice you are always on the attack and I am always 'turning the other cheek' ?
I am more of a Jesus follower than you are :-)

From what I understan is being taught to Jihadists bommers is the following:

Islam holds that any guilty person in society by murdering the enemies of Allah and by the act of shedding his own blood can atone for his own past sin. As a martyr he can becomes a hero as he enters Paradise; no matter how many sins he has committed. He by the first blood he sheds in jihad makes atonement for his past sinful acts of violation of the law of Allah.

This appeals to Islamic criminals who feel the balance of their life in the scales of divine justice does not assure them a place in Paradise. They under Islamic law are guilty of death and must die so by shedding his own blood in martyrdom he can atone for his sins against Allah in this act he makes a grand entry into Paradise. Where are the divine scales here?

One can live an evil life shed his own blood in martyrdom and gain atonement and be assured a place in Paradise. Islamic extremists teach human sacrifice of the guilty in jihad can atone for ones mortal sins.

This would seem to violate the law of God as the blood of the guilty or an unclean animal cannot atone for sin.

Boaz-David,
Waleed Aly is a man with a religious mission to deliberately undermine the democratic principles of other Australians to influence State policy. His constant public presentaiions as appeared in the Sunday Age recently "The Making of Muslim Australia" identifies his constant vision for a Muslim State in Australia. From the beginning his articles while writing on multiculturalism uses this same visionary title. http://www.theage.com.au/news/general/the-making-of-muslim-australia/2005/10/22/1129775997101.html

The use of this concept is single visionary, he does not speak about a Democratic Australia his vision is singular, whenever speaking of multiculturalism he is only focused upon Islam. Making Australia Muslim is the clear vision of this statement.

Also note other Muslim writers of his ilk also use the same phrase. The only religion clarified in the Multicultural Foundation in Victoria is Islam, nothing of understanding other religious faiths.

http://www.amf.net.au/PDF/religionCulturalDiversity/Resource_Manual.pdf

He identifies the land not the people in this phrase, that it belongs to a single religion - Islam, or to a people Muslims.

The Bali bomming is merely a mental hinderance to ordinary Australians as he writes to different opinions OLO and tries to influence our view of Islam; but the bommings realises the ultimately goal as ordinary Australians are terrorised and consent to bow under the influence of Islam. He never identifies in detail how the fallacy of Islam is influencing the mind of these bommers. He constantly defends his position but does not identify how the religion has influenced its fanatics. He even denies Islam does influence its fanatics.

Philo,

“Jihad appeals to Muslim criminals for blood atonement”

I thought the Sep11 attackers were all well educated, wealthy people with no criminal records. Ayman Zawahry was a surgeon who never committed a traffic offence.

Rather than trying to explain what you don’t understand, I have concluded a summary of what Jihad is, its history and political misuse.
After all, we can’t win a war on terror if we don’t know what is driving it.

Jihad: means to struggle, work hard for better self.

There are two defintions for the term:

- Inner Jihad: resist temptations and urges, purify your heart, master your anger and your fear, etc.

- Outer Jihad: work hard to achieve something good:
Looking after your parents when they are old.
Sponsoring the orphan, the income less widow and the helpless (this is different than the alms or a widow.
Student studying hard.
Additional charity (Alms are compulsory in our faith).
Defend your land, home, faith (Defined in the Quran as ‘state driven defence ie against armies and limited to boundaries “fight those who fight you and shall not transgress”).

H.A. Wahab (Founder of the Wahhaby political movement during British Colonialism) took the last one and stretched out of is boundaries and made the definition of enemies and geographies loose. He justified pre-emption and collateral damage based on two things:
- Changing dynamics of warfare (ie cold war is a direct war).
- Quran references to people of the book become irrelevant when nations are under occupation or in a warfare (direct or cold).

This ideology was modified further by 1920 (Muslim Brothers founder S. Kotb) to justify open warfare against british colonialism in Egypt and North Africa.
Early 1970 and under the fear of communism in Egypt, president Sadat supported the Islamic Jihad organisation founded by Dr Omar Abdel Rahman to combat the threat of communism in the region. The ideology was modified further to define any anti Islamic states (including mainly other Muslims) are a just target.

In 1980, they assassinated their very founder and supporter.

Peace,

Fellow_Human
How do you consider a well-educated wealthy Muslims surgeon could so mistake the meaning of jihad? Wouldn’t he appear as a moderate person in western society? How has his mind accepted such a mission? Please explain! Could what we would consider a moderate person be a lurking terrorist?

Quote, “I thought the Sep11 attackers were all well educated, wealthy people with no criminal records. Ayman Zawahry was a surgeon who never committed a traffic offence.”

I note you are able to define various branches of the Islamic brotherhood, but I never read your outspoken denouncement of the brotherhood. Is it a matter that the end justifies the means?

Is it true that he believed his act by shedding of his own blood it would atone for his sin against Allah and assure him a place in Paradise? From what documented Muslim authority, Qur’an etc, did he learn this theology that he was so convinced his murderous act carried virtue?

Hi Philo,

Glad we can establish a dialogue.
I guess we are dealing with a very distorted bunch of people no matter how smart they are.

The brotherhood is not supposed to be a cult nor a political movement. Also, charity in Islam is not supposed to be 'exclusive' to Muslims ( I contributed among other Muslims and Christians in Egypt in the restoration of the Mar Guirguis and the suspended church in old Cairo).

I read a lot of books in my earlier years to different writers including the founder of Muslim brotherhood movement and Dr Omar Abdel Rahman. It is always a 'sugar quoted poison' for the naive.

I can't figure how can an average Muslim fall into these traps. Maybe its religious naivety, self inflicted paranoia but these people are actually so brainwashed and convinced that their faith is under attack. Questionable hadith might be a tool but I think it is a great deal of frustration combined with lack of understanding of modern day interpretation of religion.

Lets imagine for argument sake that they believe Islam is under attack, why not contribute to forums like these? why not write a book, preach better practice? How can they justify killing, the biggest sin in Islamic religion (even if you step on ant).

There is no 'end justifies the means' in Islam because the Quran teachings is follow the good means and I think you read it too.

Two wrongs never make a right in our faith.

To end terrorism it have to start in Muslim countries by real Muslims (and I will call them moderates because in my view, Islam in essence is moderate).

Foxdemonaau, That site you mentioned (www.globalresearch.ca) is crap – full of leftwing lunitic conspiracy articles and other merda.

FH - No, the lack of conceptual consistency is a proof that a religion (and its texts) is inconsistent and confused (or confusing). It is also an indication that its text is poorly written. The Koran states itself to be simple and easy to understand, yet Muslims have a hard time explaining (or better, justifying) simple concepts and statements in their holy book. There are so many contradictory statements in the Koran that Muslims have developed two basic responses: 1. the doctrine of abrogation (like milk, Koranic verses have expiration dates!) and, 2. most of all, denial and more denial.

You say: “you can either choose to judge a religion by those who follow its teachings or by whatever they claim themselves to be”. Wrong. You choose a religion by its teaching. Period. If you follow people you are in trouble.

You also err in saying that 99% of Muslims have the same understanding of Islam. I guess that is why there are no sects or divisions in Islam (NOT) and terrorist never, ever quote the KORAN (wrong!). The fact is that anybody can get anything from the text. It is full of contradictions, not to mention vague and ambiguous statements.

As for Christianitiy, I’ll leave that to DB.

Islam means “submission” or “surrender”. That part about “peaceful surrender to the will of ALLAH” is just your wishful dreams. Peace really has very little to do with Islam, in case you haven’t been reading the newspapers recently. Jihad means “Holy War” 99.9% of the time. To argue otherwise is, one again, delusional. It only means “inner struggle” when explaining it to the stupid infidels.

FH, because of people like you, the situation will only get worse. You are blind to the many faults and failings of your religion, therefore you cannot change it. Without change, things are going to get much worse. However, on the good side, you try hard and at least you respond to these important issues.

Kactuz

FH

Changing the subject... I was talking eschatology with a friend, and he remarked on the role of Israel in the Bible endtime prophesies. He believes that the Jews are the key to the future, and stated that anybody that messes with the Jews - God’s chosen people - is looking for trouble.

Now, I am not Jewish, and I feel that being one of the chosen is a rather dubious honour, considering the history of the Jews in the last 2,600 years. I would also think that there should be no Jews, just like there are no Hittites, Romans or Trojans. They should have disappeared thousands of years ago. Maybe they are hanging around for a reason.

Now, there are a lot of people who don’t like the Jews, for many reasons – in Europe, Asia, and even the US. More than anybody, however, Muslims hate the Jews. Now that wouldn’t be much of a problem for the rest of us, except that the Arabs and other Muslims have oil – and money and influence. Personally, I see the whole situation as getting worse and worse, with no solution at all. My friend thinks that a United Europe (the New Rome?) will finally step up and impose peace, but even that will not resolve the issue, so he will try to do what Titus did 2000 years ago. At that point God steps in and destroys all the enemies of Israel (the Armies of the Beast, Kings of the East, Gog, Magog, Egypt, etc...). Interesting stuff!

FH, as a Muslim, have you considered the consequences of the confrontation between Israel and Islam? Are you familiar with the books of Revelation and Daniel? Are Muslims doing the devil’s work? Do you ever wonder? How is it all going to end?

I wonder a lot. I wonder about Intelligent Design and Darwinism. I wonder about good vs evil and right vs wrong. Two things I know: the future never is what you expect and people do strange things.

Kactuz.... (yes, this is supposed to be about Bali bombings...)

John K

If I may clarify something in regard to "Israel..Gods Chosen people"

Yes, they were chosen, but not on the grounds of anything special about themselves, it was spefically for the goal of bring salvation to the world through them.

All of God's dealing with Israel, were ultimately about the relationship of man with God, and finally through Christ.

You have touched on some very important parts of Scripture, but tread warily mate, there are many people who kind of 'jump' to rather colorful conclusions about Daniels 70 weeks etc... and many other things.

I do believe the Jews are important in matters eschatological, but I am less confident about exactly how they fit.
What I am confident about is 2 things

1/ The restoration of Israel to the land seems critically important and a portent of unfolding events in regard to Christs return.
(Ezekiel 33ff Matthew 24 Luke 17)
2/ The Jews will be restored to God. Romans 9-11 (covers also the concept of God's "election" of the Jews. "Esau I hated, Jacob I loved" is a Hebrew idiom for 'I chose Jacob'.

Revelation is also helpful though a tad confusing in regard to last days things (if one is looking for a blueprint that is). There are about 4 views of understanding it, and all have some merit.

F.H. Don't take my post on the Waleed Ali article as anything other than 'showing the broader picture'. I myself am constantly criticized (which I accept) and often ridiculed (a practice I avoid towards others) and you might have seen some things Xena has posted 'anti Christianity'.

I don't know of anything Paul said which is 'contra' Jesus for him to win out as you suggested.

We all have to 'roll with the punches' so to speak here.

Turn the other cheek ? you ? :) Well, not exactly, but you are a kind hearted person. And, a closer follower of Jesus than me ? hmm this is a debate forum mate, give as good as u get.

Kaktuz,

Terrorism is based on choice of violence then use words out of context to justify the unjustifiable in any religion. The ‘expiration date’ theory is a cult (invented by AH Gazali some 800 years ago) promoted by terrorists to the naïves. It is our unfortunate version of the KKK.

Yet you confuse a bad practice with a bad theory even though overwhelming majority is working well. Jews did not hold Christianity accountable for Hitler and neither did Muslims over the crusades.

BD,

- Islam hates Jews “myth”: Quran confirms that the Israelites were God’ Chosen people (to spread his teachings). The status was lost (when they took exclusivity over God and rejected Jesus) according to the Holy Scripture.
However, the Quran states clearly that some of the Torah’s followers are good believers and have nothing to fear on the day of judgement (2:61 as you know).
The Quran blames the men of religion who concealed the truth they knew, edited their scriptures (cheated) about God and the prophets and deliberately mislead others.

- Jews lived among Muslims (including Medina for the last 14 centuries). The Arab Israeli conflict is a political struggle though religion is used by both sides to fuel hatred. Personally, I think the Israelites lost by leaving the Arab/ Muslims world and decided to live together alone. Israelis have always been great business men and traders and in fact where safer within Muslim communities. They would have grown into an economical giant with their cousins (the Arabs) if they stayed.

- Prophecies are similar in the Quran and the Bible with the exception in the Quran the confrontation is not a done deal. The prophecy (Al Israa) translates into: “If you chose peace you will be given peace”. God reveals the wisdom of creating us as different nations is not to fight but to know each (ta’ra’fu).

Agree to an extent re hadith. There is a debate now in the Muslim world to get a scrutinised version of the hadith and reissue it. Even though it has no divinity it is confusing to some.

Well, well, well - I write about the Jews and a day later the ISLAMIC "Republic" of Iran tells us they want to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. That means killing every man, woman and child in Israel and a lot of palestinians and non-Jews also. How Islamic!

And almost all of the Muslim world is silent. So we have it. Hate, hanger and death are the fruit of Islam. How pathetic!

Have Muslims no shame? Stupid question!

Maybe destroying Israel is really an attack on Islam?

FH, I kind of thought many Muslims still blame the Crusaders (and a bunch of other people) for their problems, unlike the Jews - very few of whom blame the Christian world for Nazi terror.

Oh yes, I would like to indicate a great blog, a Muslim blog, that everybody should read:
http://muttawa.blogspot.com

That is it for today!

John Kactuz!

FH, How is Ramadan going? I once fasted for 3 days (full time, nada but water). Day one: No problema. Day two: A little hungry but not a problem either. Day three: Hungry! Fasting is probably good for the soul and also the body, in moderate doses.

John

Kaktuz,

I saw the news too its absolutely crazy.
And no, Muslims don't blame Chrsitians for the Crusades. Salahudin called them 'frengat' (ie the French invaders) so not to alienate arab christians. He never followed then into Europe after Hettein battle (There would be no France if he did).
I was part of the restoration team of the Mar Gurigus church in Egypt even during the massacres of the Muslim Bosnians by Orthodox serbs. There is no link unless I want to link them.

All I am saying don't hold every Muslim responsible because the Saudi regime have or have not done. For some reason you seem to assume that as soon as a Ahmedinejad or Bin Laden issue a press release that he is the 'spokesperson' of the religion and its followers.

Ramadan is so far so good. Now why would any 'rational' non-muslim fast in Ramadan ? :-)

I am 30 minutes away from eating time, daylight saving won't make it any better.

Peace,

AK

Personally Im tired of seeing on the news all this anti christian rhetoric and having it effect the society I live in. Im a young Canadian male. I have met and know and crossed paths with literaly 1000's of other young canadians. Perhaps 1% of them practice or care about any religion, much less christianity. The muslim radicals seem to assume that everyone in North America is religious. In Canada at least, there are FAR less practicing christians than regular worshippers. The muslims should be lashing out at Mexicans or Gautemalens or similar if they want to hurt christians (or catholics) THEIR societies are still archaic enough to support a huge christian/catholic movement. I also hate George Bush and everytime he talks about God in his speeches I want assasinate him myself. These same feelings I have for all muslim radicals, and those who lump me into a category with others I barely tolerate around me (being christians/jehovahs/ etc) Am I a racist? Absolutley not. I hate religion.

Religion has caused centuries of pain and suffering, and yet with all our technology and science proving the majority of biblical (and koranic) theories to be absolutely absurd, the ignorant killing in the name of 'god's' still continues and causes massive suffering. I once felt very much the same for all peoples, but as these islamic terrorist attacks on the non-religious continue I am driven to hate, and most notably hate muslims. To attack a soldier is one thing (ie: Iraq etc)- if the USA invaded Canada count me in on the resistance as I too will try and kill US soldiers in my country. But to blow up busses in UK, bars in Bali etc. is HEINOUS. Most of the westerners who die have no animosity to muslims and probably never practiced religion. So here is myself, who once had no disregard for any race/religion finding himself drawn more and more towards despising all of it, whether it is christian or muslims (who were all the same to me and even share alot of history) and I feel that ignorance now rules the new world from Bin Laden to Sharon to Bush, I say take ALL these religious morons and put them on the next rocket to Mars along with all their disciples and all their killing tools, our planet will finally be at peace, and if there are wars in my dream world they will be for material issues that one can prove exist, not the theories of men who lived 1000's of years ago and had barely figured out the wheel, much less real science. ( send me back 1000 years with a jerry can of gasoline, a generator, a DVD player and a TV and I too will be a GOD ) End the ignorance, and you will end my ignorance. At least I have the ABILITY and WILL POWER to look beyond my own beliefs at a future where we all live in harmony regardless of belief ( and imaginary virgins, which has to be the stupidest thing Ive ever heard ).

Monty,
Marx and Lennin believed they had the utopian world, only had to eradicate religion and everyone equally share the spoils. What happened? Learn to live under a secular democratic Government, where personal ideology is supressed for the secular wellbeing of all even those you want to kill. President Bush happens to head up a democratically elected Government and you want to kill him, I suggest you find a totalitarian atheistic society and you will be at peace. [Sorry piece]