[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Faust 

I don't understand why people cannot laugh about themselves or whatever it is they believe in, but I'm not them and if they don't think it's funny making fun of religion, it's hardly my place to judge them for it.

Good point there. I'm Catholic and you have to admit that there is a heck of-a-lot of fun poked at the Catholic faith.... guess what, i find it funny too. South park for example....it's hilarious !!! they make so much fun of Catholics n Jews n Mormons, etc and its all in good fun.

If a community doesn't find cartoons/comics funny thats acceptable. who are we to judge them for their sense of(or lack thereof) humor ? That doesn't bother me in the slightest. What does bother me that from Northern Africa, the Mid.East, and across Asia... transcending very different cultures and socio-economic communities, they have been united in rioting, flag-burning, boycotting, condemning, what is essentially harmless publications. That is well... extremist to say the least wouldn't you agree ?

When the Vatican put out its response to the DaVinci code, apart from trying to discourage and discredit it's content, i dont remember any death threats or burning of stuff that accompanied it from any Catholic/Christian society the worldwide(i could be wrong here). And last i checked Dan Brown is alive and well, and hopefully working on a new book, which i am definitely looking forward to. All i can say is, i am happy to be part of a society with the level of confidence in itself where it doesnt need to resort to violence and censorship to preserve it's ideals in this day and age. Which begs the question...
-What are they so angry about ? Why are they so angry ?
-What do they hope to accomplish ?

Cheers

[Warren Pease]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

Humans are flawed, but that doesn't explain the inherent corruption of Islam. People make errors and it is evident in centralized religion when that happens, because the error spread fast and uniformly.

In a decentralized religion such as Islam, this shouldn't be apparent because the versions of Islam are about as many as the Imams or Muslims that interpret the Koran.

However there is an amazing amount of Muslims who interpret it the same way, which leads them to blow themselves and others up, subjugate women and dismiss human rights. That points to a corruption in the religion itself. It is rotting from the inside.

McClatchy Washington Bureau | 08/08/2007 | Studies: Suicide bombers in Iraq are mostly foreigners

I agree with you that Islam is interpreted in many different ways, but I don't think that you can label all Islam as being comprised of the 'bad apples' aka suicide bombers, as you do. The article points to Saudi Arabia as being by far the largest contributer to this mindset - nearly 50% of Iraqi suicide bombers are from there.

All but 4 of the hijackers of 19 on 9/11 were Saudi as well. In addition, many members of al-qaeda are Saudi, along with the financiers. Knowing that in Saudi Arabia, wahabism, an extreme form of Islam is practiced, would lead to the conclusion that there is a mindset for extremism in this one form of Islam. This doesn't support your conclusion that Islam has a base-level of extremism/terrorism different which would be fundamentally different from christianity's 'fringe' groups, that do the same thing.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by lil'babykitten 

Lots of words and yet you said very little. You have just repeated everything you said previously, without acknowledging anything that was written in response.

Clearly you are outside your forte. I said I wasn't here to convince an Islamic apologist. That means you.

There are plenty of other people, who matter, who agree with me. That's the reality of the situation.

Originally Posted by lil'babykitten 

Basically for you, Islam = terrorism and the solution is to 'cleanse' the world of Muslims. People have tried that already, it didn't work and it never will.

Utter nonsense and idiocy. The world needs not be cleansed of Muslims, but deportation of Muslims might be necessary in Europe, however, if you people (Muslims living in Europe) don't clean up your act. Because if you don't it will be done for you.

It's been done before.

Originally Posted by lil'babykitten 

What we have learned here is that you don't really have any idea what you're talking about, you lack reading comprehension skills and the ability to debate (which means coming up with a logical point to counter the other's argument). So since you'd like people to make themselves worth something, perhaps start with yourself? Read some books. You have no excuse.

'I know you are but what am I?' is an argument in your circles?

Actions speak louder than words. I say again, make yourself useful to us Europeans or... well... you aren't. This is our society, you are here to adapt to it.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by Warren Pease 

McClatchy Washington Bureau | 08/08/2007 | Studies: Suicide bombers in Iraq are mostly foreigners

I agree with you that Islam is interpreted in many different ways, but I don't think that you can label all Islam as being comprised of the 'bad apples' aka suicide bombers, as you do. The article points to Saudi Arabia as being by far the largest contributer to this mindset - nearly 50% of Iraqi suicide bombers are from there.

All but 4 of the hijackers of 19 on 9/11 were Saudi as well. In addition, many members of al-qaeda are Saudi, along with the financiers. Knowing that in Saudi Arabia, wahabism, an extreme form of Islam is practiced, would lead to the conclusion that there is a mindset for extremism in this one form of Islam. This doesn't support your conclusion that Islam has a base-level of extremism/terrorism different which would be fundamentally different from christianity's 'fringe' groups, that do the same thing.

Indeed if there is any one country that should be dealt with to cut down terrorism it is Saudi-Arabia followed by Pakistan. That said, terrorists in general come from nearly all Muslim countries and Muslim societies in Europe. Most from Saudi-Arabia. Much thanks to Wahabism.

There are also active terrorists from Egypt, Palestine, Afghanistan, Algeria, Jordan, Malaysia, etc etc. We just don't hear as much about them as the Saudi terrorists in Iraq.

Terrorism is pervasive throughout the Muslim world. That's a fact.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

Actions speak louder than words. I say again, make yourself useful to us Europeans or... well... you aren't. This is our society, you are here to adapt to it.

I was born in this society. OMG! The horror of it all! Better get used to it though, because unlike me, you have no where else to go!

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

That's certainly an opinion to have. The usual moral-relativist liberal hogwash, but an opinion. Most commies in the West agree with you, I guess they all got top grades in class..

Um, you're in the 21st century, "commies" doesn't really motivate people to reject an argument anymore. I think a better fear tactic for you to employ would be to insinuate that if we don't embrace your monolithic painting of the Muslim religion as backward then we're as bad as the terrorists or something like that.

Look, buddy, obviously there are a lot of people and groups within the Muslim world that have values and beliefs that are antithetical to the liberal West--oh wait, liberal is a bad word to you and yet it is only Western liberalism that clashes with the values of Islam...maybe you're on the wrong side of this clash of civilizations--but the same could be said of Christianity at different times in its own history. Progress is possible, and there are voices calling for it in the Muslim world...sadly, they are still drowned out by the voices of violence and intolerance.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by lil'babykitten 

I was born in this society. OMG! The horror of it all! Better get used to it though, because unlike me, you have no where else to go!

Anything but accept your responsibility in the society you were born in, always take the role of a victim who is powerless and never ever admit the reality of Islam.

You think you're a lot smarter than you are, but you aren't as dumb as you act.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Um, you're in the 21st century, "commies" doesn't really motivate people to reject an argument anymore. I think a better fear tactic for you to employ would be to insinuate that if we don't embrace your monolithic painting of the Muslim religion as backward then we're as bad as the terrorists or something like that.

It still works on Americans. Count on it. The rest, it's just a guilt-ridden rant of a person who thinks the truth is relative. Your suggestion that you people are as bad as the terrorists is certainly an intriguing suggestion, but not one I would make. You however, are a necessary element for Islamic terrorists to thrive in Europe. Do you think there is such a thing as right and wrong? Good and evil? Is everything relative?

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Look, buddy, obviously there are a lot of people and groups within the Muslim world that have values and beliefs that are antithetical to the liberal West--oh wait, liberal is a bad word to you and yet it is only Western liberalism that clashes with the values of Islam...maybe you're on the wrong side of this clash of civilizations--but the same could be said of Christianity at different times in its own history. Progress is possible, and there are voices calling for it in the Muslim world...sadly, they are still drowned out by the voices of violence and intolerance.

Hey! Post a warning before writing such concentrated relativist-drivel. I have to break this down to make any sense of this mess.

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Look, buddy, obviously there are a lot of people and groups within the Muslim world that have values and beliefs that are antithetical to the liberal West--oh wait, liberal is a bad word to you

No, being a liberal is fine by me. A valid political opinion, but not one I lean towards personally. However Muslims don't 'hate our freedom'. That's too much White House propaganda you've been listening to. What makes you think they hate our freedom? After all they thrive in it and live a better life than at any time in their old country, wherever that was. As for the terrorists, they love our freedom as well. Makes it easy for them to hide and abide their time until they blow up a crowded marketsquare somewhere in Europe.

Originally Posted by Helmling 

and yet it is only Western liberalism that clashes with the values of Islam...maybe you're on the wrong side of this clash of civilizations--

For the Muslims living in Europe, an Islamicized version of our western freedom would be very good. For the terrorists, well they're insane. Who cares about them.

Originally Posted by Helmling 

but the same could be said of Christianity at different times in its own history.

Funny thing about Christianity. It reformed itself automagically as information and enlightenment increased in Europe. It seems like that Christianity is some sort of a miracle of religion and people could reform without going apeshit.

Information and enlightenment have been offered to Muslims as well. They use the internet to co-ordinate terrorist attacks and GSMs to detonate bombs. That seems to be how Islam approached modern information and technology.

Oh and to send death threats with email to people who say things they disagree with.

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Progress is possible, and there are voices calling for it in the Muslim world...sadly, they are still drowned out by the voices of violence and intolerance.

Oh yes, sadly. There seems to be no end in sight.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

Anything but accept your responsibility in the society you were born in, always take the role of a victim who is powerless and never ever admit the reality of Islam.

You think you're a lot smarter than you are, but you aren't as dumb as you act.

So tell me... what, exactly, are YOU doing to take responsibility for YOUR role in this society, aside from bitch on internet forums? What are YOU doing to make the world a better place with regards to this Islamic threat?

If you don't have very good answers and aren't being proactive in your community in a positive way, I suggest you keep quiet and take your hollier-then-thou garbage elsewhere.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by gradient 

So tell me... what, exactly, are YOU doing to take responsibility for YOUR role in this society, aside from bitch on internet forums? What are YOU doing to make the world a better place with regards to this Islamic threat?

Well, I'm not humoring you, for one thing.

Originally Posted by gradient 

If you don't have very good answers and aren't being proactive in your community in a positive way, I suggest you keep quiet and take your hollier-then-thou garbage elsewhere.

Yes mommy.

PS: this thread is thread is about Fitna, not your PC whining.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

Well, I'm not humoring you, for one thing.



Yes mommy.

PS: this thread is thread is about Fitna, not your PC whining.

So insisting that those who claim to be role models should lead by example is "PC whining" to you? I was already pretty much convinced that you're nothing more then a fear-soaked blowhard, but that clinches it.

You're perfectly ok with making comments about other people like this:

You think you're a lot smarter than you are, but you aren't as dumb as you act.

... but when someone turns things around and asks for some substance to back up your rantings, you claim "that's not what this thread is about". You're credibility is at exactly zero until you fess up.

[Doofy]

Wow. This thread even managed to dig LBK up.

No posts for years, then both Sayf and LBK turf up in the same week. It's almost like "sleepers" (as seen in all those cold war spy films) have been activated to defend the cult.

And that's what the "moderates" are there for - to talk you up your own backside while their nastier "brothers" get on with the business of making bombs and blowing your mom up.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

So would you agree that the rough translation of what you're saying is:

"The questionable parts of the Quran referred to can be explained by looking at the historical, social and political context of when they were written. While they are not appropriate in today's world, they were in earlier times."

No, not at all, I think what is an integral part of the Quran are tenets of a just war. These tenets are just as important as the rest of the Quran, and as relevant back then as they are now or in future.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

The problem I have with this – the obvious problem, really – is that they're still in the Quran today, and obviously they're still followed in "today's world." Fine. There's an explanation for them, just like there's an explanation for many eye-raising things found in the Old Testament. But unlike the Old Testament (which for most Christians has been supplanted by the New Testament, minus those effed-up cults that import part of the Old Testament for the purposes of gaining more manly power, and for the purposes of most Jews has been supplanted by a more-moderate and non-literal interpretative approach), a significant portion of Muslims still believe and follow these "objectionable parts" of the Quran.

So why don't you get it the **** out then? Cut cut delete.

greg

Are you joking? You, as an atheist, call for cutting out parts of God's revelation?

All aspects of the Quran are integral to each other, the tenets of a just war are just as important as anything else.

The question though is: Do radical islamists apply these tenets of a just war correctly? The answer is: Hell, no!

That will be clear when I continue my historical comparison-essay that I started with Moses, the next part of which I will write here tommorrow, if God wills.

Taliesin

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Looking forward to it.

As a initial response, I must say: the defence that radical islamists do not apply these tenets of a just war correctly is no defence at all. We are dealing with reality, not how things should be. The fact remains that there are a significant portion of Muslims who believe that violence, and extreme violence, is an acceptable solution when dealing with other religions and/or non-Muslims.

As I noted in my first post, your response provides an explanation. The world is demanding a solution.

greg

[BadKosh]

It's just you don't want to take the big steps to remove the muslims from the planet. Perhaps as their numbers dwindle, they will figure out what they have been doing wrong.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by BadKosh 

It's just you don't want to take the big steps to remove the muslims from the planet. Perhaps as their numbers dwindle, they will figure out what they have been doing wrong.

Muslims more numerous than Catholics: Vatican | Top News | Reuters

Formenti said that while the number of Catholics as a proportion of the world's population was fairly stable, the percentage of Muslims was growing because of higher birth rates.

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

The fact remains that there are a significant portion of Muslims who believe that violence, and extreme violence, is an acceptable solution when dealing with other religions and/or non-Muslims.

THe fact remains that there are a significant portion of White Westerners who believe that violence, and extreme violence, is an acceptable solution when dealing with Islam and Muslims.

Where's the outrage over that?

As I noted in my first post, your response provides an explanation. The world is demanding a solution.

greg

It seems like the West is coming closer and closer to finding the Final Solution to the cancer of a certain religious group.....

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

It seems like the West is coming closer and closer to finding the Final Solution to the cancer of a certain religious group.....

Let's hope so. Anything to shut Cruise up.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Looking forward to it.

As a initial response, I must say: the defence that radical islamists do not apply these tenets of a just war correctly is no defence at all. We are dealing with reality, not how things should be. The fact remains that there are a significant portion of Muslims who believe that violence, and extreme violence, is an acceptable solution when dealing with other religions and/or non-Muslims.

As I noted in my first post, your response provides an explanation. The world is demanding a solution.

greg

I think many parts of the islamic world have every reason to become violent, be it violent against the dictatory regimes that are supported by the west or against the israeli occupation or in Chechnya... my problem is only that radical islamists abuse/instrumentalise the religion and the Quran to get support among the islamic population for their liberation-guerillia-movements, because this instrumentalisation leads to a distortion of the religion.

In fact one of the problems is that most muslims are and were much too peaceful, that they accept alot of injustices and oppression as fate.

Taliesin

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

I think many parts of the islamic world have every reason to become violent, be it violent against the dictatory regimes that are supported by the west or against the israeli occupation or in Chechnya..
Taliesin

Funny you reminded me of Chechnya. What exactly do the Chechnyan rebels want besides independence? It can't be anything to do with Israel, as they have no presence there, in fact the USSR/Russia has been selling arms to Syria, Egypt, Iran, and Iraq over the years. You would thing the "enemy of my enemy" would apply here. They have their own oil and gas supply, so it can't be that.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

or against the israeli occupation

Ummm...which COUNTRY is Israel 'occupying' ?

If you answer Lebanon/Syria/Jordan/Egypt..... it is my opinion that Israel, having WON the 6-day war which was staged in defense against those countries(and every other conflict in that region for that matter), could have staked claim to that entire territory if they wanted to, so the losers(technically speaking of course) should quit whining and thank their lucky stars for the territory they have been allowed to occupy.

On a side note, can anyone here, get an image of the map of the world, put a single color overlay over the muslim world(or countries with predominantly muslim populations and/or muslim governments), and another overlay marking points of continuing conflict(border disputes ,etc) around the world, so we can get a better overview of what we're all discussing here. dont forget Tibet, Taiwan, etc....

I'd do it, but i dont have anywhere to host it.

Cheers

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Ummm...which COUNTRY is Israel 'occupying' ?

If you answer Lebanon/Syria/Jordan/Egypt..... it is my opinion that Israel, having WON the 6-day war which was staged in defense against those countries(and every other conflict in that region for that matter), could have staked claim to that entire territory if they wanted to, so the losers(technically speaking of course) should quit whining and thank their lucky stars for the territory they have been allowed to occupy.

On a side note, can anyone here, get an image of the map of the world, put a single color overlay over the muslim world(or countries with predominantly muslim populations and/or muslim governments), and another overlay marking points of continuing conflict(border disputes ,etc) around the world, so we can get a better overview of what we're all discussing here. dont forget Tibet, Taiwan, etc....

I'd do it, but i dont have anywhere to host it.

Cheers

everything but Brunei and the Netherlands

[Hawkeye_a]

Cheers for that mate, but i was thinking of a wordview of current conflict, everything, not just Israel. Im talkng Chechnya, Kashmir, Cyprus, Sudan, E.Timor, Bali, Taiwan, Tibet, S.America, etc...

[Big Mac]

I think it's difficult for Taliesin. He has deep Islamic commitments that lead him to offer anti-Israel statements at times, but on the other hand he's a largely ethical and logical person who rejects Jew-hatred, so there's a contradiction within him.

[vmarks]

Hawkeye, you can make your map here = World66 - visited countries

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

THe fact remains that there are a significant portion of White Westerners who believe that violence, and extreme violence, is an acceptable solution when dealing with Islam and Muslims.

Where's the outrage over that?

It seems like the West is coming closer and closer to finding the Final Solution to the cancer of a certain religious group.....

That's called a "non sequitur."

1. You're comparing a religion with a doctrinal ideology at the root of its conflicts with "everyone else." I can find no defining ideology in the "white West" – where's that, Canada, USA, Western Europe? The only common thread is that they're upset over the very problem we're discussing – that followers of Islam seem to have a disturbingly high propensity for terrorism and violence towards those of other religions/cultures. That's the equivalent of 1940s Germany saying "everyone else is just as bad as us because they're attacking us too."

A better issue is examining the West's involvement within predominantly Muslim countries (e.g. the Middle East) and whether their actions there have bred resentment which is manifested in this violence. That still doesn't address the issue that it seems to be solely justified by "the sword of Allah." That's a religion problem.

Finally, I don't see any problems with the "White West" blowing up/killing Muslims because they're Muslims. Unless you want to call the Iraq/Afghani wars ones of religion, which I think would be dumb.

greg

[lpkmckenna]

Haven't seen this video. It's probably just some Christian bashing Islam.

All religions are fundamentally the same. It doesn't matter if the religious message is pacifism or violence, all theocracies are tyrannies. Buddha taught peace, but a Buddhist theocracy would be the same as an Islamic theocracy: censorship, repression, anti-science, and anti-democracy. Debating the content of Islam is pointless.

It isn't Judaism versus Islam or Christianity versus Islam, it's secularism versus theocracy.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Haven't seen this video. It's probably just some Christian bashing Islam.

All religions are fundamentally the same. It doesn't matter if the religious message is pacifism or violence, all theocracies are tyrannies. Buddha taught peace, but a Buddhist theocracy would be the same as an Islamic theocracy: censorship, repression, anti-science, and anti-democracy. Debating the content of Islam is pointless.

It isn't Judaism versus Islam or Christianity versus Islam, it's secularism versus theocracy.

Yeah, although it's also true that there have been some bad secular-ocracies, like Stalinism, so that isn't a guarantee of niceness either. Perhaps it's liberal vs. illiberal that is key.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Yeah, although it's also true that there have been some bad secular-ocracies, like Stalinism, so that isn't a guarantee of niceness either. Perhaps it's liberal vs. illiberal that is key.

I more-or-less agree. However, Marxism is more like a secular religion than real secularism: all the trappings of an apocalyptic eschatology wrapped in materialistic slogans.

ADDED NOTE: It's pretty easy to camouflage an ideology. Think how both Scientology and Intelligent Design clothe themselves in the lingo of science, but are fundamentally anti-science. Marx, Skinner, and Spencer were all quite good at fooling people that their political ideology was scientific, when really the opposite was true.

[lil'babykitten]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I think it's difficult for Taliesin. He has deep Islamic commitments that lead him to offer anti-Israel statements at times, but on the other hand he's a largely ethical and logical person who rejects Jew-hatred, so there's a contradiction within him.

Opposing Israeli occupation and rejecting anti-semitism are not contradictory.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Haven't seen this video. It's probably just some Christian bashing Islam.

All religions are fundamentally the same. It doesn't matter if the religious message is pacifism or violence, all theocracies are tyrannies. Buddha taught peace, but a Buddhist theocracy would be the same as an Islamic theocracy: censorship, repression, anti-science, and anti-democracy. Debating the content of Islam is pointless.

It isn't Judaism versus Islam or Christianity versus Islam, it's secularism versus theocracy.

I didn't really read your post, it's probably just some liberal nonsense.

Everything is fundamentally the same. It doesn't matter what the message is, all bad things are evil. Hippies tought love, but a hippie controlled society would be the same as something really bad: all sorts of human rights violations.

Debating the content of hippiedom is useless.

It isn't society against hippies or 'the man' against hippies it's making love vs intercourse.

*****

I linked to a review that was comprised of the same trite crap your post above, hoping that would dissuade anti-thought leftists such as yourself. What made your post and that review especially much crap? Both are 'reviews' on a 15 minute film neither of you bothered to watch, but you still manage to pull all sorts of condemnation and opinions out of your ass.

Well done, well done.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I think it's difficult for Taliesin. He has deep Islamic commitments that lead him to offer anti-Israel statements at times, but on the other hand he's a largely ethical and logical person who rejects Jew-hatred, so there's a contradiction within him.

It's the opposite, because of my religion I respect the jews as people of the book as monotheists that worship the same God as I am, and because of the long history and interaction with God and His messengers I feel somewhat connected with them and because of the oppression and persecution and genocide they went through I have sympathy and mercy with jews, but ...

then there is the injustice, oppression, driving outs, murder and stealing that Israel, a predominantly jewish state, committed and commits against the palestinians.

That's indeed difficult to get together, but I decided to make a clear distinction between jews and israelis, and between israelis and the actual israeli governments.

Taliesin

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Funny you reminded me of Chechnya. What exactly do the Chechnyan rebels want besides independence? It can't be anything to do with Israel, as they have no presence there, in fact the USSR/Russia has been selling arms to Syria, Egypt, Iran, and Iraq over the years. You would thing the "enemy of my enemy" would apply here. They have their own oil and gas supply, so it can't be that.

The chechnyans and the zaristic Russia, the Soviet Union and then again Russia had a long history of oppression and injustice, and it has nothing to do with Israel.

Taliesin

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

The pharao and most of his people became opponents of Moses and God, they became "kufars", for how can a prophet dare to challenge the whole egyptian system by declaring to have been sent by the only real god, by giving orders to the pharao and threatening him with divine punishment...

Skip a few centuries to the time of Jesus and the jewish elites as part of a semi-autonom province of the roman empire.
...

to be continued...

...

The jews at that time went already through a lot of hardships, through the time in Egypt under the pharao, through the numerous wars in the holy land, they divided into Judah and Israel, all the while becoming polytheistic and monotheistic, polytheistic and then monotheistic again, back and forth.... Eventually, the assyrians crushed the northern kingdom, Israel, the exiled population became the samaritans, later the southern kingdom got destroyed by the babylonian empire, and the people captured and transferred to Babylon, until they were freed by the persian empire...and after a while the roman empire swallowed them in, granting them semi-autonomy...

This rather adventurous history has had of course its impact on the jewish religion and the jewish people. For one, the jewish laymen changed their mothertongue, the jewish religion had somehow to do without the temple, the jewish nation had to accept that they were under the rule of foreign empires...

Two main jewish groups developed, the pharisees and the sadducees.

The sadducees were the ones closely associated with the rebuilt temple, usually representing the rich jewish families, with strong affinity to hellenistic philosophies and having strong connections with the roman empire. They declared that the written torah, those five books of Moses, were the authoritative scripture, and the later ones as well as the oral tradition were false.

They held also the beliefs that there were no ressurection of the dead to be expected, no belief in the existence of angels or demons, no belief in spirit, and they basically closed down the possibility of current or future prophecy by concentrating instead on the literal word of the five Moses-books, and declared any upcoming prophets as false prophets.

The pharisees who believed in prophecy, ressurection, angels and demons... had much support among the general jewish population though.

Into that time and place, Jesus was sent by God as a messenger, and eventhough his teachings were mostly identical with the pharisical strain of jewish religion, he condemned them for their hypocrisy because they preached what they were not doing. So Jesus wanted to reconcile faith and works, and bring meaning and spirit to the religion and its law, and most of the pharisees became his opponent, they became "kufars" (what is mostly shortcuttedly translated as "unbelievers").

The sadducees who were politically inclined rather than religiously, who merely instrumentalised the religion for their secular purposes and didn't believe in an afterlife nor in judgement and viewed God in a deistic view, a diety not interested in humanity, didn't become enemies of Jesus until he violently threw the moneychangers that out of the temple.

After that the sadducees joined the pharisees in their attempts to discredit Jesus since they knew that most of the general jewish population saw in Jesus a real prophet, with the hope of possibly being the awaited messiah, so that before they could get rid of him they first had to succesfully portray him as a false prophet.

Over the time, the pharisees who held much support among the jewish population could convince more and more jews that Jesus were not the messiah that he were a heretic.. while the sadducees with their good connections to the roman empire-authorities made the case that Jesus claimed to be King of the jews, a political revolutionary, who would aim to directly challenge cesar and the roman empire...

A few decades after Jesus' ascension to heaven, fate should have it that the jews under the pharisees and sadducees indeed rebelled against the roman empire, because of some really disturbing roman rulings, resulting in the destruction of the temple, the murder of a lot of jews, and the dispersion of the jewish people in the world.

After the destruction of the temple, the phariseeic strain transformed into the rabbinical judaism, while the sadducees disappeared until they had a shortlived comeback a few centuries later.

Skip a few centuries to the time of Muhammad...

To be continued...

Taliesin

[Weyland-Yutani]

YouTube - The religion of fear

One man's comments on the reactions of the Fitna video. Making a row of smackdowns against apologists and radical muslims.

Worth watching (6m 49s)

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

YouTube - The religion of fear

Pat's a respectable guy. He criticizes all religions for their glaring flaws, instead of pretending that only Islam is flawed, like W-Y and Doofy.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by lpkmckenna 

Pat's a respectable guy. He criticizes all religions for their glaring flaws, instead of pretending that only Islam is flawed, like W-Y and Doofy.

Oh yes and I (and I'm sure Doofy) are completely fine with that and neither we nor anyone we know or share faith with will call for his videos being pulled off youtube. Nor call for his death or any sort of violence.

That being said, his criticism of Islam are very poignant and indeed prove, as you say, that he's a respectable guy.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani 

Oh yes and I (and I'm sure Doofy) are completely fine with that and neither we nor anyone we know or share faith with will call for his videos being pulled off youtube. Nor call for his death or any sort of violence.

Spot on.