44 replies to this topic

[The_Squid]

I believe the Koran so stipulates.

Does the harsh language in the Koran explain Islamic violence? Don't answer till you've taken a look inside the Bible

But in terms of ordering violence and bloodshed, any simplistic claim about the superiority of the Bible to the Koran would be wildly wrong. In fact, the Bible overflows with "texts of terror," to borrow a phrase coined by the American theologian Phyllis Trible. The Bible contains far more verses praising or urging bloodshed than does the Koran, and biblical violence is often far more extreme, and marked by more indiscriminate savagery.

--------------------

Commands to kill, to commit ethnic cleansing, to institutionalize segregation, to hate and fear other races and religions . . . all are in the Bible, and occur with a far greater frequency than in the Koran. At every stage, we can argue what the passages in question mean, and certainly whether they should have any relevance for later ages. But the fact remains that the words are there, and their inclusion in the scripture means that they are, literally, canonized, no less than in the Muslim scripture.

[jbg]

Does the harsh language in the Koran explain Islamic violence? Don't answer till you've taken a look inside the Bible(part of interior quote: "Commands to kill, to commit ethnic cleansing, to institutionalize segregation, to hate and fear other races and religions . . . all are in the Bible, and occur with a far greater frequency than in the Koran. At every stage, we can argue what the passages in question mean, and certainly whether they should have any relevance for later ages. But the fact remains that the words are there, and their inclusion in the scripture means that they are, literally, canonized, no less than in the Muslim scripture."

The difference is that the followers of the Bible have been allowed to interpret away much of the harshness of these doctrines. Such a course of interpretation among Muslims could lead to a beheading or being tossed off a cliff.

[BC_chick]

The difference is that the followers of the Bible have been allowed to interpret away much of the harshness of these doctrines. Such a course of interpretation among Muslims could lead to a beheading or being tossed off a cliff.

Christianity also had plenty of bloodshed throughout its evolution, no?

[Peeves]

All of these points have been discussed here in the past. It's kind of frustrating for us to start at point zero with these discussions over and over again.

You have an opinion on this, and we're unlikely to change that. Maybe we can jump ahead to this question:

What do you want the rest of us to do with your opinion ? What would you like to do ?

Just simply agree or disagree.
Islam is simply not just another religion.

[Peeves]

Christianity also had plenty of bloodshed throughout its evolution, no?

....and you think Islam is or will evolve?

[jbg]

Christianity also had plenty of bloodshed throughout its evolution, no?

....and you think Islam is or will evolve?

The problem is more the trend. It's grossly in the wrong direction for Islam and quite favorably in the right direction for Christianity.

[dre]

The problem is more the trend. It's grossly in the wrong direction for Islam and quite favorably in the right direction for Christianity.

Grossly in the wrong direction? How so?

[dre]

The difference is that the followers of the Bible have been allowed to interpret away much of the harshness of these doctrines. Such a course of interpretation among Muslims could lead to a beheading or being tossed off a cliff.

Well.. the real difference is a lot of christians live in secular nations of law. They behave because well chuck their asses in jail if they dont. Muslims in secular countries behave better as well.

[DogOnPorch]

Grossly in the wrong direction? How so?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decapitation

[Peeves]

The problem is more the trend. It's grossly in the wrong direction for Islam and quite favorably in the right direction for Christianity.

Well I read of many Christian churches and church goers being murdered by Muslims, but not of Muslims being killed by Christians just because they are Muslims! Christians aren't burning mosques! Christians or so called Christians just need to burn a Koran and it's world news. Muslims kill Christians and it's usually only mentioned in the Christian media.


Oh I know someone will now say nya nya! the USA -NATO forces kill Muslims all the time...yada yada. Not the same at all!
Sure a radical terrorist Islamist, enemy group or individual is targeted and there are sometimes collateral civilian Muslims killed but they aren't purposely targeted simply because they aren't Christian ,or because they are Muslims.

But that's not the same as the murdered Christians in Egypt, Nigeria
http://www.christianpost.com/news/more-than-100-christians-killed-in-nigerias-plateau-state-56473/

etc. ..who are having churches burned just because they are Christians and because they are not Muslims.

[Michael Hardner]

Oh I know someone will now say nya nya! the USA -NATO forces kill Muslims all the time...yada yada. Not the same at all!
Sure a radical terrorist Islamist, enemy group or individual is targeted and there are sometimes collateral civilian Muslims killed but they aren't purposely targeted simply because they aren't Christian ,or because they are Muslims.

Do you think that this would make them feel better about collateral casualties ?

[DogOnPorch]

Well.. the real difference is a lot of christians live in secular nations of law. They behave because well chuck their asses in jail if they dont. Muslims in secular countries behave better as well.

So left to their own devices and traditions, Christians will immediately start burning folks for heresy, witchcraft, etc? Revert to the 1600s so to speak? Can I have a modern example, please?

[The_Squid]

So left to their own devices and traditions, Christians will immediately start burning folks for heresy, witchcraft, etc? Revert to the 1600s so to speak? Can I have a modern example, please?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/18/african-children-denounce_n_324943.html

His family pastor had accused him of being a witch, and his father then tried to force acid down his throat as an exorcism.

[DogOnPorch]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/18/african-children-denounce_n_324943.html

Well that's one. How about an entire movement?

CARL SAGAN'S BALONEY DETECTION KIT

Common fallacies of logic and rhetoric

Ad hominem - attacking the arguer and not the argument.
Argument from "authority".
Argument from adverse consequences (putting pressure on the decision maker by pointing out dire consequences of an "unfavourable" decision).
Appeal to ignorance (absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).
Special pleading (typically referring to god's will).
Begging the question (assuming an answer in the way the question is phrased).
Observational selection (counting the hits and forgetting the misses).
Statistics of small numbers (such as drawing conclusions from inadequate sample sizes).
Misunderstanding the nature of statistics (President Eisenhower expressing astonishment and alarm on discovering that fully half of all Americans have below average intelligence!)
Inconsistency (e.g. military expenditures based on worst case scenarios but scientific projections on environmental dangers thriftily ignored because they are not "proved").
Non sequitur - "it does not follow" - the logic falls down.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "it happened after so it was caused by" - confusion of cause and effect.
Meaningless question ("what happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?).
Excluded middle - considering only the two extremes in a range of possibilities (making the "other side" look worse than it really is).
Short-term v. long-term - a subset of excluded middle ("why pursue fundamental science when we have so huge a budget deficit?").
Slippery slope - a subset of excluded middle - unwarranted extrapolation of the effects (give an inch and they will take a mile).
Confusion of correlation and causation.
Straw man - caricaturing (or stereotyping) a position to make it easier to attack..
Suppressed evidence or half-truths.
Weasel words - for example, use of euphemisms for war such as "police action" to get around limitations on Presidential powers. "An important art of politicians is to find new names for institutions which under old names have become odious to the public"

http://users.tpg.com.au/horsts/baloney.html

Edited by DogOnPorch, 07 February 2012 - 02:24 PM.

[Michael Hardner]

I would also call that 'anecdotal' perhaps... here's a story of something that happened... THEREFORE...