Terrorist attack in Mumbai: 80 feared dead

[garlandgreen]

Surely you're shifting the goalposts there slightly garlandgreen by changing the definition. It's clear from you above post that you were referring to the Jewish religion, and not merely those of Jewish ancestry, otherwise you would have mentioned it before. At least now you recognized how ridiculous that initial statement of yours was. (Although, if you are indeed sincere, perhaps in future you should clarify your terms, to avoid such semantic misunderstandings).

But to further the discussion slightly, do you believe that Islam is a monolithic religion, and therefore that you can presume the belief of every single Muslim?

Where did I ever refer to the "Jewish religion". I mean me defend a religion of any kind. You've got to be joking. The Jew thing is quite obviously being brought up as an equivalent because of the holocaust, the perpetrators of which were most certainly less concerned with ideology than the length of their victims noses. No this is a disingenuous attempt at equivalence. As for it being a monolithic religion I think I already covered that one - interpretations and that. But I'll make it easier for you - how many Qur'an's are there?

[Riadach]

Where did I ever refer to the "Jewish religion". I mean me defend a religion of any kind. You've got to be joking. The Jew thing is quite obviously being brought up as an equivalent because of the holocaust, the perpetrators of which were most certainly less concerned with ideology than the length of their victims noses. No this is a disingenuous attempt at equivalence. As for it being a monolithic religion I think I already covered that one - interpretations and that. But I'll make it easier for you - how many Qur'an's are there?

In the initial context of the comparison, one which you indeed did not make, the jewish religion was implied. However, you obviously changed the definition without choosing to inform the rest of us.

How many Christianities are there derived from only four gospels, each one accepted by all the faiths? And do not disregard interpretation, it can mean the difference between a greater emphasis on 'if you kill one man, you kill all mankind' and 'kill the pagan wherever you may find him'. It's also a pity for your argument that the Koran and the hadith, are not internally consistent monolithic texts. Are you still contending you can presume the beliefs of every muslim on every important matter?

[garlandgreen]

In the initial context of the comparison, one which you indeed did not make, the jewish religion was implied. However, you obviously changed the definition without choosing to inform the rest of us. It's also a pity for your argument that the Koran and the hadith, are not internally consistent monolithic texts.

How many Christianities are there derived from only four gospels, each one accepted by all the faiths? And do not disregard interpretation, it can mean the difference between a greater emphasis on 'if you kill one man, you kill all mankind' and 'kill the pagan wherever you may find him'.

1. Where was the "Jewish" religion implied?

2. The Qur'an is to be taken as the literal word of the deity dictated to a 7th century caravan raiding bandit. The gospels were thrown together for political reasons in the 4th century to help establsh the reign of Constantine based on an obscure cult he believed in and can be interpreted as metaphorially or as selectively as you like. Do I need to go on. Even then it's only ever improved it's behavior somewhat when it got a good kicking

[Riadach]

1. Where was the "Jewish" religion implied?

By the very fact it was brought into the discussion, I would imagine.

2. The Qur'an is to be taken as the literal word of the deity dictated to a 7th century caravan raiding bandit. The gospels were thrown together for political reasons in the 4th century to help establsh the reign of Constantine based on an obscure cult he believed in and can be interpreted as metaphorially or as selectively as you like. Do I need to go on.

Yes you do. Whether or not Muslims believe that the Koran is the literal word of the deity or not, has no bearing on the fact that as a document it is contradictory and inconsistent. Therefore, in much the same way the parts of the bible can be promoted or demoted over eachother due to the incongruity of the old and new testament, contradictory verses of the Koran, and the hadith, can be promoted and demoted over eachother depending on the nature or indeed the upbringing of the person who reads it. Similarly, unlike christianity and to a lesser extent judaism, there are no priests in Islam, there is no council for the doctrine of faith to decide what adheres or what does not adhere to the religion and enjoins on the people to behave accordingly. Rather most things are left up to scholarly consensus. Therefore, what a person believes in depends on what scholastic tradition they follow, perhaps which imam (these are not trained) they attend, their own personal reading of their religion, or which judicial school their state follows in implementing Sharia. And this is only in reference to those who follow their religion by the book. Have you heard of Arak for instance? It is not a case of, 'it's in the koran/hadith, therefore you believe it'.

[Red Revolutionary]

Allow me. Jews don't neccessarily share the same belief. Muslims do. And Mumbai last time I checked is in neither Israel nor Palestine

So Muslims share all the same beliefs?
How odd.

[garlandgreen]

By the very fact it was brought into the discussion, I would imagine.



Yes you do. Whether or not Muslims believe that the Koran is the literal word of the deity or not, has no bearing on the fact that as a document it is contradictory and inconsistent. Therefore, in much the same way the parts of the bible can be promoted or demoted over eachother due to the incongruity of the old and new testament, contradictory verses of the Koran, and the hadith, can be promoted and demoted over eachother depending on the nature or indeed the upbringing of the person who reads it. Similarly, unlike christianity and to a lesser extent judaism, there are no priests in Islam, there is no council for the doctrine of faith to decide what adheres or what does not adhere to the religion and enjoins on the people to behave accordingly. Rather most things are left up to scholarly consensus. Therefore, what a person believes in depends on what scholastic tradition they follow, perhaps which imam (these are not trained) they attend, their own personal reading of their religion, or which judicial school their state follows in implementing Sharia. It is not a case of, 'it's in the koran/hadith, therefore you believe it'.

1. Citation?

2. As I said interpretation. The Priests and Rabbis can dismiss the absurdities as the poor impressions of ignorant primitive men and it's divine influence lying elsewhere or "between the lines". The "scholars" in comparison are stuck with this assertion that it is the divine word of god and as you point out there are no clergy to impose their "enlightened" interpretations as writ at any rate.

[garlandgreen]

So Muslims share all the same beliefs?
How odd.

Very odd I agree

[Red Revolutionary]

Very odd I agree

How were you able to determine that they share the same beliefs with say regards the Mumbai massacre?

[Riadach]

1. Citation?

Here:

WTF?
Some lunatics, now speak for an entire Religion?
Muslims have no more responsibility for this than you do.
So get a big dose of cop the fukc on and stop trying to justify your bigotry to an entire Religion.
If such sweeping comments were made about Jews they would not be tolerated so lightly.

But you see RR Jews are not perpetrating any of these atrocities; in fact a Jewish centre was specifically targeted in Mumbai. This of course will not be a surprise to anybody who understands the pathological hatred of Muslims for Jews; any Jews, anywhere. Clearly you don’t understand this, nor do many other members of the loony left with their heads wedged firmly in their posteriors while they also manage to spew their deluded propaganda through the same orifice. As the Muslim apostate and author Ibn Warraq (a false name of course) has noted, “Not all Muslims are terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims.”

Hmmm, is it not clear from the context of their discussion that it was members of the Jewish religion he was referring to. I put it in bold to help you out.

2. As I said interpretation. The Priests and Rabbis can dismiss the absurdities as the poor impressions of ignorant primitive men and it's divine influence lying elsewhere or "between the lines". The "scholars" in comparison are stuck with this assertion that it is the divine word of god and as you point out there are no clergy to impose their "enlightened" interpretations as writ at any rate.

I'm desperately looking for the point in that piece of sophistry. Which part proves that muslims do indeed all have the same beliefs? Or are you belittling the effect that 'interpretation' can have one a specific belief?

[garlandgreen]

How were you able to determine that they share the same beliefs with say regards the Mumbai massacre?

I didn't. I was referring to their religion. Go back to sleep