Did someone mention my name?
Just a little observation - I find that the sentiments usually expressed by Madame Foxy to be the most consistently sensible and compassionate among any expressed on this forum - Poirot listens intently to information and viewpoints that are delivered in measured tones - perhaps some here should take note, as it's certainly a better method to get your point across.

Dear Poirot :) thanx for your helpful advice... I guess some of us..like me.. are not so measured.. it's a weakness.. in fact it is a lack of faith in my fellow man.. because I don't think many really enjoy getting deep into tight paragraphs for 'hidden' or nuanced points.

Yes..I am a hammer :) and to me, most things are nails.. but I'll make you a deal.. let's try your method in an excercise in 'measured' tones :)

Are you up for it?

Please read something from an online book (if you don't mind) and see what you make of it.

http://www.quranenglish.com/tafheem_quran/065.htm

Please scoll down in 'measured steps' :) to the section which has blue highlighting and the numbers 65:4.

Then..scroll down to the paragraph indicated by *13 and have a read.
Please let me know, what this man is speaking about? Don't hold back..what is he actually saying the verse means ? (for today)
You can find the exact point beginning from the 10th line in *13
to the end of the paragraph.

There :) I followed your advice.. I have not begun with any conclusion.....or assertion.. just opened a book...

PERICLES.. ur on the wrong thread you evil troll...:) that was 'negative' contributions and it was not Australian but American.

But discipline aside.. you are quite on the mark with your cut and paste...seems like this person was a bit rabid to say the least.
No argument from me on your information.. just the location of it.. "wrong thread"...why not open a thread titled "Negative contributions of Australian Christians" I'm sure many here would love that...right?
I certainly won't object.

I note you did not dispute the factuality of Myers conversion. Good.. but you did try to use irrelevant 'bluster' to dampen his noble impact and story. No problem there either.. discussions tend to become a bit derailed by the passionate.

Sorry Al - I find it difficult to join you in debate (although I did take the time to read the passage). I don't believe that I can persuade myself to believe in your religion or their religion...I have tried in days gone by, you see, to believe. I thought it would be an interesting feeling to have that sort of belief or faith - but my "little grey cells" simply will not condone the notion.
Yet, I see much before me that is good in the world (amongst all the bad). I do not need a religion to tell me what is already in my power to deduce.

Dear Al,

Most people don't have missionary complexes
or enjoy being preached at, or having
selective bits from religious texts
quoted to them either.

One's religion/or lack of,
to most people, is a private matter.
And it's extremely arrogant of
anyone to think that others need/want
converting.

Polycarp,

You should stick to that nick given it still fits your mind set
poly= multi
Carp = goes on and on and (yawn) on.

For the rest of the world

I've yet to see any plausible analysis that demonstrates that Christians are any better than an other major religion as people. Historically they are up there with the most blood thirsty and disrespecting of others.

All religions have good ones and Bad ones.

My issue is with 'factually dubious' proselytising (carping).
I'm always wary of people that constantly push self referential rote dogma as the one and only truth.
I wonder who are they trying to convince? Others? why? Are they so insecure/unsure that they need the confirmation/approval of others ? seeking identity/ relevance in terms of a group?
It seems to me that using one's religion as a personal identifier, rather misses the point of religion. Religion is about one's *personal* belief in God(s) etc. In truth if you're a bad person then you would be a bad Christian, Muslim, Rotarian etc. i.e. My sister in law is a narrow minded old before her age pain. Her being Christian and a Nun changes nothing she is still the same. Oh, except now instead of her neighbours being a problem now it's the old ladies of her church.

Rote Dogma begins where reason ceases. It is usually a substitute to the effort of thinking.

NB I have no problem with religion being what it's supposed to be PERSONAL

Dear Foxy..did I 'quote' any religious verse at anyone ?

POIROT.. you are astounding.. the simple fact that you read it is enough mate. I didn't plan to debate you.. I'm just hoping you can see what is actually there...and possibly understand why someone could be VERY concerned that such interpretations are bandied around today..FOR today.. (The commentary is quite recent historically...he began writing that in 1942)

Are you brave enough to risk the wrath of 'the gang' by actually spelling out in about 2 or 3 words what Maududi was declaring ?
C'mon..live dangerously just for once :)
I'll make no further comment on it after that (in this thread)

Exammy

You ask
//I wonder who are they trying to convince? Others? why? Are they so insecure/unsure that they need the confirmation/approval of others ?//

No..it's not an issue like that...it's plain simple obedience to our Lord "Go..into all the world.. make disciples of all nations"

Every reaction you see in response to any actual presentation of the Gospel here.. direct or indirect has been expressed since (and at that time also, see the book of Acts) the New Testament..and it will continue to be so.

But this thread is here for the sake of balance. Did you criticize Foxy for her "Muslims" thread ? I hope you are consistent there.

If you're weary of my speeches :) just click on 'ignore'.
blessings to you.