And the next logical step is to ban the Qur'an since it also preaches, in at least 149 overt surahs, to kill the non-Muslim wherever he can be found. That is incitement to murder, is it not?
Yes, it would be the next logical step, just as the Holy Bible is banned in many countries in the Islamic world, for example, in Saudi Arabia, and in many other countries besides.
The Qur'an has been an incitement to kill and slay the infidels, the kuffar, since it was written. Some people even think that the Qur'an is a 'manual of war'!
In some European countries such as Germany and Austria, Mein Kampf, Hitler's 'struggle', is already banned. It has been because of Germany's Nazi past, and because of the danger the book poses to the mind of man.
The Qur'an is Muhammad's 'struggle'; so, as you rightly point out, why not ban Al-Qur'an al Kareem, too?
So when do you think that will happen?
The answer to that question is simple: It won't! Not, at least, whilst we are ruled by unenlightened politicians who have no concept, no idea, of what the Qur'an actually preaches, no understanding of what the real message of Islam is.
Are you (or anyone else who pops in here) able to give me a reference or two from the Qur'an to support that?
The best one I can think of at the moment is the one quoted on page 30 of my book, The Dawning of a New Dark Age. It's surah IV ('Women' or Al-Nisa'), a. 89. It reads thus:
They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): but take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of God (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.
If they are not allowed to take friends or helpers from among the ranks of the infidel, then by definition Muslims owe us NO LOYALTY. Friendship and loyalty, as we all know, go hand in hand.
I am frustrated by those who believe great things will be achieved by "inter-faith dialogues" and a few surahs that show why such things are mainly time-stealing delaying tactics could help my debate.
You are right to be frustrated by those who believe great things will be achieved by "inter-faith dialogues". Little good will come out of them. Personally, I have no time for them! And nor do I have any time for the Church when it bends over backwards to appease Muslims.
There can be no meeting of the minds between a true Christian and a true Muslim, since the two religions are poles apart.
For a start, central to Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the Son of God who came down to earth to atone for our sins. He was crucified, and thus became our Saviour. Further, Christians are to believe that no man shall come to God except through Him.
Muslims reject the concept of Jesus being the Son of God; indeed it is anathema to them. To Muslims, He is just a prophet. An important one, but a prophet nevertheless. They reject totally that He was crucified, believing that someone like Him was crucified in His stead. So they reject the notion that He is our Saviour. Naturally, they also reject the idea that man can only come to God through Him.
These are some of the main things they reject. So, JudahQ, you tell me what good there is in holding "inter-faith dialogues"? What can anyone hope to achieve through them?
Dialogue and negotiation are only any use when there are bridgeable gaps. There are no bridgeable gaps; on the contrary, the gaps are quite unbridgeable! There is no meeting of the minds to be. One either believes 'the Good News' or one believes the Qur'an. Either Jesus is your Saviour or Muhammad is your most important prophet - Allah's final messenger.
One either believes the Shahada, or the profession of faith: La illah ila Allah wa Muhammadan rasul Ullah (There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah), or one doesn't. A Christian could never believe that. That's why a true Christian can never believe in Muhammad as anything other than a historical figure.
Tell me this: Would it do any good for the Church to engage in inter-faith dialogue with a group of committed atheists? Of course not. There would be nothing to discuss. Well, in my eyes, and from what you say probably in yours too, inter-faith dialogue is a complete waste of time.
On the other hand, if these dialogues are a way to help foster acceptable social controls in accordance with our laws and not Islamic laws, and curtail the extreme reactions of Muslims, then there is some sense in it provided it does not blind anyone to the truth of real Islam.
They won't. All they'll do is appease Muslims. Then, Muslims will bide their time untill they pounce again!
4 comments:
JudahQ:
And the next logical step is to ban the Qur'an since it also preaches, in at least 149 overt surahs, to kill the non-Muslim wherever he can be found. That is incitement to murder, is it not?
Yes, it would be the next logical step, just as the Holy Bible is banned in many countries in the Islamic world, for example, in Saudi Arabia, and in many other countries besides.
The Qur'an has been an incitement to kill and slay the infidels, the kuffar, since it was written. Some people even think that the Qur'an is a 'manual of war'!
In some European countries such as Germany and Austria, Mein Kampf, Hitler's 'struggle', is already banned. It has been because of Germany's Nazi past, and because of the danger the book poses to the mind of man.
The Qur'an is Muhammad's 'struggle'; so, as you rightly point out, why not ban Al-Qur'an al Kareem, too?
So when do you think that will happen?
The answer to that question is simple: It won't! Not, at least, whilst we are ruled by unenlightened politicians who have no concept, no idea, of what the Qur'an actually preaches, no understanding of what the real message of Islam is.
Mussolini:
Isn't their benightedness breathtaking!
JudahQ:
Are you (or anyone else who pops in here) able to give me a reference or two from the Qur'an to support that?
The best one I can think of at the moment is the one quoted on page 30 of my book, The Dawning of a New Dark Age. It's surah IV ('Women' or Al-Nisa'), a. 89. It reads thus:
They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): but take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of God (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks.
If they are not allowed to take friends or helpers from among the ranks of the infidel, then by definition Muslims owe us NO LOYALTY. Friendship and loyalty, as we all know, go hand in hand.
I am frustrated by those who believe great things will be achieved by "inter-faith dialogues" and a few surahs that show why such things are mainly time-stealing delaying tactics could help my debate.
You are right to be frustrated by those who believe great things will be achieved by "inter-faith dialogues". Little good will come out of them. Personally, I have no time for them! And nor do I have any time for the Church when it bends over backwards to appease Muslims.
There can be no meeting of the minds between a true Christian and a true Muslim, since the two religions are poles apart.
For a start, central to Christianity is the belief that Jesus is the Son of God who came down to earth to atone for our sins. He was crucified, and thus became our Saviour. Further, Christians are to believe that no man shall come to God except through Him.
Muslims reject the concept of Jesus being the Son of God; indeed it is anathema to them. To Muslims, He is just a prophet. An important one, but a prophet nevertheless. They reject totally that He was crucified, believing that someone like Him was crucified in His stead. So they reject the notion that He is our Saviour. Naturally, they also reject the idea that man can only come to God through Him.
These are some of the main things they reject. So, JudahQ, you tell me what good there is in holding "inter-faith dialogues"? What can anyone hope to achieve through them?
Dialogue and negotiation are only any use when there are bridgeable gaps. There are no bridgeable gaps; on the contrary, the gaps are quite unbridgeable! There is no meeting of the minds to be. One either believes 'the Good News' or one believes the Qur'an. Either Jesus is your Saviour or Muhammad is your most important prophet - Allah's final messenger.
One either believes the Shahada, or the profession of faith: La illah ila Allah wa Muhammadan rasul Ullah (There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah), or one doesn't. A Christian could never believe that. That's why a true Christian can never believe in Muhammad as anything other than a historical figure.
Tell me this: Would it do any good for the Church to engage in inter-faith dialogue with a group of committed atheists? Of course not. There would be nothing to discuss. Well, in my eyes, and from what you say probably in yours too, inter-faith dialogue is a complete waste of time.
JudahQ:
You're welcome!
On the other hand, if these dialogues are a way to help foster acceptable social controls in accordance with our laws and not Islamic laws, and curtail the extreme reactions of Muslims, then there is some sense in it provided it does not blind anyone to the truth of real Islam.
They won't. All they'll do is appease Muslims. Then, Muslims will bide their time untill they pounce again!
Post a Comment