GW... u r a naughty poster :) you clearly did not read this in my previous post:

"For example, there are people who have become Muslims based on reading the first chapter of the Quran. It must be conceded that this is a most beautiful peace of writing."

Now regarding the approach of referring to the foundation documents rather than contemporary expressions. Let me elucidate.

1/ All religous documents must be correctly interpreted. Now..I know.. I absolutely know that various denominations do interpret some things differently. Jehovah's witnesses and Mormons, are cults which deliberately interpret information in line with the views of the people who started them. This is readily identifiable.

As I've said a few (hundred?) times, the difference between 'specific/historical circumstance' and 'generalized commands' must always be recognized in the Old and New Testaments.
Suffice it to be said that there is no generalized command in the OT or the NT which suggests that Gods's people should impose 'Christian' Rule on any other people by military force.
It is clearly and unmistakably and unambiguously, the message of the Old and New testament that God is seeking reconciliation with mankind, by an act of mans choice. If this were not so, why would the prophets continually call the Israelites back? You see..the prophets themselves pointed to the consequences of not living under His covenant as per the covenant document (Deuteronomy.. see the blessings and curses at the end)

So for example Isaiah spoke during the reign of various kings.

He said this:

16 wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds
out of my sight!
Stop doing wrong,

17 learn to do right!
Seek justice,
encourage the oppressed. [a]
Defend the cause of the fatherless,
plead the case of the widow.

OR.....

20 but if you resist and rebel,
you will be devoured by the sword."
For the mouth of the LORD has spoken.

The 'Punisher' here is pagan nations, not God's people.

and..true to this prophetic word, during the reign of Hezekiah, Judea was sacked by Babylon and taken into exile.

@_GW_continued

On "balance", and seeking to identify the good parts of Islam, aah.. this is where we differ.

I'm guessing that in your case I am interacting with a secular mind?
That would possibly explain your desire for fairness in treating Islam just as any other human movement.

But the serious problem here, follows on naturally from my previous post, and this is of absolutely critical importance. This single fact determines why Islam can never be regarded as 'just' another faith or movement. It is also why one can never just look at good bits as if the rest does not matter.

The primary objective should be to identify the core_motivation and goal of the faith itself..

Irrespective of the contemporary behavior of the proverbial 'most muslims' it does not change or alter in any way, the truth that the 9th surah of the Quran (one of the latest recorded) is an action plan for world domination.

You can detect this not just from the words as they stand, but from how those same words were used historically by those closest to Mohammad during his life.

The classic is 9:29 "Fight those who do not believe in Allah etc....until they are subdued"

This is actually an applicable command.
The reason you don't hear so much about it, is this. It applies to the Islamic Caliphate. i.e.. IF..there is one leader of the Muslim world.. a Caliph.. HE is authorized to declare was on pagan nations to establish the rule of Allah.

Now..there are some who interpret that verse more broadly and take it as justification for jihadist attacks anywhere and anytime against infidels. We call those people 'radicals/extremists/terrorists' but the fact remains..if a Caliph was running the show, he would be doing the same thing.

Hizb_Ut_Tahrir are the primary 'Restore_the_Caliphate' movement in the world today. They can honestly say "We_don't_advocate_violence"

aaaah..but what they DON'T tell you is. "once the Caliphate is restored..the CALIPH will be fulfilling 9:29..very_very_violently"

If you take the time to examine the broad manifestations of Islam today you will indeed see it, but not in big posters.

You're getting close to the line again Boaz. Careful.

But before getting to that bit, I would just like to point out a teensy bit of wilful blindness on your part.

>>All religous documents must be correctly interpreted. Now..I know.. I absolutely know that various denominations do interpret some things differently. Jehovah's witnesses and Mormons, are cults which deliberately interpret information in line with the views of the people who started them. This is readily identifiable.<<

You yourself have chosen a particular path of Christianity where the available information has been "deliberately interpreted" by one Paul, would that not be a reasonable statement?

Yet you fail to see that this puts Paul into the same position vis-à-vis your version of Christianity, as Charles Taze Russell and Joseph Smith are to theirs.

It does not automatically make that one version the only right one. In fact, I would strongly suggest that the fact that myriad factions and off-shoots have blossomed and faded over the centuries, has something to do with the dissatisfaction that some feel with Paul's worldview.

No matter. To the point.

>>We call those people 'radicals/extremists/terrorists' but the fact remains..if a Caliph was running the show, he would be doing the same thing... what they DON'T tell you is. "once the Caliphate is restored..the CALIPH will be fulfilling 9:29..very_very_violently"<<

That is simply scaremongering, tub-thumping propaganda, Boaz, and you know it.

If you wish - as you have occasionally expressed - to deny the charge of fear-and-loathing driven rabble-rousing, these are exactly the kind of wild suppositions that you should consistently refrain from.

And yes, I know that a preposition isn't something you end a sentence with.

Have a great day, reassured that despite your paranoia, they really aren't out to get you.

Pericles... you raise some worthy issues.

1/ PAUL... nope.. he is nothing like Russell or Smith.

His former life is one pointer. His dramatic conversion. His spotless life, (relative to the other 2) his self denial (as opposed to self gratification by Russell and Smith) and his closeness to the other Apostles all contribute to the clear acceptance of Paul as one of the chief Apostles. Note the word "Apostle" along with those like Peter, James and John.

2/ Tub Thumping.

No I completely reject this and in so doing I strongly criticize your viewpoint. If one points out hateful violence filled commands in the Quran alone... you claim 'Whack-a-Mozzie' but when one specifically explains (as it does need some explanation to the uninformed) that the use of those verses as constitutional motivations is theoretically limited to the authority of a Caliph..and perhaps that the interim manifestations are a bit errant.. you STILL claim whack-a-mozzie.

Now..your response here is either an admission that you don't understand enough of Islam to make intelligent informed comments about it, particularly the nature and role of a Caliph in regard to the non Muslim world, or...you are simply fanning up a smokescreen for knowledge you do have but refuse to admit.

In either case Pericles...it's not a good look. It's either ignorance or sympathetic deception.

if you doubt that Hizb and co are aiming at the very scenario I outlined, then you should so some reading. Perhaps I can challenge you in the negative. Show that they do NOT see the Caliphate in this way?

All these people who cant even read fushah arabic and have suddenly become experts on the quran (which they've obviously never read, given that they cannot read fushah arabic). Amazing. Like the "bible scholar" who cannot read aramaic, greek or hebrew - you only serve to join the ranks of the laughably sad pseudo-academia.

Since when can anyone speak objectively or with any authority - without looking like an ignorant fool - about a book that is written in a language they cannot even read. The ability to copy and paste the ramblings of neo-orientalist ethno-religious bigots about something they're not even qualified to speak with knowledge about, is obviously in full force on this forum! Bravo!

Hello Everybody

I dont know about anywhere else but lets look at Australia.
Only yesterday I was talking with a friend who was helping a X paramedic from Sydney.
The reason she moved was because she got sick of being abused by some Muslims in Sydney.
The last event she was attending the home of a very ill 4 month old child.
She had to enter the house alone because men can not go into a Muslim home if the woman is alone without her husband. She explained the child was in urgent need of attening hospital.

This caused much stress to the mother as the father was not home to give consent.
While she racked through about 14 different medi care cards( all spelt very similar to find the card for the paramedic) the husand walked in.
He punched the parometic in the stomache then spat on home and tossed her out.

So whats happening about this type of Muslim? I say we put him on a plane 'NOW' and say Tootle Pip.

I also think migrants should be given vias scripts but NOT PR or citizenship. In Germany you have to live there 22 years before you can claim any welfare.

The answer is to have 'ONE' Islamic Council 'only ' to lead Muslims not 32 etc...

Now before you all rush in and call us Anti Muslim let me assure you Boazie not all Muslim people and leaders are bad people.

Stop branding all Muslims in this manner. Your so unfair.

The Australian Government needs to take another look at their promises and how they are going to ensure we dont get woman bashers in this country.

I think Rudd really needs to address this or we are going to have enourous problems.

The biggest problem however is People trying to create mass hysteria about Muslims in Australia.



Pls remember that many Aussie Christian men also abuse women.

Maybe we should pop them on a plane too to live with people they relate to better.

Food for thought.

Hi to Philip Tang