|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Jun 5th, 2003 01:24 PM | ||
| Zosimus |
Thank you Italian on your thorough "un-generalized" information, it was interesting reading! I appreciate learning new things, even when its served it in such a hostile manner. And I just want to add that I was not trying to take a stab at Christianity! I was merely pointing out that I believe that most (of the big) religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddism) were born in times with little or no laws in regard to people acting "civilized" toward each other. Looking around the world today, just makes me wonder if religion, politics or any other "laws" really ever made any great difference to mankind! Proto...Thank God: Allah/Buddah/the million Hindu Gods/Ra/Jehova/Cosmos/ Universe/etc. for people that think and act like you!  
|
|
| Jun 5th, 2003 10:50 AM | ||
| Bennett |
"Grove City, Ohio," :/ ten minutes from my house. |
|
| Jun 5th, 2003 09:46 AM | ||
| mburbank |
Proof positive that love is stronger than hate. Unless hate has a hijacked airplane or a cluster bombs or depleted uranium shells. |
|
| Jun 5th, 2003 01:10 AM | ||
| Jeanette X |
Yay! Go Proto!   
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 09:32 PM | ||
| Protoclown |
I am pleased. My grandmother wrote me back tonight, actually, and she said that she was very surprised by and impressed with my letter. She said I was a "natural writer" (haha!) and that she showed the letter to my grandfather (a World War II veteran), and after discussing it they saw my point. Now they see the situation differently and they both agree with me! How about that? I'm glad I was able to provoke some examination of the issue. |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 09:28 PM | ||
| ItalianStereotype | shutup whore. | |
| Jun 4th, 2003 09:25 PM | ||
| Cap'n Crunch | It doesn't really matter of the religion, it is just how people act. I don't know any of my friend's religions, and I won't ask. People stereotype people of this religion because of this, and it isn't true. People are people, and if they act crazy, that is on them. :/ | |
| Jun 4th, 2003 09:13 PM | ||
| ItalianStereotype |
I'm not saying that Islam "came out" of violence, but it is a generally known fact that Mohammed the Prophet preached violence and conquest. when Mohammed first began seeing visions of the Angel Gabriel, he was under the protection of his uncle Abu Talib. in 619 Talib died and Mohammmed's second uncle withdrew his promise of protection. thus, "the Prophet" was forced to leave Mecca. it took him years to establish any kind of authority in Medina, and then only because of the constant raids that he launched against the caravans leaving Mecca. in April 623, a group of 60 arabs attacked one particular caravan, firing arrows at the guards and shouting "for Allah and Mohammed" arguably the first violence committed in the name of Islam. as word of Mohammeds raiders continued to spread, a force of some 800 Meccans moved to confront Mohammed and raze Medina. at the Battle of Badr, Mohammed claimed to have seen visions which helped spur his outnumbered men to rout the enemy. this prestigious victory convinced many thousands of tribesmen who were still unsure about the legitimacy of Islam. shortly afterwards, two poets were captured from the retreating Meccan forces. their job had been to come along and write a glorious epic about the destruction of the upstart Mohammed and his "false religion." Mohammed had them promptly beheaded, their skulls emptied and left for all passing to see. Mohammed, with his army of Islam, now set out to conquer Mecca. before he could, however, a restless Jewish tribe, Qurayzah, revolted against their new lords and requested freedom to leave Mohammed's lands. 10,000 arab warriors descended on them, killing all the men, those who resisted and those who didn't, and selling the women and children into slavery. in 630, Mecca fell to Mohammed and all armed men were slaughtered and lined up at the city walls. with his former seat of power restored, Mohammed next assaulted the northern arab tribes, ravaging their ancestral homelands and dividing the plunder amongst his men. with this, all the Arab tribes were now united under the banner of Islam and thoroughly under Mohammeds control. unfortunately for them, this meant that they could no longer plunder and kill each other. thus it was decided that the new "empire of Islam" would challenge the strength of the Byzantines far to the north. before he could, however, Mohammed died on a pilgrimage to Mecca. what was it that made Islam so appealing to so many men? economic and political stability as well as a new faith that promised paradise to those who fell in battle and plunder for those who didn't. Islam was violent during its early life because the Arabs lived in a warrior culture. still too general for you? oh, and attacking christianity because it is actively seeking converts is just about the stupidest thing you could have brought to the discussion. |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 07:17 PM | ||
| Zosimus |
Quote:
I am by no means an expert on Islam either, but I think to postulate that Islam came out of violence is just a too broad, and over-generalized statement. If we go back in time, you will see that the very concept of paradise came from West Persia, by the founder of Zoriastrianism, Zarathustra. It was his vision (approx. 508 BC) of paradise that became the very foundation of what christians call "Heaven," prior to that we had a volatile earth, were God was a confusion! God/Jehova would reward people, as he would punish him. With the paradise concept, came Lucifer/Satan and thereby an opposition of Good vs. Evil. The old testament will actually show you, time and time again, how violent God "himself," was at the time. With the coming of the Messiah in the New testament, as predicted in the old testament, God changed "his" ways and became peace-loving and peace-craving, as did the followers of the faith. Sufi's are muslim and just like in Christianity, Islam branches out into several different types of worship), the Sufi's are the most peace-loving people/muslims in the world. They have often been persecuted by shiites. Christain have been violent and aggressive in their conversions of people. Crusaders would Kill, missionaries worked and imposed on others until their point was swallowed. Muslims today, are seperated in two groups. The followers of Mohammad (the prophet)= Sunni, or the followers of Ali ( a militant religeous figure)= Shiite. All religions seem to preach peace but ultimately, man will be the one to decide in the end...(may God help us all!) Check this out: (taken from a pretty shitty non-religeous board elsewhere on the net) "Seeing Islam as 'Evil' Faith, Evangelicals Seek Converts" By LAURIE GOODSTEIN (NYT) 1853 words "Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 3 ABSTRACT - Evangelical Christians seek to woo Muslims away from Islam; teacher at recent seminar in church fellowship hall in Grove City, Ohio, shows passages from Koran that he says proves Islam is regressive, fraudulent and violent; incendiary comments about Islam from religious leaders like Franklyn Graham, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Jerry Vines have drawn rebukes from Muslims and Christian groups alike, but many in grass roots of evangelical Christianity have absorbed their antipathy for Islam; in evangelical churches and seminaries across country, lectures and books criticizing Islam and promoting strategies for Muslim conversions are gaining currency; Arab International Ministry, group that leads crash courses on Islam, claims to have trained 4,500 American Christians to proselytize Muslims in last six years, many of those since 2001 terrorist attacks; their basic presumption is that world's two largest religions are headed for confrontation, with Christianity representing what is good, true and peaceful and Islam what is evil, false and violent; National Assn of Evangelicals has called on Christian leaders to temper their anti-Islam oratory, saying it is unhelpful to interfaith relations and dangerous to Christians spreading gospel to Muslims; historians note enmity between Christianity and Islam dates as far back as Crusades; photo (L) On a recent Saturday in a church fellowship hall here, evangelical Christians from several states gathered for an all-day seminar on how to woo Muslims away from Islam. The teacher urged a kindly approach: always show Muslims love, charity and hospitality, he said, and carry copies of the New Testament to give as gifts. The students, scribbling notes, included two pastors, a school secretary and college students who said they hoped to convert Muslims in the United States, or on mission trips abroad." Did someone say "Good Christian"? 
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 05:17 PM | ||
| ItalianStereotype | the way I view the Bible, or more specifically the Gospels, is as a set of beliefs to govern the faithful in their struggle against evil (Satan and his lot) not mankind. unfortunately, I have not made a study of the Bible, so if you want to make a discussion of it, I will be casting about somewhat blindly. | |
| Jun 4th, 2003 04:04 PM | ||
| Jeanette X |
[quote="ItalianStereotype"] well basically, my take on it is that Christianity started as a non-violent religion that supported faithful non-violent resistance and, as it grew in magnitude, became more violent as it meshed with the secular and political world. islam, however, started out as violent, grew decadent under the osmanli turks, and is now caught between the violent fundamentalists and a more peaceful interpretation (in western countries more than in the empire of Islam itself).[quote] What about these Bible passages? And Revalations? "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."-Matthew 10:34 "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. " - Luke 14:26 |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 03:09 PM | ||
| ItalianStereotype |
ah. i thought that what you were asking me was much more simplistic. my mistake. well basically, my take on it is that Christianity started as a non-violent religion that supported faithful non-violent resistance and, as it grew in magnitude, became more violent as it meshed with the secular and political world. islam, however, started out as violent, grew decadent under the osmanli turks, and is now caught between the violent fundamentalists and a more peaceful interpretation (in western countries more than in the empire of Islam itself). perhaps i should go into more detail, but it will have to wait. i need to go look for a job. |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 02:57 PM | ||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
The 30 Years War is a good example. Like you said, the religious "theme" guised many other issues, and in fact, if I'm correct, France often flip flopped on faiths in order to position themselves better against Spain and the Habsburghs. Doesn't the Islamic faith, and all atrocities commited in "its" name, deserve the same historical scrutiny? |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 02:43 PM | ||
| ItalianStereotype |
the olympic bomber? that guy was as much of a nut as anyone can be. for the common man, the crusades were entirely religious, but for the papacy it had more of a political bend. remember, at that time the kingdoms of Europe were only a few hundred years old and were still fragmented; the only strong kingdom, the Germanic empire, threatened the security of the papal seat. the inquisition...i would consider that an internal problem of christianity, not so much a civil war, but more of a culmination of all the internal strife caused by seperationist protestants and, in spain's case, moors. while this does not excuse the spaniards for their actions, what they did should not be held against the other christian kingdoms of europe. spain at this time was THE christian fanatic of the world as well as one of the most powerful countries in Europe. it is difficult to say "no" to a country that could easily exterminate your entire culture. this is also partially the reason for the 30 years war. besides, islam at this time had grown somewhat...sadistic. i mean, look at the janissaries... overall, this war is far too complex to simply be called a religious war. under the augsburg settlement of 1555, lutheranism was granted official recognition within the bounds of the HRE, the catholic church permanently lost lands seized by secular lords, and German princes could force their religion onto their subjects. after the peace was signed, however, many princes converted to Calvinism, legally putting them outside the terms of the agreement. when said princes continued encroaching on legally Catholic lands, small alliances were formed to protect catholic claims. at the same time, the austrians and the bohemians began a series of escalations that eventually led to open conflict and an anti -habsburg alliance that drew spain into the war. spain, looking to reclaim the power that it had been steadily losing since the end of the 16th century, invaded the lower Palatinate (whose king had also been crowned king of Bohemia, so it all works out) in order to unite its Dutch provinces with its northern italian holdings. this brought the french, the danes, and almost drew the english into the war. when habsburg forces claimed mecklemburg, gustavus adolphus of sweden invaded northern germany out of fear of habsburg dominance of the baltic. by the time westphalia was signed, the war was almost entirely secular. so anyway, i might have rambled on there a bit... |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 01:56 PM | ||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
Quote:
|
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 01:49 PM | ||
| ItalianStereotype |
Quote:
it seems to me that your grandmother considers herself a nationalist and a patriot, but maybe doesn't have quite as broad of a world view as you do. regardless, you always have a right to make your opinions known, especially around family. whether they agree or disagree, family remains so. i disagree with you about Islam being, at heart, a religion of peace. i think that, since its founding, many Muslims have grown peaceful. in the days of Mohammed, however, violence, conversion at swordpoint, and bloody expansionism were all preached as the will of Allah (in a fundamentally different way than Christianity). |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 12:56 PM | ||
| Anonymous | I see nothing wrong with how you responded. You weren't nasty or anything like that at all. (I think her email was nasty though) Anyway, if she is going to give you the silent treatment now or something.. I'd say Granma needs to grow up | |
| Jun 4th, 2003 12:35 PM | ||
| Protoclown |
Well, so far I haven't received any responses, and I don't think I'm going to. So I don't know how any of them took my reply. I did write my grandmother another letter the same day though, just a personal "hi, how ya doing, sorry about this other letter" kind of thing. Normally she writes me right back. But so far? Nothing but tumbleweeds. I think I may have offended her. But hey, she offended ME first. |
|
| Jun 4th, 2003 12:31 PM | ||
| KevinTheOmnivore |
I guess I'm sort of fortunate in regards to my family and politics. My family overall tends to be conservative. They know where I stand on things, and they in fact encourage it. Sure, we take shots at each other here and there, but generally we respect each others views and don't push buttons. For example, my uncles are all very conservative. We've had some heated matches, but ultimately, it's not worth fracturing family relations over SUVs and dividends, IMO. One of his daughters is my God daughter, despite differences of opinion. I'm sorry about the shitty e-mail, Proto. 
|
|
| May 30th, 2003 02:53 PM | ||
| Carnivore |
Well he's wrong, God dammit! Dead wrong. You did right, son. And I'm proud of you
|
|
| May 30th, 2003 12:08 PM | ||
| Protoclown |
Good point, Italian. I'm going to move it to the Political forum, where it belongs. I showed it to one of my best friends and he said I probably should have just ignored it rather than assert my opinion on all of them. |
|
| May 30th, 2003 04:38 AM | ||
| Spectre X | Buddhism doesn't belong there really, it does because Buddhists don't tend to take people with them, but some monks set themselves on fire. | |
| May 30th, 2003 04:32 AM | ||
| FS |
Quote:
Raelianism? Church for the Greater Glory and Improved Lifestyle of FS? That was a very good response, I think. I hope, even if it doesn't sway her from her opinion, she'll respect yours. |
|
| May 30th, 2003 04:03 AM | ||
| ItalianStereotype | why did you choose to post this in GB instead of poli/philo? | |
| May 29th, 2003 11:08 PM | ||
| Miss Modular |
Quote:
|
|
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||
