The Forum > General Discussion > Islamic Jihad - Violent unacceptable but non-violent OK?
Islamic Jihad - Violent unacceptable but non-violent OK?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- ...
- 13
- 14
- 15
-
- All
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 7 August 2010 11:55:52 AM
| |
As always, well stated Foxy.
Will Proxy be capable of understanding what you have presented? Or will he continue to paint all Muslims, be they Arabic, European, Indonesian, American, Australian, with the same brush? If Proxy is Christian, would he enjoy being equated with the Ku Klux Klan? Or Catholic priests' sexual predation? If he is not Christian, why focus on just one religion? As Foxy has pointed out all religions have their fanatical extremists. Posted by Severin, Saturday, 7 August 2010 12:12:21 PM
| |
Foxy,
You seem to have entirely missed the point. You focus exclusively on violent jihad and claim that only a tiny minority of Muslims in Australia support it. The article points out that the end-goal of global Islamic domination is shared by both violent jihadists and also by those in the Islamic community (Umma) who reject violent jihad. The question then becomes: Given that Australia rejects the concept of violent jihad, should we accept the principle that Muslims in Australia have the right to peacefully work toward the goal of the Islamisation of Australia? In answering this question we need to fully understand that Islam teaches that man-made laws are always subservient to Islamic laws which stem from Allah's "revelation" to Mohammed, as embodied in Shariah law. In other words, should Australia tolerate people whose ultimate goal is to implement Al-Shari'ah. Posted by Proxy, Saturday, 7 August 2010 12:36:07 PM
| |
Welcome back from the Sin Bin Proxy! -apologies that my post addresses Bugsy's post rather than the topic.
HI Bugsy.. I would like to say something about your point: *some Christian religions*..."wish to establish the kingdom of God on earth" Question 1. Do you know what the Kingdom of God is? (Biblically) Question 2. What "is" the kingdom of God? Some helpful references. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_God (Wikipedia) Biblical: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+3&version=NIV See verse 5 Mark 1:15 15"The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!" Using the above introductory verse as a starting point, you might wish to look at 'what' Jesus sought to establish through His word and life. His final commands were... Go...make disciples. (Mat 28:19ff) what is a disciple? (see John 3.5 above) Question 3. Given your answers to the above, would it be appropriate and even Biblical, for a 'Church' to seek to establish a Kingdom of God on earth? The closest possible to what seems to be in your mind, is the idea of a predominantly Christian state where laws are made which have a Biblical basis. This might be quite ok, except that you could be sure homosexual behavior and abortion would be, if not criminalized, at least dimly viewed and marginalized. In the case of abortion, it would have strong medical input for sure. But even such a state...would not be the 'Kingdom of God'.... Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Saturday, 7 August 2010 2:31:31 PM
| |
Proxy... regarding your final question "Should this be enough to concern Australians" .. absolutely!
In fact.. if you want to join me on my next demo :) feel free. I put my body where my keyboard is.... and my views on this subject are well enough known that I don't need to repeat them here again. cheers. My grandaughter is crawling all over me now.. can't type much :) Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Saturday, 7 August 2010 2:34:06 PM
| |
I can take it, and will need to after my post.
I resent any religion and its followers having too much say in my country. Followers of Islam concern me more than any other. Not in their own country but in others as a minority they often demand things I will die opposed to. However maybe we did not have political correct people[ how can something so wrong be called correct?] to warn us not to say what we think but. In the 1950,s late teenage children of newly arrived migrants shouted that Australia would be theirs one day. It in ways is their children's right now but I challenge anyone to show how those people are any different than us. Sorry foxy but no religion is worth condemning mankind to kill each other . Posted by Belly, Saturday, 7 August 2010 2:41:38 PM
|
let us also remember that violence in the name of
religion is not a new phenomenon. In fact, all
major religious traditions and ideologies that
we know of, at one point or another have used
violence and terrorism. Even today there are
Hindu militants, Jewish militants, Christian
militants; if we look at acts of violence
perpetrated by Muslims, they are comparatively
small despite the massive and prominent media
coverage given to them.
Australian Muslims have nothing to do with what
Muslim terrorists do around the world. The same
goes for Australians of other religious groups.
With acts of terrorism we should look critically
at motivation, circumstances, context, and any
other such conisderation rather than partaking in
the questionable practice of stereotyping entire
religions or groups of people.