[skinster]

The Dutch, Decky. The Dutch.

[Harmattan]

If that were the case, then how do they explain the fact that European converts to Islam (...)

There are no converts, people simply mistake hipsters for Muslims.



In all seriousness, fresh converts are always more radical, for all religions and ideologies. This says nothing about Islam and prospects about it.

[Pants-of-dog]

Anyway, let's not turn into bigots and trust blindly every letter of the Bible. God bless.

Yes, we should reserve that for when we want to paint all Muslims as bloodthirsty savages.

[EU rope]

Yes, we should reserve that for when we want to paint all Muslims as bloodthirsty savages.

Not all, but the serious ones. And since the apple doesn't fall far from the tree + Mohammed was a bloodthirsty savage... Many Muslims try to emulate him and that brings countless perversions (well, at least from Western perspective), like child sex, child marriage, rape jihad, lying (taqiya), plundering, butchering and so on, and so on.
You know, there is a perfect criteria for recognizing evil powers - their ultimate goal is to take over and rule the world. You will find this practically in every bedtime story.

[Nets]

I dunno man. Arguably, the fucked up shit that goes down in books like Numbers, Joshua and Judges and is more messed up than the events in the Quran. If Mohamed was a rapey, slaver warlord than so were Moses and Joshua. It is a fair distinction that Mohamed was probably real and Moses was almost certainly a fictional amalgam of mythical and historical characters. But stuff like this ISIS precursor in Numbers

13 Moses, Eleazar the priest and all the leaders of the community went to meet them outside the camp. 14 Moses was angry with the officers of the army—the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds—who returned from the battle.

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

This insanity is holy scripture for Jews and Christians. Can the fruit then fall far from the tree? What relation does this have to say, Reform or Conservative Judaism, or liberal Protestant denominations like Anglicans?

Don't get me wrong. I am keenly aware of the threat posed by Islamism to the west. But I just find these arguments that Islam is fundamentally bad and Christianity is fundamentally good to be absurd. Nearly godless, gay-loving Episcopalians and fire-and-brimstone preaching Baptist fundamentalists are both "Christian", but which reflects the "true fruit" here?

Anyway, let's not turn into bigots and trust blindly every letter of the Bible. God bless.

Read: I will pick and choose what I like from the Bible and call it true "Christianity", just like ISIS picks and chooses what it likes from the Quran/Hadith and calls it true "Islam".

[EU rope]

But I just find these arguments that Islam is fundamentally bad and Christianity is fundamentally good to be absurd.

That's exactly what it is. As stated before, compared to Christianity, Islam is pure evil. And we all know that "things are known in comparison".
Although I might agree on one thing - Christianity makes people too humble and underestimated. On the other hand Islam boosts the Ego (self-reflection) and makes people arrogant, overestimated and delusional. One just have to look at the migrants in Europe, or visit the Middle East.

[Pants-of-dog]

Not all, but the serious ones. And since the apple doesn't fall far from the tree + Mohammed was a bloodthirsty savage... Many Muslims try to emulate him and that brings countless perversions (well, at least from Western perspective), like child sex, child marriage, rape jihad, lying (taqiya), plundering, butchering and so on, and so on.
You know, there is a perfect criteria for recognizing evil powers - their ultimate goal is to take over and rule the world. You will find this practically in every bedtime story.

I agree. We should totally hold Islam to a different standard than Christianity.

Christianity is a diverse group of people's with different beliefs and agendas, but all Muslims are part of a bloodthirsty hive mind.

[Nets]

EURope is going about is clumsily, but trying to figure out what the actual distribution of political views and beliefs are in the Muslim world isn't a worthless or racist exercise. The "Islam is pure evil" digression is ultimately irrelevant. No one cares about what true Islam is or isn't (except for maybe EURope), they care about what Muslims today actually believe.

[Godstud]

Many who follow Islam have a learned hatred of other religions, that is supported(and indeed, encouraged) within their teachings. They won't change their ways to accept that others have a right to practice their own beliefs but EXPECT others to change their values, and acceptance, to suit their hatred. A Christian may disagree with your choice of religion but is taught not to, and won't hate you, for it. I think this is the real difference between Islam and most other religions.

[skinster]

Many who follow Islam have a learned hatred of other religions, that is supported(and indeed, encouraged) within their teachings. They won't change their ways to accept that others have a right to practice their own beliefs but EXPECT others to change their values, and acceptance, to suit their hatred. A Christian may disagree with your choice of religion but is taught not to, and won't hate you, for it. I think this is the real difference between Islam and most other religions.

[Doomhammer]

No, they are not. The Gospels were written by people.

Then why not disregard them, period?

Sure, there are no evidences of any sort to back speculations on how much more barbarian Muslim fanatics could be if they had our powers. But the fact that they're raping 13 yo girls and using mutilations and beheadings as promotional material while announcing that the final judgment is near are still good hints even by academic criteria.

Absolutely. They are a deplorable anachronism. But, other cultures don't rape, sexually harass, or murder people?

On the other hand I think that many former colonial powers are now actively seeking to stabilize and develop their former colonies since those colonies naturally form strong ties with their former colonial power and will naturally enrich them as business partners.

The new colonial elites and core elites are all part of the transnational capitalist class and have a common interest in enriching themselves at the cost of the welfare of periphery countries, so it does not matter either way.
The periphery are ultimately responsible for their fate. They started out ahead, but failed to create geopolitically competitive states with corresponding economic and social viability. However, none of this should excuse apologists of contemporary practices of imperialism. That said, I remain agnostic about rendering a moral judgement about imperialism.

I understand your point of view but in my opinion you are misleading yourself by sacrificing your intellectual objectivity in favor of good intentions, and you are demonstrating a shallow knowledge of Islam.

Islam is not just a religion; it is a political-legal doctrine more than anything else. I get that. Much of it is not amenable to many of the ideas and institutions in the modern world. Only countries with a history or semblance of secular-rational authority have produced viable states with relatively low levels of structural violence. However, I cannot but help think that the application of Islam (whatever legal-doctrinal interpretation) and levels of violence, along with a host of other socio-economic factors, vary greatly from Islamic country to country, which suggests that Muhammed being a savage is overdetermined.

What I am telling you is that if you want to call out Muhammed for his shit (and promote another effete Abrahamic idea peddler too, as the guy in the OP hinted), do so. But I absolutely guarantee that it will only succeed in further antagonizing Muslims and your endeavor will simply become a self-fulfilling prophecy... which would then justify exterminating them, I suppose.

Like you I used to believe that radical Islam was something fated to fade away as integration would progress. But alas the opposite happened: every year French Muslims are more integrated, every year Muslim radicalism increases in France.

You must not look at Muslim fanaticism through the lens of Christian history, thinking that Enlightenment and prosperity will chase religion. Muslim fanaticism is not driven by obscurantism, it is a reactionary movement to find back a mythical past where Islam was powerful, a cultural claim to reconquer an identity purged of the Western liberal influence, an uprising to gain back sovereignty and military power. It has been gaining influence in all Muslim countries for the past decades and it continues to do so every year. Ben Laden was not a retarded farmer, he was a blue blood educated in the most prestigious western institutions. Nowadays the Muslim schools that pop everywhere are funded and populated by Muslim elites, with the help of Saudi funds. A situation analogous to the Christian elites if it was not for the content of the message.

Hang on. When I spoke of wealth and integration, I was referring to a specific demographic that adopted a more or less secular life-style; I was not talking about opulent Arab elites living abroad who are so decadent that they don't know any other way to spend their money than to fund global jihad. When I mentioned integration, I was thinking about Muslim communities mixing with the locals rather than forming nuclear communities, diversifying their participation in various sectors of the economy (i.e. employment in sectors beyond food services and unskilled labor), and not being scorned as being worthless individuals -- it is in these types of circumstances that people become acutely aware of differences, and becomes resentful.

Muslim fanaticism is not driven by obscurantism, it is a reactionary movement to find back a mythical past where Islam was powerful, a cultural claim to reconquer an identity purged of the Western liberal influence, an uprising to gain back sovereignty and military power.

I would hate to live in such a world, but you are problematizing the fact that peripheral peoples disenchanted with their place in the global hierarchy want to change things with violent means and a retrograde ideology. It's shocking that Muslims would want this, right!?

Every man is an imperialist; every man is a state in the making. Remember this.


----

Anyway, I have spent more effort in this thread than I care for a thread on Muhammed. I was drawn here by my annoyance with some of the posts/posters in this threads, who seem to be advancing theological perspectives of their own.

Edit: +1 to PoD and Nets.

[EU rope]

Then why not disregard them, period?

Because, if you notice, modern secular values are very close, if not identical, with the morals taught in the Gospels.
However, Islam and Sharia law are completely different story and that's the problem.

[Potemkin]

Because, if you notice, modern secular values are very close, if not identical, with the morals taught in the Gospels.

Including the bits about homosexuality being an abomination in the eyes of the Lord? And also the bits about women having to be silent and cover their heads in church? Not to mention the fact that unbelievers are doomed to eternal perdition. In other words, your statement is nonsense.

[Nets]

Because, if you notice, modern secular values are very close, if not identical, with the morals taught in the Gospels.

What morals are those? And are they specific enough to not be universal?

By what metric do you pick out the morals you like from the NT vs. the stuff you disregard?

[EU rope]

Now, let's not talk about the OT, shall we? OT and NT are very different.

What morals are those? And are they specific enough to not be universal?

Be good, be kind, treat others like you would like to be treated, do not revenge, do not steal, etc . But the "cherry of the cake" is "love you enemies". Buddha taught something similar and that's about it.

By what metric do you pick out the morals you like from the NT vs. the stuff you disregard?

Oh, that's simple - I just follow the thing I like and disregard the things I don't.

[Nets]

Oh, that's simple - I just follow the thing I like and disregard the things I don't.

So you are a EU rope-ian, not a Christian. What value then, are the Gospels?

[EU rope]

So you are a EU rope-ian, not a Christian. What value then, are the Gospels?

They are the background of Western civilisation as we know it, consciously or unconsciously.

[Nets]

That may be true, but then you can't only ascribe the positive aspects of western history to them. It isn't hard to see the Gospels as the root of the Holocaust, for example.

[EU rope]

It isn't hard to see the Gospels as the root of the Holocaust, for example.

Wow, I'd like to hear more about this, please.
And speaking of hearing, let's talk about something else - music. One can instantly tell something about a culture by its music. Because music IS culture, the epitome of culture.
So, going back to the OP, where are the Muslim musicians, Mozarts, Bachs, Vivaldis, Sinatras, Hollywoods, etc, etc, ?
OK, where are the Muslim writers and novelists, Shakespears, Tolkienses, Dickenses, Rowlingses, Mark Twains, etc, etc?

Lets see some real fruits from the Muslim tree, hm?

[mikema63]

Now, let's not talk about the OT, shall we? OT and NT are very different.

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Be good, be kind, treat others like you would like to be treated, do not revenge, do not steal, etc . But the "cherry of the cake" is "love you enemies". Buddha taught something similar and that's about it.

Luke 14:26 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.

Matthew 15:4 God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death

Mark 7:10 Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

Matthew 10:24, Luke 12:51-53 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. (killing infidels much? )

Lets also not forget the part where he cursed a fig tree.

Such lovely sentiments.

And speaking of hearing, let's talk about something else - music. One can instantly tell something about a culture by its music. Because music IS culture, the epitome of culture.
So, going back to the OP, where are the Muslim musicians, Mozarts, Bachs, Vivaldis, Sinatras, Hollywoods, etc, etc, ?

The music you like is also a product of your culture, that you don't like Islamic music says nothing of the value of Islamic music.

OK, where are the Muslim writers and novelists, Shakespears, Tolkienses, Dickenses, Rowlingses, Mark Twains, etc, etc?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_writers_and_poets

Lets see some real fruits from the Muslim tree, hm?

Algebra, the guitar, coffee, a great deal of astronomical work, the astrolabe, surgery, the camera obscura, and on and on.