Its okay to label muslims and expect them to apologise for the actions of a bunch of deranged psychopaths; well if its good enough for muslims it should be good enough for christians. Read on.

"The label of Catholic terror was never used about the IRA

Fundamentalism is often a form of nationalism in religious disguise"

Karen Armstrong
Monday July 11, 2005
The Guardian

Last year I attended a conference in the US about security and intelligence in the so-called war on terror and was astonished to hear one of the more belligerent participants, who as far as I could tell had nothing but contempt for religion, strongly argue that as a purely practical expedient, politicians and the media must stop referring to "Muslim terrorism". It was obvious, he said, that the atrocities had nothing to do with Islam, and to suggest otherwise was not merely inaccurate but dangerously counterproductive."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/comment/story/0,16141,1525894,00.html#article_continue

Muslims DO abhor the behaviour of terrorists, read on:

"UK Fatwa to Call Bombers Unbelievers, If Proved Muslims

"Those behind this atrocity aren't just enemies of humanity but enemies of Islam and Muslims," said Sacranie.

CAIRO, July 10, 2005 (IslamOnline.net) – Britain’s top Muslim scholars are drafting a fatwa stripping those behind the grisly London blasts, if proved Muslims, from the right to call themselves Muslims, a leading British newspaper said Sunday, July 10.

Signed by dozens of prominent Muslim bodies, mosques, Islamic scholars and community groups, the religious edict will brand the attacks as a breach of the most basic tenets of Islam, reported The Independent.

http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2005-07/10/article03.shtml

TIM GOODWIN.
point of order/factual error.

The references to 'wiping out' some peoples, and 'keeping the virgins for yourself', is not a suggestion in any way that they should be used for some kind of sex toy to be raped. (except to our post 60s sexual revolution dirty minds) The text does not say that, neither should you or anyone else. It says "keep them for yourselves" now, I suggest you read the Levitical pronouncements on the treatment of captives, and while it is certainly not the 'me' generation/brought up on Disney's cup of cultural/religious tea, it is certainly not what it has been portrayed as in your post.

Your 'Vengeful' OT God/Smiling at kittens 'she'll be right mate' New Testament God spin is lacking in analysis, fails to consider all the factual information, and plain wrong. The New Testament in Christ was the goal. see Jeremiah 31.31 and you might get a hint.

JOHNNY ROTTEN

Instead of going to a conference in USA, goto Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, and see how things are spun there. Delve into the true nature of Islam with those who are not in a minority status in western countries who feel they need to 'tone down' and put a happy smiley peaceful PR face on the religion.

I've detailed the root issue in Islam with factual and accurate portrayals of the 'prophet' in his dealing with infidels. See previous documented posts.

Xena said it all when she quoted Herman Goering in the other thread,
where he said (about Hitler)

"This man is our Saviour" (paraphrase)

Germans believed it, we didn't, why ? we look at
-Mass murder,
-Torture,
-Racial Supremacy.

Mohammed says "I am God's messenger" He also said if anyone even insults him, or leaves his faith, they will die.

Its about time you guys got 'real' and recognize there is a world of difference between a faith which has 'invasion/mass murder/Theft and Torture at it's core, and one which says "Love your enemies" in the FOUNDER.

As has been observed, there are no 'Fundamentalist Christian suicide bombers', but there ARE Islamic ones

OK Boaz, point taken about the Numbers quote. (And I strenuously deny being any part of a Disney generation! Whatever that might be. My upbringing had plenty of Sunday school and no Sunday Night Disney...) I stand corrected that the chapter in question only orders the sacking of all their cities, killing all men and boys (Srebrenica anyone?) and killing all women who are not virgins.

It is a fact that the OT is a book of legalistic detail and brutality - which is to be expected in the era and the circumstances in which those tribes found themselves. But the god who emerges in those pages is jealous, vengeful, allied to one tribe and keen on smiting. In the NT, he is forgiving, compassionate, self-sacrificing (literally) and universal in his message to all people. The fact that Jeremiah refers to a "new covenant" does not stop the OT god from being inconsistent with the personality of that god as portrayed in the NT.

It seems to me that many holy books, including the Bible, are baggy collections of often disparate ideas. Different people seem drawn to different corners according to personality and the times. Wasn't it Shaw who said "God created man in his own image - and man returned the favour"?

BD,

"Mohammed says if anyone even insults him they will die"

This reference is the heart of extremism propaganda, you are just using their very same sources. Neither the Koran nor his personal history have anything link that except in your 'cult like sources'.

BTW, you didn't answer my question above.

AK

OK BD,
You stated to both Xena and Tim that you wanted factual and contextual references. Well, context this for me:

Matthew 5
17: “Do not think that I have come to do away with the Law of Moses and the teachings of the prophets. I have not come to do away with them, but make their teachings come true.”
18: “Remember that as long as heaven and earth last, not the least point nor the smallest detail of the Law will be done away with – not until the end of all things.”

So, all that is written in the Old Testament is valid. In that context, your arguments regarding the violence proposed in it must be invalid. In that context, all that you state regarding the Qu’ran must also apply to the Bible. In that context, you should then take a good long look in the mirror before criticising another faith. Your own has many holes.

As for “Its all verifiable, and subject to clear thinking scrutiny” – that is your SUBJECTIVE view of the situation. For all you – or any other person knows – Islam could be the one true religion and all us westerners are getting it wrong! Who’s to say?

Get off your high horse and try living the religion you evangelise. Your patronising, kindly tone does not hide the smugness and arrogance of your own beliefs. At no time has an Islamic proponent come to this site and attacked your faith. Seems to me, they are more believable than you. And you were a missionary?!

Xena,
Just thought I'd picked up on your hatred of men and your repulsion of pregnancy. I don't happen to believe in immaculate conception like Catholics and Muslims that so repulses you, but recognise Jesus concepton as natural, but his Divine calling was from the moment of conception to be the anointed Christ - Messiah. Your supposed insulting quote was more offensive to Ash than to me. Then you try to win his favour by agreeing with his letter in Saturday the 16th AGE. That is why I quoted the Qur'an. Be careful what you curse. Just show some respect for religious sentiments. There are blasphemy clauses of things said to defame Mary in the Qur'an.